Allowing such a big amount of players (everything bigger than 30 IMO) joining one public server will only drastically increase the gap between pub and comp play.
What is the reason behind 8v8?
iwound
(iwound)
#42
wrong.
if you restrict the player amounts a large amount of people either wont play or only play for a while then get frustrated at its inflexibility. even if its a great game.
if you allow higher amounts it will entice more players and at least they may move into the match scene.
there just has to be a middle ground to make the transition easier for novice players to at least try match play occasionally.
iv’e said many many times but here i go again
if you dont want to play in a large server, dont. simple.
spawn amounts per map can be controlled easily. but tbh if someone wants to play 32v32 on waterloo why stop them?
how does it affect you that people are having fun.
Dragonji
(Dragonji)
#43
[QUOTE=iwound;438220]but tbh if someone wants to play 32v32 on waterloo why stop them?
how does it affect you that people are having fun.[/QUOTE]
Lagfest + spam + having low FPS = complaining about how much Splash Damage screwed up another game.
“FFS, if they allow 32v32, why didn’t they balance and build every single map to run perfect with this amount of players?”
BTMPL
(BTMPL)
#44
[QUOTE=Dragonji;438223]Lagfest + spam + having low FPS = complaining about how much Splash Damage screwed up another game.
“FFS, if they allow 32v32, why didn’t they balance and build every single map to run perfect with this amount of players?”[/QUOTE]
Yeah, sadly I can see that happening. If SD wont keep such big numbers in head from the start people will complain about lack of ballance.
iwound
(iwound)
#45
[QUOTE=Dragonji;438223]Lagfest + spam + having low FPS = complaining about how much Splash Damage screwed up another game.
“FFS, if they allow 32v32, why didn’t they balance and build every single map to run perfect with this amount of players?”[/QUOTE]
Err! excuse me your playing in the 8v8 server SO YOU CANT SEE THIS HAPPENING, YOUR NOT THERE, THE PEOPLE THERE WANT TO BE THERE, THEY ARE HAVING FUN,.
Dragonji
(Dragonji)
#46
I can see this happening, after years spent in W:ET. Why would SD allow something the engine can’t handle properly? This doesn’t sound like a feature of AAA-quality game…
montheponies
(montheponies)
#47
this isnt a theoretical debate - we already know this worked way back in 2001. Are we really saying that 12yrs later the current state of technology has regressed to the point where the game has to be restricted to the kind of numbers usually reserved for consoles?
Personally I wouldnt touch a 32v32 server, maximum i would consider would be 16v16 - but that’s just me, plenty of others love that kind of mayhem which is why you had 24/7 servers running Depot. Again it’s about choice and pulling in a wide audience. I regularly played comp 6v6 in RTCW, along with 16v16 pubs on MG and Tram, alongside 16v16 ‘large team’ tournies like Battlefield Europe. Catering for one, minority, demographic in a crowded marketplace is a sure way of killing this game faster than you can say Brink (which also had a 8v8 limit…).
Finally the gap between comp and pub can be miles apart - different strokes for different folks and all that.
Breo
(Breo)
#48
We need at least 2x the size of Camden with more players also vehicles are needed to travel and to have some structure (groups) in gameplay (infantry, air, water, land) only infantry won’t work it’s will be too chaotic. With vehicles you need to add heavy weapons (rocket launchers) to balance the game etc.
Also probably multiple objects are needed because 64 players fighting for 1 object at once is maddness and technically not everyone are able to play it (lag issues).
Tast1c
(Bangtastic)
#49
battlefield dont event work with 32 players lol^^ the map design is just 16v16 imo, maps too small or too less vehicles^^ 64 players are just a gimmick, it doesnt make sense nor it is playable…
nailzor
(nailzor)
#50
Yeah… vehicles… not a fan haha! I’ve played games with vehicles but just never really like em that much, usually in search of game servers where vehicles are disabled =p
ImageOmega
(ImageOmega)
#51
Yeah…can’t understand that people are asking for vehicles in this game and even after playing it. I love Battlefield 3, but I love the infantry combat more so I prefer the Close Quarters Combat DLC.
If you want vehicles, Battlefield 3 does it best.
nailzor
(nailzor)
#52
[QUOTE=ImageOmega;438313]Yeah…can’t understand that people are asking for vehicles in this game and even after playing it. I love Battlefield 3, but I love the infantry combat more so I prefer the Close Quarters Combat DLC.
If you want vehicles, Battlefield 3 does it best.[/QUOTE]
Yeah I think Breo meant if the game was going to have the ability for 32v32, then because maps would need to be so big there would then be the need of vehicles.
Just a lot of posts here, maybe a bit of miscommunication 
INF3RN0
(INF3RN0)
#53
Vehicles might be a suggestion faaaar down in the future or just a mod. Right now this game is completely balanced around infantry play. Let’s not get too far ahead of ourselves. I liked ETQW, but I don’t think a lot of its content belongs in this game.
Nail
(Nail)
#54
vehicles would be catastrophes, although the odd Segway randomly spawned on some maps would be hilarious
Breo
(Breo)
#55
[QUOTE=nailzor;438314]Yeah I think Breo meant if the game was going to have the ability for 32v32, then because maps would need to be so big there would then be the need of vehicles.
Just a lot of posts here, maybe a bit of miscommunication :-D[/QUOTE]
Yeah exactly I was afraid this will turn into a BF clone with huge maps and high player count. I like infantry play.
TacTicToe
(TacTicToe)
#56
I’m glad I found this thread, because the small player size is a bit of a deal breaker for me. If the maps need to be made larger, then so be it. Minimum number of players should be 24, and I would prefer 32. Some of my fondest memories of ET were huge crazy epic battles with 64 players on Goldrush, Fueldump, Battery etc.
Perfect examples of premature game failure, IMO due to too small a player count are
Wolfenstein 2009
Nexuiz
Brink.
There are today, exponentially more people still playing ET and ETQW and even RTCW then there are playing Brink, Wolf 2009 or Nexuiz. What do those games have that made a difference? 64 and 32 slot servers. Being able to create mods and maps was a huge community boost as well. 8v8 is NOT going to cut it, here is why.
At 16 slots, you could EASILY have 16 clan members that want to play. With all clan members on, how do you recruit new members from the pub? The way a clan grows its community, is by having a good server, that is well admin’ed, that has a balance of clan members and pubbers. The pubbers play on your server often because they like it, get to know the members, and then decide they want to become part of your clan. That is how you are able to recruit and grow your clan. 16 just aint gonna do it. This game will fail just like the others. And having multiple 16 slot servers is not the answer either.
When Wolf 2009 came out, our clan was all excited, to the point of giddy. We could NOT wait for it. Once it was released, we were all like wat da fuq? This has to be a joke. It was 12 players by default, you had to change a setting on the command line to force it to 16 players. Ridiculous. We canceled our server immediately. That game declined in popularity over night. Currently, there are only 2 Wolf 2009 servers online. I keep one online, more for nostalgia then anything. Occasionally, there are a few players that still join and play.
My first impression of DB after I got it downloaded was goose pimples on the back of my neck. I’m sitting here watching the training video and seeing a modern version of Goldrush from the London gameplay training video. I’m screaming YES, YES, YES!!! Finally they are coming to their senses and doing it right!!! I was so excited. Then I hit the PLAY button, and saw the servers, and my jaw dropped and hit the floor. The high I had just experienced, came crashing back down. Here is a screenshot to help further illustrate my point…
Of all the server when I looked, only server that had players was the 16 slot server, and it was full. Just more evidence, that sometimes bigger is better. 
As for competition argument, I would have to say that ANYONE that tries to use that argument, must be new to the scene and never seen the leagues and tournaments that were played on RTCW, ET etc. Despite the game and maps being made for larger player counts, you could still have your competitive gameplay in these games. So please don’t use the competitiveness as your argument. It only makes you look silly, to any of us that know better.
Please SD I beg of you, make the maps larger, and increase the player count to a minimum of 24, preferably 32.
slaG
(slaG)
#57
[QUOTE=TacTicToe;441288]I’m glad I found this thread, because the small player size is a bit of a deal breaker for me. If the maps need to be made larger, then so be it. Minimum number of players should be 24, and I would prefer 32. Some of my fondest memories of ET were huge crazy epic battles with 64 players on Goldrush, Fueldump, Battery etc.
Perfect examples of premature game failure, IMO due to too small a player count are
Wolfenstein 2009
Nexuiz
Brink.
There are today, exponentially more people still playing ET and ETQW and even RTCW then there are playing Brink, Wolf 2009 or Nexuiz. What do those games have that made a difference? 64 and 32 slot servers. Being able to create mods and maps was a huge community boost as well. 8v8 is NOT going to cut it, here is why.
At 16 slots, you could EASILY have 16 clan members that want to play. With all clan members on, how do you recruit new members from the pub? The way a clan grows its community, is by having a good server, that is well admin’ed, that has a balance of clan members and pubbers. The pubbers play on your server often because they like it, get to know the members, and then decide they want to become part of your clan. That is how you are able to recruit and grow your clan. 16 just aint gonna do it. This game will fail just like the others. And having multiple 16 slot servers is not the answer either.
When Wolf 2009 came out, our clan was all excited, to the point of giddy. We could NOT wait for it. Once it was released, we were all like wat da fuq? This has to be a joke. It was 12 players by default, you had to change a setting on the command line to force it to 16 players. Ridiculous. We canceled our server immediately. That game declined in popularity over night. Currently, there are only 2 Wolf 2009 servers online. I keep one online, more for nostalgia then anything. Occasionally, there are a few players that still join and play.
My first impression of DB after I got it downloaded was goose pimples on the back of my neck. I’m sitting here watching the training video and seeing a modern version of Goldrush from the London gameplay training video. I’m screaming YES, YES, YES!!! Finally they are coming to their senses and doing it right!!! I was so excited. Then I hit the PLAY button, and saw the servers, and my jaw dropped and hit the floor. The high I had just experienced, came crashing back down. Here is a screenshot to help further illustrate my point…
Of all the server when I looked, only server that had players was the 16 slot server, and it was full. Just more evidence, that sometimes bigger is better.
As for competition argument, I would have to say that ANYONE that tries to use that argument, must be new to the scene and never seen the leagues and tournaments that were played on RTCW, ET etc. Despite the game and maps being made for larger player counts, you could still have your competitive gameplay in these games. So please don’t use the competitiveness as your argument. It only makes you look silly, to any of us that know better.
Please SD I beg of you, make the maps larger, and increase the player count to a minimum of 24, preferably 32.[/QUOTE]
I agree completely. I want 64v64 battles, maybe we can add random explosions too.
Valdez
(Valdez)
#58
[QUOTE=TacTicToe;441288]I’m glad I found this thread, because the small player size is a bit of a deal breaker for me. If the maps need to be made larger, then so be it. Minimum number of players should be 24, and I would prefer 32. Some of my fondest memories of ET were huge crazy epic battles with 64 players on Goldrush, Fueldump, Battery etc.
Perfect examples of premature game failure, IMO due to too small a player count are
Wolfenstein 2009
Nexuiz
Brink.
There are today, exponentially more people still playing ET and ETQW and even RTCW then there are playing Brink, Wolf 2009 or Nexuiz. What do those games have that made a difference? 64 and 32 slot servers. Being able to create mods and maps was a huge community boost as well. 8v8 is NOT going to cut it, here is why.
At 16 slots, you could EASILY have 16 clan members that want to play. With all clan members on, how do you recruit new members from the pub? The way a clan grows its community, is by having a good server, that is well admin’ed, that has a balance of clan members and pubbers. The pubbers play on your server often because they like it, get to know the members, and then decide they want to become part of your clan. That is how you are able to recruit and grow your clan. 16 just aint gonna do it. This game will fail just like the others. And having multiple 16 slot servers is not the answer either.
When Wolf 2009 came out, our clan was all excited, to the point of giddy. We could NOT wait for it. Once it was released, we were all like wat da fuq? This has to be a joke. It was 12 players by default, you had to change a setting on the command line to force it to 16 players. Ridiculous. We canceled our server immediately. That game declined in popularity over night. Currently, there are only 2 Wolf 2009 servers online. I keep one online, more for nostalgia then anything. Occasionally, there are a few players that still join and play.
My first impression of DB after I got it downloaded was goose pimples on the back of my neck. I’m sitting here watching the training video and seeing a modern version of Goldrush from the London gameplay training video. I’m screaming YES, YES, YES!!! Finally they are coming to their senses and doing it right!!! I was so excited. Then I hit the PLAY button, and saw the servers, and my jaw dropped and hit the floor. The high I had just experienced, came crashing back down. Here is a screenshot to help further illustrate my point…
Of all the server when I looked, only server that had players was the 16 slot server, and it was full. Just more evidence, that sometimes bigger is better.
As for competition argument, I would have to say that ANYONE that tries to use that argument, must be new to the scene and never seen the leagues and tournaments that were played on RTCW, ET etc. Despite the game and maps being made for larger player counts, you could still have your competitive gameplay in these games. So please don’t use the competitiveness as your argument. It only makes you look silly, to any of us that know better.
Please SD I beg of you, make the maps larger, and increase the player count to a minimum of 24, preferably 32.[/QUOTE]
Pretty sure the failure of Brink, Wolf 09, and Nexuiz had absolutely nothing to do with the player size of the servers.