DUST Search - Why can we not have 18 v 18 matches?

P14GU3 wrote:

Master Jaraiya wrote:

P14GU3 wrote:

Master Jaraiya wrote:

P14GU3 wrote:

Since four man squads got bumped to 6, why not 6 man to 8? Seems more logical to me..

I would definitely rather have a team with 3 squads instead of 2.

So split it down to 6-5-5 in the warbarge..

...that is 16 Merc teams. I'm asking why we can't have 18 man teams. Right now it can be split up 6-6-4 if you are lucky enough to get into a team that has another full squad and somehow manage to convince the smurfs to squad up. Lately the UMC- seems to have been getting the ****** end of the stick on that bargain in nearly every match. Oh, and good luck trying to get the randoms to squad up with each other. Usually, you will see us, then a squad of 2, another two squads of 1, and 6 not in a squad. SMH!

Well an 18 man team isn't going to fix this. Bumping squads to 8 wont either. I was think more along the lines of que-syncing. It would be easier to sync two 8 man teams rather than three 6 man teams.

Pages: 1 :: [one page]

Author	Thread Statistics \| Show CCP posts - 0 post(s)
Master Jaraiya Ultramarine Corp 586	Posted - 2013.08.30 23:29:00 - [1] - Quote What is preventing this. We currently have 16 v 16. I could be wrong, but it doesn't seem like this would impact server load any more than it currently does as it would only be another 4 players per match. 16 v 16 made perfect sense when we had 4 man squads in Chromosome, because teams could be comprised of 4 full squads of 4. Now we have 6 man squads. If we had 18 v 18, teams could be comprised of 3 full squads of 6. Does this not make more sense than 2 full squads, and 4 random smurfs? Is it doable CCP? CCP, can you make this happen?
Nick nugg3t Condotta Rouvenor Gallente Federation 30	Posted - 2013.08.30 23:37:00 - [2] - Quote or think about this. . . ahem. . 20 vs 20. ayyy?? no no no wait how about this. You ready?. . . ahem 22 vs 22. NO NO NO WAIT you know what would be EVEN BETTER than 22 vs 22?? . . . . wait or it. . . . . 24 vs 24! its perfect! wait how about this. . . __-2 hours later-__ ahem. . . . 1,400 vs 1,400 how does that sound? or maybe even 1,402 vs 1,402. . <----- i think you get the joke haha XD on a serious note i AGREE it should be 18 vs 18 :) +1
DeadlyAztec11 Red Star Jr. EoN. 2083	Posted - 2013.08.30 23:47:00 - [3] - Quote Nick nugg3t wrote: or think about this. . . ahem. . 20 vs 20. ayyy?? no no no wait how about this. You ready?. . . ahem 22 vs 22. NO NO NO WAIT you know what would be EVEN BETTER than 22 vs 22?? . . . . wait or it. . . . . 24 vs 24! its perfect! wait how about this. . . __-2 hours later-__ ahem. . . . 1,400 vs 1,400 how does that sound? or maybe even 1,402 vs 1,402. . <----- i think you get the joke haha XD on a serious note i AGREE it should be 18 vs 18 :) +1 Love how you undermined the idea just to agree with it.
Master Jaraiya Ultramarine Corp 589	Posted - 2013.08.30 23:48:00 - [4] - Quote DeadlyAztec11 wrote: Nick nugg3t wrote: or think about this. . . ahem. . 20 vs 20. ayyy?? no no no wait how about this. You ready?. . . ahem 22 vs 22. NO NO NO WAIT you know what would be EVEN BETTER than 22 vs 22?? . . . . wait or it. . . . . 24 vs 24! its perfect! wait how about this. . . __-2 hours later-__ ahem. . . . 1,400 vs 1,400 how does that sound? or maybe even 1,402 vs 1,402. . <----- i think you get the joke haha XD on a serious note i AGREE it should be 18 vs 18 :) +1 Love how you undermined the idea just to agree with it. I was searching for the words to phrase how I felt about his statement. You sir are a gentleman and a scholar! +1
Master Jaraiya Ultramarine Corp 589	Posted - 2013.08.30 23:49:00 - [5] - Quote Nick nugg3t wrote: or think about this. . . ahem. . 20 vs 20. ayyy?? no no no wait how about this. You ready?. . . ahem 22 vs 22. NO NO NO WAIT you know what would be EVEN BETTER than 22 vs 22?? . . . . wait or it. . . . . 24 vs 24! its perfect! wait how about this. . . __-2 hours later-__ ahem. . . . 1,400 vs 1,400 how does that sound? or maybe even 1,402 vs 1,402. . <----- i think you get the joke haha XD on a serious note i AGREE it should be 18 vs 18 :) +1 You did agree...eventually +1 to you good sir!
Nick nugg3t Condotta Rouvenor Gallente Federation 32	Posted - 2013.08.30 23:51:00 - [6] - Quote DeadlyAztec11 wrote: Nick nugg3t wrote: or think about this. . . ahem. . 20 vs 20. ayyy?? no no no wait how about this. You ready?. . . ahem 22 vs 22. NO NO NO WAIT you know what would be EVEN BETTER than 22 vs 22?? . . . . wait or it. . . . . 24 vs 24! its perfect! wait how about this. . . __-2 hours later-__ ahem. . . . 1,400 vs 1,400 how does that sound? or maybe even 1,402 vs 1,402. . <----- i think you get the joke haha XD on a serious note i AGREE it should be 18 vs 18 :) +1 Love how you undermined the idea just to agree with it. I was teasing haha
Maken Tosch DUST University Ivy League 3833	Posted - 2013.08.30 23:51:00 - [7] - Quote CCP is doing it in baby steps. Originally it use to be 12 vs 12 during closed beta. Eventually will get to as much as 48 vs 48 or even 128 total in one match over the next 10 years as the performance of consoles improve.
P14GU3 The Southern Legion The Umbra Combine 344	Posted - 2013.08.30 23:53:00 - [8] - Quote Since four man squads got bumped to 6, why not 6 man to 8? Seems more logical to me..
Government CheeseBurger Molon Labe. RISE of LEGION 605	Posted - 2013.08.30 23:54:00 - [9] - Quote Pretty sure its due to match making. It allows for solo players to join in on the fun with full squads. Just my guess.
Master Jaraiya Ultramarine Corp 592	Posted - 2013.08.30 23:58:00 - [10] - Quote Maken Tosch wrote: CCP is doing it in baby steps. Originally it use to be 12 vs 12 during closed beta. Eventually will get to as much as 48 vs 48 or even 128 total in one match over the next 10 years as the performance of consoles improve. Well, going up to 18 v 18 seems like the next logical baby step. I wonder what is preventing it.

Master Jaraiya Ultramarine Corp 592	Posted - 2013.08.31 00:00:00 - [11] - Quote P14GU3 wrote: Since four man squads got bumped to 6, why not 6 man to 8? Seems more logical to me.. I would definitely rather have a team with 3 squads instead of 2.
P14GU3 The Southern Legion The Umbra Combine 345	Posted - 2013.08.31 00:01:00 - [12] - Quote Government CheeseBurger wrote: Pretty sure its due to match making. It allows for solo players to join in on the fun with full squads. Just my guess. Wouldn't matchmaking actually be better if my squad is not slaughtering randoms, relying on ignorant blues, ect?
Master Jaraiya Ultramarine Corp 592	Posted - 2013.08.31 00:01:00 - [13] - Quote Government CheeseBurger wrote: Pretty sure its due to match making. It allows for solo players to join in on the fun with full squads. Just my guess. Allowing the solo players to join in teams of squads only makes it worse for the teams of squads. Solo players should be relegated to their own teams. Yes relegated!
Master Jaraiya Ultramarine Corp 592	Posted - 2013.08.31 00:02:00 - [14] - Quote P14GU3 wrote: Government CheeseBurger wrote: Pretty sure its due to match making. It allows for solo players to join in on the fun with full squads. Just my guess. Wouldn't matchmaking actually be better if my squad is not slaughtering randoms, relying on ignorant blues, ect? Yes, it would. Especially the relying on ignorant blues part. Seriously though people still do that?
P14GU3 The Southern Legion The Umbra Combine 345	Posted - 2013.08.31 00:05:00 - [15] - Quote Master Jaraiya wrote: P14GU3 wrote: Since four man squads got bumped to 6, why not 6 man to 8? Seems more logical to me.. I would definitely rather have a team with 3 squads instead of 2. So split it down to 6-5-5 in the warbarge..
Master Jaraiya Ultramarine Corp 592	Posted - 2013.08.31 00:33:00 - [16] - Quote P14GU3 wrote: Master Jaraiya wrote: P14GU3 wrote: Since four man squads got bumped to 6, why not 6 man to 8? Seems more logical to me.. I would definitely rather have a team with 3 squads instead of 2. So split it down to 6-5-5 in the warbarge.. ...that is 16 Merc teams. I'm asking why we can't have 18 man teams. Right now it can be split up 6-6-4 if you are lucky enough to get into a team that has another full squad and somehow manage to convince the smurfs to squad up. Lately the UMC- seems to have been getting the ****** end of the stick on that bargain in nearly every match. Oh, and good luck trying to get the randoms to squad up with each other. Usually, you will see us, then a squad of 2, another two squads of 1, and 6 not in a squad. SMH!
P14GU3 The Southern Legion The Umbra Combine 345	Posted - 2013.08.31 01:09:00 - [17] - Quote Master Jaraiya wrote: P14GU3 wrote: Master Jaraiya wrote: P14GU3 wrote: Since four man squads got bumped to 6, why not 6 man to 8? Seems more logical to me.. I would definitely rather have a team with 3 squads instead of 2. So split it down to 6-5-5 in the warbarge.. ...that is 16 Merc teams. I'm asking why we can't have 18 man teams. Right now it can be split up 6-6-4 if you are lucky enough to get into a team that has another full squad and somehow manage to convince the smurfs to squad up. Lately the UMC- seems to have been getting the ****** end of the stick on that bargain in nearly every match. Oh, and good luck trying to get the randoms to squad up with each other. Usually, you will see us, then a squad of 2, another two squads of 1, and 6 not in a squad. SMH! Well an 18 man team isn't going to fix this. Bumping squads to 8 wont either. I was think more along the lines of que-syncing. It would be easier to sync two 8 man teams rather than three 6 man teams.
Master Jaraiya Ultramarine Corp 592	Posted - 2013.08.31 01:14:00 - [18] - Quote P14GU3 wrote: Master Jaraiya wrote: P14GU3 wrote: Master Jaraiya wrote: P14GU3 wrote: Since four man squads got bumped to 6, why not 6 man to 8? Seems more logical to me.. I would definitely rather have a team with 3 squads instead of 2. So split it down to 6-5-5 in the warbarge.. ...that is 16 Merc teams. I'm asking why we can't have 18 man teams. Right now it can be split up 6-6-4 if you are lucky enough to get into a team that has another full squad and somehow manage to convince the smurfs to squad up. Lately the UMC- seems to have been getting the ****** end of the stick on that bargain in nearly every match. Oh, and good luck trying to get the randoms to squad up with each other. Usually, you will see us, then a squad of 2, another two squads of 1, and 6 not in a squad. SMH! Well an 18 man team isn't going to fix this. Bumping squads to 8 wont either. I was think more along the lines of que-syncing. It would be easier to sync two 8 man teams rather than three 6 man teams. True, it would. Hopefully in 1.4 it will be easier to Qsync. You will be ably to Q into Minmatar battles, for instance, and if multiple squads from your Corp also Q Minmatar battles, wouldn't you be likely to end up on the same team? I hope so. They really need to implement full team deployment at least for FW.
Rynoceros Rise of Old Dudes 602	Posted - 2013.08.31 01:28:00 - [19] - Quote 6/6/6 would be nice... Now we usually see 2/5/3/1/1/1/3. Idiots will still dominate the population. +1, regardless.
DeadlyAztec11 Chatelain Rapid Response Gallente Federation 2088	Posted - 2013.08.31 05:44:00 - [20] - Quote Master Jaraiya wrote: DeadlyAztec11 wrote: Nick nugg3t wrote: or think about this. . . ahem. . 20 vs 20. ayyy?? no no no wait how about this. You ready?. . . ahem 22 vs 22. NO NO NO WAIT you know what would be EVEN BETTER than 22 vs 22?? . . . . wait or it. . . . . 24 vs 24! its perfect! wait how about this. . . __-2 hours later-__ ahem. . . . 1,400 vs 1,400 how does that sound? or maybe even 1,402 vs 1,402. . <----- i think you get the joke haha XD on a serious note i AGREE it should be 18 vs 18 :) +1 Love how you undermined the idea just to agree with it. I was searching for the words to phrase how I felt about his statement. You sir are a gentleman and a scholar! +1 Sir? Gentleman? Scholar!? Oh my, how droll. I fear you have yet to see my behavior in other matters, such that most would feel negative about participating in. I digress, a thanks to you and all whom like what I have to say,

Zero Harpuia Turalyon 514 755	Posted - 2013.08.31 06:46:00 - [21] - Quote The number of players should always be divided into a number of full squads. +1 to the toad sage.
Necandi Brasil Conspiratus Immortalis 315	Posted - 2013.08.31 06:56:00 - [22] - Quote one can only dream ... how about 128 vs 128 ? maybe in 20 years an entire cybernetic war with fronts with 1 million man each side (ok, ok ... went too far ...lol )


Pages: 1 :: [one page]