![]() |


|
|
#61 (permalink) |
![]() Join Date: Aug 2007
Location: Ottawa, Canada
Age: 31
Posts: 76
|
Re: Conquest Server: Temporary reduction to 32 players
I was on from about 10:30pm - midnight last night and I enjoyed it. The engagements felt more deliberate and I enjoyed the slightly slower pacing.
The level of play was higher with about 2/3 of the people on the server sporting |TG| tags with a good mix of IHS, Irregs and general community members. That made every success all the more sweet knowing it was against a tough opponent! I didn't personally observe any bunny hopping, UCB camping, or other misbehaviour. I'm keen to play more during the short experiment. I suspect the quality of the games will get better as more SL and CO's adjust their tactics to the lower player numbers. -Zot. |
|
|
|
|
|
#62 (permalink) |
![]() Join Date: Apr 2007
Location: The republic of awesomeness!
Age: 32
Posts: 3,015
|
Re: Conquest Server: Temporary reduction to 32 players
Ok, i didn't like it.
The game is just slower, longer and has less action than before. It's like the 3 am games that was mentioned. The high intensity that is battlefield for me seems gone. Well, stop complaining and use different tactics i hear someone say. Well yes sure that will work, but it will still be slow. At least for me i think. But it's definitely a different kind of game now and other tactics than the usual run and gun is called for. Smaller squads, more armour-usage, cloak-runs for back flags and other stuff. So i can see this game getting better once we all have played it more and get the tactics going. But do we all really want it this slow? Maybe as an alternative on a secondary server, but not on the main one i think.
__________________
TG-E1st TacticalGamer European Division - having fun on the battlefield, the "TG way" xfire: superfastkill steam: Superfast ![]() ![]() ![]() ![]() ![]() ![]() ![]() ![]() |
|
|
|
| Sponsored links | |
|
|
|
|
|
#64 (permalink) |
![]() Join Date: Apr 2007
Location: Southwest FL
Posts: 526
|
Re: Conquest Server: Temporary reduction to 32 players
While limiting the numbers to 32 will open up the boards to more maneuvering and some new tactics, the main TG conquest server should be left at the higher 50 person limit to facilitate welcoming more pubbies to the TG mentality. I think the Titan server could be used to host the 32 person Conquest games on certain days and Titan games on others. Say Titan Sundays and then some sort of staggering of Conquest and Titan during the week. It is good to see Frosty Fridays but maybe an extra day of NS would be good, too.
__________________
![]() |
|
|
|
|
|
#65 (permalink) |
![]() ![]() ![]() Join Date: Jun 2007
Posts: 1,354
|
Re: Conquest Server: Temporary reduction to 32 players
I played for a few hours last night and had a pretty good time. The game didn't really seem slower to me as flags would go back and forth and the bleed kept shifting, so it was always interesting.
That said, I would still like to see the main server remain at the 50/52 size - it's selfish really - I hate not getting on the server. I also like the idea of the second server being used for "daily specials" and events. |
|
|
|
|
|
#66 (permalink) |
|
Join Date: Sep 2007
Location: To the left. Near the dog.
Posts: 1
|
Re: Conquest Server: Temporary reduction to 32 players
I found the TG conquest server almost immediately when I bought this game, and have played that server nigh exclusively. Most of the people on my buddy list refuse to play in games with a head count less than (or at least a max) 48 people. I personally enjoy having the higher count as well, though I will be playing the server more this evening to see if tactics do increase at all. The past few days of playing there has been a distinct lack of communication between anyone half the time. I would love to see more people using comms and just playing more cooperatively in general, so if this is what it takes to do it so be it; but it is sad that possible targets/helpers will be getting kicked at the load screen T_T Plus me getting kicked out randomly to make room for full fledged TG people ._. That definately puts a hamper on community play when the community is hurled from the server 9_9 Getting in the game with people that actually want to win and want to be a team is great, but it does require actually getting in. Tactical gaming for the masses I say! ;_;
|
|
|
|
| Sponsored links | |
|
|
|
|
|
#67 (permalink) |
![]() ![]() ![]() Join Date: Nov 2006
Location: Bridgewater, NJ
Age: 34
Posts: 6,912
|
Re: Conquest Server: Temporary reduction to 32 players
I had my first opportunity to log in to the 32 player conquest server this afternoon at around 3pm and had one great round after another. There weren't many TG players on, but the pub guys did a damn fine job. The only issue I had was someone pinning an "Orbital Strike Me" sign to my back each round, I want to know who it was - fess up!
![]() |
|
|
|
|
|
#68 (permalink) |
![]() Join Date: Apr 2007
Location: Pittsburgh
Age: 21
Posts: 1,028
|
Re: Conquest Server: Temporary reduction to 32 players
Well, that's better than a few days ago where someone on the other team had a commander hack that let him drop OSs almost constantly.
![]()
__________________
|TG-3rd|Razcsak ![]() Proud to have been an Irregular!
|
|
|
|
|
|
#70 (permalink) | |
![]() Join Date: Apr 2007
Location: TN
Posts: 2,895
|
Re: Conquest Server: Temporary reduction to 32 players
Quote:
EDIT: Hey did I miss the poll where supporting members voted on this and the majority wanted it to happen? I know admin stated earlier that a majority of us wanted to test it out but I don't remember seeing any polls of PMs about it.
__________________
|
|
|
|
|
| Sponsored links | |
|
|
|
|
|
#71 (permalink) |
![]() Join Date: Apr 2007
Location: Victor, NY
Age: 34
Posts: 175
|
Re: Conquest Server: Temporary reduction to 32 players
I was on for about an hour last night, and found it kind of 'meh', slow but not in a nail-biting tactical way. Of course, then my program crashed and burned and took off with my wallet and I had to re-install, so I'm not a very good data point. Gimme a few days and I'll work out a way to blame Bommando.
I prefer the organized chaos of the 48-52 man servers for casual play, and save the more tactical play for squad scrims. Saying that, I would support a couple / few days a week at the lower count, or like mentioned before put it in a rotation with the other server. One question I have is if the conquest server hyothetically went to 24/7 32 count, do you all think it would be a detriment to recruiting, since there would be less room for prospective pubbies when there are three or four IHS' on during some of the peak periods?
__________________
"Oratio Ultima Regem -- The Last Argument of Kings" |
|
|
|
|
|
#72 (permalink) |
|
Join Date: Jun 2005
Location: Georgia
Age: 27
Posts: 2,187
|
Re: Conquest Server: Temporary reduction to 32 players
After playing tonight I don't have much to say.
I felt as if I was on a bad pubbie server and the game was no fun at all for me. The maps were way toooooo drawn out and little happened. The Titan server was no better. It's also interesting to note that the server rarely stayed at 32 but usually around 26-28. People aren't enjoying it and quitting. If this is a voting matter, I say NO.
__________________
Telorn |
|
|
|
|
|
#74 (permalink) | |
|
Join Date: Feb 2007
Age: 36
Posts: 4,211
|
Re: Conquest Server: Temporary reduction to 32 players
Quote:
__________________
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
#75 (permalink) |
|
Join Date: Jun 2007
Posts: 234
|
Re: Conquest Server: Temporary reduction to 32 players
Ok so I gave it my 'official' go...
After the run, it'd be alright for like weightloss wednesdays kinda thing, but as an all the time gig... no please. That and as a non-supporting member I played for about 1.5 rounds before getting kicked for a supporting member, whereas on the 50 man servers I would play for somewhere on the order of 5 - 7 before getting kicked ---SIDE NOTE--- The server is full at 51/52, 33/34, 47/48... its not two slots held open, its one. If the server shows 32/34, you can get in just fine, same with 50/52, 46/48. The MOTD says its full at those points. NOT TRUE
__________________
---Bellicosity--- |
|
|
|
| Sponsored links | |
|
|
|
![]() |
| Bookmarks |
| Currently Active Users Viewing This Thread: 1 (0 members and 1 guests) | |
| Thread Tools | |
|
|

