Jump to content
Search In
  • More options...
Find results that contain...
Find results in...
ObsLoD

Some Shadowbane reminiscing...

Recommended Posts

When I played AA there was a hated, juggernaut of a guild on our server that pretty much dominated it through the powers of game understanding, organization and zerg.  I don't think any of the leadership and probably very few of the regular guild members were even close to twitch elites, yet they pretty much had control. Other guilds of those closer to your arena types would beat them in BG/arena thing AA had, and could win small skirmishes.  However, that's it.  If a trophy had to be handed out, undeniably it went to the juggernaut guild.  The wider view and more varied skill set carried the day. 

 

Now, can a large, organized group of arena players gather and be a juggernaut in CF?  Absolutely.  However, things like passive skill progression, lowered skill ceiling (in comparison to several current games), and non-twitch combat will act as a governor of sorts.  Therefore, other aspects of CF will play a more prominent role in success.  The game could changed to favor twitch, but at this point it does not appear to be the direction.  I guess we'll both have to wait and see. 

The problem with using archeage as a reference is that it was extremely p2w and gear dependent to the extreme.

 

What were shadowbane's actual numbers? Or does anecdotal "evidence" hold more weight in your book?

Shadowbane actually sold more than 200000 copies...  Clearly it wasn't topping out at only 50k subs.  But hey... anyone that actually played at launch would have known that. 


Skeggold, Skalmold, Skildir ro Klofnir

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

The problem with using archeage as a reference is that it was extremely p2w and gear dependent to the extreme.

 

Shadowbane actually sold more than 200000 copies...  Clearly it wasn't topping out at only 50k subs.  But hey... anyone that actually played at launch would have known that. 

Source? If you had owned stock in Ubisoft and read their annual report, perhaps you would think something different. On page 16, you'll note they claim over 120,000 units sold, and 50k subscribers.


CF_Van.png

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Source? If you had owned stock in Ubisoft and read their annual report, perhaps you would think something different. On page 16, you'll note they claim over 120,000 units sold, and 50k subscribers.

So at the end of the fiscal year ubisoft is claiming the game counted more than 50k subs... which definitely doesn't match up with the graphs you worship...  You just totally proved yourself wrong lol.


Skeggold, Skalmold, Skildir ro Klofnir

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

So at the end of the fiscal year ubisoft is claiming the game counted more than 50k subs... which definitely doesn't match up with the graphs you worship...  You just totally proved yourself wrong lol.

Their fiscal year ends March 31, noob.


CF_Van.png

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Nope... they'll definitively be better...

This is the equivalent of "Well, my dad can beat up your dad". GG! 

 

Now, can a large, organized group of arena players gather and be a juggernaut in CF?  Absolutely.  However, things like passive skill progression, lowered skill ceiling (in comparison to several current games), and non-twitch combat will act as a governor of sorts.  Therefore, other aspects of CF will play a more prominent role in success.  The game could changed to favor twitch, but at this point it does not appear to be the direction.  I guess we'll both have to wait and see. 

The biggest problem the "Pro/Pure Gamers" will face is ego. Finding a place in the crowd. Taking a backseat. Falling in line. Working as a collective. There will be more Chiefs than Indians. Unless they can shed their "look at me attention sweet pea" mindset, they will likely fail at the meta. Small wins sure, gank squads absolutely. Campaigns, more than likely not. This isn't an esport, not even close.


.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

This is the equivalent of "Well, my dad can beat up your dad". GG! 

 

The biggest problem the "Pro/Pure Gamers" will face is ego. Finding a place in the crowd. Taking a backseat. Falling in line. Working as a collective. There will be more Chiefs than Indians. Unless they can shed their "look at me attention sweet pea" mindset, they will likely fail at the meta. Small wins sure, gank squads absolutely. Campaigns, more than likely not. This isn't an esport, not even close.

Nope, it's the equivalent of you have no idea what you are talking about... which doesn't surprise me as the guild you are in has a different philosophical approach to gaming and generally isn't successful in the games with the real pvp crowds.


Skeggold, Skalmold, Skildir ro Klofnir

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Nope, it's the equivalent of you have no idea what you are talking about... which doesn't surprise me as the guild you are in has a different philosophical approach to gaming and generally isn't successful in the games with the real pvp crowds.

Nope, You sir are just an ignorant contrarian. You have no Idea who I have and have not played with, what games I have or have not played in or my general skill level. I joined Pax shortly after Crowfall/ACE became an actual entity, it is a fine community I must say!. You are just an A+ "Pro/Pure" Troll, nothing more, nothing less.

 

As far as success and who will have it, I stated my case and I stand by it. To quote, or restate:

 

  "Here you will be a cog in a wheel of a machine, a link in a chain. 3v3/5v5/10v10 will mean jack poorly made socks here. It will be an open world sandbox. Those that create the best group specs, have the available numbers, create alliances and manipulate the political system the best will win. Just like in Shadowbane. There is no doubt about that." 

 

I wouldn't bet on you at all. That's a fact. You'll always have arenas though! 5v5 ARAM?!!


.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Nope, You sir are just an ignorant contrarian. You have no Idea who I have and have not played with, what games I have or have not played in or my general skill level. I joined Pax shortly after Crowfall/ACE became an actual entity, it is a fine community I must say!. You are just an A+ "Pro/Pure" Troll, nothing more, nothing less.

 

I'm not ignorant though, anyone that sits at the table of champions knows what I am talking about... anyone with real pvp experience knows that what I say is true.  I can tell your general skill level through a couple of things... 1.  Your perception:  If your perception is that of someone that hasn't been shaped by real pvp success it is quite obvious.  2.  Your guild:  No top notch pvper joins megazerg guilds like pax.  It's boring and unfun to play with people of that skill level and under that dynamic.  Top notch pvpers seek a challenge. 

 

As far as success and who will have it, I stated my case and I stand by it. To quote, or restate:

 

  "Here you will be a cog in a wheel of a machine, a link in a chain. 3v3/5v5/10v10 will mean jack poorly made socks here. It will be an open world sandbox. Those that create the best group specs, have the available numbers, create alliances and manipulate the political system the best will win. Just like in Shadowbane. There is no doubt about that."

 

I wouldn't bet on you at all. That's a fact. You'll always have arenas though! 5v5 ARAM?!!

 

What you don't realize is that most pvp fights that happen in mmorpgs are not gigantic battles... those take planning and time and happen occasionally, most of the great pvp comes from roaming pvp, where you have to adapt on the fly and counter whatever force you may run into.  So guess what?  Small scale coordination and skill matter a great deal in that regard... and then on top of it to be the best at something like 3v3 arena in WoW, you are competing with hundreds of thousands if not millions of players, and guess what that coordination and timing and tactical insight you develop can be applied to a larger scale easily...

 

The only people that think large scale pvp is hugely different are people that sucked at small scale pvp and had niche success in some small pond zerging each other. 


Skeggold, Skalmold, Skildir ro Klofnir

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

 

 

What you don't realize is that most pvp fights that happen in mmorpgs are not gigantic battles... those take planning and time and happen occasionally, most of the great pvp comes from roaming pvp, where you have to adapt on the fly and counter whatever force you may run into.  So guess what?  Small scale coordination and skill matter a great deal in that regard... and then on top of it to be the best at something like 3v3 arena in WoW, you are competing with hundreds of thousands if not millions of players, and guess what that coordination and timing and tactical insight you develop can be applied to a larger scale easily...

 

The only people that think large scale pvp is hugely different are people that sucked at small scale pvp and had niche success in some small pond zerging each other. 

You most obviously are ignorant."Table of Champions and Pure/Pro Gamers" are constructs of your delusion.  How many server wars did you take part in? None.  I have participated in multiple. Due to your ignorance I will explain, 3-7 month scorched earth seiging campaigns with up to 450 people on the field (Malog). 150 v 150 was commonplace. Political skill, group composition, coordinated leadership and the will to hold it together, not to break, even after you have lost multiple cities. THAT is what wins campaigns. Not "Roaming PvP". Your only future is that of an outlier, rabble, a merc force at best. You're a joke.

Edited by armegeddon

.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

You most obviously are ignorant."Table of Champions and Pure/Pro Gamers" are constructs of your delusion.  How many server wars did you take part in? None.  I have participated in multiple. Due to your ignorance I will explain, 3-7 month scorched earth seiging campaigns with up to 450 people on the field (Malog). 150 v 150 was commonplace. Political skill, group composition, coordinated leadership and the will to hold it together, not to break, even after you have lost multiple cities. THAT is what wins campaigns. Not "Roaming PvP". Your only future is that of an outlier, rabble, a merc force at best. You're a joke.

I was in the most dominant shadowbane guild to date... Nt though...

 

Your view is so naive tbh, it speaks to your experience... you definitely didn't sit at the table of champions.

 

You basically think the 200/200 army wins the game, and not the small skirmishes and decisions that came before it... there is no end game without an early game... The joke's.... on you.

Edited by VIKINGNAIL

Skeggold, Skalmold, Skildir ro Klofnir

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Hey, folks. Friendly reminder that there is a vast difference between disagreeing with someone and insulting someone. The former is fine, the latter is not. Personal attacks can lead to warning points. For the most part, I stay out of this thread so everyone can thump their chests and all that fun stuff, but it has gotten out of hand and I've had to step in several times in this last week or so.  

 

Chill on the personal attacks, please.  


Valerie "Pann" Massey, Director of Community
 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Comes down to this. 

 

A gamer like Viking can zerg if he wants to and do well.

Can rolling in a small group and do well.

And can solo and do well.

 

I say why limit yourself? 

 

Not knocking large guilds, but I found the truly good large guilds have a core of elite players or they work with a small elite roaming guild. 

 

GW2 a large guild asked my guild to tag up under them and win some GvGs against two smack talking elite roaming guilds.   After we won two things happened the smack talking elite guilds shut up and the large guild had a ton of people asking for invites their numbers nearly doubled.  

 

Really it just takes a little practice to get decent at small scale fighting, its well worth it.

Edited by Xomox

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Comes down to this. 

 

A gamer like Viking can zerg if he wants to and do well.

Can rolling in a small group and do well.

And can solo and do well.

 

I say why limit yourself? 

 

Not knocking large guilds, but I found the truly good large guilds have a core of elite players or they work with a small elite roaming guild. 

 

GW2 a large guild asked my guild to tag up under them and win some GvGs against two smack talking elite roaming guilds.   After we won two things happened the smack talking elite guilds shut up and the large guild had a ton of people asking for invites their numbers nearly doubled.  

 

Really it just takes a little practice to get decent at small scale fighting, its well worth it.

Yep the people that excelled in shadowbane when it was at its most competitive and populated and the people that excel in other pvp focused games are the ones that adapt to whatever situation is presented.  There is no "I'm a 3v3 guy only" or "I'm a big battle guy only"... Someone that was like that would be an incomplete pvper and in a game like crowfall you will need to be adaptive to truly excel, because not every fight will be small, not every fight will be large.

 

People imagine the big battles that the game will hopefully be able to facilitate, but they are forgetting all the small caravan skirmishes and random battles at resource points that transpire to ever build up the funds to make war or defend against a siege. 

 

As they say you gotta walk before you run... and people will need to be able to win all the small skirmishes to get what they need before even worrying about the big battles. 

 

And the guilds that excel most will be the ones that can allocate as few players as possible to each individual resource node or caravan while still guaranteeing the success of getting the materials back to the guild... So you are still going to want those great pvpers to make things generally more efficient in how you use your manpower.  And of course the more efficient your guild the better off you are with your roaming bands to administer some sorta territorial control or hinder an enemy's control.

 

Edit:  I remember some of the great power my guild could administer, in shadowbane, on the map simply because our A-team pvpers could basically take on anywhere from 3x to 15x their own number and win.  It made it very difficult for opponents to have any sort of real map control. 

Edited by VIKINGNAIL

Skeggold, Skalmold, Skildir ro Klofnir

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Comes down to this. 

 

A gamer like Viking can zerg if he wants to and do well.

Can rolling in a small group and do well.

And can solo and do well.

dafuq___by_merkmusic-d8czprw.png


30Vkd00.png

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Yes and shadowbane launched on march 25th... you aren't doing yourself any favors here...

 

How do you figure? Ubisoft doesn't claim anywhere remotely close to your 200k in sales number, which you purport to be the equivalent of the initial pop.

 

Ubisoft states 50k subscriptions several weeks in, which stayed relatively consistent until August (which is after you admit to having left), with a rise in pop in December with the expansion release and the opening of European servers. 

 

Bottom line - you don't have a clue what you are talking about, and have yet to make a single post with a shred of evidence regarding your claims. By the end of 2004, the pop had dropped significantly, but that's 18 months after your 8 week tour ended. As I said to Sheen previously, you left just as the general public was getting leveled and geared well enough to defend themselves.

 

By the way, continuing to tell people that "if they sat at the table of champions they would know" doesn't make you seem better than everyone else - in fact, I think it has the opposite effect.


CF_Van.png

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

 are the ones that adapt to whatever situation is presented.  There is no "I'm a 3v3 guy only" or "I'm a big battle guy only"... Someone that was like that would be an incomplete pvper and in a game like crowfall you will need to be adaptive to truly excel, because not every fight will be small, not every fight will be large.

 

People imagine the big battles that the game will hopefully be able to facilitate, but they are forgetting all the small caravan skirmishes and random battles at resource points that transpire to ever build up the funds to make war or defend against a siege. 

 

As they say you gotta walk before you run... and people will need to be able to win all the small skirmishes to get what they need before even worrying about the big battles. 

 

And the guilds that excel most will be the ones that can allocate as few players as possible to each individual resource node or caravan while still guaranteeing the success of getting the materials back to the guild... So you are still going to want those great pvpers to make things generally more efficient in how you use your manpower.  And of course the more efficient your guild the better off you are with your roaming bands to administer some sorta territorial control or hinder an enemy's control.

What guild was that again?

 

Otherwise, I pretty much agree with this post. The most effective pvp players will be small units in larger empires - the empire provides them with resources, and the small unit PvPers will essentially become force multipliers for the larger mass.

Edited by vandarr

CF_Van.png

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

But if this is your (narrow and absurd) view, you inherently cannot determine who the best Shadowbane players were in the first place if you only played on one of the release servers, missing something like 90% of the game's PvP development. Your base of reference, just as a matter of logic and common sense, provides too small and too crude of a sample to support your assertion, and if you possessed a modicum of logic or common sense you wouldn't advance the claims that you do in the first place. Such comments would only be justified if the nature of PvP, GvG, and siege warfare did not evolve in SB over time, when in fact the opposite is true; nor did the game population instantly bottom out, but the largest server populations (in terms of raw numbers) and largest sieges were on servers from 2004-2005, not 2003, and not on release servers. If you're going by raw population numbers and collective guild experience, then Vengeance was easily more competitive than ANY release server, as its population more than doubled that of every release server's peak #s, and the top guilds that had survived on Treachery, Scorn, Dread, Death, Deception, Chaos, and Carnage all migrated to duke it out on there. Simply put, if your experience is limited to a release server, you're not fit to comment on when SB was most competitive, or when the best players played, or even whom the best players were, as your game experience and base of reference is intrinsically too limited for such an assessment. It's like saying that the Greek hoplite constituted the greatest infantry formation of the ancient era, but without any acquaintance with the Roman legion... or even that Assyrians produced the best cavalry, any and all subsequent adaptations or evolutions, even cataphracts of the later Iranian variation, are entirely irrelevant.

 

I played from 2003-2007, when the supposedly most elite beta guilds played and thereafter.. Comparing the dominant guilds of 2003 and the dominant guilds of 2005 and thereafter is like comparing apples and oranges due to how the nature of the political game changed (e.g., forming alliances became frowned upon), but it's undeniable that the competitive nations of '05 and thereafter were more organized than even the most organized guilds in '03 by leaps and bounds, and both the average player and average guild on each server became far more competitive as time progressed. This shouldn't be surprising, as Shadowbane was an extremely Darwinian game. By 2005, the most competitive guilds were nothing like the beta guilds or old guilds who migrated to SB from older games, but were mongrelized consortiums of the best of the best pure Shadowbane players who came from competitive release guilds and the competitive guilds who followed them.

 

Simply put, dominating at a time when the average guild didn't understand how to form the best groups with the best built characters and didn't even use a voice communication server is an almost meaningless and laughable accomplishment. There's historical value in such achievements, but not much by way of objective bragging rights. This is why players who played when average GvG and siege tactics were far more evolved laugh at the players who think they "beat the game" because they tagged into some release server zerg that won a few wars against poorly organized coalitions of nations with no reputation.

 

With all of that being said, my commentary shouldn't be construed to indicate that guilds who came later were necessarily more evolved and more competitive than guilds who temporally preceded them (albeit this would be true with the average skill level of guilds as time progressed), but that you have to take a lot of factors into consideration for such comparisons. One also has to account for the political nature of server warfare changing as the "anti-nutcupping" norm became a determining factor and NvN sieging became the ideal. In some ways this wasn't a wholly positive development, as certain types of political activity disappeared, as well as certain types of RP guilds, merchant guilds, and so forth.

 

Jesus man (Man? Time? Can I call you Man?). You post just like I do.  And btw I came when you started talking about classical military.  As one history nerd to another, I have to call out one thing though.  The Roman legion was just the name of a roman "division" whereas hoplite speaks to a particular type of troop.  It would be more accurate to compare "hoplite" as a formation to the Roman maniple system, which was, after Rome itself abandoned the hoplite formation, the primary military method used by the legion.

 

I dig your posts bro.


Your milkshake lures all the fine folks to the yard. Verily, it is better than mine. Surely it is better than mine. Would you teach me, or would you levy a fee? - Integ

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Create an account or sign in to comment

You need to be a member in order to leave a comment

Create an account

Sign up for a new account in our community. It's easy!

Register a new account

Sign in

Already have an account? Sign in here.

Sign In Now

  • Recently Browsing   0 members

    No registered users viewing this page.

×
×
  • Create New...