Im really glad PC has 32 people

[ShadowX8001]

I was just playin in a server with 24 people, and it was like nothing was good on. It was weird. i felt like I was alone in the server. Poor console people I would like to see more people in the final version of the game too. The more the merry. (nothing you can say will change my mind)

[Kylee!]

Re: Im really glad PC has 32 people

I actually rather play with 20-15 people then 32...

[The_Eliminator]

Re: Im really glad PC has 32 people

Yea i agree i have preferred playing with around 20 people, i dunno i just find its less sniper and mortar spam and more about actually defending or attacking the objectives.

[troybob]

Re: Im really glad PC has 32 people

you mean - rush mode. not the game. right?

[imported_Erol]

Re: Im really glad PC has 32 people

I like 5v5 games better

[Indecisi0n]

Re: Im really glad PC has 32 people

I like when its just me....im a EMO loaner :shakehead:

[DarQraven]

Re: Im really glad PC has 32 people

I enjoy smaller games, like 8v8, very much. Your actions directly influence the outcome of the match. Not so much with higher player counts.

With 32v32, stuff becomes cramped and random. Whether or not you manage to destroy an objective is only partly based on whether you are good at the game or coordinated a good attack, and mostly based on whether or not 5 people just happened to spawn nearby or there is one guy in a dark corner somewhere that you hadn't seen.

It's a rush to play, but ultimately less fun.

This is mostly due to prediction. When you're playing 8v8, you can more or less keep track or at least accurately guess where enemies are and where they're going, and sometimes even what kit they're using. This allows you to set up well-timed pushes and avoid spots where you know the enemy is at an advantage.

This is simply impossible in 32 player matches. There is NO WAY you can predict, much less keep track of, 16 other players. You can be shot at from practically every angle, so arming charges becomes more of a trial and error affair than anything.

Simple example: lure all the engies to objective A of the first section of Port Valdez by camping and 'harassing' with the MBT or light vehicles (possibly even get people to switch kit just to kill you), and then set up a rush attack on objective B with soldier kit players.
Then, when they come to defuse, you know what direction they're going to come from, and they'll be ill equipped.
Good luck trying that on a 32pl server

[Kylee!]

Re: Im really glad PC has 32 people

i enjoy smaller games, like 8v8, very much. Your actions directly influence the outcome of the match. Not so much with higher player counts.

With 32v32, stuff becomes cramped and random. Whether or not you manage to destroy an objective is only partly based on whether you are good at the game or coordinated a good attack, and mostly based on whether or not 5 people just happened to spawn nearby or there is one guy in a dark corner somewhere that you hadn't seen.

It's a rush to play, but ultimately less fun.

This is mostly due to prediction. When you're playing 8v8, you can more or less keep track or at least accurately guess where enemies are and where they're going, and sometimes even what kit they're using. This allows you to set up well-timed pushes and avoid spots where you know the enemy is at an advantage.

This is simply impossible in 32 player matches. There is no way you can predict, much less keep track of, 16 other players. You can be shot at from practically every angle, so arming charges becomes more of a trial and error affair than anything.

qft.

[JunoPPCLI]

Re: Im really glad PC has 32 people

Disagree.. In 21cw we predict, keep track of, and react, to an opposing army of 32 players.. Every week, for 12 hours on battleday.

Is it difficult ? Yes.

Can it be done.

Yes.

[Vreki]

Re: Im really glad PC has 32 people

16v16, yes but on each side:
*4 will be sniping with little effect on the game
*3 are either camping for vehicles or trying (unsuccesfully) to steal the enemies
*1 is AFK
*2 think they are playing team deatmatch.

So its usually one or two squads doing the fighting anyway.

[troybob]

Re: Im really glad PC has 32 people

If you design a game for 32 players - it can play well.

If you design a game for 64 players - it can play well.

I stick by my original stand. Just because you design a game for 64 players doesn't mean it won't play well with 32 or even 8. You just have to make the maps smaller.

If I wanted small battles - I'd buy MW2.

I suppose I'll just wait for BF3 to get back to the BF1942 days. Not sure why I have to wait until 201x to play the style of game that was popular in 2001. I guess people just eat what EA feeds them.

Nah it's just a matter of preference I guess.

[CptainCrunch]

Re: Im really glad PC has 32 people

People are crazy and always think more= better. If a game is awesome with 32 players then its super sized extreme awesome with two times that.

Game is good without prone, it would be AMAZING with it.

Sniper rifles are great without a silencer, but WHAT IF it has one?

Oh man, the possibilities are endless.

Crunch

[Rambo]

Re: Im really glad PC has 32 people

high palyers = lots of chance to kill many without having to search forever

low players on high player server= everyone has a choice of lots of vehicles and rounds are long

negative to high players= everyone hogs vehicles and not enough for everyone(enter the whores and TKers)

posatives to high players= maps are nice and big(for sniping ,freedom and engaging at a distance)

[MrKLM]

Re: Im really glad PC has 32 people

24 is not that bad really. The maps are a good scale for 24, the PS3 beta level played a lot better with 24 then the demo does, but that map in general is just not as good and doesnt flow as well.