what size of servers do u prefer?

2006-09-11 16:28:41

#1

cl4u53w1t2: Salon-Bolschewist; +269|6519|Kakanien

i always played bf42 and bfv on servers that had more than 40 slots. in bf2 i nearly always played on 32 player servers. but since a few days, i tried all the 64 player servers again and i think it is at least the same fun as are the smaller servers.

in my opinion, this size is the way bf2 is (and bf42 and bfv are) meant to be played. the only disadvantage of these larger servers is that the rounds do not last long enough. they should have 400 vs. 450 tickets or something like that.

i would like to know which size of servers u play.

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=L2oh3h3DvY0

2006-09-11 16:32:59

#2

A_Richmofo: Member; +5|6494|Santa Rosa, Cali

64 almost every time-But im a karkand whore so my opinion probably dosen't count.

2006-09-11 16:33:25

#3

[mcp]eltorrente: Member; +26|6554

I play on 64 person servers because that's where the action is.

I see a lot of people posting screenshots of their best scores and when they went 37-2 - and they always seem to be on small servers. I would get bored sick if I only played on small servers.

Small servers are easy and boring IMO. I don't like playing with less than 48, and 64 is the best.

2006-09-11 16:39:06

#4

AAFCptKabbom: Member; +127|6704|WPB, FL. USA

"I like my servers like my cigars - rounded and browned-ed"
Oh! and gosta have junk in the truck for the "BIG TIP" I'm going to give her
{...or was he talking about game servers - hmmm??}

2006-09-11 16:39:53

#5

Skexis: Member; +6|6505

I usually like the 64 person servers, but only as long as the map supports it without turning into a bloodbath. Sharqi is fucking insane with a full complement of 64 people, and Mashtuur can be the same way, so I prefer Daqing, Dalian, Wake, and Jalalabad with a lot of people.

Lately I've been playing 32 person Dalian and a 20 person/high points airmaps server, because I was going for veteran engie and I knew I'd never have enough time in a high population server to finish getting it.

Of course, it's bad if you go the opposite way too, and end up with 20 people on a 64 person map, because then you're constantly struggling to defend, or you're taking the flags too easily and not getting enough poitns out of it.

A balance is always nice. It just depends on the type of map and the activity at the time.

2006-09-11 18:05:07

#6

The_Jester: Member; +52|6537|Italy

Map size: always big, i hate small and medium maps.
Population: 30/40 on special forces and vanilla city maps, 40/50 on big maps like FuShe or Daqing.

2006-09-11 18:08:18

#7

R3v4n: We shall beat to quarters!; +433|6532|Melbourne

I played on a 64 player Wake server but the tickets had been changed to 2000 vs 2000 dam it was fun but unforgently for me it was unranked but still fun!

~ Do you not know that in the service … one must always choose the lesser of two weevils?

2006-09-11 18:13:17

#8

{B-T}<babacanosh>: Member; +31|6648

i like cheese!

2006-09-11 18:13:39

#9

killer21: Because f*ck you that's why.; +400|6637|Reisterstown, MD

32

2006-09-11 18:13:57

#10

Unclean009: Da Dirty Man!; +66|6698|Spokane, Washington

64 is my bag. If its on infantry only, I like 16 player karkand.

2006-09-11 18:14:05

#11

timeinfinite: gõt ðæmôñ?; +14|6772

32

2006-09-11 18:14:26

#12

{B-T}<babacanosh>: Member; +31|6648

more cheese

2006-09-11 18:16:12

#13

SGT.Slayero: Member; +98|6511|Life in a vacuum sucks

42 i think is the best (and i do not mean 32 or 64 i mean 42) but i like all sizes 2-64 all i need is low ping

Last edited by SGT.Slayero (2006-09-11 18:17:05)

2006-09-11 18:21:59

#14

HCSkorpio: Hind Secks; +8|6582|California

64 only...and only if its 50 people or more..because its more chaotic and funner.

I only played 32 once on the demo with my cousin cause his comp cant handle 64. That was one long boring round. I cant even imagine 16 player.

I wish that if there was much more streamlined netcode / no lag...I wish to see 128+.

2006-09-11 18:26:31

#15

Unclean009: Da Dirty Man!; +66|6698|Spokane, Washington

HCSkorpio wrote:
64 only...and only if its 50 people or more..because its more chaotic and funner.

I only played 32 once on the demo with my cousin cause his comp cant handle 64. That was one long boring round. I cant even imagine 16 player.

I wish that if there was much more streamlined netcode / no lag...I wish to see 128+.

They were origionally gonna put in 128 but never did. I'm still sad about that

2006-09-11 18:26:50

#16

CLEVERLITTLETROJAN: I killed you,you just don't know it yet; +18|6660|birmingham,uk

32 player size pwnz

2006-09-11 18:27:35

#17

Doctor Strangelove: Real Battlefield Veterinarian.; +1,758|6514

I like 50~64 players, unless I am after an award.

2006-09-11 18:30:18

#18

Darky: Hi..; +71|6608|Here.

32 - 45/50 players on most 64 maps works well. 64 players on most maps, mostly doesnt work all that well.

2006-09-11 18:31:56

#19

BrimstoneFire: Member; +5|6505|Brisbane

48 on 64 ftw!

the less people on a 64 map the more carnage i can hand out!

2006-09-11 18:33:01

#20

Baglicka: Member; +8|6487|Manitoba,Canada

I look for servers with low ping and 30-40 players

2006-09-11 20:22:11

#21

Mad Ad: Member; +178|6557|England, UK

64 of course......

but when are we going to see 128??!! Another broken promise and it doesnt look like we will get that in 2142 either.

Can the unreal engine do 128 slots?

2006-09-11 20:23:54