Ya so in oblivion the reason we all almost died was becuase the cyrodillic army was consisted of 20 soldiers
What do you people think about the option of being able to raise an army of actual people from the game and fight along side them in a battlefeild
i dont know about you but when the dragons come and the end dawns in fire i want a biggass army to help me out here,,not 20 boozed up lazyass guards
on there vacation time

Well, that'd depend on the power of the engine. But I think maybe we would be able to have about 60 NPCs on screen at once, with the new engine it will hopefully run better.

Skyrim's in a state of civil war. There'll be more than one army.

That said, the reason the Cyrodillic army in Oblivion was so small was because of engine limitations, and that will probably be the case in Skyrim as well. You'll never be able to fight in an army of 100+ people, but Bethesda could still do a better job of making it seem like there are more troops than you see in game. Would really add to the immersion.

I AGREE COMPLETELY!
In Bruma, I was getting all pumped for the big battle at the major Oblivion Gate, and I was thinking "YES!!! Maybe there'll be like 200 soldiers there!"
*8 City Guards, 3 Blades, and the Emperor run outside and start flailing their arms at the Daedra.* I was then thinking "WOW this is cheap"
I agree.

Raise an army and have it run as a cutscene or animation I'd go for.

Otherwise

It's just more "friendlies" that I'd just end up accidentally hitting and eventually have to end up killing

agreed -
Option b would involve having the soldiers all dressed the same, using a simple model. However they did it in Dead Rising, they managed to have seemingly hundreds of independant characters on the screen at once. I would prefer the cut scene though. Maybe have a final duel between the MC and baddie or something more creative for once.

Personally, when I want to lead an army, I load up Medieval: Total War 2. When I want to play an RPG, I load up a TES game. A crossover would only hurt the RPG elements.

Though with a strong enough engine they could still do something better than the Battle of Bruma, surely!

The epic battle of Bruma... with what? Like 8 guys? XD

My heart was pounding it was so action packed.

I suppose it was the best they could do back then though with that engine, its still fun to tease though.

I agree with you almost completely. However, some other RPGs have had great additions to them by including some form of RTS element.

If you could direct a battle- "archers go here, etc., etc., etc.", you could easily make the battle feel more enjoyable.

Granted, I'm biased- it always seems like most of my mods for Morrowind or Oblivion involve some form of world-changing big battles. Including my latest unannounced project that will probably never see the light of the forums (being that I'm out of time to work on it properly and starting to run low on ideas).

You make a good point. On the other hand it could be twice as good as the Battle of Bruma, and I would still find it annoying and crappy.



Back in '92 a game called http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Castles_II:_Siege_and_Conquest came out. For it's time it was pretty good. Now (since it's over 18 years old) it is an outdated piece of junk. So far I've never seen an RPG do better combat than Castles II. Sure, I few upgrades would make them more enjoyable, but that doesn't mean it will be any better than stepping on a rusty nail.

60 NPCs at once...TOTAL VIDGASM