Forum Discussion
Thank you for your detailed reply. Yes, indeed, there are ways to make 128 player Conquest work better. But as you pointed out yourself, it is NOT! map design.
It would require fundamental changes to the rules of the game (as well as bigger capture zones 😉 ). And I assume those changes are not even considered. Honestly, I am so accustomed to the current way that I myself are reluctant to accept broad changes here. But I would need to think about that more deeply to know how I feel about that.
What I do not understand is why those who 'created' the Battlefield series in the first place somehow lost the knowledge what is required to keep the game fun.
Seems like nobody really cares for or is in favor of 128 player modes (or at least nobody that has a good reason why this mode is better).
- 4 years ago
Don’t mind the 128 players but firstly you actually need the netcode to be able to handle 128 players consistently and it’s not even close and secondly the maps don’t lend themselves well to 128 players due to absolutely zero cover at all.
It’s nice that it’s moved on to 128 players and we have the consumer tech to play it but sadly the talent at dice is what’s holding the franchise back.
- 4 years ago
@emerson1975 wrote:Don’t mind the 128 players but firstly you actually need the netcode to be able to handle 128 players consistently and it’s not even close and secondly the maps don’t lend themselves well to 128 players due to absolutely zero cover at all.
It’s nice that it’s moved on to 128 players and we have the consumer tech to play it but sadly the talent at dice is what’s holding the franchise back.
You nailed it @emerson1975 ... !
Which is also the answer to @DuaneDibbley 's previous post, asking why the knowledge of prior BF games did not seem to stick to newer BF game releases from EA/DICE: A very substantial part of the original team that made the classics, aka BF2, BF3, BFBC2 and BF4 mainly left during the BF1 game creation and more had even left then for the start of the BFV game development cycle.
A very large group of them actually have teamed up in a new Stockholm based company named Embark Studios, and they have also some very good promising shooter game in the pipeline now... So worthwhile to keep an eye on and check out for their playtesting.
- BR-DuaneDibbley4 years agoSeasoned Ace
Not the most popular topic -- or maybe not enough arguments in favor of 128 player modes after all.
Well, soon it will not matter anymore as we can only play 64 player matches if we are lucky anyway as this seems to be the TOTAL number of players per region this game slowly converges to.
So even if they WOULD keep 128 player Conquest as an option around (which I hope they won't), then there would hardly be enough active players to fill one server, even if half of the players are AI bots.
- 4 years ago
all the answers will be opinions.
but there really is a actual answer to this that is fact.
The correct answer for the number of players for conquest is what ever the person who is renting the server puts it at. and you chose to go into that server.
way back in the stone age of BF we could make maps smaller or larger and set the number of players on our rented servers. Funny how so many years later options from the past seem like something that would be nice to have now.
- GrizzGolf4 years agoSeasoned Ace
128 is great to me. I just wish they would have put more into the maps
About Battlefield 2042 General Discussion
Recent Discussions
- 2 hours ago
- 8 hours ago