|
|
|
|
Flind wrote:
PS the difficulty about playing conquest large on our server is, there is only 16 people on each side. Conquest large maps are designed for the 64 man servers because of the sheer size and amount of vehicles spawned. If we played conquest large i am fairly certain after the novelty of the new map has warn off everyone would be droning on about how rubbish it is.
Indeed, thus your Back to Karkand suggestions cannot be implemented as only one Back to Karkand map comes in a Conquest Small version, and that map is Gulf of Oman. All other B2K maps are Conquest Assault which is practically Conquest Large.
Enjoy the experience, not the scoreboard.
|
|
|
Bluecewe wrote:
Flind wrote:
PS the difficulty about playing conquest large on our server is, there is only 16 people on each side. Conquest large maps are designed for the 64 man servers because of the sheer size and amount of vehicles spawned. If we played conquest large i am fairly certain after the novelty of the new map has warn off everyone would be droning on about how rubbish it is.
Indeed, thus your Back to Karkand suggestions cannot be implemented as only one Back to Karkand map comes in a Conquest Small version, and that map is Gulf of Oman. All other B2K maps are Conquest Assault which is practically Conquest Large.
Sharqi Peninsula is a perfect size map that is conquest assault but around the same size and normal conquest, I think it will be a great addition however having B2K maps will add the B2K flag in the server settings which could go two ways; it could help populate the servers or make them die out. Also caspian border is gayyyy
|
|
|
Yeah i like the idea that the players can choose which map comes next , i think it would work quite well in rush scine there is a rush mode for every map ,thus you don't have to worry about conquest large,conquest assault,etc.
If In Doubt, Go Flat Out !
|
|
|
Doesn't seem like we are using our Rush server much lately, unless I'm mistaken.
Enjoy the experience, not the scoreboard.
|
|
|
speak for yourself! I been playing rush almost exclusively lately. But if we can cut server expenses in half by not having a rush server, then fine by me. Playing with the clan is mostly conquest though since most EFG's seem to prefer that.
I've taken an almost perverse liking to Rush though.
|
|
|
Tinfoil Hat wrote:
speak for yourself! I been playing rush almost exclusively lately. But if we can cut server expenses in half by not having a rush server, then fine by me. Playing with the clan is mostly conquest though since most EFG's seem to prefer that.
I've taken an almost perverse liking to Rush though.
Yes, but are you using our Rush server, or other people's server? That is my point.
Enjoy the experience, not the scoreboard.
|
|
|
I like Conquest server, Rush server:Bleeeh
|
|
|
Ours, if it's populated but as I stated if it's gone for the sake of funds then it's no biggie. It's very convenient to have a rush server where I can force people into squads and kick abusers but I think only me and DVD plays on it frequently.
|
|
|
Tinfoil Hat wrote:
Ours, if it's populated but as I stated if it's gone for the sake of funds then it's no biggie. It's very convenient to have a rush server where I can force people into squads and kick abusers but I think only me and DVD plays on it frequently.
I used to play on it, but few others seemed to, so I haven't lately. I am going to try to get a map vote plugin operational in the next week or so.
Enjoy the experience, not the scoreboard.
|
|
|
I recommend Wake Island as a rush map. Very Open, and exciting when you get to the bridge tbh. One of my favourites!
 Robot Devil: Punishing you since 2275
|
