Global Conflict

There are many reasons for asking this. First of all it is rumored that CQ DLC will only have 16 player maps, something that isn't compatible with the basic ideology of GC. 64 player battles is what makes GC the way it is, factoring not only player skill, but tactics as well. Secondly, there is much discontent among players about the quality of DICE/EA products, including the latest patch which did more harm than good. There is a general movement to boycott the next DLC so that EA finaly understand that "the gaming bunch" are actually sensible consumers. If GC is not going to implement CQ maps in their conquest, then I will too skip that DLC.

I am definitely not interested in padding the paychecks of EA after this recent patch, and I'm unconvinced such a limited-player map will really be much fun anyway.

Of course, any decision will be made by the community on the actual DLC...but I doubt we'd ever play anything less than a 32-player map in a GC battle.

It has more or less already been said that GC will not be partaking in CQB as an official battle, due to the 16 player max. That being said its fairly obvious that CQB is being tailored for console gaming so I dont see why any PC players would buy it.

Im purchasing it,

Ive got to m320 some nub through a wall.

prob 14.95 $

In the past GC did use any Addon out there, as far as I recall. This will be for the Generals active at that time to decide. And it could also be something we will have our votable members (The members that donate for GC) to vote upon, since it is them that keep us going.

Nothing for you to worry about atm. Let the DLC hit the shelf's first. There will be not decisionmaking before that.

Yeah, I don't see it being using for the campaign, but I'll probably buy it. First, the guns. Oh god I want an AUG. Second, I've played pretty much only metro since Friday (excluding the time spent with GC). 64 player, no explosives is a lot of fun for me.

I'll be purchasing based off a few factors though: reviews, namely looking at LvLCap and rivalXfactor (who seem to enjoy the same bouts of metro as I do), and my opinion of DICE. I'm quite happy to hear about the AA fixes coming so quickly. Hopefully suppression and paper tank fixes can come quickly, though I suspect they aren't seen as bugs, so unlikely.

bitesizebeef wrote:It has more or less already been said that GC will not be partaking in CQB as an official battle, due to the 16 player max. That being said its fairly obvious that CQB is being tailored for console gaming so I dont see why any PC players would buy it.

Theres no way to really know if its going to be skipped, but I havent seen any signs of requirement. Its inclusion can be examined after release. Its a Dice product, which means we are the quality control department. They will fix some things after releasing it.

For a Saturday battleday, I think there will be a strong opposition of playing 64 players on a 16 player map. It will be seen as mindless carnage.
For a Tuesday or Wednesday black op battlenight, we had regulars and intense firefights on 16 player maps loaded with 64. Could revive that tradition.

GC did skip the bf2 "booster packs" when they were released. we did also use special forces when it was out.

but as stated it looks like the CQ pack is going to be about consoles and the 12 year olds wanting more call of duty style gameplay. I'm not getting it even if we do play it here.

I'm buying, looks like lots of fun to me. But obviously if it really is 16-player maps it'd be a non-starter for GC.

I love CQC and can't wait to check out the improved interior destruction.

From how packed Metro 24/7 servers are, I think Dice/EA will sell alot of copies. Some people love Metro, others hate it.

You know once all three DLC's are released they will come out with a sale pack price to nab even more purchases.

And then a few years down the road, release them for free.

Personally I'm not buying it. I don't enjoy CQC style of play.

Guns, that is all