Replace Siege With a Free For All Server

[Zildjan]

[Paul]

We all know that "we all know" is a horrible way to start a suggestion. Furthermore is siege not dead. At least not on EU and only EU counts in my book.

[NejStark]

We all know FFA would be awesome.  And shouldn't be hard to implement.  And let's be honest, siege is dead so we need something new. 

XP scoring system could be a combination of surviving and getting kills, so it would dissuade people from hiding.


And sorry if theres another topic on this already, I couldn't find one to bump so I made my own

(click to show/hide)

visitors can't see pics , please register or login

[Zildjan]

We all know that "we all know" is a horrible way to start a suggestion. Furthermore is siege not dead. At least not on EU and only EU counts in my book.

I was trying to make a reference but that's not important...

It's been months since I logged on to find NA siege with more than 5 people in it.  Right now there's zero.  Of EU's is still going I'm happy for you.  But ours isn't and I like having an occasional alternative to battle.  I've heard lots of guys talking about this; that it's been brought up before and they liked the idea.  But nothing came of it.  I think it would be a great addition to the game.  And as far as the 'only EU counts in my book' thing... well I guess I won't even respond to it 

[Elindor]

The interesting question is why is EU Siege's population alive and kicking (often bigger than their battle server), and NA's is so dead?

- Do EU players employ better teamwork as a whole and therefore siege is more enjoyable to them?
- Is the stigma of siege being only for noobs (untrue of course) limited only to NA?
- Is it just an overall population problem, where NA just doesn't have enough to keep critical mass going in NA2? 

It is a curious question....


----

On that note, by FFA you mean DM (Deathmatch) - which is a silly mode ultimately.

What I would 110% support is a *** TEAM DEATHMATCH SERVER (TDM) ***
Paul, make it happen!   

[Nightmare798]

free for all is ill suited for crpg imo, not to mention your totally nuts idea to override siege with it. NOT COOL.

[Jarold]

At least not on EU and only EU counts in my book.

The developers have admitted it now.

[Jarlek]

The developers have admitted it now.

Write the date down for the history books.

(click to show/hide)

December 2010

[Malaclypse]

Is it just an overall population problem, where NA just doesn't have enough to keep critical mass going in NA2? 

I think so. Most nights I play anyways, and anything other than nights it's always a ghost town. Lately there have been folk in there, later in the evening, from 20 up to 60 people some nights.

Battle has more population in general as it's the go-to server, due both-and to it's population being at a higher point on the server screen, and perhaps a preference for the game mode. Anyhow, that cascades into even more of the total people playing NA side going to battle, and we have a relatively small pool of regulars and floaters to work with- after all there was a time where Siege, Battle, and the Community server all had decent populations for playing simultaneously. Less of those people are playing (which I take as a good sign), and not enough new people are entering the mod to take their place.

[Umbra]

The interesting question is why is EU Siege's population alive and kicking (often bigger than their battle server), and NA's is so dead?

- Do EU players employ better teamwork as a whole and therefore siege is more enjoyable to them?
- Is the stigma of siege being only for noobs (untrue of course) limited only to NA?
- Is it just an overall population problem, where NA just doesn't have enough to keep critical mass going in NA2? 

- No
- No
- I do not know if NA has pop problems

I guess siege if just more fun for some people, i hop on siege when i get tired of the constant cav rape. Another explanation would be that there are clans on EU that have a history of consistently playing on siege, such as HRE, DRZ or grey etc.

[Jack1]

IMO make rageball a Tdm server before seige. The only reason I see people in there is to leech multi's.

And do NOT make it a DM server.

[Kafein]

Siege is the superior game mode because you don't have to suffer in the hands of delaying scum.

[Sir_Hans]

IMO make rageball a Tdm server before seige. The only reason I see people in there is to leech multi's.

And do NOT make it a DM server.

I +1 this...

Team death match would be great... Basically siege on battle maps without the flags. No waiting around while dead for 3+ minutes watching a lone fucking horse archer run around and miss 19/20 shots until the flags come up.
Also if you change rageball to TDM servers... allow players to use any/all strategus siege equipment... Siege towers... Catapults... ladders... etc...

FFA would be great fun, but people would group up in makeshift teams on teamspeak and gank others. It would also constantly be dominated by just a few people... and how would xp/multi's work on a FFA server?

[Ellie]

IMO make rageball a Tdm server before seige. The only reason I see people in there is to leech multi's.

And do NOT make it a DM server.

Agreed. TDM would be pretty interesting on cRPG. DM though... would just be a clusterfuck and spawn camping, if anything from what I see on native carries over.