Hmmm somebodies listening....
It's nice to see someone somewhere is listening. And when I didn't think we'd be getting any changes with the devs being on break for holidays. Lol still waiting on an apology about making us pay ...
Forum Discussion
Going to be interesting to see how this plays. I myself love the 128 players most of the time. Only if I'm in a discord squad with voice though.
I feel like 48 v. 48 may be the magic spot for 2042 maps. 96 players total
Thinking about it really just brings the elephant to light. We need voice coms asap
Are the maps smaller as well or is it just 64 players on 128 player size maps?
It’s nice that they are listening but the Maps are still huge and it feels like they didn’t cut down the vehicle spam from 128. Vehicles every second of the match at every location on the map. Infantry play still suffering as a result.
In addition most of the objectives are still located at the same horrible locations, many totally void of cover. As a result vehicles no where near that objective are farming enemy infantry that are located inside the objective by the dozen. It’s so bad it’s unbelievable.
That desert map spawned me in as a defender on the objective that’s located in the flower bed. Literally 3 enemy tanks, 2 enemy helicopters and about 20 enemy infantry were set up in the buildings and sand dunes overlooking this HORRIBLY designed objective and they all instantly deleted me from existence the millisecond I spawned in. Who in their right mind would think this is a well designed objective? And how about that spawn location?
It’s great that DICE is seeing how terrible the 128 experience is, however the core issues remain. Too many vehicles, poor map design(lack of cover for infantry!) and poor spawn in logic still plagues game play.
@Psychopski wrote:It’s nice that they are listening but the Maps are still huge and it feels like they didn’t cut down the vehicle spam from 128. Vehicles every second of the match at every location on the map. Infantry play still suffering as a result.
In addition most of the objectives are still located at the same horrible locations, many totally void of cover. As a result vehicles no where near that objective are farming enemy infantry that are located inside the objective by the dozen. It’s so bad it’s unbelievable.
That desert map spawned me in as a defender on the objective that’s located in the flower bed. Literally 3 enemy tanks, 2 enemy helicopters and about 20 enemy infantry were set up in the buildings and sand dunes overlooking this HORRIBLY designed objective and they all instantly deleted me from existence the millisecond I spawned in. Who in their right mind would think this is a well designed objective? And how about that spawn location?
It’s great that DICE is seeing through light but the core issues with too many vehicles, poor map design(lack of cover for infantry!) and poor spawn in logic still plagues game play.
Yeah maps are still trash. Discarded is even worse with 64 players in my opinion. Performance still sucks.
- @TickTack121 Discarded is dreadful on 64 players my word they don’t play test before releasing these game modes lol.
They are using the same large maps which is inconvenient. They should've adjusted the maps like they did with last gen consoles.- @KNlGHTMARE They did do that.
The map in the 64 player mode is exactly the same as on the Ps4/XboxOne version- @BizzyVaping Yes, and yet still big and empty
- @KNlGHTMARE Silly goose I just checked and the maps are smaller for the 64 player version.
- @CantGetRight Yup, been having a blast on the 64 conquest. I'll go ahead and scratch my post.
