criterion-sm dice-lg ea-starwars-lg instagram lucasfilm-lg motive-lg twitch you-tube

Not a single big map in the outer rim DLC?

2Next

Replies

  • fyrefox46 wrote: »
    fyrefox46 wrote: »
    fyrefox46 wrote: »
    fyrefox46 wrote: »
    fyrefox46 wrote: »
    fyrefox46 wrote: »
    They didn't split the dlc into 2 map sizes to prevent the community from being completely fractured. Had they done that, and worked them into the regular rotations via a toggle, there would have ended up being 224 modes, some incredibly specific, to chose from at the end. The way they have it planned will be 14, give or take a few based on playlist consolidation so players can actually keep findig games.

    I seriously doubt that has anything to do with it. So am I really to expect the next DLC to be 4 large maps so they don't fracture the community? You don't go with a unique large/small map philosophy like this if you are concerned about splitting the community because that's exactly what it did.

    if they had gone with the same philosophy as BF4, none of this would be an issue. Every map would be a large map with cut outs of those maps for the smaller game modes. Most if not all of the small maps we have are not even in the large maps.

    And besides, they split the Jakku pack 1 large, 1 small. That didn't seem to cause any more headaches than this DLC.

    The jakku filter toggle took the base game from 9 modes to 19, and was free. These dlcs are sold seperately, and theres 4 of them. To work them into the game on stackable combos would lead to 224 modes. It would be a nightmare. Even 2 lobby sizes a map pack would take us to from 14 to 18 places to search, per region. It gets out of hand fast, people cant find games, go play something else, more people cant find games as a result, and it spirals while all the remaining hunker down in the latest dlc and the base game only.

    I'm not following this to be honest with you. Every shooter for 10 years has had DLC. This is the first one I've seen that can't seem to figure out how to mix new maps in with the existing ones. Call of Duty has been doing it since COD 4. With Call of Duty, if you didnt have the DLC when the map turned up in the rotation, then you got booted. EA has been doing it since Bad Company.

    And if no one is searching for a match at that point with the dlc? That seems worse as teams get dumped left and right and someone that could have that dlc is playing in another lobby.

    Call of Duty doesn't have much issues with people not buying DLC, or player count for that matter. And really neither did the Battlefield games, although some of those games were lobby based which made things easier. Either way, the game was still able to check to see if you had the DLC before allowing you to load into a map.

    The only way this becomes a problem is if you have a community that doesn't buy the DLC. The worst that can happen there is you end up with an empty lobby for a DLC map. People that get booted just queue up again and get into a game running the launch maps.

    So ok, if we go on a case by case basis and mix dlc maps into rotation and boot players as they come up, thats still going to be 224ish possible lobby combos at any one time. How likely is it you ever get to play a full game of dlc1 supremacy 6 months from now if it goes that route, as that mode already suffers from the only a few lobbies syndrom as is in many regions. Putting them in a playlist makes them playable far longer.

    Where are these 224 combos coming from? I'm saying put all the maps in each game mode rotation. All maps that Blast runs on in the Blast rotation, all maps Cargo runs on in the Cargo rotation, etc. So you'd queue up for a Blast or Cargo, the game puts you into a lobby with a map you have downloaded.

    Maps are tied to a map pack. So you either have outer rim downloaded or not. If you don't then all it has to do is filter out 4 maps when searching for a game.

    No, it has to filter through a combo of 5 options across an eventual 14 modes.

    Combos
    Base game
    DLC1
    2
    3
    4
    12
    13
    14
    123
    124
    134
    1234
    23
    24
    234
    34

    Thats 16 combos of possible dlc for each mode in the game across 14 modes. 14x16=224 possible lobby combinations so you can actually play the maps you own without getting tossed from maps you dont and emptying lobbies every few matches, and not finding any players to fill the spots. DLC map packs are bad practice, but at least DICE is trying to set it up to be playable for as long as possible.

    But you only queue for one game mode at a time. You don't queue for all 14 modes at the same time. For instance you just queue for a Blast match. So the game then has to just deal with the 16 possible DLC combinations for Blast. With only one paid DLC pack out, the game would just have to find out if you own Outer Rim or not for 4 of the 16 maps in a Blast playlist.

    Theres only x number of players playing at any one time, all searching for various modes. Lets use your blast for example. At dlc 1 it would halve (or whatever percent the buythrough for dlc is) the playerbase for it. Now do that again 3 times over plus more for the rare buyer of more than 1 but not all 4. You also really shouldnt go dropping players for the 4 dlc maps, as then you never fill them, so even the base maps should be on a seperare lobby for dlc owners.

    When you drop players for not having the DLC maps, the idea is that people queuing who do have the DLC maps would fill those spots.

    It never was a problem with COD. And I never saw any issues in the Battlefield games either. But those are known for having plenty of people buying the DLC. Battlefield 4 ran on a lobby system, so there was no queuing in that game. The only time this can become an issue is if you have a community that doesn't buy the season pass or DLC. Then you end up with empty lobbies for the DLC maps.

    And as this game was bought in large part due to ep7 hype that is long since faded, and its a genre (arcade style shooter) that fell out of favor a decade ago, how many of those that bought the game are still playing, and will be in 6 months to a year? Its not as bad the one site suggests, possibly not by a lot, but its still smaller than CoD for sure. Needing 40 dlc owners on the fly for a match of supremacy is just something that would never ever happen. It would be like CoD, where good luck playing any of ghosts dlc on a mixed server today afaik. Judging by a quick google search it didnt even take 6 months for that games dlc to have issues showing up in rotation, and it doesnt need 40 people.

    A server browser would help, but youd still have issues playing more than 1 dlc at a time or all at once, and finding many combos matches at all.
  • Fugazi_123
    132 posts Member
    edited March 2016
    The DLC is a joke. If anyone is thinking about buying it, do yourself a favor and don't.


    Is it 'tongue in cheek' or just ironic that your pic and name are based on the hero for the new DLC, the one that is 'so bad'?
  • Fugazi_123 wrote: »
    T0TALfps wrote: »
    Hey ArchAngeL_777,

    That is indeed correct, there was no big mode offerings with the Outer Rim DLC. Personally, given the nature of the maps it would have been a tad bit difficult. That doesn't mean that there wont be any going forward however, and I will voice the disappointment folks have shared regarding the lack of big mode maps this time around.

    Exactly...I welcome the small maps..we already had 3 new free big maps, and more will come next time...

    You also got 3 free small maps along with those free big maps, so lets give up the pretense that your in some kind of small map drought. And that's after the game launched with twice as many small maps as large maps.
  • Fugazi_123 wrote: »
    T0TALfps wrote: »
    Hey ArchAngeL_777,

    That is indeed correct, there was no big mode offerings with the Outer Rim DLC. Personally, given the nature of the maps it would have been a tad bit difficult. That doesn't mean that there wont be any going forward however, and I will voice the disappointment folks have shared regarding the lack of big mode maps this time around.

    Exactly...I welcome the small maps..we already had 3 new free big maps, and more will come next time...

    You also got 3 free small maps along with those free big maps, so lets give up the pretense that your in some kind of small map drought. And that's after the game launched with twice as many small maps as large maps.

    Mate I welcome it because it encourages me to play smaller games modes...I am an 80% WA player and 20% HvV. I am happy to play other modes...also why I really hope some space battles come in the death star DLC because I have only played this mode a couple of times
  • ArchAngeL_777
    1347 posts Member
    edited March 2016
    fyrefox46 wrote: »
    fyrefox46 wrote: »
    fyrefox46 wrote: »
    fyrefox46 wrote: »
    fyrefox46 wrote: »
    fyrefox46 wrote: »
    fyrefox46 wrote: »
    They didn't split the dlc into 2 map sizes to prevent the community from being completely fractured. Had they done that, and worked them into the regular rotations via a toggle, there would have ended up being 224 modes, some incredibly specific, to chose from at the end. The way they have it planned will be 14, give or take a few based on playlist consolidation so players can actually keep findig games.

    I seriously doubt that has anything to do with it. So am I really to expect the next DLC to be 4 large maps so they don't fracture the community? You don't go with a unique large/small map philosophy like this if you are concerned about splitting the community because that's exactly what it did.

    if they had gone with the same philosophy as BF4, none of this would be an issue. Every map would be a large map with cut outs of those maps for the smaller game modes. Most if not all of the small maps we have are not even in the large maps.

    And besides, they split the Jakku pack 1 large, 1 small. That didn't seem to cause any more headaches than this DLC.

    The jakku filter toggle took the base game from 9 modes to 19, and was free. These dlcs are sold seperately, and theres 4 of them. To work them into the game on stackable combos would lead to 224 modes. It would be a nightmare. Even 2 lobby sizes a map pack would take us to from 14 to 18 places to search, per region. It gets out of hand fast, people cant find games, go play something else, more people cant find games as a result, and it spirals while all the remaining hunker down in the latest dlc and the base game only.

    I'm not following this to be honest with you. Every shooter for 10 years has had DLC. This is the first one I've seen that can't seem to figure out how to mix new maps in with the existing ones. Call of Duty has been doing it since COD 4. With Call of Duty, if you didnt have the DLC when the map turned up in the rotation, then you got booted. EA has been doing it since Bad Company.

    And if no one is searching for a match at that point with the dlc? That seems worse as teams get dumped left and right and someone that could have that dlc is playing in another lobby.

    Call of Duty doesn't have much issues with people not buying DLC, or player count for that matter. And really neither did the Battlefield games, although some of those games were lobby based which made things easier. Either way, the game was still able to check to see if you had the DLC before allowing you to load into a map.

    The only way this becomes a problem is if you have a community that doesn't buy the DLC. The worst that can happen there is you end up with an empty lobby for a DLC map. People that get booted just queue up again and get into a game running the launch maps.

    So ok, if we go on a case by case basis and mix dlc maps into rotation and boot players as they come up, thats still going to be 224ish possible lobby combos at any one time. How likely is it you ever get to play a full game of dlc1 supremacy 6 months from now if it goes that route, as that mode already suffers from the only a few lobbies syndrom as is in many regions. Putting them in a playlist makes them playable far longer.

    Where are these 224 combos coming from? I'm saying put all the maps in each game mode rotation. All maps that Blast runs on in the Blast rotation, all maps Cargo runs on in the Cargo rotation, etc. So you'd queue up for a Blast or Cargo, the game puts you into a lobby with a map you have downloaded.

    Maps are tied to a map pack. So you either have outer rim downloaded or not. If you don't then all it has to do is filter out 4 maps when searching for a game.

    No, it has to filter through a combo of 5 options across an eventual 14 modes.

    Combos
    Base game
    DLC1
    2
    3
    4
    12
    13
    14
    123
    124
    134
    1234
    23
    24
    234
    34

    Thats 16 combos of possible dlc for each mode in the game across 14 modes. 14x16=224 possible lobby combinations so you can actually play the maps you own without getting tossed from maps you dont and emptying lobbies every few matches, and not finding any players to fill the spots. DLC map packs are bad practice, but at least DICE is trying to set it up to be playable for as long as possible.

    But you only queue for one game mode at a time. You don't queue for all 14 modes at the same time. For instance you just queue for a Blast match. So the game then has to just deal with the 16 possible DLC combinations for Blast. With only one paid DLC pack out, the game would just have to find out if you own Outer Rim or not for 4 of the 16 maps in a Blast playlist.

    Theres only x number of players playing at any one time, all searching for various modes. Lets use your blast for example. At dlc 1 it would halve (or whatever percent the buythrough for dlc is) the playerbase for it. Now do that again 3 times over plus more for the rare buyer of more than 1 but not all 4. You also really shouldnt go dropping players for the 4 dlc maps, as then you never fill them, so even the base maps should be on a seperare lobby for dlc owners.

    When you drop players for not having the DLC maps, the idea is that people queuing who do have the DLC maps would fill those spots.

    It never was a problem with COD. And I never saw any issues in the Battlefield games either. But those are known for having plenty of people buying the DLC. Battlefield 4 ran on a lobby system, so there was no queuing in that game. The only time this can become an issue is if you have a community that doesn't buy the season pass or DLC. Then you end up with empty lobbies for the DLC maps.

    And as this game was bought in large part due to ep7 hype that is long since faded, and its a genre (arcade style shooter) that fell out of favor a decade ago, how many of those that bought the game are still playing, and will be in 6 months to a year? Its not as bad the one site suggests, possibly not by a lot, but its still smaller than CoD for sure. Needing 40 dlc owners on the fly for a match of supremacy is just something that would never ever happen. It would be like CoD, where good luck playing any of ghosts dlc on a mixed server today afaik. Judging by a quick google search it didnt even take 6 months for that games dlc to have issues showing up in rotation, and it doesnt need 40 people.

    A server browser would help, but youd still have issues playing more than 1 dlc at a time or all at once, and finding many combos matches at all.

    This game just didn't have enough content at launch. People wanted more than 4 maps to play Walker Assualt on. There weren't many unlockables in the game. The rank system only went up to 50.

    If the player base isn't where it needs to be, they only have themselves to blame. They probably should have delayed this game until fall 2016 before the Rogue One movie. Then they could have put all this free content and more in the launch game and proceeded with DLC from there.

    Its possible they don't have enough season pass sales to justify mixing the DLC into the same queues as the normal maps.
  • I dont have a doubt in my mind that had lucasarts allowed it, they would have gone for the extra year in the dev cycle. 2 years just isnt enough time to make a game from scratch, and even CoD that has all sorts of assets it can share and reuse goes for 3 now. Im happy with what we have, the gameplay and whats coming, but I get why a l ot of others weren't. I only hope they learned from this and give the amy henning/visceral project the full time it needs. I think if the game had less modes and wasnt adding a new one with each dlc a mixed playlist for all modes could be successful on even limited numbers, but I just dont see there being 100k concurrent players 24 hours a day on every platform for 14 to survive dlc splits.
  • T0TALfps wrote: »
    Hey ArchAngeL_777,

    That is indeed correct, there was no big mode offerings with the Outer Rim DLC. Personally, given the nature of the maps it would have been a tad bit difficult. That doesn't mean that there wont be any going forward however, and I will voice the disappointment folks have shared regarding the lack of big mode maps this time around.

    hey Totalfps, will you also please voice the disappointment of many players in the fact that we are forced to play through a playlist on the Outer Rim? i am very confident that the majority of us would rather have the option to manually choose our preferred mode and stay in that mode until if and when we decide to change modes. also, do you see this change being implemented in the near future?
  • Fugazi_123 wrote: »
    The DLC is a joke. If anyone is thinking about buying it, do yourself a favor and don't.


    Is it 'tongue in cheek' or just ironic that your pic and name are based on the hero for the new DLC, the one that is 'so bad'?

    No, it's not ironic. It's ICONIC. Isn't he everyone's favorite character?

    huehue
  • If I had known the Outer Rim DLC would be all small maps, I would never have bought the season pass. I don't buy DLC for games like Battlefront and Battlefield to play small map game modes.

    If I ever see another shooter with this same map split between small and big maps again, I will not be buying the season pass. It's ruining this game for me. I got my time in for the price I paid for the game itself. But unless they start putting out a lot more large maps, my season pass is going to be wasted.
  • Battlefront is meant for large game modes, vehicles, heroes, etc. You can't do all that on small maps.

    Big maps > Small maps

    The Nunb has spoken

    Large modes are definitely more casual friendly. A lot more room for poor tactics and easy kills. A lot less competitive. That's for certain.
  • QQnerfQQ wrote: »
    Battlefront is meant for large game modes, vehicles, heroes, etc. You can't do all that on small maps.

    Big maps > Small maps

    The Nunb has spoken

    Large modes are definitely more casual friendly. A lot more room for poor tactics and easy kills. A lot less competitive. That's for certain.

    yeah because running around a small map one shotting people with a DL-44 or destroying them with a DH-17 is just so difficult, not to mention the cheesy star card tactics that work a lot better on a small map.
  • fyrefox46
    2787 posts Member
    QQnerfQQ wrote: »
    Battlefront is meant for large game modes, vehicles, heroes, etc. You can't do all that on small maps.

    Big maps > Small maps

    The Nunb has spoken

    Large modes are definitely more casual friendly. A lot more room for poor tactics and easy kills. A lot less competitive. That's for certain.

    yeah because running around a small map one shotting people with a DL-44 or destroying them with a DH-17 is just so difficult, not to mention the cheesy star card tactics that work a lot better on a small map.

    You dont actually play a lot of small maps do you? All the cheesy deaths come from big modes, from the classic luke gank to the everybody's favorite, the rampaging atst because your entire decided not to pack ion. Small modes are mostly your gun skills and reaction vs thiers, with a bit of tactics mixed in. Plus theres much less forgiveness when you arent potentially being carried by 19 others.
  • ArchAngeL_777
    1347 posts Member
    edited March 2016
    fyrefox46 wrote: »
    QQnerfQQ wrote: »
    Battlefront is meant for large game modes, vehicles, heroes, etc. You can't do all that on small maps.

    Big maps > Small maps

    The Nunb has spoken

    Large modes are definitely more casual friendly. A lot more room for poor tactics and easy kills. A lot less competitive. That's for certain.

    yeah because running around a small map one shotting people with a DL-44 or destroying them with a DH-17 is just so difficult, not to mention the cheesy star card tactics that work a lot better on a small map.

    You dont actually play a lot of small maps do you? All the cheesy deaths come from big modes, from the classic luke gank to the everybody's favorite, the rampaging atst because your entire decided not to pack ion. Small modes are mostly your gun skills and reaction vs thiers, with a bit of tactics mixed in. Plus theres much less forgiveness when you arent potentially being carried by 19 others.

    Actually I've played a lot of small maps. And most rooms are overrun with the pistols, especially the DL-44 and DH-17. There's no easier kill in the game than the DL-44 and DH-17 outside of homing shot. They are fire from the hip instant killing machines. I've been one shot by DL-44s or otherwise chewed up by pistols on small maps more times than I care to remember. I don't use anything but a DH-17 on small maps for that very reason.

    And yeah, my personal stats are far better on small maps than on large maps. I would argue that it takes more skill to do well on large maps where heroes and vehicles are active all around you and the player count is much higher making it harder to flank for easy kills. You also see a much larger gun variety on large maps because rifles actually stand a chance with all the mayhem and the mix of close quarters and long range terrain.
  • fyrefox46 wrote: »
    QQnerfQQ wrote: »
    Battlefront is meant for large game modes, vehicles, heroes, etc. You can't do all that on small maps.

    Big maps > Small maps

    The Nunb has spoken

    Large modes are definitely more casual friendly. A lot more room for poor tactics and easy kills. A lot less competitive. That's for certain.

    yeah because running around a small map one shotting people with a DL-44 or destroying them with a DH-17 is just so difficult, not to mention the cheesy star card tactics that work a lot better on a small map.

    You dont actually play a lot of small maps do you? All the cheesy deaths come from big modes, from the classic luke gank to the everybody's favorite, the rampaging atst because your entire decided not to pack ion. Small modes are mostly your gun skills and reaction vs thiers, with a bit of tactics mixed in. Plus theres much less forgiveness when you arent potentially being carried by 19 others.

    Pretty much exactly as I would have put it. Much less forgiveness in small modes.

    I'm surprised there's any argument about this? I thought it was pretty much universal that small modes were more competitive than large modes.
  • QQnerfQQ wrote: »
    fyrefox46 wrote: »
    QQnerfQQ wrote: »
    Battlefront is meant for large game modes, vehicles, heroes, etc. You can't do all that on small maps.

    Big maps > Small maps

    The Nunb has spoken

    Large modes are definitely more casual friendly. A lot more room for poor tactics and easy kills. A lot less competitive. That's for certain.

    yeah because running around a small map one shotting people with a DL-44 or destroying them with a DH-17 is just so difficult, not to mention the cheesy star card tactics that work a lot better on a small map.

    You dont actually play a lot of small maps do you? All the cheesy deaths come from big modes, from the classic luke gank to the everybody's favorite, the rampaging atst because your entire decided not to pack ion. Small modes are mostly your gun skills and reaction vs thiers, with a bit of tactics mixed in. Plus theres much less forgiveness when you arent potentially being carried by 19 others.

    Pretty much exactly as I would have put it. Much less forgiveness in small modes.

    I'm surprised there's any argument about this? I thought it was pretty much universal that small modes were more competitive than large modes.

    A lot of people don't pick up Star Wars Battlefront to play Call of Duty in space. The vehicles and heroes that you claim are not competitive is the draw of this game. Every game play they showed off and every commercial they had was for large maps.

    And even so, how competitive can small maps be when all you have to do is pick up a DL-44 or DH-17 and own everyone who has a rifle? The only counter to them on small maps is to use a DL-44 and DH-17 yourself.
  • fyrefox46
    2787 posts Member
    QQnerfQQ wrote: »
    fyrefox46 wrote: »
    QQnerfQQ wrote: »
    Battlefront is meant for large game modes, vehicles, heroes, etc. You can't do all that on small maps.

    Big maps > Small maps

    The Nunb has spoken

    Large modes are definitely more casual friendly. A lot more room for poor tactics and easy kills. A lot less competitive. That's for certain.

    yeah because running around a small map one shotting people with a DL-44 or destroying them with a DH-17 is just so difficult, not to mention the cheesy star card tactics that work a lot better on a small map.

    You dont actually play a lot of small maps do you? All the cheesy deaths come from big modes, from the classic luke gank to the everybody's favorite, the rampaging atst because your entire decided not to pack ion. Small modes are mostly your gun skills and reaction vs thiers, with a bit of tactics mixed in. Plus theres much less forgiveness when you arent potentially being carried by 19 others.

    Pretty much exactly as I would have put it. Much less forgiveness in small modes.

    I'm surprised there's any argument about this? I thought it was pretty much universal that small modes were more competitive than large modes.

    A lot of people don't pick up Star Wars Battlefront to play Call of Duty in space. The vehicles and heroes that you claim are not competitive is the draw of this game. Every game play they showed off and every commercial they had was for large maps.

    And even so, how competitive can small maps be when all you have to do is pick up a DL-44 or DH-17 and own everyone who has a rifle? The only counter to them on small maps is to use a DL-44 and DH-17 yourself.

    A280C and E11 are probably the most competitive across the range of small maps at the moment, not the pistols, with the CA87 for some of the ones that offer enough cover. You do know the 44 is not what it was 3 months ago right? Theres pretty much no reason to use the 17 right now unless youre very consistent at tagging both headshots. Even then youd likely go for the a280c. Its damage doesnt fall off a cliff at 20m
  • This sad excuse of a battlefront game has no large maps. especially when compared to battlefield 4 sized maps. Few more months till bf5
  • So I unlocked the DLC today and downloaded everything. I go to see what large game mode maps we got, and I can't find a single one. Is this honestly for real? 4 maps and not a single one that support the large game modes?

    I primarily play Battlefront for the big game modes. We only got 4 large maps at launch and 1 in the Jakku pack. I've played those to death, and no, one map added free every month or so does not help. That plus large maps in the DLC would have.

    If every paid DLC pack is just going to be 4 small maps, not only will I have wasted my money on a season pass, but you can officially count me off the bandwagon. I have defended this game, but no more.

    I certainly hope I'm wrong and just missed something. Otherwise, this is a huge let down.

    Would you really want to play the same map over and over? These are standalone minigames that are worse then the base game .
  • fyrefox46 wrote: »
    They didn't split the dlc into 2 map sizes to prevent the community from being completely fractured. Had they done that, and worked them into the regular rotations via a toggle, there would have ended up being 224 modes, some incredibly specific, to chose from at the end. The way they have it planned will be 14, give or take a few based on playlist consolidation so players can actually keep findig games.

    In theory but the reverse is true.
  • fyrefox46
    2787 posts Member
    fyrefox46 wrote: »
    They didn't split the dlc into 2 map sizes to prevent the community from being completely fractured. Had they done that, and worked them into the regular rotations via a toggle, there would have ended up being 224 modes, some incredibly specific, to chose from at the end. The way they have it planned will be 14, give or take a few based on playlist consolidation so players can actually keep findig games.

    In theory but the reverse is true.

    Is it? I'm finding OR games faster than I've found cargo games in over a month personally.
  • RadicalFanatic
    42 posts Member
    edited March 2016
    fyrefox46 wrote: »
    fyrefox46 wrote: »
    They didn't split the dlc into 2 map sizes to prevent the community from being completely fractured. Had they done that, and worked them into the regular rotations via a toggle, there would have ended up being 224 modes, some incredibly specific, to chose from at the end. The way they have it planned will be 14, give or take a few based on playlist consolidation so players can actually keep findig games.

    In theory but the reverse is true.

    Is it? I'm finding OR games faster than I've found cargo games in over a month personally.

    I have a harder time finding OR games most dlcers are in base game and with 4 expansion packs mixed map sizes and games real playlist could hit over 1000 compared to your 200 but you know math :p

    But i guess seperating them in 1000+ instead of 200 is somehow faster to find games ?
  • fyrefox46
    2787 posts Member
    fyrefox46 wrote: »
    fyrefox46 wrote: »
    They didn't split the dlc into 2 map sizes to prevent the community from being completely fractured. Had they done that, and worked them into the regular rotations via a toggle, there would have ended up being 224 modes, some incredibly specific, to chose from at the end. The way they have it planned will be 14, give or take a few based on playlist consolidation so players can actually keep findig games.

    In theory but the reverse is true.

    Is it? I'm finding OR games faster than I've found cargo games in over a month personally.

    I have a harder time finding OR games most dlcers are in base game and with 4 expansion packs mixed map sizes and games real playlist could hit over 1000 compared to your 200 but you know math :p

    Care to share your math? Theres 16 possible toggle combos and there will be 14 modes. 224 is over by a few because 4 modes are only in their dlc sets and the base game only has 10. That also was assuming we got the 2+2 map combo a dlc. Having it all one size does lower it further, in the neighborhood of 50 depending on which modes are covered by which dlc.
  • RadicalFanatic
    42 posts Member
    edited March 2016
    Your right mt math failed iam sleepy however my 17+ years of playing mmos your method never worked and failed miserabely everytime give it time you paid 80$ for star cards and nein game cost less then season pass to boot.
    Base only game id bet on it. I doubt battlefront will be that 1 miracle in 17 years.

    Btw let me know if you can still find OR games 6-9 months from now.
  • "Patience,patience for the jedi it is time to eat."
  • So I unlocked the DLC today and downloaded everything. I go to see what large game mode maps we got, and I can't find a single one. Is this honestly for real? 4 maps and not a single one that support the large game modes?

    I primarily play Battlefront for the big game modes. We only got 4 large maps at launch and 1 in the Jakku pack. I've played those to death, and no, one map added free every month or so does not help. That plus large maps in the DLC would have.

    If every paid DLC pack is just going to be 4 small maps, not only will I have wasted my money on a season pass, but you can officially count me off the bandwagon. I have defended this game, but no more.

    I certainly hope I'm wrong and just missed something. Otherwise, this is a huge let down.

    Would you really want to play the same map over and over? These are standalone minigames that are worse then the base game .

    Yeah how they mechanized it is a whole new issue. No I would not want any new maps to be separate from the others. That's as bad as having to play Turning Point on just the Jakku map for two months like we did. haha

    Maybe its a good sign in a way though. If they are going to continue this philosophy, then its likely they wont mix small and large maps anymore within a DLC. That could mean the Bespin pack is all large maps. Then again, it could mean we never see another large map in paid DLC. If that happens, I will be considering a total boycott of DICE shooters. At the least, I wont buy their next Battlefield game until it and the season pass drop in price by a combined $50. haha
  • set
    6 posts Member
    I have the Season Pass and I have been gaming for over 35 yrs. I want LARGE maps with my order please thank you!
  • briandt75
    5610 posts Member
    fyrefox46 wrote: »
    fyrefox46 wrote: »
    fyrefox46 wrote: »
    fyrefox46 wrote: »
    They didn't split the dlc into 2 map sizes to prevent the community from being completely fractured. Had they done that, and worked them into the regular rotations via a toggle, there would have ended up being 224 modes, some incredibly specific, to chose from at the end. The way they have it planned will be 14, give or take a few based on playlist consolidation so players can actually keep findig games.

    I seriously doubt that has anything to do with it. So am I really to expect the next DLC to be 4 large maps so they don't fracture the community? You don't go with a unique large/small map philosophy like this if you are concerned about splitting the community because that's exactly what it did.

    if they had gone with the same philosophy as BF4, none of this would be an issue. Every map would be a large map with cut outs of those maps for the smaller game modes. Most if not all of the small maps we have are not even in the large maps.

    And besides, they split the Jakku pack 1 large, 1 small. That didn't seem to cause any more headaches than this DLC.

    The jakku filter toggle took the base game from 9 modes to 19, and was free. These dlcs are sold seperately, and theres 4 of them. To work them into the game on stackable combos would lead to 224 modes. It would be a nightmare. Even 2 lobby sizes a map pack would take us to from 14 to 18 places to search, per region. It gets out of hand fast, people cant find games, go play something else, more people cant find games as a result, and it spirals while all the remaining hunker down in the latest dlc and the base game only.

    I'm not following this to be honest with you. Every shooter for 10 years has had DLC. This is the first one I've seen that can't seem to figure out how to mix new maps in with the existing ones. Call of Duty has been doing it since COD 4. With Call of Duty, if you didnt have the DLC when the map turned up in the rotation, then you got booted. EA has been doing it since Bad Company.

    And if no one is searching for a match at that point with the dlc? That seems worse as teams get dumped left and right and someone that could have that dlc is playing in another lobby.

    Call of Duty doesn't have much issues with people not buying DLC, or player count for that matter. And really neither did the Battlefield games, although some of those games were lobby based which made things easier. Either way, the game was still able to check to see if you had the DLC before allowing you to load into a map.

    The only way this becomes a problem is if you have a community that doesn't buy the DLC. The worst that can happen there is you end up with an empty lobby for a DLC map. People that get booted just queue up again and get into a game running the launch maps.

    So ok, if we go on a case by case basis and mix dlc maps into rotation and boot players as they come up, thats still going to be 224ish possible lobby combos at any one time. How likely is it you ever get to play a full game of dlc1 supremacy 6 months from now if it goes that route, as that mode already suffers from the only a few lobbies syndrom as is in many regions. Putting them in a playlist makes them playable far longer.

    How likely is it that this game will be played in 6 months no matter what? I'd call it 50/50 at best.
    41st Forum Fury Battalion Member
  • briandt75
    5610 posts Member
    edited March 2016
    fyrefox46 wrote: »
    I dont have a doubt in my mind that had lucasarts allowed it, they would have gone for the extra year in the dev cycle. 2 years just isnt enough time to make a game from scratch, and even CoD that has all sorts of assets it can share and reuse goes for 3 now. Im happy with what we have, the gameplay and whats coming, but I get why a l ot of others weren't. I only hope they learned from this and give the amy henning/visceral project the full time it needs. I think if the game had less modes and wasnt adding a new one with each dlc a mixed playlist for all modes could be successful on even limited numbers, but I just dont see there being 100k concurrent players 24 hours a day on every platform for 14 to survive dlc splits.

    Man, you sure have more confidence than most about the longevity of this game. I'll give ya that.
    41st Forum Fury Battalion Member
  • Fugazi_123 wrote: »
    T0TALfps wrote: »
    Hey ArchAngeL_777,

    That is indeed correct, there was no big mode offerings with the Outer Rim DLC. Personally, given the nature of the maps it would have been a tad bit difficult. That doesn't mean that there wont be any going forward however, and I will voice the disappointment folks have shared regarding the lack of big mode maps this time around.

    Exactly...I welcome the small maps..we already had 3 new free big maps, and more will come next time...

    2 of those came with small maps btw. Please look next time before commenting.
  • Fugazi_123 wrote: »
    T0TALfps wrote: »
    Hey ArchAngeL_777,

    That is indeed correct, there was no big mode offerings with the Outer Rim DLC. Personally, given the nature of the maps it would have been a tad bit difficult. That doesn't mean that there wont be any going forward however, and I will voice the disappointment folks have shared regarding the lack of big mode maps this time around.

    Exactly...I welcome the small maps..we already had 3 new free big maps, and more will come next time...

    2 of those came with small maps btw. Please look next time before commenting.

    and 3 big maps btw...little dumb ****...never comment again...

  • Small maps with cqb is fine if you have good game dynamics. That means 'crisp' movement and gun play.
    Sadly, SWBF has neither of these. Movement is floaty and buggy (over uneven terrain) and the gun play sucks. Totally random whether you live or die, pumping numerous blaster shots into an opponent only to be one-shotted with a pistol. Total pants.

    At least the larger maps have some 'wow' factor in terms of spectacle.

    I came back to this game today after a 2 month break 'cos I was utterly sick of it. Well, this DLC delivered nothing. No large maps, no improvements in gameplay dynamics.
    Actually, less than nothing. We now have a bunch of bugs, including zero credits and terrible lag.
  • When you add in the factor of all the upstairs down stairs,tunnel, hallway, ect I would have to say these new maps are not small
  • ArchAngeL_777
    1347 posts Member
    edited March 2016
    Fugazi_123 wrote: »
    Fugazi_123 wrote: »
    T0TALfps wrote: »
    Hey ArchAngeL_777,

    That is indeed correct, there was no big mode offerings with the Outer Rim DLC. Personally, given the nature of the maps it would have been a tad bit difficult. That doesn't mean that there wont be any going forward however, and I will voice the disappointment folks have shared regarding the lack of big mode maps this time around.

    Exactly...I welcome the small maps..we already had 3 new free big maps, and more will come next time...

    2 of those came with small maps btw. Please look next time before commenting.

    and 3 big maps btw...little dumb ****...never comment again...

    and 3 small maps. Between Jakku, and the free drops of January, February, and March, we got 3 small maps and 3 big maps.

    Stop trying to pretend big maps have ever had their day in this game. The current count is 16 small maps to 7 big maps...SIXTEEN. That means it was already a 12 to 7 advantage in favor of small maps before the Outer Rim DLC released.
  • ArchAngeL_777
    1347 posts Member
    edited March 2016
    Djezc420 wrote: »
    When you add in the factor of all the upstairs down stairs,tunnel, hallway, ect I would have to say these new maps are not small

    Agreed, but they only play the small game modes and are still not large enough for a 40 player battle. So the result is the same...no maps for the large game modes.
  • Fugazi_123 wrote: »
    Fugazi_123 wrote: »
    T0TALfps wrote: »
    Hey ArchAngeL_777,

    That is indeed correct, there was no big mode offerings with the Outer Rim DLC. Personally, given the nature of the maps it would have been a tad bit difficult. That doesn't mean that there wont be any going forward however, and I will voice the disappointment folks have shared regarding the lack of big mode maps this time around.

    Exactly...I welcome the small maps..we already had 3 new free big maps, and more will come next time...

    2 of those came with small maps btw. Please look next time before commenting.

    and 3 big maps btw...little dumb ****...never comment again...

    and 3 small maps. Between Jakku, and the free drops of January, February, and March, we got 3 small maps and 3 big maps.

    Stop trying to pretend big maps have ever had their day in this game. The current count is 16 small maps to 7 big maps...SIXTEEN. That means it was already a 12 to 7 advantage in favor of small maps before the Outer Rim DLC released.

    As I previously mentioned, I am a big map player. I play WA most of the time, roughly 80%. I welcome a DLC based on small maps & game modes because it gives me more incentive to play these modes and therefore more variety. If another DLC has a focus on fighter squadron then I will welcome this too, for the same reason, having barely played it at all in it's current format. I also like the hutt contracts for the same reason, it makes me try different weapons that I previously never did...

    I am not trying to compare which modes has how many maps...I am just saying I like them to focus on what I deem are weaker modes to make them more interesting for me to play.
  • I felt the same exact way as you man
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!