Pretty self explanatory. Although the developers are probably pretty far into developing these sorts of things, I just wanted to make this anyway.

Never ever. Gamebryo would explode with that many moving actors on the screen.

This is really the only argument, and it's valid. If they didn't have to adhere to these parameters, then I'd like to see huge wars in TES, and not just in cinematics; wars I could participate in.

Nopper. We already seen "Large Scale Battles" in Oblivion with the Dremora seen as "Evil" because of this kind of setup.

No.
For one, as mentioned above, Gamebryo would be forced to rip a hole in the fabric of space-time to render whole armies on the screen all at once.

For two, even if we want to do the workaround where we segment areas into separate minuscule cells and have the battle purportedly raging around us just out of sight, battles favor players who can take damage. The Battle of Bruma was nightmarish enough with a character that relied on stealth; I don't even want to consider doing it again.

For three, battles are a part of the collection of things that I find increases the severity of what's going on around the player, thus guilt-tripping them into doing whatever needs doing and thus rushing the storyline and the game. And purposely ignoring such things brings out illogical scenarios:
"Hey, c'mon! You need to do some prep-work for this big battle we're going to have shortly!"
"Oh, actually, I was just going to delay it indefinitely while I go pick some flowers."

Is the OP talking about those Japanese battle games? Like Kessan 1 and 2 for Ps2. I like those games but NO for TES.

NO! Is Ibe been saying before, I HATE that every fantasy game/movie allways have a great "epic" battle. I get so sick of it, I mean almost any new rpg has atleast 1 huge battle, so please dont.

And as someone said, It would be too much hack and slash for a stealth character.

Once in a while between provinces

Yes, as long as there's sufficient plot elements behind it (no random epic battles for the lulz) and it doesn't lag the game to an unplayable state (which is what will happen in oblivion).

There should be large scale battles between provinces rarely I think.

no inter province stuff. i laugh in the face of anyone who hopes for tht. :wave: in my imagination it can stay.

Here's a reason why Large scaled battles in TES= BAD

I got a mod that makes more daedra pour out of the Gates at the Battle for Bruma quest and the mod also made the gate intervals longer.

First try:
I loaded up an old save file with all the Allies from each city and we lost

Second try:
I did the same as the first but this time I created full actor copies of some of the guards

The end result was a large group of NPCs running from one gate to the other, it wasn't as laggy as one would think. I made about forty extra guards altogether

The only no factor seems to be coming from the Gamebryo engine.

They need to get rid of that.

And crap people , are the only good battles the ones where its 1n1 all the time? Maybe I wan't to see 50vs50, with total mayhem slaughtering each other, that is awesome!

Having to close all those Oblivion gates became quite a tedious task, so no large scale battles for me.

Only if combat is so quick, that I can kill an enemy with one blow, like in Assassin's Creed 2. Otherwise, it would not be fun.

Besides, can't Umbra help with the lag factor if they wanted to do epic battles?

I prefer small raids that can happen randomly in some places, bandits attacking villages near their hideout and guerrilla attacks near the borders, like in http://www.imperial-library.info/mwbooks/danceinfire.shtml.
Story wise i could see border conflicts instead of a full blown war, where you could play a spy or diplomat instead of a warrior.
But i strongly dislike the "Big Epic War Of Good And Evil?"

Nah, smallish battles (like, about 500-1000 fighters in total) should be fine, I don't need big ones. I fought a few castle sieges in Lineage II with that many players at once in the area, and it was big fun - you never ran out of things to do.

Sure, a smalish battle. That's what, the whole poppulation of Cyrodiil represented in TES IV?

I remember seeing a thread like this a while ago, and I would say large battles.

A thing they can do to get around that is have the player far away, maybe even commanding the battle from the top of a big, tall thing. As oposed to being in the battle.
And since your far away, instead of having really good visual quality actors (which should slow it down), it can be so they don't have as good visual quality.
Maybe even so that your teammates only have backsides(since thats all you will be able to see), and your enemies only have frontsides (since thats all you will be able to see)
Or they could do what was done in Gears of War 2 (which let the designers have caboodles of characters on screen at a time). I have no idea how they did that, but if Bethesda could do that, then it would be happyness.

It may be confusing, but I think that if they could, I would love to see some large scale battles.
Maybe a huge raid on a city, or even between provinces would be cool. I would also like to have a part of the game when you command the battle, and whatnot.

Of course. The Bruma gate battle was a start. Even a handful of 10vs10 battles would be new for TES. Something like 100vs100 sounds unbelievable though

When I first bought Morrowind and chose to become a Spellsword because "supports imperial troops in battle", I actually expected to fight alongside some imperial troops.

A bit less than that.

Basically, my rough guidelines are like that:

* Below 100 participants - a skirmish
* 100 to 1000 participants - a small-scale battle
* 1000 to 10000 participants - a medium-scale battle
* 10000+ participants (say, the Battle of Vienna 1683) - a large-scale battle

So really, I don't need TES5 to have large-scale battles. Small-scale ones would be enough for me.

Depends on the numbers but yeah. 30 vs 30 is large fo TES. If you're playing as a thief or a florist or whatever then you can prance around or just avoid the quest, that's no reason for being against them.

But yeah, Oblivion couldn't handle that. Could barely handle the Batte for Bruma on my 360, was absolute hell on my PC.

I'd love to see a situation in the game where the "huge battle" is somewhere removed, and you're dealing with the smaller skirmishes in the surrounding areas. That's workable, but still gives you a "taste" of the action. You can actively dive in and do battle if your character is geared to do so, skulk around the edges and "ambush" rival skirmishers as a stealth character, or provide healing, magical enhancement, and other support from the back ranks for a more pacifistic or fragile character.

We keep complaining that there's nothing to spend all that money on in the games; what about if YOU are financing one of the armies, or at least a company of the participating troops, in support of one side or the other. You've got to provide them with the equipment, training, leadership, and raw recruits over the course of the game in order for your "faction" to have a chance of winning, both by direct financial contributions and by various "quests". Your own combat on the fringes would also have an effect, but a non-combat character could still "win" by providing "support" during the actual fight, and advantages through intrigue or statesmanship during the preceeding quests, to keep their side viable, whereas a "tank" character would have to do more of the fighting personally. By allowing you to back either faction, and gearing the quests accordingly, you give the player more "replay" value than a simple "us versus them" one-sided story like the MQ in OB.

They shouldn't happen. I think a large battle could be a good ending for a main quest; but only if it was a pre-rendered movie. Large battles shouldn't happen in-game because of too much lag and you will get ridiculously much loot that will unbalance the game after that.

A better idea, would be to sneak into the enemys territory and liquidate their leader. Without a leader, the enemys army will disintegrate and become unorganized. That would be a much better and peaceful solution, instead of a giant massacre.

As someone else mentioned, Id rather have some border conflicts than full-scale war. Some guerilla warfare or chance encounters between passing scout parties.