I mean really? This throws every online FPS handbook out the window. No more spawn-camping, no more camping (unless the maps are HUGE), and lastly the vehicle wait lines. I've played Battelfield games and have seen literally lines of people waiting for the helicopter, so that'll be like half the team waiting for it. Why would they come up with 256 anyways? Even with 256, how much lag is there?  
 
Feel free to correct my ignorance of not researching the game too well...

" No more spawn-camping, no more camping "

I've yet too play MAG, but I think it's an interesting enough premise.

I'm going to pick this up anyway.
 
From what I hear the beta plays fine, and the structure of the game allows for some pretty crazy scenarios. 
 
 I suspect it's a game that will get better with time. Almost by default, those who choose to stick with it will want to play the game properly. I want to play the game properly. I want to get on a good team that works together and reaps the rewards.
 
I've always wanted a console version of Battlefield 2, and this might fit the bill. If it doesn't work out, then at least somebody tried to do it. I suspect it won't be a huge smash, but the game only needs enough players to make it fun.

I think it's a ridiculous amount of people, but I suppose it could be awesome.

Their will ALWAYS be camping.

So i am wondering if there is a mode that has team elimination in it, no respawning, that would be pretty sweet.  Of course, I find the premise of 256 dumb here because you dont actually ever see the other players, just the ones you are competing against to complete your objective right?  Or is it possible to run across the map to see the other players.  From my experience in the beta, it seems more like they set up concurrent games and the sever just updates the other players on the status of other teams.

" So i am wondering if there is a mode that has team elimination in it, no respawning, that would be pretty sweet.  Of course, I find the premise of 256 dumb here because you dont actually ever see the other players, just the ones you are competing against to complete your objective right?  Or is it possible to run across the map to see the other players.  From my experience in the beta, it seems more like they set up concurrent games and the sever just updates the other players on the status of other teams. "

Nope.

Are there even vehicles in this game? From what I played of the beta I did not see any... Anyway, the game is actually really well designed for that many players, many of the issues you seem concerned about where non-existent.
 
@TheHBK: The maps are open, you can go wherever, though it is highly recommended you work with your squad on what you where assigned to do.  

well they tout the 256 player thing but, from what I understand, you are broken up into squads which makes it more like it is 16 on 16 (or how many ever people are in a squad...I dunno).  Then you have a bunch of squads all fighting it out on a big map for control.  So, imo, the 256 thing is kind of meaningless.  Why do I want to play with a ton of people that I don't know and that I will never see in the same game that I'm in.
 
I guess it is over my head.  I was in the beta and only gave it an hour's chance.  Mainly because I just simply didn't like the feel of the game in general.  I'm interested in seeing what people's opinion on the full game is tho, regardless.

"well they tout the 256 player thing but, from what I understand, you are broken up into squads which makes it more like it is 16 on 16 (or how many ever people are in a squad...I dunno).  Then you have a bunch of squads all fighting it out on a big map for control.  So, imo, the 256 thing is kind of meaningless.  Why do I want to play with a ton of people that I don't know and that I will never see in the same game that I'm in.  I guess it is over my head.  I was in the beta and only gave it an hour's chance.  Mainly because I just simply didn't like the feel of the game in general.  I'm interested in seeing what people's opinion on the full game is tho, regardless. "

I have been waiting for a 256 player war game...  But to bad there isn't any on the xbox 360!!  Now for it being to much!!!!  How can it be???  Its war!!!!  There isn't a 16-31 people cap in real wars.  I totally welcome it and yes I hope our internet and video game systems can over come the huge amount of stress this can make.  256 hell I want even more!!!!  But if thats the cap at the moment I'll except that!

" I mean really? This throws every online FPS handbook out the window. No more spawn-camping, no more camping (unless the maps are HUGE), and lastly the vehicle wait lines. I've played Battelfield games and have seen literally lines of people waiting for the helicopter, so that'll be like half the team waiting for it. Why would they come up with 256 anyways? Even with 256, how much lag is there?   Feel free to correct my ignorance of not researching the game too well... "

The number of players depends on the mode type.
 
I think it ranges from the twenties, sixties, hundreds and the maximum 256 depending on the mode.

I've been playing it for a little while now. Haven' t had to much problems with lag. Yes there are vehicles in the game.

Can i run over the entire other team and become emperor of the map?

That's the good thing about the game, I guess, if they can make it work properly. Although that is not an easy task, and, by having played the beta, the developing team failed at making it work, since it did not deliver a fun clusterfuck, but simply a clusterfuck.

There are many game modes with various amounts of people for different peoples enjoyment.  There is NO lag.  I have yet to run into it even on the 256 player matches.  If you do have lag I can promise that it is your internet.  Vehicles don't seem to be a problem I see them sitting vacant all the time, especially in the beta.  I reccommend everyone who enjoyed the beta even a little bit to buy the game.  

Vehicles are nice in the game, but not a must like in Battlefield, in order to get anywhere. Since there is usally objectives and enemies everywhere. I often see the vehicles provide cover-fire more often than actually transporting troops. 
 
But the 256 player limit really works. The large 256 player maps basically have 4 fronts. Each front tackled by 32 people which is 4 squads of 8 people. And there is two squads per "sector" so you can choose if you want to spawn at Squad 1 or Squad 2 spawn. But not at 3 and 4 which is really on the same front and really close. 32 people on one front usally help eachother out with repairing bunkers and gates. But the chaos really begins when there arent many objectives left. Then its basically 128 attackers mowing into 128 defenders. But as long as you can hold your front with gates and defences, it's quite easy to keep the enemy at bay. 
 
Because, 128 players vs 128 players on a straight map wouldn't be much fun. Have you ever played a small map in CS and someone set the player limit to 64 players? Yeah, that's basically how it would turn out, people spawning and shooting and just chaos, no control or no tactics. With these four fronts, each platoon has to do their job well. It kinda makes you feel as you are a part of a bigger team. It's still chaotic as hell.
 
BFBC2 feels really massive and that's only 24 player matches (on console atleast) so 256 is.. Quite stunning actually, that they made it work and made it fun. The last game that tried alot of players was Joint Ops (by the Delta Force guys Novalogic) and that was just a cluttred mess that didn't sound or look good at all. Basically 100 players running and gunning without any clear objectives or so. This game really works because of the structure that comes via squads. If people follow a good squad leader, it'll often be better for the team, more fun and more exp!

Its just a gimmick. Its clear that even in those big games most of the skirmishes will involve maybe 40 people at a time, at most.

Not really, read the big post directly above you. The high player count really comes to the fore when you've got a good commander issuing orders and players who aren't acting like giddy like COD bunnies.

Yeah, exactly like Hooligan says. And even if it was 128 vs 128. Imagine a COD MW2 map with 100 players, 50 on each team. It wouldn't be any fun, it would just be death-respawn-death-respawn. Sure, it might look impressive with people everywhere going at it like it was some sort of civil war -warfare with everyone just charing into the fray but it wouldnt be much fun.
 
It's fun to play with the thought of massive player amounts just charging but in every game or mod that this has been done with, it's just chaos. I remember a BF2 demo server that somehow had around 150 players on the smallest map, for 16 players or what it was. It wasn't any fun, trust me. :P
 
You need structure and good game design to really make it work. Besides, it really feels massive. Theoretically, everyone could just abandon their front and flock to another and duke it out there, but most people dont, they stick with their objectives and defend their front. Which in turn makes this game massive and playable.
 
I mean, take World of Warcraft. You don't see 7 million playing at the same time, you don't even see the full thousand or what the server caps might be when you play. Same with MAG. It feels massive in the same way, you might not engage in battle with all the players, but you know they are there and you know what your friends on your team are doing their best to advance to the next objective. That's why it feels pretty massive!
 
 
Sorry for the long post again. :P

A game like Battlefield handles this by creating essential specialist roles. I think its a problem that everyone's kind of rolling around with the same kind of dude and that vehicles don't play a bigger role. The more I think about the problems I see in the game the more I notice Battlefield already kind of solved them.