mannon
True Bro
wordy bastard PSN:mannonc Steam:mannonc XB:BADmannon
Posts: 15,371
|
Beta
Oct 4, 2011 14:23:56 GMT -5
Post by mannon on Oct 4, 2011 14:23:56 GMT -5
I've also had some issues with the dead zones. Specifically I will sometimes drift left on both thumbsticks event though both are centered. Mostly just annoying, though. As I often wind up drifting left in aim or strafing slowly whenever I stop moving around.
I have started to counter it by making a habit of applying just a bit of right force to the sticks for a moment whenever I recenter them. As long as they were last pushed to the right I can release them and not drift, but if last pushed left they often drift. Although this works it feels like a bad habit and may have some consequences reducing my response time when I come under fire right at the moment that I decided to stop and apply my right force recenterings. It also makes sniping annoying, because I cannot effectively make small changes in aim to the left without it often continuing to drift off target. I have to apply some right force to stop the drift, but that force may or may not stay within the dead zone so there may or may not be just a tad of right drift. Add on top of that the waviness of being scoped and it adds insult to injury.
Granted my controller's thumbsticks might be a bit loose in their recentering, but I think they are generally pretty decent as I don't have any drifting issues in any other games at all. The BC3 Beta is the first game I've had to have any drifting on this controller. (I have another one that sometimes drifts on one of the sticks.)
*shrug*
As for movement I think as long as they fix the little dance stepping BS I'll be mostly okay with it. Sometimes it is washy and feels like I'm moving in slowmo, but a lot of the time I get sort of a whooshing rushing feeling, at least when I'm sprinting and vaulting over stuff.
Given that sprinting is a major improvement over CoD sprinting (IMO) I don't mind if the regular running is a little nerfed.
As for the whole attacker/defender thing. My experience has absolutely been that either the defense holds out really well right at the start or the attackers steamroll their way to victory. On defense I've had my team steamrolled so hard that I can't even respawn far enough back to setup a defense as the attackers have already overrun the area while I was waiting to respawn.
BTW why the fuck can't I respawn the moment the deploy button comes up? I can't figure out the exact timing to be able to actually respawn quickly. It's like you see the guy that killed you (in the least useful camera angle possible) for a good little bit, then the class UI shows up complete with deploy button, only the hud sort of does the distortion glitch thing. Some several seconds AFTER the distortion glitch I seem to FINALLY be able to actually deploy. But usually it just winds up with me sitting there mashing the damn button over and over waithing for the UI to actually work as advertised by the "Deploy" button. I think that is one of my biggest pet peeves at the moment. Sure dying in CoD can be frustrating too, but at least as soon as the UI shows you a respawn button... you can fucking respawn. Can I improve my timing or something or just hold it down?
I'm not sure how best to change the Rush thing, but it does seem like some change could improve the game mode. It does suck how 1 really bad teammate can cripple the attackers by using up all the tickets. It would literally be better for a bad player to hang back at the spawn and do nothing. That isn't a good way to encourage new players to learn teamwork.
I kinda like the idea of using tickets for the defense too, somehow, but wouldn't want to make it the same as for the attackers or it would just be TDM: Extra (Now with bomb sites!). I'm thinking more like Defenders have tickets for instant respawn but also have infinite respawns on a respawn timer. That could add an element of management where you might wait for the timer on purpose to save a ticket if the rest of your team has the defense, or you use a ticket to get back on the line ASAP. You could do other things as well such as supplying the defense with tickets at a certain pace over time. If you did that it wouldn't just be they have instant respawns until the tickets run out, but they would actually have a finite supply but also a steady rate at which they get more if they can hold the defense a while. If you want to tweak the pace of games you could also alter the starting cache of tickets and the rate at which new tickets are deposited. You could also supply tickets in waves, or only add new tickets for each stage, ect. Or you could supply new tickets based on actions such as defending points and defusing bombs. But you have to be careful with that not to encourage bad things. For example it should not be more beneficial to allow the enemy to plant a bomb just so you can defuse it. I also would gravitate away from giving tickets for killing attackers specifically because then you just get into a whole HoN/LOL/DotA thing where the bad players on the attacker team will get shouted at for feeding. ;3
I was also thinking it could make sense for defenders to have personal tickets or some mix of personal and team tickets. What I mean by that are your personal respawn tickets could only be used by you, so you would have that many guaranteed respawn tickets nobody else could take away from you by sucking. It would take some tickets out of the team pool since it would have to be balanced, but I don't think that's as big a deal since defenders could still respawn on the timer even if all the team tickets have run out. You could also play around with how many personal vs team tickets were given as rewards.
Personal tickets unfortunately don't really work for attackers, much as I wish they would. But it would be pretty fecked up if you ran out of team tickets and then only half your team could actually respawn. Much as it sucks to have the sucky guys dying uselessly and using up all the tickets it is preferable to at least have your whole team able to respawn.
Then again maybe all this would just over-complicate it and it's just better to tweak the maps and hope for the best. ;3
BTW I think there is one premise previously stated that seems a bit erroneous to me. It was stated that the defenders have to spread out and defend both points but the attackers can choose to team up on one. While it would seem like the attackers can gain an advantage by doing so against a team spread across both defenses I thought that I would point out that the an organized team of defenders could actually just concede 1 point and simply entrench at the other. The attackers HAVE to take both points before the next stage begins so technically the defenders only have to prevent the destruction of one site. It's just generally a good idea to have one in reserve as a backup and to hopefully catch out the attackers at both and get more kills rather than simply giving them one site for free. (I think even if you are focusing defense on one site it would be good to at least have one player do some harassment at the other site or at least be close enough to kill and defuse if only a lone attacker tries to take it.)
Anyway... I'm still a noob at this, but the game is pretty cool.
|
|
mannon
True Bro
wordy bastard PSN:mannonc Steam:mannonc XB:BADmannon
Posts: 15,371
|
Beta
Oct 4, 2011 15:54:34 GMT -5
Post by mannon on Oct 4, 2011 15:54:34 GMT -5
Played a couple games and GOD the lag was bad. My internet is already not the best for gaming, but even when I'm sprinting it's like, spring, swim, spring, swim. And everything is sooo glitchy. It's like my soldier is amped up on coffee and can't fucking hold still because he twiches all over the place. lol I even tried to blow up one of the things as an attacker and the "hold B" thing spazzed out on me flashing on and off and on and off and wouldn't let me plant. Then when I respawned it was stuck on blocking my view of the bomb site thing. (I can't seem to be arsed to remember what the game calls them... they are bomb sites to me. heh)
Would have played more than just two games, but the lag really got to me. I'll try again another day. I did have one pretty decent run sniping at least. Defense was definitely more effective and fun today. Attacking was mostly run, run, run, die... repeat. Even though we did win it just wasn't fun.
|
|
mannon
True Bro
wordy bastard PSN:mannonc Steam:mannonc XB:BADmannon
Posts: 15,371
|
Beta
Oct 4, 2011 16:06:16 GMT -5
Post by mannon on Oct 4, 2011 16:06:16 GMT -5
PS When the hold B thing was glitching I was crouching while trying to plant the bomb. Can you not do that or something? Do you have to stand up to plant it?
|
|
|
Beta
Oct 4, 2011 18:21:12 GMT -5
Post by fatsix on Oct 4, 2011 18:21:12 GMT -5
Add a timer in for the ticket whores. Like when you get recesitated and die again. The spawn time stacks. But what would happen when you get stuck on team full of snipers that don't want to capture the mcom? I wouldn't worry about it right now. People are still trying out everything.
|
|
|
Beta
Oct 4, 2011 18:51:14 GMT -5
Post by leki on Oct 4, 2011 18:51:14 GMT -5
@den
How are things looking to do a weapons chart for BF3 or post the weapon details?
are files encrypted and you cant access them or are you just waiting for final?
cheers
|
|
|
Beta
Oct 4, 2011 21:01:07 GMT -5
Post by Dertie Bertie on Oct 4, 2011 21:01:07 GMT -5
PS When the hold B thing was glitching I was crouching while trying to plant the bomb. Can you not do that or something? Do you have to stand up to plant it? As long as you are beside it you can do anything, whilst holding B of course. You can even move left and right and turn the other way, it should still plant. That is how it is on the PC beta at least, I assume it's the same on console.
|
|
|
Beta
Oct 4, 2011 21:04:03 GMT -5
Post by rubionubio on Oct 4, 2011 21:04:03 GMT -5
Mannon, weird about the controller drifting thing! But once again I can't even begin to postulate why, I haven't heard of such a problem on PCs :/ The movement is definitely different than CoD, and takes some getting used to if you are coming to BF straight over from CoD or any other arcade-style shooter. In those games (a la Quake) you definitely "glide" around, and there's no significant "weight" to your movement. DICE goes the opposite way and makes you feel like you're actually moving a human body around, and that there's a lot of momentum to stop/start/change every time you want to do something. I personally prefer it, but that's definitely a subjective thing. The running/mantling/diving in BF3 is absolutely amazing in my opinion. They went out and applied the Madden NFL engine to BF3 and it definitely shows. The feeling definitely comes through when you're sprinting and slide over a low stack of boxes/crates and you hear all the little details. Love it. Dunno about the respawn thing either bro. On PC you can't spawn immediately after you hit the selection screen, but have a small wait of like 5 seconds or less before the deploy button becomes active. Once it shows up you click it and spawn lol. There are a few times where I've clicked it and it says "saving..." for a second or two before I spawn, so maybe that's what it's doing on XBOX? And lastly on the Attacker/Defender thing, I agree wholeheartedly with you Mannon, but we're not talking about organized play, we're talking about pubs and the offense/defense balance. In public servers you're never going to get more than a squad or two (at absolute most, two is near unpossible) that's going to try to really execute a defense. The rest are playing TDM. Now because of that if the defense were to just give up a crate at each stage in order to consolidate at the more defensible crate (a very viable strategy and used often in organized scrims) then the offense would have a HUGE advantage if they did what you're describing because the offense would be crawling all over the map; The defense'd have no contain, essentially doing away with a "front" and having to encircle the MCOM station, Custer's Last Stand style. Remember, the rest of the team is out playing TDM, so our one squad is having to hold off almost the entire offense, from every angle because the defense has given up contain. Again, we're talking about pubs here. Just my opinion obviously, everyone has made valid points so far, and I definitely agree with most of their opinions, I'm just making mine is all
|
|
|
Beta
Oct 5, 2011 0:19:24 GMT -5
Post by pooneega on Oct 5, 2011 0:19:24 GMT -5
This game is almost unplayable right now for me on consoles.
Instantly throwing nades when I spawn + spawning next to a teammate that is stuck in the ground, making me stuck in the ground + not being able to run away from my nade since sprinting is spotty AND cuz im stuck in the ground = suicide all due to game glitches = rage quit. I've completely given up on trying to capture A in the first area because I, without fail, fall in the ground whenever I go near that place.
I also experienced something weird today after I died. The screen where it shows who killed you and with what weapon didn't show either of those things. There was no weapon, no remaining health for the player, no number of how many times he's killed me or I killed him, just his dog tag. The game didn't even show the player's position... it was looking randomly at one of the escalators down in the subway station and there was nobody near that part of the map.
MORE inconsistency with weapons. I give up on shotguns. Sometimes they work beautifully and other times I get out-pistoled by a guy that is 3 feet away from me. And the game says I hit him AND that he lost health after I died. Snipers are continuing to be inconsistent as well. I've gotten as much as 5 hit markers with no kill on a person. Headshot detection is kind of weird, I really wish I could experiment with bullet drop and how far above somebody I need to aim at the longer distances.
Dont get me wrong, I know I'm sounding harsh. But I'm actually having fun with this game. And this game COULD be amazing if all these very glaring glitches were fixed. And I'm willing to bet that they will be by game release. But of all the beta's I've played this one is by far the buggiest (just to let you all know I haven't played that many betas but they most certainly have been more polished than this. The game is coming out in a few weeks FFS!)
And I wont even get started on the lag and magic hit markers.
|
|
|
Beta
Oct 5, 2011 1:06:10 GMT -5
Post by volgon on Oct 5, 2011 1:06:10 GMT -5
There's been a few instances where I die and there is no information on the killcam either. I think that happens when you get killed by the M320 GL. I'm pretty certain that's the only times I've ever had that happen.
|
|
|
Beta
Oct 5, 2011 2:27:33 GMT -5
Post by pooneega on Oct 5, 2011 2:27:33 GMT -5
The debris from a wall fell on me and I got the same effect tonight. The other time nothing exploded though. I just died from like 20 almost simultaneous hit markers when I was running and the no info death came up.
|
|
|
Beta
Oct 5, 2011 14:00:41 GMT -5
Post by kirbyderby on Oct 5, 2011 14:00:41 GMT -5
mannon: there is a respawn delay, but it doen't tell you when you can respawn. The screen distortion when you try to respawn too soon is probably intentional. volgon pooneega: The "no info" killcam normally shows up when you commit suicide or are killed by the environment. Also, I'm pretty sure that the fire in the Metro can kill you.
|
|
Den
He's That Guy
Posts: 4,294,967,295
|
Beta
Oct 5, 2011 14:12:03 GMT -5
Post by Den on Oct 5, 2011 14:12:03 GMT -5
The problem with "Deploy" button is that it breaks after your first spawn in.
If you notice the very first time you join a server, there is a countdown timer before "Deploy" shows up. All following respawns fail to show the countdown.
Just count to five or so once your screen changes from the killcam to the spawnpoint selection menu.
|
|
|
Beta
Oct 5, 2011 14:12:31 GMT -5
Post by SheWolf on Oct 5, 2011 14:12:31 GMT -5
also, there is a cheat out there (at least on pc) that teleports your enemies to a specific location and blows them up, giving you the kills. if you fall victim to that you also just explode or die and get no info.
|
|
|
Beta
Oct 5, 2011 17:22:11 GMT -5
Post by pooneega on Oct 5, 2011 17:22:11 GMT -5
Im betting thats what happened then cuz I know I didnt run through fire the first time I got the no info death
|
|
|
Beta
Oct 5, 2011 19:29:56 GMT -5
Post by volgon on Oct 5, 2011 19:29:56 GMT -5
I've had the chance to level up the M320 enough to get Smoke Grenades (more of a pain than I expected) and they are super useful for attacking. I don't think I'll end up buying the game but if I was, I'd definitely use Smoke Nades over the Health Kit when attacking and using Assault. I combine that with the Squad Explosive specialization so I end up with 6 nades, generally enough to make two MCOM rushes. Blocking the vision of the defenders tactical loitering on that rock hill overlooking the right-most MCOM in the first set is invaluable. I wish the smoke would last a little bit longer but the M320 reloads fast enough that you can shoot off another round before the first begins dissipating.
|
|
|
Beta
Oct 6, 2011 2:52:27 GMT -5
Post by SheWolf on Oct 6, 2011 2:52:27 GMT -5
squad explosive perk works for you? it doesn't do anything to my 40mm grenades, neither squad explosives nor squad frags
|
|
|
Beta
Oct 6, 2011 3:10:31 GMT -5
Post by volgon on Oct 6, 2011 3:10:31 GMT -5
It seems to only work on the M320 rounds. I noticed I only had 1 hand grenade both with and without the perk equipped. Are you using the M320 underslung or by itself? Not sure if that matters but I was using it solo with grips on my rifles. Anyway, if you're not using the perk you should have 4 M320 rounds (1 loaded + 3 spare), with Squad/Solo Explosives it goes up to 6 total. It did seem like a few times I was missing some rounds, though, so there seem to be a few bugs with it. I specifically remember one instance where I only had 3 spare when I don't recall using any beforehand.
|
|
|
Beta
Oct 6, 2011 3:12:58 GMT -5
Post by SheWolf on Oct 6, 2011 3:12:58 GMT -5
i was using it solo with grip on my rifle. squad explosive didn't work, but maybe i have to retry. funny enough, squad frags works for me and my whole squad, giving me 2 instead of one frag grenade. it works most of the time, anyway, sometimes not.
description of frag perk says that it would give you extra 40mm rounds, but we all know how much they can be trusted..
|
|
mannon
True Bro
wordy bastard PSN:mannonc Steam:mannonc XB:BADmannon
Posts: 15,371
|
Beta
Oct 6, 2011 17:32:25 GMT -5
Post by mannon on Oct 6, 2011 17:32:25 GMT -5
THANK YOU Den! I'll try to remember that. And thanks to all the bros. For some reason I was not seeing the deployment stuff at the top. I think in the first few games I played I didn't see any teammates listed and so from then on just ignored it. I'd pay attention to the classes at the bottom and there was the Press Y for your squad or something, but meh.
I don't know if it's from people dropping games or what, but it seems like the deployment screen is often devoid of teammates. Or do they drop off the list if they too are dead? That would probably make a lot of sense.
I was finally able to deploy where I wanted and that did help a lot.
All told there are probably still too many problems with lag over my crappy internet so I doubt I'll play as much as I had hoped to. It just isn't fun. I have fun for like 1 round then groan through the rest of the game, basically. In fact, honestly only the long range stuff works halfway decent for me, because trying to move around is a huge fail. I'm better off going stationary and sniping. Too bad... Guess I'll give it another go after full release.
|
|
|
Beta
Oct 6, 2011 20:32:16 GMT -5
Post by rubionubio on Oct 6, 2011 20:32:16 GMT -5
Mannon, they won't show up on the list if they're: Dead, too far into the offense's "back field", or if the boxes have just switched locations and they have yet to move back. Basically if they're beyond the "defense" area.
|
|
mannon
True Bro
wordy bastard PSN:mannonc Steam:mannonc XB:BADmannon
Posts: 15,371
|
Beta
Oct 7, 2011 16:14:29 GMT -5
Post by mannon on Oct 7, 2011 16:14:29 GMT -5
tl;derp ARRG! I love/hate this beta!!!!
Actually I discovered my problem. You can't deploy on your whole team, just your current squad, and I was not joining squads as of yet because I'm a noob and wanted to just loan wolf for a bit without anyone really counting on me to do anything actually useful.
Well, herp dee durp. The more you know...
I can't unlock jack didly in this because I just can't force myself to play for very long. I go from fun game immediately to HORRIBLY NOT FUN GAME! I juuuust cannot play this beta much more. I'm going to try to hit it this weekend before it ends, but I'll probably wait a good while after the launch before I pick it up, both 'cause it'll be cheaper and because given the state of the beta I 100% expect this game to need another six months or so of patching after release before most of the kinks have been worked out, kinda how MW2 really did. (Granted MW2 needed 1 more balancing patch to nerf a couple things, but I still find it a better game than BO even with all the patches BO has gotten. With MW2 the problems are just a few glitches and overpowered synergies, but in BO it's just lame design. heh But each to his own.)
I feel like I'm beating my head against a wall everytime I play BF3 beta. We even just won the last match. In fact we won it defending in the very first territory. And yet it was complete suckage. I went 1/7 and we had fools up in our spawn, and it just plain sucked. I know it would get better if I could make myself play enough to really learn the maps and hone my situational awareness, but with the lag I just can't do it.
If any bros see me in BF3 on xbox this weekend feel free to invite. Be warned, I suck balls at this game, but it is fun... well approximately half the time it is fun.
BTW today I had the pleasure of defense 100% dominating. Neither side got past the subway in any of the rounds played. Honestly I don't think there is a way to balance rush under the current design. I think the only real way to have a balanced match would be to do it the L4D way where both teams take turns being the attackers and the team that gets the furthest the fastest with the most points wins the match.
Sure the goal should be to balance it so that attackers win 50% of the time, but I don't see it as realistic given the disparity between random pubs and organized teams. Could be wrong, but meh. REALLY wish we had a more symmetrical game type for the beta, but I guess they decided Rush was the game type that needed the most testing.
I also REALLY wish they would do at least 1 patch to the beta to fix the most glaring bugs, which would allow better balance testing. As is you cannot balance the game based on the beta due to the bugs still present in it. ;-/
|
|
|
Beta
Oct 7, 2011 18:15:49 GMT -5
Post by didjeridu on Oct 7, 2011 18:15:49 GMT -5
Hello Conquest; goodbye high SPM.
I can't say I miss spending half the game traveling between points or waiting for action to happen, but it sure beats playing as the only Attacker who knows what MCOMs are for. Also, flying jets is pretty easy (much easier than flying helis), even with the terrible mouse controls. I'd definitely say that a joystick would do wonders. I also like how you can just spawn into them rather than have to hunt one down. Plus, now I can play Engie and not feel like I'm wasting my time.
|
|
|
Beta
Oct 7, 2011 18:31:55 GMT -5
Post by volgon on Oct 7, 2011 18:31:55 GMT -5
Tried playing Conquest 3 separate times, I don't understand at all how it's enjoyable. You never have any idea where someone is going to kill you from (at least in Rush you know where the Att/Def will be spawning and coming from). More often than not I spawned right next to someone in a tank and was blown to pieces immediately. While Rush feels fairly lopsided, I'll take it any day to the (even worse) campfest of a huge Conquest map. There's far more running involved in a Conquest map too with there being 3-5 spawns a game and the action can be at any one of those spots.
|
|
|
Beta
Oct 7, 2011 19:17:31 GMT -5
Post by rubionubio on Oct 7, 2011 19:17:31 GMT -5
Tried playing Conquest 3 separate times, I don't understand at all how it's enjoyable. You never have any idea where someone is going to kill you from (at least in Rush you know where the Att/Def will be spawning and coming from). More often than not I spawned right next to someone in a tank and was blown to pieces immediately. While Rush feels fairly lopsided, I'll take it any day to the (even worse) campfest of a huge Conquest map. There's far more running involved in a Conquest map too with there being 3-5 spawns a game and the action can be at any one of those spots. I take it this is your first experience with Conquest?
|
|
|
Beta
Oct 7, 2011 19:22:12 GMT -5
Post by volgon on Oct 7, 2011 19:22:12 GMT -5
I played Conquest occasionally when I was a BC2 regular but I felt the same way as I do now. Of course I am not much of a Battlefield fan due to the tactical loitering so my opinion probably isn't particularly valid.
|
|
|
Beta
Oct 7, 2011 21:07:02 GMT -5
Post by didjeridu on Oct 7, 2011 21:07:02 GMT -5
Caspian is a little too big. And by big, I mean too spread out. 5 Flags mean the action is so spread out that there's really not much going on at any given moment. I thought I'd be having a blast blowing up tanks and maybe the occasional heli as Engineer, but it's so slow that I only find myself playing Recon. I don't even like sniping that much, but most of the combat opportunities are at such great distances that I feel I need the best ranged weapon. It isn't as bad as Heavy Metal, but I can't see Caspian being one of my favorite maps. Still, it looks nice, and it's great to relax compared to the non-stop carnage of Rush.
In other news, I've come to the conclusion that shotguns are terrible. After I first got my hands on the 870, I was so impressed at what they had done, and could only imagine how good the other shotguns would be. I was so mistaken. The M1014 is pure garbage, since it just feels like a weaker 870. That wouldn't normally be a bad thing, but it fires so slow that you're almost guaranteed to lose any engagement against any weapon. At least the 870 packs a punch, and is pretty good at OHKs with or without slugs. I just unlocked the SAIGA, and while it's better than the M1014, it's not by much. It feels like it fires a little faster or does more damage; can't really put my finger on it. I can imagine the SAIGA being decent with a laser sight, but that's going to be painful to unlock. I've come to the conclusion that the 870 has to be bugged. It pumps so fast. Too fast. I seriously cannot tell any major difference between the fire rate of the 870 vs the M1014. I can only imagine the USAS being a clone of the SAIGA but with automatic fire and maybe more spread or less range, and I don't see the DAO-12 being a speed demon. The shotguns really need some love. Without slugs, they're already pretty worthless considering the emphasis on large scale battles in BF. At the very least, the semi-auto/auto shotguns should fire as fast the semi-auto rifles.
|
|
|
Beta
Oct 7, 2011 21:29:56 GMT -5
Post by rubionubio on Oct 7, 2011 21:29:56 GMT -5
I played Conquest occasionally when I was a BC2 regular but I felt the same way as I do now. Of course I am not much of a Battlefield fan due to the tactical loitering so my opinion probably isn't particularly valid. You're opinion is definitely valid Volgon! I wasn't meaning to be snarky with my comment, though reading it back now it definitely comes across that way so I apologize. I only meant that your comment read like you were frustrated by most of the unique challenges that Conquest mode presents, so I assumed that it wasn't something familiar to you. I guess for me it has some similarities to Groundwar/Domination in CoD, in that if you don't know the status of the control points people will frequently flank you and catch you unawares. BF definitely plays that up even further, so if that's not a mechanic that you like to begin with it's definitely not something you'll like with BF3. I did find it very frustrating at first, and was one of the primary reasons behind me being such a medic-whore when I first started playing, because I would always plop down a lunchbox and basically sit in a corner lol. Personally, I like Conquest because it brings a very "Battlefield" feel to the game, where all the elements of a combined-force philosophy come together. All your elements have to be working for you to pull off a solid victory, and your team (at least at the squad level) has got to be spawning off each other, spotting targets, communicating, etc. Personally I find Caspian to my liking, but I can see why a person wouldn't like it; because it heavily down-plays the effect a single infantryman has on the battlefield, and it's size forces you to maximize stuff like vehicle transport, Recon spawn-radio-thingies, and picking the right base to spawn on. Going at that map in a squad of randoms is just asking for an Adonis-class fisting.
|
|
|
Beta
Oct 7, 2011 22:33:25 GMT -5
Post by volgon on Oct 7, 2011 22:33:25 GMT -5
I definitely didn't take your comment as snarky at all. Really, the things that Battlefield brings to the table are simply not things to my liking is all. I don't like vehicular combat; I feel like infantry combat is much more satisfying (more "skillful" I guess, since aiming a tank cannon into a building and blowing it and all its occupants apart isn't really difficult). I don't like big maps, either; I prefer getting to grips with my enemy as soon as I can and using superior mobility/reflexes instead of patience and more "tactical" play. Plus I just love Objective games and so Conquest isn't really to my liking right off the bat. I think Battlefield, for me, is a case of really wanting to enjoy the game but just being unable to because of conflicting game styles that I like to do versus what is reality in the game. Anyway, no disrespect at all meant to any Battlefield players /rantoff Unrelated question: has DICE said whether it's going to be running a significant amount of its own servers or will there mostly be player servers? I know people are raging about how awesome 64 players is but to run one (without external voice chat like vent) is ~$85 dollars a month last time I checked on gameservers. Doesn't seem like a reasonable investment for one person or even a clan.
|
|
|
Beta
Oct 8, 2011 0:23:13 GMT -5
Post by rubionubio on Oct 8, 2011 0:23:13 GMT -5
I can definitely understand where you're coming from Volgon. I think I'm beginning to feel the same way about CoD actually, but that might just be Blops. I play BC2 or BF3 for a while and it really speaks to me, but then I try to play Blops and I get killed in .25 seconds by some dude hosing me down with a FamAug with Steady-Aim and Rapid Fire before I can even get my bearings the maps are so small lol. It's just frustrating for me because I feel like I spend far more time respawning/getting situated than I do actually earning a killstreak or whatever. Like you said, just not bringing to the table aspects that I enjoy in an FPS right now apparently.
I've gotta think they will be running a lot of their own servers. They said that the primary reason for allowing Caspian back into the rotation over this last weekend is to test their server back-end, to be sure that it can handle the load and that the routing is being switched properly, etc. Testing something like that indicates to me that they intend to be running a lot of servers for a long time, otherwise it's not profitable.
And I would think that since they did away with peer-hosted entirely -- even on consoles -- they must have known pretty early on that they were going to need to run a lot of servers since obviously those console folks aren't going to be paying for servers to play on.
|
|
|
Beta
Oct 8, 2011 1:01:36 GMT -5
Post by volgon on Oct 8, 2011 1:01:36 GMT -5
The prices on Gameservers are just crazy. I would definitely hope consoles get a lot of servers since they don't get to rent their own. PC versions tend to encourage players to get their own servers, but it would be pretty difficult to convince a person/clan to pay:
$42/month for 32 people $62/month for 48 $83/month for 64
A lot of the people running servers don't have big clans and might just be a small group of friends. I'm hoping DICE is banking more on its own servers and not that the players will want to spend that much to run their own.
|
|