|
|
| Author |
Thread Statistics | Show CCP posts - 1 post(s) |
Derpty Derp
Dead Man's Game
1820
   |
Posted - 2017.04.07 23:06:00 -
[1] - Quote
BO0OMSLANG wrote:And no instant kills that most fps do these days.
But... Charge snipers in the red zone, what will they do if they can't 1 shot scouts? |
Derpty Derp
Dead Man's Game
1902
|
Posted - 2017.05.24 15:07:00 -
[2] - Quote
Richard Gamerich-R wrote:"Higher player count" No, I disagree with that. I'm playing BF since a year now on PC, and 32vs32 is not really fun as 16vs16, and mostly, there is no really strategy, just chaos (I don't need to explain the case of Planetside 2 lul). I remember in DUST that sometimes, when I was leading my 15 Prima's guys on Planetary conquest, it was really hot because they talked often for nothing, and listened only 50% of my words, so I prefer to not imagine with 31 guys.  Most seriously, I think one of the biggest part that I loved in DUST, was the strategy side with a team of 16 players. It's a sweet spot I guess, more is not really a good idea for me.
That's because Prima were skraaaaaaaabs!
I jest, <3 the Prima dudes.
But I'm gonna name drop MAG again... As is happening a lot lately. If the maps and objectives are well designed, those 16 dudes working together can make a huge difference when the rest of your massive team are getting their arses handed to them.
Don't forget, the other team has the same odds of having crappy team-mates as you do! |
Derpty Derp
Dead Man's Game
1910
|
Posted - 2017.05.26 02:37:00 -
[3] - Quote
Sweet spot for me was MAG Sabotage 32 v 32... Queue times were nice enough and it made running round behind the enemy team far more difficult... In Dust, sometimes both teams would seemingly run around each other with little to no fights breaking out.
Made controlling the map that little bit more interesting as you really had to adapt to when the guys holding your flanks died out. 16 v 16 isn't bad, but the spread of people can leave you running around trying to find something to shoot quite a bit.
I'll admit 256 v 256 was a little over the top, but it did have its moments... When you could actually get 2 full teams. |
Derpty Derp
Dead Man's Game
1912
|
Posted - 2017.05.26 16:08:00 -
[4] - Quote
Juno Tristan wrote:Up it to 18 v 18, that way you can have 3 squads of 6
Simple math wins again!
Unless we're going with 4 person squads... Which I don't think really took off in Dust. |
Derpty Derp
Dead Man's Game
1915
|
Posted - 2017.05.26 23:08:00 -
[5] - Quote
Mejt0 wrote:Sequal's Back wrote:Derpty Derp wrote:Juno Tristan wrote:Up it to 18 v 18, that way you can have 3 squads of 6 Simple math wins again! Unless we're going with 4 person squads... Which I don't think really took off in Dust. Haha true. I completely forgot that it was 4 at the end of the game. In the end this didn't change anything relevant other than messing up with corp squadding (in my case there was always 5th member that couldn't join)
Lol, we've got a tank with 3 people in it, and a dropship supporting from the sky... But we've got no room for infantry to support... How many vehicles must we lose to blueberrys, since we have to jump out and hack everything ourselves! |
Derpty Derp
Dead Man's Game
1922
|
Posted - 2017.05.28 23:45:00 -
[6] - Quote
BlazeXYZ wrote:Now imagine 32 people spawning on the last uplink that some random blueberry scout dropped thinking he could change the course of this game. Little that he knew a full pledged squad of mass drivers and core grenade enthusiasts were just waiting for them to spawn.
Better... I imagine them all spawning under my dropship... The sound as each one pops. It'll probably teach people not to get so boned in the match that everyone has only 1 option of where to spawn. The people with brains would know to spawn back at base I think. |
|
|
| |
|