Print

[3.14]

I don't think it's much fun to play ZC, when one of the parties has 10 players and other factions swarm the map with 50 fighters each.

What if there was a limit on the number of attacking players? Say max 150% of defending players? Or rounded to the next multiple of 10 ( so if 11 players defend then up to 20 players from each faction can attack).
The limit would be set at the 5 minutes mark and after that entry will be denied if there are to many  players on the map (for both sides, so defenders can't start with 10 and call in 50 more later).   

As a side effect this will limit lag.

[mAdman]

As the member of a faction that is constantly outnumbered and outgunned, I second this sentiment, but it would be hard to regulate, go against some of the core mechanics, and you're probably also going to find those same 50 guys ganging up on you to argue that they should be able to do so.

[cirn0]

It really sucks attacking a swarm if you're numerically disadvantaged but I've seen some amazing play by small commando team that pick apart unorganized swarms.

As for defender side, the Family hold and earn polymer labs against numerical disadvantages.

But I do agree, numbers advantages is huge and I understand that it sucks however, I personally wouldn't want to limit the dynamics of PvP by enforcing arbitrary restrictions. Perhaps better reward for the side that fought with less people ( provided they fought well ).

Unless your speaking from the perspective of the 50 and you had to wait in line behind 20 guys to even get a chance to see the enemy, I have no sympathy for you.

[3.14]

I would think it sucks for both sides, the swarmers and swarmees alike.
10 vs 15? No problem.
10 vs 20? Could be fun
10 vs 30? Suicide
10 vs 40? Genocide
10 vs 50?! Mmmmoonster Kill!

But then again - the score idea is good. Final score could be multiplied by number_of_enemies/number_of_allies.

[wojciech]

It really sucks attacking a swarm if you're numerically disadvantaged but I've seen some amazing play by small commando team that pick apart unorganized swarms.

As for defender side, the Family hold and earn polymer labs against numerical disadvantages.



But I do agree, numbers advantages is huge and I understand that it sucks however, I personally wouldn't want to limit the dynamics of PvP by enforcing arbitrary restrictions. Perhaps better reward for the side that fought with less people ( provided they fought well ).

Unless your speaking from the perspective of the 50 and you had to wait in line behind 20 guys to even get a chance to see the enemy, I have no sympathy for you.

50 people will just flood and crash that 10 guys and the smaller team will not have time to take some score

[Myakot]

They will still have to engage through the same narrow doorways (usually). That's where numbers matter less.

[Poor Ernie]

Exactly this. It's so hard to go against so many people when it takes us hours to get 10 people together. We've been relying on fresh tactics but goddamn, there's only so much planning we can do until hordes of other players crash in and just over power is with numbers. That bullshit too with the 35k caps being handed out was so stupid, just makes the best faction better and the worst, well, worse.

[Gimper]

I do agree that getting swarmed is a big problem for the Family.

As for defender side, the Family hold and earn polymer labs against numerical disadvantages.

But this is true as well. We have won in some cases 9 vs 21 against V-tech.

Numbers aren't always everything, but obviously getting swarmed in inconvenient locations (Such as the middle of a street) is going to be a pain.

It is a nice suggestion and even though it IS possible with the engine, it will be quite difficult and time consuming I think. In my opinion, time will even the factions out. Just be patient and eventually we will be up there in ranks 

[Doobee]

If one team of very organized people with great gear tacticaly suiting the place they decided to do the ZC in should face a shit swarm of noobs who just rush in not knowing anything, then those noobs can easily be 3 times their number. I think this idea is poinltess as sometimes the advantage of your possition gives you a chance to do crazy things and in this matter, you dont want less enemies to come, you want moaaaar and MOOOAAAAAAAAR 

[Aco]

Some say "10 skilled players can beat 30." But can 10 skilled players beat 30 skilled players? Thats the main problem. It is completely on luck. And the chances are on the 30 people swarm.

During my experience in playing FOnline (for 4 years) I can say that 8skilled players can not beat 15 skilled players.
Because, What is skill ? Skill is not being stupid and dying like a noob. Knowing when to back out. When to attack. It takes a real retarded squad to die 20v8.
For example. Rogues (Brahmin boys) Are a lot of people on teamspeak. They are organized by teamspeak. And to me, Playing with newbs (Militia) is like playing with nobody. Devs like to say "Oh this server u can fight 10v30 and win !" The only reason its possible is because newbs actually have the will to fight.

But lets cut out all militia from a pvp fight, and you will see how numbers matter.

[Doobee]

My point was that if you can set the number of enemies that can enter ZC by your own number, then you can except swarm of noobs who arent coordinated who just wants to rush in but they take the chance from skilled players who wouldnt need even half the number usualy. It wasnt my vision of skill vs. nonskill fights.