criterion-sm dice-lg ea-starwars-lg instagram lucasfilm-lg motive-lg twitch you-tube
Game Update
Forest of Endor

20v20 or 32v32?

I prefer 32v32.

What do you want?

Replies

  • 32v32 for sure.
    PSN: Trooper8059
    "Remember: Your focus determines your reality."
    ezgif_5_a643336582.gif
  • leftweet
    2216 posts Member
    I definitely would like to see 32v32 for the big modes. Wouldn't mind seeing a mid-sized mode at 16v16 or 20v20, though.
    I write things for The Star Wars Game Outpost
  • Jrob122
    4638 posts Member
    32vs32? That's not Battlefront :joy: 16vs16 is where it's at!
  • Jrob122 wrote: »
    32vs32? That's not Battlefront :joy: 16vs16 is where it's at!

    Nah man, 8v8.
    PSN: Trooper8059
    "Remember: Your focus determines your reality."
    ezgif_5_a643336582.gif
  • Jrob122
    4638 posts Member
    Jrob122 wrote: »
    32vs32? That's not Battlefront :joy: 16vs16 is where it's at!

    Nah man, 8v8.

    1v1...
  • Jrob122
    4638 posts Member
    Actually more like 0vs0 cause no one plays anymore
  • Jrob122 wrote: »
    Actually more like 0vs0 cause no one plays anymore

    Point taken. Back in February, Battlefield 1 PC stats were near equivalent to the entire playerbase of Battlefront, but now...

    Now there are more people on Battlefield 1 on PC alone than there is players on Battlefront total.
    PSN: Trooper8059
    "Remember: Your focus determines your reality."
    ezgif_5_a643336582.gif
  • CPT_Rex
    725 posts Member
    32vs32 is how Battlefront should have been from the start. At 20vs20 you may as well call it Skirmishfront.
    "In my book, experience outranks everything."
  • Whodunnit
    5578 posts Member
    32v32.
    In HvV.
    Battlefront II has a 45.8% chance of success.
    sfg04pfx1l31.gif
  • 32v32 is true Star Wars, I didn't sign up for 6v6.
    Member of the 501st
  • Master_Cunha
    4562 posts Member
    edited March 2017
    32 vs 32 conquest and 1 operations style multi stage like galactic conquest online.

    No walker assault, supremicy or turning point.

    Some smaller modes like extraction, drop zone, hero blast and a hero hunt with two heroes.
  • Alvonator wrote: »
    I prefer 32v32.

    What do you want?

    32v32 yes!
  • 32v32
    For General Ahsoka Tano!
    h3d5nuo8y0jq.png

  • Bigger the better
  • 100 v 100
  • Trooper8059
    10199 posts Member
    edited March 2017
    100 v 100

    Let's go to Planetside 2 levels of players and have thousands on a single map!
    PSN: Trooper8059
    "Remember: Your focus determines your reality."
    ezgif_5_a643336582.gif
  • Jrob122 wrote: »
    Actually more like 0vs0 cause no one plays anymore

    Point taken. Back in February, Battlefield 1 PC stats were near equivalent to the entire playerbase of Battlefront, but now...

    Now there are more people on Battlefield 1 on PC alone than there is players on Battlefront total.

    Oh man, just checked.
    That's ***** bad.
  • idk because battlefront never had 32 v 32
  • Wallofman
    1195 posts Member
    32 vs 32 conquest and 1 operations style multi stage like galactic conquest online.

    No walker assault, supremicy or turning point.

    Some smaller modes like extraction, drop zone, hero blast and a hero hunt with two heroes.

    32v32 in extraction? no thank you
  • 32v32 as long as the pickups are removed, no more pulling rockets/thermal imploaders/etc for cheap 1 hit kills out of the behinds.
  • Master_Cuhna, dude the game would be to repetitive with just one all out mode
  • CPT_Rex
    725 posts Member
    idk because battlefront never had 32 v 32

    That's incorrect. In BF2 on PC you could up the number of AI to 32. I don't know about on multiplayer as I never played but there was most definitely 32vs32.
    "In my book, experience outranks everything."
  • CPT_Rex wrote: »
    idk because battlefront never had 32 v 32

    That's incorrect. In BF2 on PC you could up the number of AI to 32. I don't know about on multiplayer as I never played but there was most definitely 32vs32.

    This and even Battlefield 1 which came out one years later with the same engine can handle 32vs32 and many vehicles at the same time.
    For General Ahsoka Tano!
    h3d5nuo8y0jq.png

  • 32v32
    You can't spell "steal" without EA


    hxed7ph501zd.png
  • leftweet wrote: »
    I definitely would like to see 32v32 for the big modes. Wouldn't mind seeing a mid-sized mode at 16v16 or 20v20, though.

    What i was thinking.
  • Wallofman wrote: »
    32 vs 32 conquest and 1 operations style multi stage like galactic conquest online.

    No walker assault, supremicy or turning point.

    Some smaller modes like extraction, drop zone, hero blast and a hero hunt with two heroes.

    32v32 in extraction? no thank you

    I wouldn't want that either. That's why I said SMALLER modes
  • They should focus on two sizes only, more than that and it separates the player base. Who's bright idea was it to have 20v20, 16v16, 12v12, 8v8, and 6v6 modes?
  • They should focus on two sizes only, more than that and it separates the player base. Who's bright idea was it to have 20v20, 16v16, 12v12, 8v8, and 6v6 modes?

    Was Dennis's idea. Small Battles Season Pass. Like in the movies you know?...
    For General Ahsoka Tano!
    h3d5nuo8y0jq.png

  • They should focus on two sizes only, more than that and it separates the player base. Who's bright idea was it to have 20v20, 16v16, 12v12, 8v8, and 6v6 modes?

    I disagree. It may split playerbase a bit, but I think it's worth it to have some variety. I (and many others) love to be able to play a large scale mode, and then mix it up and play a more competitive objective mode like cargo or drop zone. The problem with this game is the player base (which I assume will be higher in the sequel)
    Just another sniping YouTuber.
  • They should focus on two sizes only, more than that and it separates the player base. Who's bright idea was it to have 20v20, 16v16, 12v12, 8v8, and 6v6 modes?

    I disagree. It may split playerbase a bit, but I think it's worth it to have some variety. I (and many others) love to be able to play a large scale mode, and then mix it up and play a more competitive objective mode like cargo or drop zone. The problem with this game is the player base (which I assume will be higher in the sequel)

    Agreed. I think there should be some variety. For example, can you imagine playing 16v16 on a huge map like Tatooine dune sea or the wookie village on Kashykk?
    PSN: DynamitePro26
  • N3gativePrime
    4828 posts Member
    edited April 2017
    CPT_Rex wrote: »
    idk because battlefront never had 32 v 32

    That's incorrect. In BF2 on PC you could up the number of AI to 32. I don't know about on multiplayer as I never played but there was most definitely 32vs32.

    Starwars EA is a separate game. It never had 32 players.
  • Tyjames
    807 posts Member
    This needs to be 32vs32. I anticipate some disappointments when we find out all the information for this upcoming game. I really hope this won't be one of fhem
  • CPT_Rex
    725 posts Member
    CPT_Rex wrote: »
    idk because battlefront never had 32 v 32

    That's incorrect. In BF2 on PC you could up the number of AI to 32. I don't know about on multiplayer as I never played but there was most definitely 32vs32.

    Starwars EA is a separate game. It never had 32 players.

    True, but I (and many others) believe that should change in EABF2.
    "In my book, experience outranks everything."
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!