-
Hey, guest user. Hope you're enjoying NeoGAF! Have you considered registering for an account? Come join us and add your take to the daily discourse.
Battlefield 3 |OT2| Mine! RendeZook! Wa Isl!
- Thread starter The Faceless Master
- Start date
The Faceless Master
Member
SirButterstick
Banned
I just tried my first round of 64 player TDM. Holy retarded Batman!
Why are you playing 64 players anyway? DICE has gone on record stating NONE of the game modes (even the "tried and true" Conquest) isn't balanced for that many players. :/ PC gamers are hardheaded and wanting so many people more than the maps can take and then whine when it's a cluster fuck. Well, gee, I wonder why!?
Fixed it!
Oh, didn't know that. Aaargh. I hate switching servers. I just like to stick with a group of people and kind of 'learn' to work with a given squad. Its fun sometimes learning how others in your squad play and how you can back them up or vice versa as you go from match-to-match.
SirButterstick
Banned
Jesus, I just wanted to stretch my legs a bit and try something new. Don't have an aneurism
Man, I hate bolt actions, but tonight I had a great round with the M40 thanks to the magic of the straight pull bolt. I was able to effectively plop down a spawn beacon close to the objective and just pick guys off with the 8x, and sustain that fire thanks to the straight pull. It's always such a chore to play with the bolt actions since one miss can mean life or death and missing a moving target is just so easy, but now that I can make that fast follow-up, plinking heads is much less stressful. I still main with assault weapons and don't think I'll ever play a sniper proper on conquest maps, but it's something I can do now on rush, so I'm good. :3
Wake is terrible in B2K.
Sharqi and Oman are worth the money alone. Spiderman3SoGood.gif on Rush.
TheMan
Member
is it terrible because it's a 3-flag map now, or are there other issues as well?
Both. There is no other carrier so it's basically Conquest Assault, which isn't a bad mode. But not a great mode either. And the three flags basically ruin any sense of movement/travel because you're going to basically revolve around the airspace to keep it for your team if you're on that team so jets can spawn.
Anton Sugar
Member
Didn't they add a 5 flag version to the consoles?
Steelyuhas
Member
Yes, they did.
TheMan
Member
is that a patch for the karkand map pack or a new download?
Steelyuhas
Member
I believe it's a part of the latest patch.
Yes, but it's still Conquest Assault. So it's still ruined (IMO) because there's no even "rush for the flags from different ends and then battle" like 1943 flipping had. DICE's design decision for Wake here is baffling.
The Faceless Master
Member
it's "terrible" because Seks likes the 1943 version, which is baby mode Conquest Head-On instead of Conquest Assault.
XANDER CAGE
Member
What.
TheMan
Member
ok, so i bought the fucking map pack about an hour ago but I cannot access the content. I downloaded that rent a server update, I deleted my cache, but I can't access the maps when I try to pick them from the quick match menu, and I can't join any games using the maps from the server browser. btw, i have the 360 version.
any help would be appreciated.
any help would be appreciated.
The bitter tears of someone who has only played 24 player matches.
All the Karkand maps are designed with 64 players in mind. I would never play them with anything else.
Anton Sugar
Member
Wait, when the hell did DICE say that NONE of the game modes are balanced for 64 players? I call BS on that. Pretty sure they referred to a few specific game modes and/or maps.
"64 player servers are unsupported. Please don't play them."
They never balanced for 64 players in mind. It was basically a bullet point on their list for PC owners so they wouldn't whine and complain when/if DICE admitted they weren't balancing maps for 64 players.
Besides, all you need to see is the base maps to know DICE never intended for more than 32 players to be in the maps.
gregor7777
Banned
Here's what I did:
- Purchased the DLC on the Live website
- It downloaded a 108kb key to the console
- Put in BF3, and it told me I couldn't access the maps
- Went to the "Store" or whatever in-game
- "Purchased" the expansion for 0pts
- Downloaded a very large update which I assume contains the maps and such
- then restarted the game and the content was there
I mean, it's really apparent 64-players was not on DICE's mind, even with the "Conquest Large" variants they did to "support" that bullet point.
Rush: Totally meant for 32 players and it shows in the base maps. Even then that's questionable with Metro, Bazaar chokepoints.
Deathmatch: Not really meant for more than 16 players, I feel. But no more than 32 players either. Total Chaos on the maps (mostly because of no smart spawn system) and too small to where there's too much "action" at times and you're spawning into a trap of being nearby someone to be killed/to kill them.
Conquest: This is, again, touch and go. But the maps of "Conquest Large" are basically adding 1-4 new flags over the console/Conquest base variants and in some cases (Canals D) they aren't too useful for more than "map movement" for that larger player count.
It's like "hack"ing (as DICE would say, but we all know it isn't) 16 players into Squad Rush and then complaining that it's too chaotic because the map is too small and there is only one objective to focus on. Well, no duh. 16 players wasn't meant to be played on that map and supported. That's my point.
I really feel DICE dropped the ball on 64-players, despite not touching the PC version (yet) simply because I can see the map design doesn't support those in any of the modes with the exception of, again, Conquest which is touch-and-go at best given there's no alt-routes on maps at times.
Rush: Totally meant for 32 players and it shows in the base maps. Even then that's questionable with Metro, Bazaar chokepoints.
Deathmatch: Not really meant for more than 16 players, I feel. But no more than 32 players either. Total Chaos on the maps (mostly because of no smart spawn system) and too small to where there's too much "action" at times and you're spawning into a trap of being nearby someone to be killed/to kill them.
Conquest: This is, again, touch and go. But the maps of "Conquest Large" are basically adding 1-4 new flags over the console/Conquest base variants and in some cases (Canals D) they aren't too useful for more than "map movement" for that larger player count.
It's like "hack"ing (as DICE would say, but we all know it isn't) 16 players into Squad Rush and then complaining that it's too chaotic because the map is too small and there is only one objective to focus on. Well, no duh. 16 players wasn't meant to be played on that map and supported. That's my point.
I really feel DICE dropped the ball on 64-players, despite not touching the PC version (yet) simply because I can see the map design doesn't support those in any of the modes with the exception of, again, Conquest which is touch-and-go at best given there's no alt-routes on maps at times.
I H8 Memes
Member
That's weird. All of the maps I prefer to play on seem to be fine with 64 players. Maps like Sharqi, Caspian, and Karkand feel like ghost towns at 48 players.
Anton Sugar
Member
They actually said this?
So you're talking about the base maps, and in modes other than Conquest? Because the cap points in the B2K map pack are almost exactly the same as they were in BF2 for 64 players. The base maps you might have more of a point on, especially for maps like Damavand, Metro, and Bazaar, but Caspian, Kharg, Firestorm, and even Canals are absolutely fine with 64 players.
Hate to say it, but you really need to actually PLAY the 64-player maps before you rant against whiny PC players and how the maps you've (technically) never played are imbalanced.
The Faceless Master
Member
pretty sure that comment was for modes other than Conquest 64...
SirButterstick
Banned
lol consoles
Agree, when you've played a couple of games with full 64 players and then suddenly there is much less action and enemy encounters. You look at the scoreboard and see that it's 25 v 25 instad of 32 v 32. Just that small of a difference seems to make a big impact on the battlefield.
I've only played 24p games on 360 so far, but I'm certainly getting BF3 when I build my new pc. Rush feels overcrowded with even that many; I don't see how it would work with more. BC1/2 didn't have 64 player rush and it was always filled with constant action on 32p servers when I got it for pc.
Conquest however; BF3 has bigger maps than BC2, and engagements feel a bit more sparse. Watching videos of a 64p game on Oman, kharg, and all the other greats looks amazing fun and makes the battlefield look alive relative to 24p console servers.
Conquest however; BF3 has bigger maps than BC2, and engagements feel a bit more sparse. Watching videos of a 64p game on Oman, kharg, and all the other greats looks amazing fun and makes the battlefield look alive relative to 24p console servers.
Nemesis121
Member
Once again Dice/EA sucks...Origin is messed up, I can play but can't access my stats, I am level zero and can't do shit in load out....sheeeeesh I might go back to Black Ops if they keep fucking up like this...
Red Blaster
Member
what the fuck am I reading
The Faceless Master
Member
what kind of keyboard? mechanical again right?
I'd like to hear the answers to this as well.
SirButterstick
Banned
I have my new super-Battlefield 3 system coming in two days. i7 with 2 580s SLI. I passed on getting a 680 as I have a 580 already in my old rig. Can't wait to see how good this plays, as I played on medium settings on my old machine.
You only ran medium on a 580? Older CPU or something? I run almost full ultra on my 2.5gb 570 with 2500k.
SirButterstick
Banned
Yeah it was a Phenmon2 x4 970 . . . I was noticng a lot of lag on High.
The Faceless Master
Member
hahaha my party was just talking about that last night... how the stationary launchers sucked and how they were good in bad company and how they had a variety.. stationary machine guns, grenade launchers, etc...
So from the EA Q4 results they have this line
"Battlefield 3 players are still deeply engaged 6.3 million MAUs in March. New content downloads available in May and June."
So is this a hint that PS3 users will get the DLC last week of may or is this talking about something else?
"Battlefield 3 players are still deeply engaged 6.3 million MAUs in March. New content downloads available in May and June."
So is this a hint that PS3 users will get the DLC last week of may or is this talking about something else?
Nabs
Member
Are you in a rush to pick it up? If not I'd recommend waiting for a deal.
Not terribly. I was going to play this weekend while I wait for D3 is all. How often does it go on sale?