BattleBlog #11

[StarLord]

Yes but only if we have less than 32 players online

You mean for EUBOs/NABOs?

Yes, if we have more than 32 players online on EUBO and NABO (which can happen, more so in the first few campaign on BF3, attendance will be high) we should stick to conquest 64 and NOT split people between servers...

[.Sup]

Yes but only if we have less than 32 players online

You mean for EUBOs/NABOs?

Yes, if we have more than 32 players online on EUBO and NABO (which can happen, more so in the first few campaign on BF3, attendance will be high) we should stick to conquest 64 and NOT split people between servers...

Yes of course. What I meant was I would always like to play conquest on Saturdays. But EUBOs/NABOs depends on numbers and other factors ofc.

[HumanSpeedbumpAK]

A pool of 9 maps is plenty sufficient if we use two game modes. Spec-Ops days would be perfect for rush mode seeing as they only have 32 players max. I'm trying to develop a (fair) system where an army would play a map on rush mode during spec ops for either advantages or a smaller number of wins needed or something along those lines to give them a +1 going into the main battle day on conquest mode.

EX: Spec Ops days are two shorter length battles, one for each timezone. Each army will get to use one of those two battles (rotating each week) as their attack. So for week 1, lets say Brummie attacks Sushi on Metro-Rush and wins during the first battle. Then during the second battle, Brummie is able to hold of Sushi when he attacks Caspian Border-Rush.

The following Saturday, round 1 would be Brummie attacking Metro-Conquest. He would need to win 2 of 5 rounds to win the map. Round 2 would consist of Sushi attacking Caspian Border-Conquest. Sushi would need to win 3 of 5 rounds, to take the map. If time permits, a 3rd even 4th map could be played, with no advantages given out. Essentially, winning the Rush battle on Spec-Ops days gives you a 1-Win advantage going into the main battle day.

A simple system that mixes up the gameplay and doubles our map count from 9 to 18 without forcing HC or INF-Only on players that may not be interested in those modes.

[WoodenPlank]

A pool of 9 maps is plenty sufficient if we use two game modes. Spec-Ops days would be perfect for rush mode seeing as they only have 32 players max. I'm trying to develop a (fair) system where an army would play a map on rush mode during spec ops for either advantages or a smaller number of wins needed or something along those lines to give them a +1 going into the main battle day on conquest mode.

EX: Spec Ops days are two shorter length battles, one for each timezone. Each army will get to use one of those two battles (rotating each week) as their attack. So for week 1, lets say Brummie attacks Sushi on Metro-Rush and wins during the first battle. Then during the second battle, Brummie is able to hold of Sushi when he attacks Caspian Border-Rush.

The following Saturday, round 1 would be Brummie attacking Metro-Conquest. He would need to win 2 of 5 rounds to win the map. Round 2 would consist of Sushi attacking Caspian Border-Conquest. Sushi would need to win 3 of 5 rounds, to take the map. If time permits, a 3rd even 4th map could be played, with no advantages given out. Essentially, winning the Rush battle on Spec-Ops days gives you a 1-Win advantage going into the main battle day.

A simple system that mixes up the gameplay and doubles our map count from 9 to 18 without forcing HC or INF-Only on players that may not be interested in those modes.

This seems like a solid idea. You can even fit the concept into campaign by saying that they attacked key, critical intelligence assets on Rush during BO, giving them the advantage of surprise when attacking the full size map on battle day.