Battlefront3.net

Post by **Legion 2.5** » Mon Jul 19, 2010 1:26 am

I like that a little better.

Post by **Arosenivai** » Mon Jul 19, 2010 1:31 am

But I was thinking like bases that have their own turret systems, scanning devices, etc. there has to be a more logical way of transferring control over to your factions.

Post by **Legion 2.5** » Mon Jul 19, 2010 1:32 am

Hum, like extra power bonuses or something.

Post by **Scott** » Mon Jul 19, 2010 3:56 am

You guys need to play MAG. Your basically describing the game

Post by **Legion 2.5** » Mon Jul 19, 2010 11:55 am

I know it's off topic but what systems is MAG for?

Post by **Arosenivai** » Mon Jul 19, 2010 1:55 pm

I think it's a PS3 exclusive, but I'm not sure. All the commercials I saw for it were strictly PS3 though.

Post by **Legion 2.5** » Mon Jul 19, 2010 2:02 pm

Looked it up and it is a ps3 exclusive. I don't have a ps3.

Post by **Arosenivai** » Mon Jul 19, 2010 2:14 pm

It kind of makes sense, the specs on the PS3 are better than the XBox360. I don't want to start a xBox vs. PS3 war, but I don't know if the xenon processor could handle a 256 multiplayer game.

Post by **Sam** » Mon Jul 19, 2010 4:57 pm

I dunno but then again I have no idea how the MAG system works. There is no doubt in my mind that the PS3 is more powerful than the 360 (im a 360 man myself) but it begs the question, how many players could you push a 360 to?

Post by **Legion 2.5** » Mon Jul 19, 2010 5:07 pm

Maybe at least 16. That's how Halo works.

Post by **Sam** » Mon Jul 19, 2010 6:03 pm

I know 16 is the most out there but the PS3 system can't be so much more powerful that it can fit in 16 times more players in than the 360.

hmmm....anyway back to topic

what if CP's where completly removed from the game, attackers are spawned inside thier fleet ships and have to get down to the battle via a drop ship and defenders would 'walk' onto the map in waves?

I don't know how that would pan out in gameplay style, it would make the attacking sides job much much harder...and would require new win objectives, what do you guys think? do you think you litterally can't get away from using CPs?

Post by **Arosenivai** » Mon Jul 19, 2010 6:47 pm

Tretarn wrote:I know 16 is the most out there but the PS3 system can't be so much more powerful that it can fit in 16 times more players in than the 360.

I personally believe I could push 64 at least... networking isn't too bad (at least my history with it). There's certainly enough ram for it.

Tretarn wrote: what if CP's where completly removed from the game, attackers are spawned inside thier fleet ships and have to get down to the battle via a drop ship and defenders would 'walk' onto the map in waves?

I don't know how that would pan out in gameplay style, it would make the attacking sides job much much harder...and would require new win objectives, what do you guys think? do you think you litterally can't get away from using CPs?

CP's make sense. I think it would be interesting otherwise, but command posts are a representation of the advancing armies. The way I picture a space invasion on a ground map would be something like this:

Ground:

1. starts with all the command posts.

2. instead of the BF2 CP timer that resets every time, it just "pauses" and then continues if they re-take control of all command posts. The timer starts higher than normal though like 10-15 minutes or so. (since it starts counting down from the start of the battle).

Space:

1. starts with a fleet which they can spawn at (does not count as command post)

2. their timer is similar to the BF2 timer which will reset.

The whole point of this setup is to encourage a stop on that timer asap and secure a strong and steady hold on the planet soon and early, otherwise a weak hold will just unpause the countdown to defeat. That's how I viewed it. The beginning of the battle would be intense a swarm of gunships and fighters trying to make it to the planets, AA gunners trying to let through as few as possible. just the way I would try and design it.

Post by **Legion 2.5** » Mon Jul 19, 2010 7:38 pm

The number of people could be maximized while online?

Post by **Scott** » Mon Jul 19, 2010 8:41 pm

Arosenivai wrote:
Tretarn wrote:I know 16 is the most out there but the PS3 system can't be so much more powerful that it can fit in 16 times more players in than the 360.
I personally believe I could push 64 at least... networking isn't too bad (at least my history with it). There's certainly enough ram for it.

Networking for the 360 should be more stable than the PS3 and the 360 is no slack although is lesser to the PS3 in its power (particularly GPU). You could find the specs and a do a fractional comparison (if the 360 is half the machine the PS3 is then 128) but that's probably not the most accurate.

Legion 2.5 wrote:The number of people could be maximized while online?

As long as it doesn't lag like the first two games did.

@Arosenivai

To reply to your entire post instead of quoting it, I would hope not every map is setup like this. Maybe it is an additional mode but I think the thrill of defending or attacking a planet would go away quickly. I like the idea but not as the standard. I like the normal system where each team has some CPs and a few neutral ones scattered about. I'd like to see that on ground and in space so you had a choice of where to fight but if you and your allies don't spread out properly you'll lose one of the sectors (land or space).

Post by **Arosenivai** » Mon Jul 19, 2010 9:21 pm

Sadly any thrill will become outdated if overused, but if it's fun enough why not have it? The way I picture it. I'd like to see a galactic conquest a lot differently. I like it if we had planets with multiple maps and some with only one. eh I lost my track of thought