Tweet
Re: EURO Pack Worth To PAY?!?!
I'm in 2 minds about it. While sure new content is good but EF is restricted to a max map size of 32 players which is what I don't like about it.
We have a fully dedicated 64 player server which we choose to limit to 50 players because we find the teamwork is better and there is less chaos and mayhem. We pay nearly twice as much as a regularly 64 player shared server to ensure we never have any lag, can run VOIP @ max quality and also run Battle recorder on 64 player maps even though EA don't recommend to all without any lag.
Now if we add EF maps into the server rotation for a start its going to kick players that don't have it, potentially limiting the player base or ****ing people off enough not to play there again if they refuse to buy EF or we may find if we want to keep the teamwork aspect which we obviously do that 50 players on 32 player maps probably won't cater for good teamwork and it will become chaos and mayhem again both scenarios are not good.
So if we find that the 32 player maps are really suited to only 32 players its going to kick the player number down from 50 to 32, again we pay for the ability to run 64 players not 32 so its a waste of money.
So far we have paid over $2300 for our server costs since day 1 BF2 so others can play for free so we have done a lot to support this community yet EA can't turn around and even make 64 player maps! I find this to be a kick in the guts and not the "oh thanks for your support and saving EA the money and also for us lining their pockets with more money" but we can't be bothered making 64 player maps for only $10 US.
Is this going to continue to be the case with Armoured Fury and the next booster pack or packs?
I hope Shawn or someone from DICE can answer this question because a lot of support they have relied on from private servers may not be there because of the lack of 64 player maps. Hence if its pointless to run it on our server then why even buy the booster packs.
I'm in 2 minds about it. While sure new content is good but EF is restricted to a max map size of 32 players which is what I don't like about it.
We have a fully dedicated 64 player server which we choose to limit to 50 players because we find the teamwork is better and there is less chaos and mayhem. We pay nearly twice as much as a regularly 64 player shared server to ensure we never have any lag, can run VOIP @ max quality and also run Battle recorder on 64 player maps even though EA don't recommend to all without any lag.
Now if we add EF maps into the server rotation for a start its going to kick players that don't have it, potentially limiting the player base or ****ing people off enough not to play there again if they refuse to buy EF or we may find if we want to keep the teamwork aspect which we obviously do that 50 players on 32 player maps probably won't cater for good teamwork and it will become chaos and mayhem again both scenarios are not good.
So if we find that the 32 player maps are really suited to only 32 players its going to kick the player number down from 50 to 32, again we pay for the ability to run 64 players not 32 so its a waste of money.
So far we have paid over $2300 for our server costs since day 1 BF2 so others can play for free so we have done a lot to support this community yet EA can't turn around and even make 64 player maps! I find this to be a kick in the guts and not the "oh thanks for your support and saving EA the money and also for us lining their pockets with more money" but we can't be bothered making 64 player maps for only $10 US.
Is this going to continue to be the case with Armoured Fury and the next booster pack or packs?
I hope Shawn or someone from DICE can answer this question because a lot of support they have relied on from private servers may not be there because of the lack of 64 player maps. Hence if its pointless to run it on our server then why even buy the booster packs.
Comment