Battlefront3.net

Post by **Legion 2.5** » Tue Jul 27, 2010 12:14 pm

I know but at least it's fun.

Post by **Arosenivai** » Tue Jul 27, 2010 12:58 pm

Scott wrote:
Resistance is during WWII and Halo is in the future. Resistance features an infection and Halo is in the future. Resistance is interesting, and Halo...is in the future.

I was talking about gameplay elements, not storyline, but its all good.

Soooo... about that campaign.

Post by **Kelevra** » Tue Jul 27, 2010 1:30 pm

Stepping back here...

No it wouldn't. 32 v 32 sounds more ideal for Battlefront if they can get ground-to-space tech working. There's a reason why top selling games like Halo and Modern Warfare 2 cap it at around 16 players total. Any more and you would become insignificant to the game outcome.

I thought that was kinda what they were trying to do in the first place. Make you feel as if you're just another soldier. It works well early on. Until you start unlocking the Elite rifle and whatnot.

MAG manages to handle 256 players pretty well, mainly because of the squad mechanic that's in place.

But there should be restraints for some maps. Having 100 people trying to run around the Tantive IV would be hell.

Post by **Legion 2.5** » Tue Jul 27, 2010 4:53 pm

It could be from the same style point of view as republic commando?

Post by **Arosenivai** » Tue Jul 27, 2010 5:02 pm

Kelevra wrote: I thought that was kinda what they were trying to do in the first place. Make you feel as if you're just another soldier. It works well early on. Until you start unlocking the Elite rifle and whatnot.

That's how I felt about BF2.

Kelevra wrote: MAG manages to handle 256 players pretty well, mainly because of the squad mechanic that's in place.

I agree to some extent, but there's a lot of things in Battlefront that would've really been intensive on processors: fighters, creatures, vehicles, AI.

Kelevra wrote: But there should be restraints for some maps. Having 100 people trying to run around the Tantive IV would be hell.

Well I don't know if the Tantive IV is still necessary. If I may be honest, I believe that maps should be completely redone. Start from scratch. Adding in a space to ground mechanic, along with extra gameplay elements, is going to way down, and drown older maps. Let me put it this way. I don't want to play a "prettier" BF2.

Post by **Legion 2.5** » Tue Jul 27, 2010 5:05 pm

You just spoke my mind.

Post by **Kelevra** » Tue Jul 27, 2010 5:50 pm

Well, that depends on the campaign. They do have room to expand the Tantive, but it's still a pretty cramped area. And if they want to make it movie-accurate it'll probably stay that way, give or take a few more rooms. You have to remember than in the movie, the Empire seemed to be taking out anyone that managed to escape.

As far as Conquest maps go, I'd be fine with the smaller cruisers being part of a bigger battle. Even better if you could actually be one of the Imperial gunners trying to shoot down the escape pods.

Post by **Arosenivai** » Tue Jul 27, 2010 8:03 pm

Kelevra wrote: As far as Conquest maps go, I'd be fine with the smaller cruisers being part of a bigger battle. Even better if you could actually be one of the Imperial gunners trying to shoot down the escape pods.

I definitely agree. That would be fun. But the problem with blockade runners like the Tantive IV, is they only had what two maybe three starfighter ports? The TantiveIV really isn't that big.

Post by **Kelevra** » Tue Jul 27, 2010 8:06 pm

I knew it couldn't carry fighters. Maybe it would act as an escort to the capitol ship.

Post by **Arosenivai** » Tue Jul 27, 2010 8:55 pm

What I mean is, how would enemies get on the ship?

Post by **Scott** » Tue Jul 27, 2010 8:56 pm

Arosenivai wrote:What I mean is, how would enemies get on the ship?

Beam me up Scotty.

Seriously though, why not just have small a-wing fighters (or whatever the rebel equivalent would be) carry you out. Or even escape/drop pods.

Post by **Legion 2.5** » Tue Jul 27, 2010 8:58 pm

That's not bad Scott.

Post by **Arosenivai** » Tue Jul 27, 2010 10:22 pm

It's not so much the fighters or a way to get off, as it is a way to get on the blockade runner. It would be fun, but if a good flow of enemies couldn't get on the vehicle, there wouldn't be any fighting. Any ideas?

Post by **Scott** » Tue Jul 27, 2010 10:24 pm

Arosenivai wrote:It's not so much the fighters or a way to get off, as it is a way to get on the blockade runner. It would be fun, but if a good flow of enemies couldn't get on the vehicle, there wouldn't be any fighting. Any ideas?

I have to be honest I have no idea what you are talking about.

Post by **Arosenivai** » Tue Jul 27, 2010 10:34 pm

Scott wrote:
Arosenivai wrote:It's not so much the fighters or a way to get off, as it is a way to get on the blockade runner. It would be fun, but if a good flow of enemies couldn't get on the vehicle, there wouldn't be any fighting. Any ideas?
I have to be honest I have no idea what you are talking about.

We all agree being able to fight aboard a blockade runner would be fun. In order for that to happen, as part of a large scale battle a couple things are necessary: 1. the enemy will need some way in which to maintain a flow onto the ship. 2. in order to prevent crowding there needs to be ways in order to get off the ships (escape pods only work if it's space to ground, what if it was space only). There's a few other things but I lost my train of thought. I'm also trying to program right now...