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

Dice, Why are you shooting yourselves in the foot? (Player Count)

Prev1
(precursor: I say Dice, because Multiplayer is their field of this game)
Dice, you guys have done an amazing job at providing a game that answers a lot of feedback demands, which we love you for, however there is one glaring flaw that you may not understand the ramifications for yet, so I'll explain:
The player count on space battles and large ground battles is too low!
Space Battles:
1. If you guys added the feature to board capital ships, their would be noone in space other than AI, which make me believe you didn't add this feature
2. To take out capital ships, and to have epic dogfights going on at once in a large space that these fights take place in, 12v12 will seem empty even with AI who are just target practice in the first battlefront
3. 12v12 means that its really 8v8 while 4 members of each team are racing back to the fight after dying
Ground Combat:
1. If you guys added classic conquest to the game (non-linear sandbox game mode) then the battlefield will defintiely seem empty (as Battlefields conquest can still get slow at times with 64 players), which again, makes me think it isn't in the game
2. If you guys really did add a lot more vehicles, which I'm excited for (like tanks, more spaceships, and rideable TaunTauns, then the amount of infantry left in the fight will be like 12 soldiers per team, UNLESS you guys made it so each team can maybe only have two pilots in the air, with one ground vehicles, and one or two smaller vehicles (like a speeder bike). Which is really shallow and lame in terms a of a battle.
3. Large battles should include 4+ aircraft per team with 2+ land vehicles, and smaller vehicles/animals while STILL MAINTAINING a large infantry base to play objectives and, lets be real, allow the vehicles to have targets to prey on, and allow vehicles to be killed, BECAUSE, one infantry should not be able to kill one tie fighter or tank or hero, it takes A LOT of infantry

#UpThePlayerCount
giphy.gif

Replies

  • Preach.

    If it's actually technically possible, which I suspect it is, I think this might just end up being the thing the fans turn them around on before launch.
  • Preach.

    If it's actually technically possible, which I suspect it is, I think this might just end up being the thing the fans turn them around on before launch.

    I mean its definitely possible, and would be foolish of them not to change, because this seems to be the only MAJOR backlash against the information given so far. Uping the player count would please everyone in the end
    giphy.gif
  • +1

    Raise the player count or add AI if its not technically possible, 20v20 is not enough.
  • Ahsoka_Tano
    7339 posts Member
    edited April 2017
    32vs32 like 12 years ago or 1 year ago in Battlefield 1.
    For General Ahsoka Tano!
    h3d5nuo8y0jq.png

  • +1

    Raise the player count or add AI if its not technically possible, 20v20 is not enough.

    I honestly don't know why this was a standard, they should have 64 player lobbies WITH 10 or so AI, where its needed (in space battles, i thought it would be important to have constant AI soldiers in your own capital ship)
    THAT was my standard, and Dice took a huge undercut of that
    giphy.gif
  • Yeah 20v20 just ain't enough
  • +1

    20 v 20 on large scale battles is not enough
  • SG-17
    111 posts Member
    20v20 is fine if the maps are made well.
    Visit The Star Wars: Battlefront Community for clans and tournaments on the PlayStation 4, Xbox One, and PC. Established 2007.
  • Just making another point here dice, space battles should have the same player count as large scale ground battles (at least 32v32)! unless you're giving us the underwhelming fighter squadron mode again in space and thinking its the same?
    giphy.gif
  • Willpated3 wrote: »
    +1

    20 v 20 on large scale battles is not enough
    I mean 20v20 would be good for certain mods and maps but for all out war, it would be underwhelming
  • Massman98
    299 posts Member
    edited April 2017
    SG-17 wrote: »
    20v20 is fine if the maps are made well.

    Seriously stop, I know you have your opinion, and I want to respect that, but my list is completely justified, you're just under the impression that we are going to have linear concentrated WA game modes and maps with 3 hallways to go down. If thats the case, this game will be disappointing but you can't seriously read my list and ignore my points
    This game should have conquest in it
    giphy.gif
  • SG-17
    111 posts Member
    Conquest works just fine in 20v20.
    Visit The Star Wars: Battlefront Community for clans and tournaments on the PlayStation 4, Xbox One, and PC. Established 2007.
  • SG-17 wrote: »
    Conquest works just fine in 20v20.
    I respect your opinion but i feel like that hardly wouldnt be enough
  • SG-17 wrote: »
    Conquest works just fine in 20v20.

    Okay fine, lets go through this, conquest on hoth: 20 v 20 with Echo base plus one or two outposts with a massive white plain (think of that shot from the trailer, now you want combat to be exciting in multiple areas of the battlefield, because, well, everyone will be spread out as squads have different objectives they're going for, so maybe a squad per team going after each objective (8-10 guys on each objective total, now lets take out the men in aircraft, in vehicles, on speeder bikes or animals, sniping or have died, dont forget about heroes, which in turn draw infantry in with the sole goal to kill the hero. Thats, on average, has 1-2 guys battling for each objective at any given moment. AND THAT SEEMS OKAY to you? (you are on the wrong side of this)
    giphy.gif
  • There's still a lot of time to update your game and update the website dice, I suggest you get started. 32v32 is really 20v20 infantry once the vehicles and hero slots get taken up, then remember that 1/4 of the remaining infantry will be running up to combat at any given moment
    giphy.gif
  • SG-17
    111 posts Member
    edited April 2017
    A map the size of Cloud City or Mos Eisley from SWBF2005 would work well with 40 players on Conquest. The maps just need to be properly scaled and have good flow.

    It worked well enough with only 24 players, as did most of the maps from the original games. 40 is enough with good maps period.
    Visit The Star Wars: Battlefront Community for clans and tournaments on the PlayStation 4, Xbox One, and PC. Established 2007.
  • Massman98 wrote: »
    There's still a lot of time to update your game and update the website dice, I suggest you get started. 32v32 is really 20v20 infantry once the vehicles and hero slots get taken up, then remember that 1/4 of the remaining infantry will be running up to combat at any given moment

    Deduct two for that one guy trying to shoot the moon with a pulse cannon while his partner laugh emotes at him.
  • Massman98 wrote: »
    There's still a lot of time to update your game and update the website dice, I suggest you get started. 32v32 is really 20v20 infantry once the vehicles and hero slots get taken up, then remember that 1/4 of the remaining infantry will be running up to combat at any given moment

    Exactly. With such huge, epic, beautiful maps and modes, we need a higher player count so that it really looks and feels like an epic battleground.
    Just another sniping YouTuber.
  • Massman98 wrote: »
    There's still a lot of time to update your game and update the website dice, I suggest you get started. 32v32 is really 20v20 infantry once the vehicles and hero slots get taken up, then remember that 1/4 of the remaining infantry will be running up to combat at any given moment

    Deduct two for that one guy trying to shoot the moon with a pulse cannon while his partner laugh emotes at him.

    exactly haha
    giphy.gif
  • SG-17 wrote: »
    A map the size of Cloud City or Mos Eisley from SWBF2005 would work well with 40 players on Conquest. The maps just need to be properly scaled and have good flow.

    It worked well enough with only 24 players, as did most of the maps from the original games. 40 is enough with good maps period.

    Well then our argument is the size and structure of the maps themselves, I think d=Dice will have to build up inherently (easier to make) smaller maps (like cloud city) to make them on the same scale of the inherently bigger maps like hoth and mos eislely. Im praying they don't scale them down
    giphy.gif
  • Apparently there will be 40 AI ships in space combat, so its nice to the point that space won't feel too empty... BUT, AI won't be able to help with the boarding of capital ships, at least I highly doubt it
    giphy.gif
  • Landeaux
    3467 posts Member
    +100000000000000000
  • Landeaux wrote: »
    +100000000000000000

    :D :D Thanks for the support!
    giphy.gif
  • Frix
    626 posts Member
    Simply put no one understands why we don't have larger game modes. We need a technical explanation for why not, more players, or tons of adequate ai.
  • Frix wrote: »
    Simply put no one understands why we don't have larger game modes. We need a technical explanation for why not, more players, or tons of adequate ai.

    Yeah exactly, hopefully Elliot or anyone on twitter can squeeze an answer as to why it wasn't improved upon from the last game.
    Just another sniping YouTuber.
  • Yeah, this player count issue sounds pretty dire. I think that tells us we're not getting air-to-ship boarding play, or ground-to-air-to-ship play. The maps would have to be pretty small for that to work. If they don't keep those servers full, we're going to have some trouble as is.
    I am one with the force. The force is with Steve.
  • While I'm not normally one to weigh in on this sort of thing, I do think that increasing the player count would make the game more fun.
    Ub0a8xV.gif
    You are part of the Rebel Alliance and a traitor!
  • RIFRIG
    480 posts Member
    If the game is going to have a 4K option for Pro & Scorpio the FB3 engine may not be able to deliver an acceptable performance for high count multiplayer modes thus the 40/24 decision being made.
  • Quizolio
    3221 posts Member
    While I'm not normally one to weigh in on this sort of thing, I do think that increasing the player count would make the game more fun.

    It would.

    After playing Battlefield 1, I can say the chaos of a 64 player match would fit perfectly in a Star Wars game. I'm not as upset as others are, but I can't help but feel miffed at such a missed opportunity.
    "A thing called grammar needs a buff."
    - tankertoad
  • I love both space battles (well, ship battles in general) and massive gamemodes. now that they made ships customizeable it will be even more popular to me and the few others already loving ships and even more people who didn't like it already. if they didnt add it I would be very upset as I would miss it so bad and they could easily make it 40 player gamemode. and seriously... are you stupid? no massive gamemodes? did you hit your head while writing that?
  • Massman98 wrote: »
    SG-17 wrote: »
    20v20 is fine if the maps are made well.

    Seriously stop, I know you have your opinion, and I want to respect that, but my list is completely justified, you're just under the impression that we are going to have linear concentrated WA game modes and maps with 3 hallways to go down. If thats the case, this game will be disappointing but you can't seriously read my list and ignore my points
    This game should have conquest in it

    they said they were not gonna have it because they didn't want to copy the battlefeild series.
  • SG-17
    111 posts Member
    AI should not be in any ground mode at all.
    Visit The Star Wars: Battlefront Community for clans and tournaments on the PlayStation 4, Xbox One, and PC. Established 2007.
  • Landeaux
    3467 posts Member
    SG-17 wrote: »
    AI should not be in any ground mode at all.

  • Massman98 wrote: »
    SG-17 wrote: »
    20v20 is fine if the maps are made well.

    Seriously stop, I know you have your opinion, and I want to respect that, but my list is completely justified, you're just under the impression that we are going to have linear concentrated WA game modes and maps with 3 hallways to go down. If thats the case, this game will be disappointing but you can't seriously read my list and ignore my points
    This game should have conquest in it

    they said they were not gonna have it because they didn't want to copy the battlefeild series.

    The originals had them though so it makes no sense for them to do this.
  • Landeaux
    3467 posts Member
    Massman98 wrote: »
    SG-17 wrote: »
    20v20 is fine if the maps are made well.

    Seriously stop, I know you have your opinion, and I want to respect that, but my list is completely justified, you're just under the impression that we are going to have linear concentrated WA game modes and maps with 3 hallways to go down. If thats the case, this game will be disappointing but you can't seriously read my list and ignore my points
    This game should have conquest in it

    they said they were not gonna have it because they didn't want to copy the battlefeild series.

    Fine, then have 50 players, then. Something more than just 40. 40 is way too small for large war games
  • Quizolio wrote: »
    While I'm not normally one to weigh in on this sort of thing, I do think that increasing the player count would make the game more fun.

    It would.

    After playing Battlefield 1, I can say the chaos of a 64 player match would fit perfectly in a Star Wars game. I'm not as upset as others are, but I can't help but feel miffed at such a missed opportunity.

    Definitely as far as 24 player space battles are concerned. It just doesn't sound like it's nearly enough, AI ships or not.
  • 40 isn't a bad amount, but even a slight increase to 48 would be welcomed. 6 squads of 4. I admit 64 or 60 would be better, but I don't see 40 as that bad. I do hope Space Battles feel engaging. So far I'm skeptical about that.
  • SG-17 wrote: »
    AI should not be in any ground mode at all.

    Yeah, Im not sure how I feel about this, I feel like I could love it and then immediately get tired of it
    if they didnt add it I would be very upset as I would miss it so bad and they could easily make it 40 player gamemode. and seriously... are you ****? no massive gamemodes? did you hit your head while writing that?

    "no massive gamemodes?" what are you referencing here?
    Massman98 wrote: »
    SG-17 wrote: »
    20v20 is fine if the maps are made well.

    Seriously stop, I know you have your opinion, and I want to respect that, but my list is completely justified, you're just under the impression that we are going to have linear concentrated WA game modes and maps with 3 hallways to go down. If thats the case, this game will be disappointing but you can't seriously read my list and ignore my points
    This game should have conquest in it

    they said they were not gonna have it because they didn't want to copy the battlefeild series.

    Well that's a dumb reason, it was in the original battlefronts
    giphy.gif
  • I would accept AI on the ground only if it's impossible for them to make it 32 v 32, which is highly unlikely
  • Willpated3 wrote: »
    I would accept AI on the ground only if it's impossible for them to make it 32 v 32, which is highly unlikely

    True and it may be harder to implement then upgrading the player size, also, remember guys, there are no more star cards (no more spamming of explosives) so grenade spam should be toned down, so a more hectic gameplay would be more hectic with blaster fire, a lot more enjoyable than grenade spam
    giphy.gif
  • Massman98 wrote: »
    Willpated3 wrote: »
    I would accept AI on the ground only if it's impossible for them to make it 32 v 32, which is highly unlikely

    True and it may be harder to implement then upgrading the player size, also, remember guys, there are no more star cards (no more spamming of explosives) so grenade spam should be toned down, so a more hectic gameplay would be more hectic with blaster fire, a lot more enjoyable than grenade spam

    ^
  • I'd want at least 64 players for conquest and by conquest i mean the conquest the original 2 SWBF games had. Walker assault seems to be ok with 20 v 20, but i would to see this bumped up to 24 v 24, just to make it a bit more intense. The smaller modes like the Hero vs Hero one seemed fine with low player counts. If changes are to be made they need to be made now, lets just hope DICE is listening and acting upon it.
    1pw96s.gif
  • Hopefully it's like battlefront 2 heroes vs villains [email protected]
  • I'd want at least 64 players for conquest and by conquest i mean the conquest the original 2 SWBF games had. Walker assault seems to be ok with 20 v 20, but i would to see this bumped up to 24 v 24, just to make it a bit more intense. The smaller modes like the Hero vs Hero one seemed fine with low player counts. If changes are to be made they need to be made now, lets just hope DICE is listening and acting upon it.

    Yeah I agree, that's why 64 player, and I feel like they could implement other game modes (even walker assault) to where 64 players works perfectly
    giphy.gif
  • Star Wars Battlefront is about Large Scale Battles at its Core. For a battle to be large in scale then it needs to have a large amount of players. Small game modes are fine for 20 v 20 and if they want to make a different Star Wars game that has smaller player counts then that's fine too, but don't make a game called Star Wars BATTLEFRONT and give it small player counts. If anyone has seen the movies then they know that most of the awesome battles that take place have tons of people and Battlefront the only game that would make sense to include such battles. Large player counts on Massive maps should be a major selling point for this game, yet I don't even think they mentioned it in the interview. Large scale maps should be 64 v 64 with Ai on top of that, but if its not technologically possible then 32 v 32 will have to do, 20 v 20 shouldn't even be a option for large scale maps.
  • TyranicRex wrote: »
    Star Wars Battlefront is about Large Scale Battles at its Core. For a battle to be large in scale then it needs to have a large amount of players. Small game modes are fine for 20 v 20 and if they want to make a different Star Wars game that has smaller player counts then that's fine too, but don't make a game called Star Wars BATTLEFRONT and give it small player counts. If anyone has seen the movies then they know that most of the awesome battles that take place have tons of people and Battlefront the only game that would make sense to include such battles. Large player counts on Massive maps should be a major selling point for this game, yet I don't even think they mentioned it in the interview. Large scale maps should be 64 v 64 with Ai on top of that, but if its not technologically possible then 32 v 32 will have to do, 20 v 20 shouldn't even be a option for large scale maps.

    +1
  • TyranicRex wrote: »
    Star Wars Battlefront is about Large Scale Battles at its Core. For a battle to be large in scale then it needs to have a large amount of players. Small game modes are fine for 20 v 20 and if they want to make a different Star Wars game that has smaller player counts then that's fine too, but don't make a game called Star Wars BATTLEFRONT and give it small player counts. If anyone has seen the movies then they know that most of the awesome battles that take place have tons of people and Battlefront the only game that would make sense to include such battles. Large player counts on Massive maps should be a major selling point for this game, yet I don't even think they mentioned it in the interview. Large scale maps should be 64 v 64 with Ai on top of that, but if its not technologically possible then 32 v 32 will have to do, 20 v 20 shouldn't even be a option for large scale maps.

    +2
    giphy.gif
  • Frix
    626 posts Member
    40 isn't a bad amount, but even a slight increase to 48 would be welcomed. 6 squads of 4. I admit 64 or 60 would be better, but I don't see 40 as that bad. I do hope Space Battles feel engaging. So far I'm skeptical about that.

    40 is kinda bad. For example 2 people on both team are in vehicles and 6-8 on both team are dead or not anywhere near combat yet. Now it's a 10 v 10 or 12 v 12.
  • Frix wrote: »
    40 isn't a bad amount, but even a slight increase to 48 would be welcomed. 6 squads of 4. I admit 64 or 60 would be better, but I don't see 40 as that bad. I do hope Space Battles feel engaging. So far I'm skeptical about that.

    40 is kinda bad. For example 2 people on both team are in vehicles and 6-8 on both team are dead or not anywhere near combat yet. Now it's a 10 v 10 or 12 v 12.

    Exactly, and Dice can't even e surprised by this blow back, I know the first battlefront only had 40 player lobbies but 64 players is the standard since Battlefield is a Dice game
    giphy.gif
  • I've got a bad feeling about this.
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!