3 or more teams per map??

2006-04-10 13:04:24

#1

+IMP+ Neelzy: Member; +0|6639

ok who doesnt think that wouldnt b cool to play karkand with 3 teams? u could even have the team commanders choose their teams diplomacy
now who thinks ea could handle it? 1st they would have to fix that red team glitch or it would get out of hand then they would have to do a good job stopping exploits and another problem would be they would need a good scoring system ect or noobs would be switching allies so they lose 5 seconds b4 the end of the round
but still..
any ideas?

2006-04-10 15:35:11

#2

R0lyP0ly: Member; +161|6697|USA

i think maps aren't large enough to contain 3 different factions. Servers would need severe reconfiguration to accomodate three different approachs (one per team). I don't think three different teams would be appropriate, however, if there was a 3rd local faction, that would be awesome. For example, on Karkand there would be the USMC, MEC, and a civilian militia that could, through a majority vote, play on either side. This 3rd party could be different at different maps to increase diversity - i.e. on Wake Island there could be something like an Indonesian boat sunk near China Arty, and then Indonesians could fight for either side. To help with AutoBalance (b/c 2 teams v 1 will more than likely be a gangbang), if a 3rd party joins a faction, both that faction and the 3rd party sacrifice a few members to the opposing team. The teams would be stacked, but only slightly. (i.e. 35-27, etc)

2006-04-10 23:50:06

#3

xbrandomx: Member; +9|6693

I think that'd be neat if they did that. I've thought about it once or twice. The 3rd team can start from the middle or something like that say if they're playing Karkand.

I don't think they'll do it- but it'd be cool... it'd be cool.

2006-04-11 13:17:32

#4

+IMP+ Neelzy: Member; +0|6639

R0lyP0ly wrote:
i think maps aren't large enough to contain 3 different factions. Servers would need severe reconfiguration to accomodate three different approachs (one per team). I don't think three different teams would be appropriate, however, if there was a 3rd local faction, that would be awesome. For example, on Karkand there would be the USMC, MEC, and a civilian militia that could, through a majority vote, play on either side. This 3rd party could be different at different maps to increase diversity - i.e. on Wake Island there could be something like an Indonesian boat sunk near China Arty, and then Indonesians could fight for either side. To help with AutoBalance (b/c 2 teams v 1 will more than likely be a gangbang), if a 3rd party joins a faction, both that faction and the 3rd party sacrifice a few members to the opposing team. The teams would be stacked, but only slightly. (i.e. 35-27, etc)

yes i agree they are lightyears from being able to make it work it would be glitchtastic but just an idea mabey someday.....

2006-04-11 13:41:13

#5

[TUF]Whiskey_Oktober: mmmm...Toasty!; +91|6765|Oregon

i was lucky enough to be part of a group interviewing the game develpers of BF2. my theory was that it would be cool to have 2 main teams, and then a smaller guerilla force of insergents on the side...my hypothesis was flatly rejected as follows "Unfortunately, the Bf2 engine only supports 2 teams per map, but maybe we will see something like that in BF3!" this was before the announcement of BF2142, and scince that is based on the BF2 engine, we will not be seeing it in that either...i guess we will have to keep waiting.

also, i talked to a mod team and they said that they would have to redo practically the entire code (several million lines) to do so...

2006-04-11 13:46:59

#6

jokerhv: Member; +1|6730

interseting

2006-04-12 11:58:34

#7

+IMP+ Neelzy: Member; +0|6639

[TUF]Whiskey_Oktober wrote:
i was lucky enough to be part of a group interviewing the game develpers of BF2. my theory was that it would be cool to have 2 main teams, and then a smaller guerilla force of insergents on the side...my hypothesis was flatly rejected as follows "Unfortunately, the Bf2 engine only supports 2 teams per map, but maybe we will see something like that in BF3!" this was before the announcement of BF2142, and scince that is based on the BF2 engine, we will not be seeing it in that either...i guess we will have to keep waiting.

also, i talked to a mod team and they said that they would have to redo practically the entire code (several million lines) to do so...

yeah definetly would take a while and knowing ea it would have to many glitches , exploits ect to count

by the way do u know if they will add new ranks to bf2142 it would b cool if it just kept on going up and u could expand your bf2 stats by playing 2142

2006-04-15 11:27:12

#8

ReDmAn_ThE_uNiQuE: oh hai :D; +156|6694|The Netherlands

looks very cool but dont think it will ever work out.

2006-04-15 11:31:22

#9

FuzzBuck Fuzz: Member; +1|6678

Good idea. Completely new game.

2006-04-15 11:58:34

#10

jord: Member; +2,382|6721|The North, beyond the wall.

But how would the scores work?Say their is china vs mec vs usmc.If china and usmc had clanmates and decided to team up mec would be fucked.

2006-04-15 12:06:40

#11

see-pie: Member; +1|6719|Denmark

thats a good idea actually...if Ea manages to do so they'll prove even better, that is if it wer to be glitchless with 3 teams, it would give them a competitive advantage among other game producers. But yeah it would be so much fun to play on karkand with 3 teams Colours of the names of the enemies would be blue red and yellow lol

2006-04-15 12:12:15

#12

ShellShock.PwN: Member; +31|6830|Barrie Ontario

I tought about it to, but as every one says ea wouldnt do it. THe maps would be super huge and sweet

2006-04-17 13:56:08

#13

+IMP+ Neelzy: Member; +0|6639

lets give ea the idea and hope they make a new game it would b amazing

2006-04-19 17:50:41

#14

PRiMACORD: Member; +190|6668|Home of the Escalade Herds

+IMP+ Neelzy wrote:
u could even have the team commanders choose their teams diplomacy

Problem right there...one team will get ass raped and then be forced to sit out and wait while the remaining teams duke it out...all those ppl will leave the server.

Its an interesting idea but it would be hard to work out properly.

2006-04-21 06:00:59

#15

StokoE: Losers-Server; +51|6883|UK

PRiMACORD wrote:
+IMP+ Neelzy wrote:
u could even have the team commanders choose their teams diplomacy
Problem right there...one team will get ass raped and then be forced to sit out and wait while the remaining teams duke it out...all those ppl will leave the server.

Its an interesting idea but it would be hard to work out properly.

But I think still they should be say 3 teams of 20.. If one team leaves.. the level ends and the others get spread out to the people who did actually leave. .. or maybe have the base UCB so that they cant lose as such.. but say they can get pinned in..

i am confusing myself here

BF2S Forums 3 or more teams per map??

R0lyP0ly wrote:

[TUF]Whiskey_Oktober wrote:

+IMP+ Neelzy wrote:

PRiMACORD wrote:

+IMP+ Neelzy wrote:

Board footer