Posted 16 March 2015 - 09:35 PM

aniviron, on 16 March 2015 - 08:18 PM, said:



That's the reason we've been given in the past- that the way servers are instanced means stuffing more players into a match is better for their server loads than splitting the same number of players into more matches.



Of course, the resulting gameplay benefits from not having 150% of the intended player count in a map might make more people enjoy playing, and spending money. I don't have the numbers, but I guess PGI do, and they think smaller server bills makes up for having worse games.

We're never going back, or at least not for a whileI think Russ already tweeted such a statementThe community cried way too load to get 12v12 back in the day for that to happen (pfft, I remeber people making a claim that we'd get more tactics with 12vs12)Of course the maps are too small; they there designed for 16 playersHehI remember people shouting they want a really dark map since frozen city night is sooo brightHence river city nightOr maps are too small and favor brawling too muchSo we got AlpineGotta be careful what you want in this game, might turn out to be really bad in the long runLike increasing the hitboxes on raven legs since hitreg and rubberbanding was so badHitreg is better now, but hitboxes stayed the sameRelics of the past don't get cleaned up fast in MWOSigh I miss 8vs8One person was able to turn around thingsNow that groups are separate from solo, that might be nicer all togetherAt least put new players (like <100 matches, or any number that seems reasonable) in a 8vs8 (maybe 4vs4 <40 matches?)