View Poll Results: What is the best/will be the best PvP MMO of 2009?

Voters
95. You may not vote on this poll
  • Darkfall

    33 34.74%
  • Fallen Earth

    1 1.05%
  • Global Agenda

    4 4.21%
  • Star Wars: The Old Republic

    3 3.16%
  • World of Warcraft

    12 12.63%
  • Warhammer Online

    2 2.11%
  • Age of Conan

    2 2.11%
  • Dark Age of Camelot

    10 10.53%
  • Other (Please reply with your opinion and description/links)

    28 29.47%
Page 4 of 4 FirstFirst ... 34
Results 46 to 59 of 59

Thread: Best PvP MMO

  1. #46

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by Caffy View Post
    200 total combatants would have been a small battle at launch. Fights against the server zerg could easily see 300 on each side.
    Oh, well I missed the very very beginning of SB by maybe a week. And perhaps were talking about different servers here. But my point is it was a scale and concept that trumps just about any other game, easily surpassing DAOC.
    Last edited by Gloomrender; 06-21-2009 at 07:40.

    Quote Originally Posted by Branwulf View Post
    Criminals will always get their weapons, it's the fucking lunatics that you should be worried about Colonist.
    Quote Originally Posted by United States Department of Education
    Give us the child for 8 years and it will be a Bolshevik forever.

  2. #47
    1000+ Long term follower
    Join Date
    Jan 2002
    Location
    On the edge
    Posts
    1,651

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by Gloomrender View Post
    Oh, well I missed the very very beginning of SB by maybe a week. And perhaps were talking about different servers here. But my point is it was a scale and concept that trumps just about any other game, easily surpassing DAOC.
    I agree SB had some huge sieges, but so did DAOC

    The population of DAOC at it's peak was about 200k (plus 50k buffbots lol), there were some absolutely massive sieges at some points around 03 - 05

    After playing both games I would definitely say DAOC had more players at most sieges, more often, than SB

  3. #48
    Normal User
    Join Date
    Jun 2008
    Posts
    228

    Default

    clearly eve online

  4. #49

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by Carnagel View Post
    I agree SB had some huge sieges, but so did DAOC

    The population of DAOC at it's peak was about 200k (plus 50k buffbots lol), there were some absolutely massive sieges at some points around 03 - 05

    After playing both games I would definitely say DAOC had more players at most sieges, more often, than SB
    Shadowbane had a population higher than that at the beginning. Regardless, population isn't the measure. SB had more players actually fighting in sieges. This is indisputable. Plus, it actually meant something to fight in SB since survival and dominance were on the line. No other game in MMO history can match that.
    Last edited by Gloomrender; 06-21-2009 at 10:01.

    Quote Originally Posted by Branwulf View Post
    Criminals will always get their weapons, it's the fucking lunatics that you should be worried about Colonist.
    Quote Originally Posted by United States Department of Education
    Give us the child for 8 years and it will be a Bolshevik forever.

  5. #50
    1000+ Long term follower
    Join Date
    Jan 2002
    Location
    On the edge
    Posts
    1,651

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by Gloomrender View Post
    SB had more players actually fighting in sieges. This is indisputable
    Actually I did dispute that, making it not indisputable

  6. #51
    6000+
    Join Date
    Sep 2005
    Location
    Maine
    Posts
    6,650

    Cool

    Quote Originally Posted by Carnagel View Post
    I agree SB had some huge sieges, but so did DAOC

    The population of DAOC at it's peak was about 200k (plus 50k buffbots lol), there were some absolutely massive sieges at some points around 03 - 05

    After playing both games I would definitely say DAOC had more players at most sieges, more often, than SB
    a ssomeone who did both , allow me to get in on this a bit

    the really huge difference between DAoC and SB when it came to seiges was player created...

    on the whole, DAoC could indeed have larger battles...which were all about breaking down a keep door...but no player built the keep, or what was in it, or placed it in the world and after being taken the keep was exactly the same as it had been before the battle....the world was unchanged

    THAT is the key to what made SB great...the Players built the cities, and burned them down and rebuilt them or built their somewhere else....after any seige the world was changed, by Players...over and over, never being the same from week to week...much less server to server

    in DAoC it was always the same, all servers looked alike save the minor details of who controlled what server generated permanent structures

    when i was with Myth on Merlin...i tried to tell the devs what would help them tremendously...have it so that if a faction controlled the keep zone, they could invade another factions housing zone and burn shit down...the devs almost pissed themselves in fear of the carebear backlash

    so that's what separates SB and EVE from other games like DAoC...consequences for Player actions...those Relics could not compare, in terms of player impact, to what could be wrought in world changes, with SB or EVE

    which is one of my main complaints with DF, the choice to make the cities "npc" like in that devs placed and constructed them ...for all that Players have to grind to fill them up...it is the Devs who decided what was in each city, where it was placed, what order things got built in and so on

    your mileage may vary...
    Last edited by DocGonzo; 06-21-2009 at 18:06.
    QFT -- survived JTT -- "little less hostile please" - Viranth -- Doc's radio

    "I can't say what I want to, even if I'm not serious..." - TooL

  7. #52

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by Gloomrender View Post
    I very much doubt that. In SB we had battles of up to 200 people with cities numbering in the thousands of residents. All of it was fully player created and fully destructible. DOAC can't top that.

    Wait so you're trying to argue that SB was better than DAoC, but you never played, nor do you know anything about DAoC?

    You had keeps that were fully destructible, no cap on how many people could fight, so you could get 400-500 people in an important battle, every piece of siege equipment you can think of, from boiling oil to siege towers, naval combat, relics to fight over that were actually worth a damn, and RvR dungeons.

    As for keeps not changing, for the most part correct.

    You could build up the keep though, repair it, make it stronger, place guards and balistas and trebuchets on it in different build spots, so it wasn't entirely the same every time.
    Last edited by Tibernicus; 06-21-2009 at 18:25.

  8. #53
    6000+
    Join Date
    Sep 2005
    Location
    Maine
    Posts
    6,650

    Cool

    Quote Originally Posted by Tibernicus View Post
    Wait so you're trying to argue that SB was better than DAoC, but you never played, nor do you know anything about DAoC?

    You had keeps that were fully destructible, no cap on how many people could fight, so you could get 400-500 people in an important battle, every piece of siege equipment you can think of, from boiling oil to siege towers, naval combat, relics to fight over that were actually worth a damn, and RvR dungeons.

    As for keeps not changing, for the most part correct.

    You could build up the keep though, repair it, make it stronger, place guards and balistas and trebuchets on it in different build spots, so it wasn't entirely the same every time.
    the seige equipment had to be pre-placed where the Devs said they went...as opposed to SB, where you placed your seige tent and trebs where YOU wanted for your strategy...and i think i already showed how minimal the Relics were as opposed to making your opponents homeless, or even better...taking their city and rebuilding it as you liked (or even selling it to a third party)

    overall, SB wins because of the simple fact that the Players, not the Devs shaped the world completely...this aspect...as well as the cause/effect consequences of political interplay rendered SB superior

    what politics could there be in the DAoC realm system outside of your own alliance...who could NEVER kill, as opposed to SB where you could not only kill your own allies/guildmates but infiltrate and spy from within, trashtalk, ally/switch alliances and so on as the Player desired rather than as Devs dictated by hard coded and limiting "rules"

    and don't get me started on the grind as compared to getting a toon to max level and fully geared out in less than a day's playing

    EVE is another kettle of fish entirely...but again, outside of the controlled high sec areas...it is built and controlled by Players, again giving it the advantage over DAoC as an open sandbox like environment
    QFT -- survived JTT -- "little less hostile please" - Viranth -- Doc's radio

    "I can't say what I want to, even if I'm not serious..." - TooL

  9. #54

    Default

    wow for #2! woohoo!

  10. #55

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by Carnagel View Post
    Actually I did dispute that, making it not indisputable
    You can dispute a fact, doesn't make it a valid disputation.

    Quote Originally Posted by DocGonzo View Post
    the seige equipment had to be pre-placed where the Devs said they went...as opposed to SB, where you placed your seige tent and trebs where YOU wanted for your strategy...and i think i already showed how minimal the Relics were as opposed to making your opponents homeless, or even better...taking their city and rebuilding it as you liked (or even selling it to a third party)

    overall, SB wins because of the simple fact that the Players, not the Devs shaped the world completely...this aspect...as well as the cause/effect consequences of political interplay rendered SB superior

    what politics could there be in the DAoC realm system outside of your own alliance...who could NEVER kill, as opposed to SB where you could not only kill your own allies/guildmates but infiltrate and spy from within, trashtalk, ally/switch alliances and so on as the Player desired rather than as Devs dictated by hard coded and limiting "rules"

    and don't get me started on the grind as compared to getting a toon to max level and fully geared out in less than a day's playing

    EVE is another kettle of fish entirely...but again, outside of the controlled high sec areas...it is built and controlled by Players, again giving it the advantage over DAoC as an open sandbox like environment
    This.

    Quote Originally Posted by Branwulf View Post
    Criminals will always get their weapons, it's the fucking lunatics that you should be worried about Colonist.
    Quote Originally Posted by United States Department of Education
    Give us the child for 8 years and it will be a Bolshevik forever.

  11. #56
    Normal User
    Join Date
    Oct 2008
    Location
    In your thread
    Posts
    148

    Default

    Duke Nukem Forever

    /win

    /thread

  12. #57

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by Slashduel View Post
    Duke Nukem Forever

    /win

    /thread
    It's true, review here:

    http://www.escapistmagazine.com/vide...-Nukem-Forever

    Quote Originally Posted by Branwulf View Post
    Criminals will always get their weapons, it's the fucking lunatics that you should be worried about Colonist.
    Quote Originally Posted by United States Department of Education
    Give us the child for 8 years and it will be a Bolshevik forever.

  13. #58

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by DocGonzo View Post
    the seige equipment had to be pre-placed where the Devs said they went...as opposed to SB, where you placed your seige tent and trebs where YOU wanted for your strategy...and i think i already showed how minimal the Relics were as opposed to making your opponents homeless, or even better...taking their city and rebuilding it as you liked (or even selling it to a third party)


    what politics could there be in the DAoC realm system outside of your own alliance...who could NEVER kill, as opposed to SB where you could not only kill your own allies/guildmates but infiltrate and spy from within, trashtalk, ally/switch alliances and so on as the Player desired rather than as Devs dictated by hard coded and limiting "rules"
    First off, you could place siege ANYWHERE, I don't know what you're on about. There were only pre designed build points on some towers and on some warships(which makes sense). Other than that, we had one relic battle where a hill was being defended by Albion by about 250 people, with rows and rows and rows and rows and rows of catapults, while Midgard and Hibernia, each with about 200-300 players each tried to swarm up it. The first wave was turned into a route, but the fighting lasted all night. When I woke up the Hibs had taken the relic and were trying to escape by sea, but ran into a blockade. Can't do that shit in Shadowbane.

    Second off, you can do all the things you just mentioned in DAoC, just play the PvP server where keeps were guild owned, not realm owned. Problem solved. That took a lot of wind out of your argument.


    As someone who played both, unlike Mr. Fanboy over here....
    Quote Originally Posted by Gloomrender View Post
    Shadowbane had a population higher than that at the beginning. Regardless, population isn't the measure. SB had more players actually fighting in sieges. This is indisputable.
    Who has just been ignoring when people point things out to him, and defear his arguments (DAoC had the second largest subscriber number in MMOs at the time, SB was a shit stain no one played because of its buggy horrible launch, bigger battles? not quite)... I can say that DAoC did ever the better sieges, and they were much larger usually. (also, you didn't have that fucking horrible control scheme)
    Last edited by Tibernicus; 06-22-2009 at 17:42.

  14. #59
    6000+
    Join Date
    Sep 2005
    Location
    Maine
    Posts
    6,650

    Cool

    so Tibernicus...you didn't play Sb either, did you?

    as for you bit about being able to place catapaults, this invalidates my point about the difference between a player built world and a dev built one ...how?

    fail, imo...but i can agree that DAoC was pretty fun for a while, yet trying to compare it's theme park to EVE or SB as sandbox player driven PvP games is bullshit for one reason alone which you cannot argue with

    you cannot kill your own faction, nor talk to, ally with or spy on an enemy faction

    that with the part about player created environments within the game world demonstrates the inferiority of DAoC in this discussion
    QFT -- survived JTT -- "little less hostile please" - Viranth -- Doc's radio

    "I can't say what I want to, even if I'm not serious..." - TooL

Posting Permissions

  • You may not post new threads
  • You may not post replies
  • You may not post attachments
  • You may not edit your posts
  •