Bring Back 40-Player Operations!

Comments

  • Ameriken05
    451 postsMember, Battlefield 3, Battlefield 4, Battlefield Hardline, Battlefield, Battlefield 1, CTE, Battlefield V Member
    Your opinion on what to do in an actual war situation, now that I might listen to. But I've been gaming for 3 decades, so I value my own opinion on what makes this game fun, more than a military vet's.

    What if you have military vets who have also gamed for 3 decades? What then?
  • cracksteady
    121 postsMember, Battlefield 3, Battlefield 4, Battlefield, Battlefield 1, BF1IncursionsAlpha Member
    edited October 2017
    Ameriken05 wrote: »
    Ha, everyone gets **** over my comment about being veterans. I think our opinion/preference does matter a little, after all it is a war game. Of course it's just a game. Not saying our opinion matters more, so don't be so self-conscious - yikes.

    NSA challenges us? Did I say something that made it sound like we are unbeatable - because we are not. I am just continuing to advocate for 40-player operations, and clearly there are some folks that really HATE that idea. Let us play our way and you guys can play yours - but sure NSA we can play you sometime if you want.

    Ameriken05 aka [CBRA] SturmSabreSix
    Cobra Platoon

    Self conscious? what? Dude when you insult someone, expect a equal or escalated response... this is just basic social interaction.

    Implying that people who prefer 64 player games have short attention spans... implies a lack of intelligence.

    I'll not waste any more time... guarantee you... 1 game of frontlines and we'll have you rage quitting halfway though.
  • Ameriken05
    451 postsMember, Battlefield 3, Battlefield 4, Battlefield Hardline, Battlefield, Battlefield 1, CTE, Battlefield V Member
    edited October 2017
    And the short attention spans comment was a general dig at the 64-player mode - and it's true. It's utter chaos, that is undeniable. We play it too, and are successful - but it doesn't make it the superior mode. We are talking balance here - and the 40-player version takes the cake, hands down.

    You guys have my name, and my platoon name - you can come play. We are on Xbox though, and only play certain nights because of life. Oh and get us earlier in the night because we slowly start seeing double...

    Ameriken05 aka [CBRA]SturmSabreSix
    Cobra Platoon
    Xbox One
  • Kattegat_Twin
    856 postsMember, Battlefield 3, Battlefield 4, Battlefield, Battlefield 1, CTE, Battlefield V Member
    edited October 2017
    It matters not if you're a military vet, or a rocket scientist. I still prefer what I prefer, uninfluenced by the opinions of others. You can say 40p is better, because you have real life strategy experience. But how does that real life experience translate into an arcade simulation, where a large percentage of the players are actually kids? ARMA is where you should be if you want your real life military experience to digitally translate, since that playerbase seems generally more mature and full of people who are very into tactical play.

    If we are both seasoned gamers, then our respective experience in that area is what we can go on, regarding a non realistic game like BF. Then it just boils down to opinion, where neither of us are wrong.
  • cracksteady
    121 postsMember, Battlefield 3, Battlefield 4, Battlefield, Battlefield 1, BF1IncursionsAlpha Member
    edited October 2017


    My stats are RIGHT THERE for EVERYONE to see... narrow the category search to United states. (and btw I don't nitpick at stats when playing with certain players, I didn't know the dudes I played with were so high in the leaderboards till after the fact)

    I can't name people because of forum rules, otherwise I would tell you EXACTLY who I play with.

    You're right I could make this up, but I challenge ANYONE in this forum to bring their platoon, Were looking for a challenge.
  • Ameriken05
    451 postsMember, Battlefield 3, Battlefield 4, Battlefield Hardline, Battlefield, Battlefield 1, CTE, Battlefield V Member
    Ameriken05 wrote: »
    Ha, everyone gets **** over my comment about being veterans. I think our opinion/preference does matter a little, after all it is a war game. Of course it's just a game. Not saying our opinion matters more, so don't be so self-conscious - yikes.

    NSA challenges us? Did I say something that made it sound like we are unbeatable - because we are not. I am just continuing to advocate for 40-player operations, and clearly there are some folks that really HATE that idea. Let us play our way and you guys can play yours - but sure NSA we can play you sometime if you want.

    Ameriken05 aka [CBRA] SturmSabreSix
    Cobra Platoon

    Self conscious? what? Dude when you insult someone, expect a equal or escalated response... this is just basic social interaction.

    Implying that people who prefer 64 player games have short attention spans... implies a lack of intelligence.

    I'll not waste any more time... guarantee you... 1 game of frontlines and we'll have you rage quitting halfway though.

    Maybe not lack of intelligence - but preference for immediate gratification, a la COD. If Battlefield is supposed to be the game about teamwork and tactics - then play the modes that do it best. Is 64-player operations better than ANYTHING you find in COD - absolutely! But all I'm saying is that even if you are annihilating people in the large server - you are STILL limited by your own numbers, and are ABSOLUTELY beholden to the skill of the rest of your team (more so than 40-player). We play hard too buddy - and if you take that as a challenge we are obviously not going to chicken out assuming we are all on same platform here. Never said we were the ultimate BF1 team - but you guys clearly think you are. If we rage quit - good for you. If not and it's a good match, even better!

    Now stop detracting from the main argument here - I think this thread has seen enough from the two guys who LOVE 64-player operations and hate other's opinions ;)
  • cracksteady
    121 postsMember, Battlefield 3, Battlefield 4, Battlefield, Battlefield 1, BF1IncursionsAlpha Member
    Ameriken05 wrote: »
    Ameriken05 wrote: »
    Ha, everyone gets **** over my comment about being veterans. I think our opinion/preference does matter a little, after all it is a war game. Of course it's just a game. Not saying our opinion matters more, so don't be so self-conscious - yikes.

    NSA challenges us? Did I say something that made it sound like we are unbeatable - because we are not. I am just continuing to advocate for 40-player operations, and clearly there are some folks that really HATE that idea. Let us play our way and you guys can play yours - but sure NSA we can play you sometime if you want.

    Ameriken05 aka [CBRA] SturmSabreSix
    Cobra Platoon

    Self conscious? what? Dude when you insult someone, expect a equal or escalated response... this is just basic social interaction.

    Implying that people who prefer 64 player games have short attention spans... implies a lack of intelligence.

    I'll not waste any more time... guarantee you... 1 game of frontlines and we'll have you rage quitting halfway though.

    Maybe not lack of intelligence - but preference for immediate gratification, a la COD. If Battlefield is supposed to be the game about teamwork and tactics - then play the modes that do it best. Is 64-player operations better than ANYTHING you find in COD - absolutely! But all I'm saying is that even if you are annihilating people in the large server - you are STILL limited by your own numbers, and are ABSOLUTELY beholden to the skill of the rest of your team (more so than 40-player). We play hard too buddy - and if you take that as a challenge we are obviously not going to chicken out assuming we are all on same platform here. Never said we were the ultimate BF1 team - but you guys clearly think you are. If we rage quit - good for you. If not and it's a good match, even better!

    Now stop detracting from the main argument here - I think this thread has seen enough from the two guys who LOVE 64-player operations and hate other's opinions ;)

    Okay, fair enough...

    i'll simmer down.

  • Phat_Helmet
    2164 postsMember, Battlefield 3, Battlefield 4, Battlefield, Battlefield 1, CTE Member
    Ameriken05 wrote: »
    Your opinion on what to do in an actual war situation, now that I might listen to. But I've been gaming for 3 decades, so I value my own opinion on what makes this game fun, more than a military vet's.

    What if you have military vets who have also gamed for 3 decades? What then?

    Their opinion holds no more weight than ANY other players.
  • Ameriken05
    451 postsMember, Battlefield 3, Battlefield 4, Battlefield Hardline, Battlefield, Battlefield 1, CTE, Battlefield V Member
    Ameriken05 wrote: »
    Your opinion on what to do in an actual war situation, now that I might listen to. But I've been gaming for 3 decades, so I value my own opinion on what makes this game fun, more than a military vet's.

    What if you have military vets who have also gamed for 3 decades? What then?

    Their opinion holds no more weight than ANY other players.

    Fair enough. I sincerely apologize for even mentioning it ;)
  • Phat_Helmet
    2164 postsMember, Battlefield 3, Battlefield 4, Battlefield, Battlefield 1, CTE Member
    Ameriken05 wrote: »
    Ameriken05 wrote: »
    Your opinion on what to do in an actual war situation, now that I might listen to. But I've been gaming for 3 decades, so I value my own opinion on what makes this game fun, more than a military vet's.

    What if you have military vets who have also gamed for 3 decades? What then?

    Their opinion holds no more weight than ANY other players.

    Fair enough. I sincerely apologize for even mentioning it ;)

    Thank you for your service, however.
  • Ameriken05
    451 postsMember, Battlefield 3, Battlefield 4, Battlefield Hardline, Battlefield, Battlefield 1, CTE, Battlefield V Member
    Well thanks - but sorry didn't mean to pull the vet card. Was not my intent to make it sound like my opinion somehow counted more, just wanted to make point on perspective.

  • Phat_Helmet
    2164 postsMember, Battlefield 3, Battlefield 4, Battlefield, Battlefield 1, CTE Member
    Ameriken05 wrote: »
    Well thanks - but sorry didn't mean to pull the vet card. Was not my intent to make it sound like my opinion somehow counted more, just wanted to make point on perspective.

    All good.
  • Ashgni
    10 postsMember, Battlefield 3, Battlefield 4, Battlefield, Battlefield 1, CTE, Battlefield V Member
    40 player ops ran smoother for me and my squad mates who have all now moved on to a different game mode/entirely different game.

    People have been stating that the 2 options split the ops community but I think with now only 64 player op the community will be reduced even further!
  • BFV_HPoor
    27 postsMember, Battlefield 3, Battlefield 4, Battlefield, Battlefield 1 Member
    Good riddance - go play Arma or go watch paint dry.
  • Ashgni
    10 postsMember, Battlefield 3, Battlefield 4, Battlefield, Battlefield 1, CTE, Battlefield V Member
    edited October 2017
    HousePoor wrote: »
    Good riddance - go play Arma or go watch paint dry.

    To be honest I'd rather do that than continue playing against 10-15 players with high ping etc every game. At least in 40 player ops you only had 1 or 2 in a game.

    There's no reason why both options can't be in the server browser then the community can decide which they want to play...
    Post edited by Ashgni on
  • AlotOfThunder
    1545 postsMember, Battlefield 3, Battlefield 4, Battlefield Hardline, Battlefield, Battlefield 1, CTE, Battlefield V Member
    To be fair, I've played plenty of 40p matches and I've found plenty of braindead hillhumpers there too. Actually, I think they affect 40p even worse than 64 since there is less people per team.
  • HANSGRUBER30
    3090 postsMember, Battlefield 3, Battlefield 4, Battlefield Hardline, Battlefield, Battlefield 1, CTE, Battlefield V Member
    I want 40 player ops back but they need to keep 64 player ops as well, the two mods offer the player different experiences and the game mod is popular enough to keep both sets of operation fans happy.

    The operation selection screen still puts you in empty servers so they have not fixed that problem at all.
  • MrOnlineToughGuy
    691 postsMember, Battlefield 3, Battlefield 4, Battlefield Hardline, Battlefield, Battlefield 1, CTE Member
    If people leave because they believe that 64p is too hard and chaotic, then I say good riddance! I don't want people that aren't willing to die a bit in order to win.
  • full951
    2468 postsMember, Battlefield 3, Battlefield 4, Battlefield Hardline, Battlefield, Battlefield 1, CTE, Battlefield V Member
    James-MII wrote: »
    Literally never heard anyone crying for this.

    this is where the minority comes to voice their opinions.
  • Ameriken05
    451 postsMember, Battlefield 3, Battlefield 4, Battlefield Hardline, Battlefield, Battlefield 1, CTE, Battlefield V Member
    Again - not about skill here. 64-player operations isn't the sole domain of elite BF1 players. There is a preference, and they have tried to fix something that wasn't broken (removing 40-player operations). All they needed to do was introduce the server browser so players could find each other on the type of server they prefer (40 or 64). Coming onto a thread and acting like the 40-player version is inferior as well as all of those who prefer it is just idiotic. Okay we get that you prefer 64-player operations - but there is absolutely no reason for you to be against the return of 40-player ops. A lot of players that prefer one over the other will simply go play another mode - and you will have gained nothing from the change. You literally have nothing to gain from criticizing players who want 40-players ops back!
Sign In or Register to comment.