EA Forums - Banner

For drop-in, change it so someone doesn't have to pick D in 3s

Prev1
It's really not necessary IMO, and slows down matchmaking. It's going to be a chaotic back and forth affair. We already know this before picking the mode.

Replies

  • yeah and it seem pointless. coz what we have played it seem the best tactic is to rotate the positions. we play a system were who ever is lowest player when we enter the zone has to stay as a defender. also we constantly rotate the when in the zone. it would better if you could pick from all the classes.
  • Agreed, you should be allowed to have any combination of players, even 3 F or 3 D. It's not like anyone actually plays their position in drop-ins anyways ;)

    Not sure the club mode should be any different either. If a team wants to go with 3 snipers or 3 defensive D, that's their choice.
  • Yeah you need a D or it won't start.
  • You probably "technically" need a D man or else it might mess up face off formation logic. The game might explode if the coding is overwhelmed ... I dunno I'm just making up * lol
  • You probably "technically" need a D man or else it might mess up face off formation logic. The game might explode if the coding is overwhelmed ... I dunno I'm just making up * lol

    I mean, it's a perfect example of EA doing the bare minimum. Why spend the time to really turn it into a completely separate mode and let users choose any player type from any position when you can just take the current code you have for 6v6 drop-ins and just add a few lines of code to require 2 F and 1 D?
  • I agree. This would make for quicker matchmaking. It's not like anyone plays their position anyways lol
  • yes they didn't really program this right. in 3v3 games you don't have positions. and faceoff mechanics are easy to solve. Just have 3 slots, 1 C, 2FWD and then have the game just decide which one it wants behind the C for faceoffs like it would in a normal game where you have 5 on 3 and both D are in box.
  • You probably "technically" need a D man or else it might mess up face off formation logic. The game might explode if the coding is overwhelmed ... I dunno I'm just making up * lol

    I mean, it's a perfect example of EA doing the bare minimum. Why spend the time to really turn it into a completely separate mode and let users choose any player type from any position when you can just take the current code you have for 6v6 drop-ins and just add a few lines of code to require 2 F and 1 D?

    @jmwalsh8888 is on to something. The easy solution would be to choose C or Other, you get to choose whatever player type you want and the game could decide who goes in the back based off player type selection (the build with the higher D awareness starts in the back).
  • Im all for this, In the nhl some teams go with 3 forwards in ot actually iv seen it alot I mean yeah someone has to play the position but it shouldn't be locked to a dman build also forward positions should be able to pick a d if they wanted to. Just open it up so you can pick any player class
  • B_Bunny
    888 posts Moderator
    "Few lines of code"
    PSN: B-Bunny
  • Santini3
    482 posts Member
    B-Bunny wrote: »
    "Few lines of code"

    What an oversight though, isn't it? Why wouldn't EA think to have this be an option in the first place? It's 3 on 3.
  • B-Bunny wrote: »
    "Few lines of code"

    It is definitely not a few lines of code but you can understand why people are upset that it looks copy and paste. Overall I think everyone will be happier if they could choose any player build in run and gun style of 3v3.
  • B_Bunny
    888 posts Moderator
    edited July 2017
    B-Bunny wrote: »
    "Few lines of code"

    It is definitely not a few lines of code but you can understand why people are upset that it looks copy and paste. Overall I think everyone will be happier if they could choose any player build in run and gun style of 3v3.

    Yeah. Pretty sure the GC's mentioned it. I think it's the way classes are coded to positions that makes it not as simple as 'a few lines of code'
    PSN: B-Bunny
  • nickythewop
    451 posts Member
    edited July 2017
    B-Bunny wrote: »
    B-Bunny wrote: »
    "Few lines of code"

    It is definitely not a few lines of code but you can understand why people are upset that it looks copy and paste. Overall I think everyone will be happier if they could choose any player build in run and gun style of 3v3.

    Yeah. Pretty sure the GC's mentioned it. I think it's the way classes are coded to positions that makes it not as simple as 'a few lines of code'

    I never said fixing it would require a few lines of code, I said that the difference between 3v3 drop-ins and 6v6 drop-ins was a few lines of code to only allow 2F and 1D. The premise being that EA chose the easy route instead of putting much effort into it.
  • B_Bunny
    888 posts Moderator
    B-Bunny wrote: »
    B-Bunny wrote: »
    "Few lines of code"

    It is definitely not a few lines of code but you can understand why people are upset that it looks copy and paste. Overall I think everyone will be happier if they could choose any player build in run and gun style of 3v3.

    Yeah. Pretty sure the GC's mentioned it. I think it's the way classes are coded to positions that makes it not as simple as 'a few lines of code'

    I never said fixing it would require a few lines of code, I said that the difference between 3v3 drop-ins and 6v6 drop-ins was a few lines of code to only allow 2F and 1D. The premise being that EA chose the easy route instead of putting much effort into it.

    Still not a few lines of code, if you've ever taken a programming class you'd know nothing is a few lines of code. But it doesn't matter.
    PSN: B-Bunny
  • B-Bunny wrote: »
    B-Bunny wrote: »
    B-Bunny wrote: »
    "Few lines of code"

    It is definitely not a few lines of code but you can understand why people are upset that it looks copy and paste. Overall I think everyone will be happier if they could choose any player build in run and gun style of 3v3.

    Yeah. Pretty sure the GC's mentioned it. I think it's the way classes are coded to positions that makes it not as simple as 'a few lines of code'

    I never said fixing it would require a few lines of code, I said that the difference between 3v3 drop-ins and 6v6 drop-ins was a few lines of code to only allow 2F and 1D. The premise being that EA chose the easy route instead of putting much effort into it.

    Still not a few lines of code, if you've ever taken a programming class you'd know nothing is a few lines of code. But it doesn't matter.

    "It doesn't matter", yet you felt the need to reply at all. And yes, if you copy/pasted the 6's matchmaking code and found the lines that define the max number of F and D for a given room, you could pretty easily change them to 2 and 1 instead of 3 and 2. Please don't talk down to me, I probably have more experience than you on this subject.
  • PrototypeX85
    115 posts Member
    edited July 2017
    As someone learning programming, I know that it's not simply a few lines of code. However, if more than a "few lines of code" is the main reason EA isn't making an effort here, then there's a pretty good example as to why I'm probably waiting for a price drop for the first time since NHL 07. If there really aren't "enough resources" to make any major changes/improvements to the game, then why are we being charged the same price as we are with games that do "have the resources"?

    My point is, if the development team of the NHL series is somewhere in the middle of indie and AAA, then they should price it accordingly. $30-40 would be appropriate IMO.
  • B_Bunny
    888 posts Moderator
    edited July 2017
    B-Bunny wrote: »
    B-Bunny wrote: »
    B-Bunny wrote: »
    "Few lines of code"

    It is definitely not a few lines of code but you can understand why people are upset that it looks copy and paste. Overall I think everyone will be happier if they could choose any player build in run and gun style of 3v3.

    Yeah. Pretty sure the GC's mentioned it. I think it's the way classes are coded to positions that makes it not as simple as 'a few lines of code'

    I never said fixing it would require a few lines of code, I said that the difference between 3v3 drop-ins and 6v6 drop-ins was a few lines of code to only allow 2F and 1D. The premise being that EA chose the easy route instead of putting much effort into it.

    Still not a few lines of code, if you've ever taken a programming class you'd know nothing is a few lines of code. But it doesn't matter.

    "It doesn't matter", yet you felt the need to reply at all. And yes, if you copy/pasted the 6's matchmaking code and found the lines that define the max number of F and D for a given room, you could pretty easily change them to 2 and 1 instead of 3 and 2. Please don't talk down to me, I probably have more experience than you on this subject.

    Keep showing your ignorance, your posts just mean less and less each time.
    PSN: B-Bunny
  • B-Bunny wrote: »
    B-Bunny wrote: »
    B-Bunny wrote: »
    B-Bunny wrote: »
    "Few lines of code"

    It is definitely not a few lines of code but you can understand why people are upset that it looks copy and paste. Overall I think everyone will be happier if they could choose any player build in run and gun style of 3v3.

    Yeah. Pretty sure the GC's mentioned it. I think it's the way classes are coded to positions that makes it not as simple as 'a few lines of code'

    I never said fixing it would require a few lines of code, I said that the difference between 3v3 drop-ins and 6v6 drop-ins was a few lines of code to only allow 2F and 1D. The premise being that EA chose the easy route instead of putting much effort into it.

    Still not a few lines of code, if you've ever taken a programming class you'd know nothing is a few lines of code. But it doesn't matter.

    "It doesn't matter", yet you felt the need to reply at all. And yes, if you copy/pasted the 6's matchmaking code and found the lines that define the max number of F and D for a given room, you could pretty easily change them to 2 and 1 instead of 3 and 2. Please don't talk down to me, I probably have more experience than you on this subject.

    Keep showing your ignorance, your posts just mean less and less each time.

    Don't become Kory, please.
  • B-Bunny wrote: »
    B-Bunny wrote: »
    B-Bunny wrote: »
    B-Bunny wrote: »
    "Few lines of code"

    It is definitely not a few lines of code but you can understand why people are upset that it looks copy and paste. Overall I think everyone will be happier if they could choose any player build in run and gun style of 3v3.

    Yeah. Pretty sure the GC's mentioned it. I think it's the way classes are coded to positions that makes it not as simple as 'a few lines of code'

    I never said fixing it would require a few lines of code, I said that the difference between 3v3 drop-ins and 6v6 drop-ins was a few lines of code to only allow 2F and 1D. The premise being that EA chose the easy route instead of putting much effort into it.

    Still not a few lines of code, if you've ever taken a programming class you'd know nothing is a few lines of code. But it doesn't matter.

    "It doesn't matter", yet you felt the need to reply at all. And yes, if you copy/pasted the 6's matchmaking code and found the lines that define the max number of F and D for a given room, you could pretty easily change them to 2 and 1 instead of 3 and 2. Please don't talk down to me, I probably have more experience than you on this subject.

    Keep showing your ignorance, your posts just mean less and less each time.

    If you think I'm being ignorant, you don't understand what I'm writing. If you'd like to have a conversation about it, I'd appreciate it if you treated me with a bit of respect.
Sign In or Register to comment.

Howdy, Stranger!

It looks like you're new here. If you want to get involved, click one of these buttons!