BF1942 for clans?

[Skyler]

I have been wondering this for a while, when BF1942 is released and it really takes off (I'm expecting it will), what rules will we play by ?

The biggest thing I've been wondering is how many a side ?

I first thought 16 because thats a good amount for mass warfare, but imagine organising 16 players to get into one server to play a clanmatch. It would be a mission, considering most clans have trouble getting 5 into a server now..

So what about 8v8 ?

Well that seems a bit small to me, but would work I think and this seems the most likely course of action, I'd like more but I cant see it being viable for clans. 8v8 is enough to cater for all tanks/aeroplanes on each side with some infantry to spare so its not that bad.

I also thought about 12v12, that seems like a nice balance, 4 more men per side = much more of a battle, but not as daunting a prospect for clan leaders/clans.


What do you lot think ?


I'm guess clanmatches will be played as dod matches currently are, timelimit or whatever with each clan playing each side once on a chosen map.


I cant help but feel that bf1942 could go the same way as Tribes 2, it seemed to fail on getting enough people per clan to play it, and general cocking around of idiots on servers


I'd love to have bf1942 16v16 leagues for some ub3r battle ownage, having seperate tank squads in each clan as well who do a specific job etc, with more people and large maps there are so many more prospects for teamplay, rather than the traditional small team tactics in CS/TDM etc.

What do you lot think anyway about how bf1942 will be for clans etc.?

 

[xane]

Not all maps are 16v16.

 

[1tchy trigger]

I think the fact that so many people are playing the multiplayer demo is going to help a great deal. Not much of a pool of players for Tribes2, but BF1942 should have loads of peeps chomping at the bit for the full release.

I'm sure this has been said on many occassions before...but I think this might be the one to topple CS

 

[Will]

Here's something to think about. A 32 player server is a lot of bandwidth, more than most current clan servers support. My wallet is getting scared already.

 

[killermarc]

i reckon 12 v 12 is about right

 

[lojik]

without having seen the full game its impossible to tell, but from previews etc that I have read the maps are gernally all very different from each other, some may only require 4 or 5 players per side even...

 

[Mr.Monkey]

There is no way BF will be more successful than CS.

For the simple reason:
Everyones computer can run CS. Not many can run BF.

 

[Scooba Da Bass]

Mine can't run CS...my mate stole my HL cd

 

[old.D0LLySh33p]

Kill him.

Kill him now.

 

[S-Gray]

Yes. Kill.

Anyone takes my CD there will be Blood on the Floor, maybe mine but who knows

 

[1tchy trigger]

Originally posted by Mr.Monkey
There is no way BF will be more successful than CS.

For the simple reason:
Everyones computer can run CS. Not many can run BF.

In that case why doesn't everyone still play Doom2?

I run a 1gb P3 with 128Mb Ram and a GeForce 2 - not exacly l33t kit, but BF1942 runs just fine. If you haven't got this set up as a minimum i would suggeest that most games aren't going to run on your PC

 

[Mr.Monkey]

Doom doesn't have a n00b friendly multiplayer gui. Thats why.

A 1Ghz is a good system fella. Same as one of my PC's. It's ok, but BF only runs ok, its not that pretty.

CS can be played very well on a p250, with a TNT2 gfx card. Which is what my kids have, and they play.... CS.
That is the sort of system the vast majority of people have access to.

I just happen to think CS sucks, cos people like my kids play it. Bunnyhopping gits.

 

[Sar]

12v12 sounds about right to me, and shouldn't put too much strain on the server.

Less processes per box, but the higher player numbers per process should balance that out.

Great fun so far, it's good to get a decent team, instead of a bunch of ppl who only work for themselves.

Clan games should be excellent in this.

When's it hit retail here?

 

[Will]

Originally posted by Sar
When's it hit retail here?

This Friday

 

[Sar]

\o/

I'm shit at it atm mind, but it's good fun

Text ingame is a bit hard to read, like it is in HL though :/

 

[Daffeh]

Originally posted by 1tchy trigger


In that case why doesn't everyone still play Doom2?

i still play doom2, albeit via a new spanky engine

JDoom are the r0xx0r

 

[Scooba Da Bass]

Daf is a statistical anomaly, and as such can be ignored.

 

[Sar]

Oddly that's what his parents said too.

He lacked love as a child.

;/

 

[Mr.Monkey]

I'll give him some love.

Man love. All over his face uke:

 

[wildie]

what

So what about 8v8

Are you somesort of cs or worst a T F C (spit) player ? if you seen the full game reviews, pictures and the maps you find 8v8 a long boring game, 1 takes ages to get from a to b and vehicals are rare and can carry only 2 a time so if u want to get in to the action fast you cant tanks are slowwwwww
so please shut up about your master plan, the game is for 64 players 32x32 if you cant get a clan of 32 players than tough.

go look up the game in full before you speakth wake island is small very small....

=FUK=Wildie

 

[Bazerka]

Originally posted by Skyler


The biggest thing I've been wondering is how many a side ?

I first thought 16 because thats a good amount for mass warfare, but imagine organising 16 players to get into one server to play a clanmatch. It would be a mission, considering most clans have trouble getting 5 into a server now..

This may be the case with existing games which everyone are bored to death of. Just because of the current apathy towards most of the games out there, doesn't mean that BF42 will suffer the same fate

So what about 8v8 ?

Well that seems a bit small to me, but would work I think and this seems the most likely course of action, I'd like more but I cant see it being viable for clans. 8v8 is enough to cater for all tanks/aeroplanes on each side with some infantry to spare so its not that bad.

I also thought about 12v12, that seems like a nice balance, 4 more men per side = much more of a battle, but not as daunting a prospect for clan leaders/clans.

What do you lot think ?

I think that by placing such small limits on a game which is capable of much more, is just going to prevent the game from reaching it's full potential.

I'm guess clanmatches will be played as dod matches currently are, timelimit or whatever with each clan playing each side once on a chosen map.

This may be fine for the "standard" game modes, but Conquest is definitely best suited to the tickets system that BF42 has introduced.

I cant help but feel that bf1942 could go the same way as Tribes 2, it seemed to fail on getting enough people per clan to play it, and general cocking around of idiots on servers

I'm gonna have to disagree once again. Although Tribes 2 was quite popular, it certainly never generated the interest that BF42 already has. Not only that, a sizeable portion of the original T1 community didn't find the game appealing. Whereas BF1942 appeals to lots of players from quite a few existing communities. I don't think it will be particularly hard to get clans up to a decent size to play the game how it was intended.

I'd love to have bf1942 16v16 leagues for some ub3r battle ownage, having seperate tank squads in each clan as well who do a specific job etc, with more people and large maps there are so many more prospects for teamplay, rather than the traditional small team tactics in CS/TDM etc.

Yes, I thoroughly agree. This could turn out to be the "killer app" as far as teamplay games are concerned. It has certainly brought quite a few players out of "retirement" from within the QWTF community, as we see it as the first genuine contender for successor to the QWTF throne

What do you lot think anyway about how bf1942 will be for clans etc.?

I think if people realise this game needs larger numbers than the crop of existing MP games out there, (as well as REQUIRING teamplay, not individual/selfish DM skillz) then everything will be fine.

My €0.02 worth

Jase.

 

[Scooba Da Bass]

Re: what

Originally posted by wildie


Are you somesort of cs or worst a T F C (spit) player ? if you seen the full game reviews, pictures and the maps you find 8v8 a long boring game, 1 takes ages to get from a to b and vehicals are rare and can carry only 2 a time so if u want to get in to the action fast you cant tanks are slowwwwww
so please shut up about your master plan, the game is for 64 players 32x32 if you cant get a clan of 32 players than tough.

go look up the game in full before you speakth wake island is small very small....

=FUK=Wildie

The problem is more finding a server with the bandwidth and the capabilities to support 64 players at once. I also think he asked a question, no need to go off on one at him...

 

[Bazerka]

Re: Re: what

Originally posted by Scooba Da Bass


The problem is more finding a server with the bandwidth and the capabilities to support 64 players at once.

This is quite true, at least for the short to mid term future. Almost all game server providers are running hardware that was specced against the previous generation of games. As more and more cpu intensive games hit the market over the coming months, GSPs will have to improve their baseline specs to cater for those games. (And potentially for existing games/mods, which seem to gobble more cpu/ram each time a new version is released).

Jase.

 

[Sar]

Re: what

Originally posted by wildie


Are you somesort of cs or worst a T F C (spit) player ? <snip a load of old bollocks>

=FUK=Wildie

Better than being a retard anyway.

 

[wildie]

yea

Yea he may have asked, but it may have been a hint in there too, we can’t let it be done the game demands more than 8v8
12v12 is min even then that’s still makes for a slow game, 16v16 yes that would suit the game and the way its played out by tickets for control, this isnt kill all end of round or ctf as we all use too, it`s far more indepth than that, we all seen a game go right down the the last few tickets, with the servers as they are now 16v16 on wake is a battle on a small map and suited to 16v16 what hapens when the map is 5x the area of wake to fight over? 8v8 wont be fun 12v12 wont be, 16v16 may be just but still 32v32 is how it ment to be.
so lets see what the full game looks like and plays like we may end up 20v20 for some maps 16 for others but not 8.

as for servers and bw I think they can handle it, its the modem users that will have a hard time of it, isdn min speed for the game i rekon unless they tweak the net code in the full game,
from what i been seeing and reading about modem users.

 

[drleq3]

*puzzlement*

I can't see how, even on small maps like wake (just imagine all the water as land), surviving with 8v8 very long. On the BW beta servers which are regularly filled you often find yourself with barely a couple of re-enforcements to help you out when a flag is being over run. With 8v8 the games could be very short and tbh not much fun.

Now envisage 32v32. Wake would be quite crowded and flags would swap left right and centre _but_ on a large map even your 32 players would be stretched. If you think about it half the fun, and often agrovation , from this game comes from being outflanked by the enemy because they are working together much better than your team. You can try and fight them off but ultimately you end up respawning and reflanking them!

The point I'm making is that with 8v8 or 12v12 there is a much narrower scope for such levels of teamplay which is, quite honestly, what I find so much fun about this game. The vehicles are entertaining for a while, then you do crazy jumps with dynamite but all that ultimately becomes tiresome. BF goes much beyond that but the depth of the gameplay can only be reached with 16v16 teams and up.

As for having clans large enough I know of one group (=FUK=, of which I am a member but they're too lazy to update the web page and also [G] which have numerous players. Once people can buy the game and give it an honest go (ie not a couple of rounds) they can join a clan if they want.

Clans may have to merge but I don't think that it'll be a game stopping problem. After all who wants to run/drive for miles across a map just to get Sherman'd

 

[Scooba Da Bass]

Originally posted by Itcheh
Here's something to think about. A 32 player server is a lot of bandwidth, more than most current clan servers support. My wallet is getting scared already.

Heh, my boss doesn't know it yet, but I think he's gonna be sponsoring us.

Your wallet is safe!

 

[xane]

Originally posted by drleq3
[BClans may have to merge but I don't think that it'll be a game stopping problem. [/B]

If =FUK= were merged into [G], would that be =FUKinG ?

 

[wildie]

heh

nice heh

 

[Will]

Originally posted by Scooba Da Bass


Heh, my boss doesn't know it yet, but I think he's gonna be sponsoring us.

Your wallet is safe!

Wow, sponsored in two different games. Now, if only I can get another couple, I can quit my day job.