Archwing Pvp/tdm/conquest/ctf/etc

[Teadude]

It'd be cool if there was Archwing PVP.

Lock on melee/leaping will still be there,but lock on attacks can be countered if timed correctly.

Maps will be smaller,although there can be larger maps for bigger teams/players.

Conquest will work similarly to interception.

Player count will be(if possible,due to engine limitations) 16v16,8v8(smaller maps),24v24(on medium sized maps),and 4v4(for smaller,squad based maps)

Shields/Health will be based on the Archwing,with a bonus 200health/100shield.

In conquest,when the losing team only has one captured point,the team will have a 15% shield/health buff,with a 5% dmg buff. If the losing team captures another point,the buff will be removed.

I know the player count may sound ridiculous but hey,it's possible(hopefully)

Feedback appreciated.

Edited November 18, 2014 by Teadude

[TheErebus.]

Neat idea, but it would be very difficult to implement.

For starters, the whole reason we have the lock on melee system is because it makes it easier for us to use melee, otherwise we'd keep missing. Which would be the case if it was PvP.

Then there comes lag issues, and balancing as well (because tank frames dominate the entirety of the Archwing field)

[Teadude]

Neat idea, but it would be very difficult to implement.

For starters, the whole reason we have the lock on melee system is because it makes it easier for us to use melee, otherwise we'd keep missing. Which would be the case if it was PvP.

Then there comes lag issues, and balancing as well (because tank frames dominate the entirety of the Archwing field)

Yeah,i usually run with my rhino on archwing missions,and tank frames are more of a use than other squished frames.

i'll think of a solution to this

[xethier]

the ultimate problem is going to be hosting.

the bandwidth requirements for regular 1 host and 3 clients is already in excess of 1mbps. (120k/sec)

which exceeds almost all DSL users. (and there are still a huge number of us (at least in the USA) due to clandestine tactics of our ISPs)

 

the current pvp battles have less mobs (and thereby reduces the bandwidth requirements) but it's still borderline unhostable for those of us with limited upload bandwidth.

 

even 6v6 would be a nightmare (3.3mbps). 24v24 would be... 14.1 mbps. (assuming 0.3 mbps per client) -- (and that's peak usage)

that's far in excess of even most cable users.

 

if DE can reduce the bandwidth requirements drastically (or implement dedicated servers for high-population battles) it might be doable, but i wouldn't hold my breath. (and dedicated servers would only be beneficial for folks close to them to reduce ping times, anybody in say... asia or eastern europe is in for a terrible session.) (anywhere there isn't a nearby colo hosting DE's servers)