DUST Search - We want 24vs24 or more

All Channels

General Discussions

We want 24vs24 or more

» Click here to find additional results for this topic using Google

Monitor this thread via RSS [?]

Pages: [1] :: one page

Author	Thread Statistics \| Show CCP posts - 0 post(s)
Halfwings Warbringer ThislsWhyimhot 40	Posted - 2013.09.13 22:12:00 - [1] - Quote I'm so sick of big map with only 32 people, we need more
Monkey MAC killer taxi company General Tso's Alliance 446	Posted - 2013.09.13 22:13:00 - [2] - Quote The next will 36v36, it is a lot of work and requires changes to the 'deep code'. Once core mechanics are fixed it will be considered!!
Kane Fyea DUST University Ivy League 1649	Posted - 2013.09.13 22:14:00 - [3] - Quote I think the next upgrade should be 20vs20. Don't want to add too many at one time or it could get really buggy.
Monkey MAC killer taxi company General Tso's Alliance 446	Posted - 2013.09.13 22:16:00 - [4] - Quote Kane Fyea wrote: I think the next upgrade should be 20vs20. Don't want to add too many at one time or it could get really buggy. If you could do that you could do 36v36 it would be redundant and still put the same amount of strain on the system, it always follow binary!! 1v1 2v2 4v4 8v8 16v16 32v32 64v64 128v128 etc, etc
Csikszent Mihalyi DUST University Ivy League 167	Posted - 2013.09.13 22:18:00 - [5] - Quote It's already too laggy, the game right now can't sustain 30 FPS with a lot of players on the screen. Increasing the player count is just going to compound the issue. I doubt that it's possible without seeing drastic performance improvements first. Which might mean that we have to wait for the PS4.
Baal Roo Subdreddit Test Alliance Please Ignore 2568	Posted - 2013.09.13 22:19:00 - [6] - Quote We were once told to expect at least 32 vs. 32 at launch, and that they (CCP) were hoping to implement 64 vs 64 by that time. This game was designed to be played with a lot more players on the field, and it shows. So many of the design choices don't really make any sense with these tiny player counts. Unfortunately, CCP doesn't seem to have the know how to squeeze out that sort of performance on this dinosaur of a gaming machine.
SgtDoughnut M.E.R.C. Elite 108	Posted - 2013.09.13 22:20:00 - [7] - Quote Cant we just do what planetside 2 did, everybody vs everybody :P
Csikszent Mihalyi DUST University Ivy League 167	Posted - 2013.09.13 22:22:00 - [8] - Quote Monkey MAC wrote: Kane Fyea wrote: I think the next upgrade should be 20vs20. Don't want to add too many at one time or it could get really buggy. If you could do that you could do 36v36 it would be redundant and still put the same amount of strain on the system, it always follow binary!! 1v1 2v2 4v4 8v8 16v16 32v32 64v64 128v128 etc, etc That's not how it works. It's natural to go with this kind of progression, but the main limiting factor is really just how many polygons are on the screen and how many objects need to be calculated. Sadly this doesn't follow a binary curve.
Johnny Guilt Algintal Core Gallente Federation 282	Posted - 2013.09.13 22:31:00 - [9] - Quote i feel the game isnt quite ready yet for high player counts seeing as CCP cant even get spawning right,hell i dont think the game is designed objectively for high player counts.
Arx Ardashir Imperium Aeternum 216	Posted - 2013.09.13 22:36:00 - [10] - Quote "We want" yet "I'm sick..." Anyways, this topic is humorously ignorant in it's demands. Higher player counts have always been planned, CCP just needs to get this bucking bronco under control.

Baal Roo Subdreddit Test Alliance Please Ignore 2568	Posted - 2013.09.13 22:37:00 - [11] - Quote Johnny Guilt wrote: i feel the game isnt quite ready yet for high player counts seeing as CCP cant even get spawning right,hell i dont think the game is designed objectively for high player counts. Aside from the uplink spam, what's wrong with spawning? The game has been designed for much larger player counts from the very beginning. It's only recently, now that CCP seem to have given up on most of the basic ideas they had for the game early on that they are rebalancing for these tiny matches.
Monkey MAC killer taxi company General Tso's Alliance 448	Posted - 2013.09.13 22:42:00 - [12] - Quote Csikszent Mihalyi wrote: Monkey MAC wrote: Kane Fyea wrote: I think the next upgrade should be 20vs20. Don't want to add too many at one time or it could get really buggy. If you could do that you could do 36v36 it would be redundant and still put the same amount of strain on the system, it always follow binary!! 1v1 2v2 4v4 8v8 16v16 32v32 64v64 128v128 etc, etc That's not how it works. It's natural to go with this kind of progression, but the main limiting factor is really just how many polygons are on the screen and how many objects need to be calculated. Sadly this doesn't follow a binary curve. Its unsual to do otherwise because each character is given an individual shortcut number, calculations are the limiting factor but its usially highly redundant to have any other progression!!
TEBOW BAGGINS The Corporate Raiders 976	Posted - 2013.09.13 22:47:00 - [13] - Quote we used to play modified battlefront servers on the PS2 that were 128 total. there were also MMOs on the PS2 hopefully PS4 will throwback to those days
Johnny Guilt Algintal Core Gallente Federation 282	Posted - 2013.09.13 22:59:00 - [14] - Quote Baal Roo wrote: Johnny Guilt wrote: i feel the game isnt quite ready yet for high player counts seeing as CCP cant even get spawning right,hell i dont think the game is designed objectively for high player counts. Aside from the uplink spam, what's wrong with spawning? The game has been designed for much larger player counts from the very beginning. It's only recently, now that CCP seem to have given up on most of the basic ideas they had for the game early on that they are rebalancing for these tiny matches. i spawned between the same cargo containers 3 times( as did my team ,no uplink) in the last ambush match i was in, while it was surround by enemy,the game ended with the enemy team having 59 of their clones left. Spawning simply put it's crap where the safest place is within killing range of an enemy AR. The most of thegame modes haven't been design for higher player counts,the maps them self's are, everything else isn't(yet)
Baal Roo Subdreddit Test Alliance Please Ignore 2570	Posted - 2013.09.13 23:05:00 - [15] - Quote Johnny Guilt wrote: Baal Roo wrote: Johnny Guilt wrote: i feel the game isnt quite ready yet for high player counts seeing as CCP cant even get spawning right,hell i dont think the game is designed objectively for high player counts. Aside from the uplink spam, what's wrong with spawning? The game has been designed for much larger player counts from the very beginning. It's only recently, now that CCP seem to have given up on most of the basic ideas they had for the game early on that they are rebalancing for these tiny matches. i spawned between the same cargo containers 3 times( as did my team ,no uplink) in the last ambush match i was in, while it was surround by enemy,the game ended with the enemy team having 59 of their clones left. Spawning simply put it's crap where the safest place is within killing range of an enemy AR. The most of thegame modes haven't been design for higher player counts,the maps them self's are, everything else isn't(yet) Ambush is the only mode with random spawning, and that's actually one of the "points" of the mode... thus the name (Ambush, get it?). Besides any halfway decent squad that's been playing for more than a week is dropping uplink spam in safe locations anyway. Otherwise, almost everything about the game is designed for larger player counts. How do I know this? Because up until just a few weeks before launch, CCP was still telling us that they intended to have at least 32 vs. 32 and were hoping to have 64 vs 64. If CCP intended to have larger player counts while designing the game, it follows pretty obviously that they were designing the game for larger player counts.
Orion Vahid DUST University Ivy League 181	Posted - 2013.09.13 23:06:00 - [16] - Quote CCP can't do it because of the fancy textures they implemented in Uprising . I don't care about fancy graphics,
Halfwings Warbringer ThislsWhyimhot 41	Posted - 2013.09.13 23:09:00 - [17] - Quote Orion Vahid wrote: CCP can't do it because of the fancy textures they implemented in Uprising . I don't care about fancy graphics, We don't really need the graphics at all we need more players
Halfwings Warbringer ThislsWhyimhot 41	Posted - 2013.09.13 23:12:00 - [18] - Quote Also the 5 point map is too much for 2 squad of 6 and 1 squad of 4, I think they should make like atleast ea squad of 6 for ea point and also doesn't make sense for third squad only have 4 people in it
mister sp Commando Perkone Caldari State 0	Posted - 2013.09.14 00:21:00 - [19] - Quote dust in ps4 128 v.s 128 now high number corp that suck will have chance to succeed in pc.
CPP BROLOGI Company of Marcher Lords Amarr Empire 4	Posted - 2013.09.14 00:23:00 - [20] - Quote Halfwings Warbringer wrote: I'm so sick of big map with only 32 people, we need more No, that's a tank nerf and we don't need it.

Chad Michael Murray The Phoenix Federation 13	Posted - 2013.09.14 00:53:00 - [21] - Quote TBH I'd rather have smaller maps and 6v6 or 8v8 but 24v24 works too.. I mean it's whatever.
Spycrab Potato Hold-Your-Fire 465	Posted - 2013.09.14 00:53:00 - [22] - Quote This game can barely run 16V16
KEROSIINI-TERO Seraphim Initiative.. 732	Posted - 2013.09.14 01:57:00 - [23] - Quote No, if the PS3 with Unreal engine can't handle it. No, if it means getting lower fps and jerkier gameplay. YES if it can be done with no problems!
Necandi Brasil Conspiratus Immortalis 334	Posted - 2013.09.14 02:33:00 - [24] - Quote I think they were optimistic ... One year and we still have 16 vs 16...
Sgt Buttscratch SLAPHAPPY BANDITS 756	Posted - 2013.09.14 02:49:00 - [25] - Quote I would prefer: More maps/installations/atmospheres Missing weapons Missing dropsuits Missing vehicles and a proper Eve connection, before my battlefield is invaded by 4 full proto squads versus 24 blueberries
Nick nugg3t United Universe Corp 151	Posted - 2013.09.14 03:08:00 - [26] - Quote SgtDoughnut wrote: Cant we just do what planetside 2 did, everybody vs everybody :P step 1- install planetside 2 step 2- begin to play planetside 2 step 3- continue to play planetside 2 I think that solves your problem
Rynoceros Rise of Old Dudes 722	Posted - 2013.09.14 03:14:00 - [27] - Quote Anybody for 16v16v16?
KEROSIINI-TERO Seraphim Initiative.. 733	Posted - 2013.09.14 14:10:00 - [28] - Quote Rynoceros wrote: Anybody for 16v16v16? not me


Pages: [1] :: one page
First page \| Previous page \| Next page \| Last page

COPYRIGHT NOTICE
EVE Online/DUST514, the EVE/DUST514 logo, EVE/DUST514 and all associated logos and designs are the intellectual property of CCP hf. All artwork, screenshots, characters, vehicles, storylines, world facts or other recognizable features of the intellectual property relating to these trademarks are likewise the intellectual property of CCP hf. EVE Online and the EVE logo are the registered trademarks of CCP hf. All rights are reserved worldwide. All other trademarks are the property of their respective owners. CCP hf. has granted permission to OMG Labs to use EVE Online/DUST514 and all associated logos and designs for promotional and information purposes on its website but does not endorse, and is not in any way affiliated with, OMG Labs. CCP is in no way responsible for the content on or functioning of this website, nor can it be liable for any damage arising from the use of this website.