128? - Page 3

Morganan · 06-10-2007, 07:51 PM

When I played in CAL, we used the 32 player size, in TWL 8v8 ladders, we used the 16 or 32 player size. (depending on the map) Dynamic is a poor choice of words, as it leads one to think the maps change based on the players in the server, not on how the server is set up.

Just because server admins choose not to use the scaled maps on smaller max-player servers, they are indeed still there.

I've never tested, but does the "spotter" get points if the target is killed while spotted? Understandably the spotter wouldn't get points just for "spotting" the target,(especially with their stupid unlock system, can't just give points away) but if it was killed while spotted, that might be a different kettle of fish. Honestly from an old bf2 pilot, infantry spotting targets for air to destroy makes their destruction almost child's play in even a semi-organized setting.

All in all they did a good job with the Battlefield franchise with the exception of a few minor glitches. (anyone remember when an infantryman could shoot a pilot out of a moving plane back in 1942 just by hitting the plane? Or when they screwed up and left clients access to the client prediction commands, and thus gave everyone a "wallhack"? The "superman exploit"? In Vietnam you could break lock on a heat seeker simply by switching seats in the aircraft?)

TheMunster · 06-11-2007, 04:50 AM

Have the guys doing these coding changes actually approached EA/DICE just to ask them if they are wasteing thier time or not?

Surely if it was that easy to do it would of already been done by the vanilla games dev's?

DrJOnes666 · 06-12-2007, 12:48 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Betterdeadthanred

The most important thing was that the maps were going to scale ingame. Almost all servers run 64 player maps only so whats the point in that? Tactical Gamer is the only server I've EVER seen to have maps change durring the loading times. Something like this would have been a huge innovation for the FPS genre but they omitted it for reasons unknown, probably hoping people would tactically forget their original plans.

I am one of those players who played since BF1942. I remember vividly reading about the ingame scalable maps that would adjust themselves accoring to number of players, automatically. I remember talking about that with my friend, and I was amazed in anticipation to see this in action. When the game came out, I was puzzled by the feature missing... And I don't remember finding any reason given to why they actually dropped this big featured they had hyped up in previous interviews...

The game was still great though. But I would have loved to see it in action. That, and the original 100 players they had discussed.

06-10-2007, 07:51 PM	#31 (permalink)
Morganan Join Date: Mar 2007 Age: 37 Posts: 481	Re: 128? When I played in CAL, we used the 32 player size, in TWL 8v8 ladders, we used the 16 or 32 player size. (depending on the map) Dynamic is a poor choice of words, as it leads one to think the maps change based on the players in the server, not on how the server is set up. Just because server admins choose not to use the scaled maps on smaller max-player servers, they are indeed still there. I've never tested, but does the "spotter" get points if the target is killed while spotted? Understandably the spotter wouldn't get points just for "spotting" the target,(especially with their stupid unlock system, can't just give points away) but if it was killed while spotted, that might be a different kettle of fish. Honestly from an old bf2 pilot, infantry spotting targets for air to destroy makes their destruction almost child's play in even a semi-organized setting. All in all they did a good job with the Battlefield franchise with the exception of a few minor glitches. (anyone remember when an infantryman could shoot a pilot out of a moving plane back in 1942 just by hitting the plane? Or when they screwed up and left clients access to the client prediction commands, and thus gave everyone a "wallhack"? The "superman exploit"? In Vietnam you could break lock on a heat seeker simply by switching seats in the aircraft?)

06-11-2007, 04:50 AM	#32 (permalink)
TheMunster Join Date: Jun 2007 Posts: 14	Re: 128? Have the guys doing these coding changes actually approached EA/DICE just to ask them if they are wasteing thier time or not? Surely if it was that easy to do it would of already been done by the vanilla games dev's?

Currently Active Users Viewing This Thread: 1 (0 members and 1 guests)

Sponsored links

Sponsored links