BF3 32 VS 32 ?

This thread had 3 pages; 1 page was never captured by the Wayback Machine — some replies are missing.

TWL Member

2011-10-10 14:29

Does anyone know what the ladder will look like for BF3. We need to know this information ASAP!

Thank you,

Darius

TWL Member

2011-10-10 15:01

Lol, not too many teams out there that can field 32. TWL always offers various ladder sizes and game modes. 8v8 is the competitive standard but it definitely won't be the only offering.

Ladders aren't usually determined until the game is released though (based on recent history).

{LOD}Joker

TWL Member

2011-10-10 15:49

I am sure there will be clans that can field 32 players with little problems. But if TWL does not make it an option then it will not happen. What is the next max numbers people think it will likely be?

Redux that you for your post

Darius

Chowder

Competition StaffLead Ladder AdminBattlefield Series

2011-10-10 15:55

We will provide what ladders TWL will be offering soon.

thanks

Jun_el

Retired Admin

2011-10-10 17:00

Originally posted by: Darius.CA
I am sure there will be clans that can field 32 players with little problems. But if TWL does not make it an option then it will not happen. What is the next max numbers people think it will likely be?

Redux that you for your post

Darius

In all my years on TWL I've never seen a team that could *consistently* field 16 players, let alone 32.

There are not many teams that can field that many players, don't get me wrong I'm sure there are some teams that can field 16 players or even 32, but there aren't many, which means any large ladders like that won't be very active, but it could be fun for the teams that are able to pull it off.

hydro'

TWL Member

2011-10-10 17:21

Yeah if you want a 32v32 scrim then you are better off working that out between the two clans.

hackshot.

Thread KillerTeamWarfare Vet

2011-10-10 17:42

it'll probably be 12v12, 8v8, 5v5 and 4v4. Later when bf3 is on the way out 2v2 air/tanks.

Altorous

Competition StaffNA Ladder AdminCall of Duty Series

2011-10-10 18:43

Originally posted by: Darius.CA
I am sure there will be clans that can field 32 players with little problems. But if TWL does not make it an option then it will not happen. What is the next max numbers people think it will likely be?

Redux that you for your post

Darius

I am sure there probably are, but in recent history teams have enough problems getting 5 players together, at least on the COD side of things, it would be hard to get 15-20 teams signed up with 32 players available to play on any given night. If there are 15-20 teams interested and can have that many players then I assume that the Battlefield admins would have no problem putting up the ladders.
Post edited by =H4H=Altorous at 10/10/2011 6:44:32 PM

Donaramu

TeamWarfare Vet

2011-10-10 19:29

idk the max players online UwG ever had was lower something, we maxed out a groundwar on MW2 and had a few pubbin else where. and that back when we were strong and had a huge community all in the same game, and most werent into leagues.

its very unlikely any team will be able to get 32 players on for a match and be able to set it all up. most would be 12v12 and thats pushing it.

Smithy021

TeamWarfare Vet

2011-10-10 21:11

12v12 would Be A MAZING.. but ill settle for 8v8 lets just get the gaming on!

Jun_el

Retired Admin

2011-10-10 22:45

12v12 ladders have been offered in the past with mixed results. Some of them were very active for a while, while some others had a spike in popularity at launch then fizzled quickly.

It really depends on the game's popularity. If the game is popular enough, and BF3 probably will be, then I'm sure larger ladders will be offered, provided the smaller ones fill up.

Donaramu

TeamWarfare Vet

2011-10-10 22:49

Originally posted by: =H4H=Altorous
Originally posted by: Darius.CA
I am sure there will be clans that can field 32 players with little problems. But if TWL does not make it an option then it will not happen. What is the next max numbers people think it will likely be?

Redux that you for your post

Darius

I am sure there probably are, but in recent history teams have enough problems getting 5 players together, at least on the COD side of things, it would be hard to get 15-20 teams signed up with 32 players available to play on any given night. If there are 15-20 teams interested and can have that many players then I assume that the Battlefield admins would have no problem putting up the ladders.

COD ADMIN EWWW... j/k i miss my h4h buddies. But like i said, i think this wont work. I think once UwG start picking up members 12v12 would be interesting. 8 should be easy to get
Post edited by Donaramu at 10/10/2011 10:51:27 PM

.ricket.

TWL Member

2011-10-10 22:58

Originally posted by: redux`
Lol, not too many teams out there that can field 32. TWL always offers various ladder sizes and game modes. 8v8 is the competitive standard but it definitely won't be the only offering.

Ladders aren't usually determined until the game is released though (based on recent history).

wait is he serious, and are you serious getting trolled ?

.ricket.

TWL Member

2011-10-10 22:59

Originally posted by: Donaramu
Originally posted by: =H4H=Altorous
Originally posted by: Darius.CA
I am sure there will be clans that can field 32 players with little problems. But if TWL does not make it an option then it will not happen. What is the next max numbers people think it will likely be?

Redux that you for your post

Darius

12v12 will never happen

I am sure there probably are, but in recent history teams have enough problems getting 5 players together, at least on the COD side of things, it would be hard to get 15-20 teams signed up with 32 players available to play on any given night. If there are 15-20 teams interested and can have that many players then I assume that the Battlefield admins would have no problem putting up the ladders.

COD ADMIN EWWW... j/k i miss my h4h buddies. But like i said, i think this wont work. I think once UwG start picking up members 12v12 would be interesting. 8 should be easy to get

.Kasmos.

TWL Member

2011-10-11 18:42

I hope TWL does a 32v32. Considering the immense following BF3 has I would be surprised if there weren't a decent amount of clans that could sport those numbers. I know mine will be able to.

And 12v12 is too small in my opinion as the "largest" option for laddering, especially on large scale maps like Caspian Border.

Re!gn

TWL Member

2011-10-11 20:11

Originally posted by: .ricket.
Originally posted by: redux`
Lol, not too many teams out there that can field 32. TWL always offers various ladder sizes and game modes. 8v8 is the competitive standard but it definitely won't be the only offering.

Ladders aren't usually determined until the game is released though (based on recent history).

wait is he serious, and are you serious getting trolled ?

What???

XShades

TWL Member

2011-10-11 20:27

RetroKasmos,

I think I read somewhere that each map can be scaled for different sized teams. Caspian can be small medium and large depending on how many people you want in there.

In the beta you probably noticed that it said Caspian Boarder (large) next the map name in the server browser, indicating there are other sizes of Caspian boarder.

Could be wrong but that would solve the issue.

Jun_el

Retired Admin

2011-10-11 21:10

Originally posted by: RetroKasmos
I hope TWL does a 32v32. Considering the immense following BF3 has I would be surprised if there weren't a decent amount of clans that could sport those numbers. I know mine will be able to.

And 12v12 is too small in my opinion as the "largest" option for laddering, especially on large scale maps like Caspian Border.

Unlikely without some sort of mutli-clan event.

I've never seen a team field 32 players.

Is it possible? I'm sure it is, but almost no team can field 32 players on a consistent basis.
Post edited by Jun_el at 10/11/2011 9:11:29 PM

<>DisturbeD<>

TeamWarfare Vet

2011-10-11 21:49

I think 32v32 lends itself more to the BF2c/21CW type thing where people signed up and had a regular battle each week.
___________________________________________________________________
Xfire: deesturbed
steam: major_bildo
Origin: DeeSturb3D
Gamers Portal: DisturbeD

MadChild

Competition ManagerNA Game OperationsBattlefield Series

2011-10-11 22:28

Actually, we are thinking about doing something similar to BF2c.

AOWC has generously provided TWL with a 64 person server, and we are thinking about running a weekly 32v32.

TWL|MadChild
TeamWarfare Competition Manager
Email: madchild@teamwarfare.com
IRC: #teamwarfare, #twl_bf

.c.recon

TWL Member

2011-10-12 14:39

in my experience the MAX sustainable level is 12v12.

and even then only for the first season.

Maniac51

TWL Member

2011-10-12 15:22

I think you guys offered a 12 vs 12 or a 10 vs 10 back in bf2 competitions with vehicles. It was a blast! Conquest

<>DisturbeD<>

TeamWarfare Vet

2011-10-12 17:22

Originally posted by: Maniac51
I think you guys offered a 12 vs 12 or a 10 vs 10 back in bf2 competitions with vehicles. It was a blast! Conquest

Ya I remember 12v12. That was pretty fun.
___________________________________________________________________
Xfire: deesturbed
steam: major_bildo
Origin: DeeSturb3D
Gamers Portal: DisturbeD

{LOD}Joker

TWL Member

2011-10-13 00:09

Good posts all... well from what I take of all the info is that 12 VS 12 should be our goal. But I still thinking in the back of my mind 32 VS 32 is still in reach in the future

<>DisturbeD<>

TeamWarfare Vet

2011-10-13 00:31

___________________________________________________________________
Xfire: deesturbed
steam: major_bildo
Origin: DeeSturb3D
Gamers Portal: DisturbeD

.c.recon

TWL Member

2011-10-13 10:57

Originally posted by: Darius.CA
Good posts all... well from what I take of all the info is that 12 VS 12 should be our goal. But I still thinking in the back of my mind 32 VS 32 is still in reach in the future

^^it's not. don't bother. This is the stuff BF3Combat is made of.

JGR-G3-NGHT

TWL Member

2011-10-14 11:25

What if teams were allowed to form alliances for 32v32?

Kyle..

TWL Member

2011-10-14 11:55

That's against rule #68 look it up. Would be a good idea.

mx+b

TeamWarfare VetRetired Admin

2011-10-14 12:23

Originally posted by: [SYN] juggernaught
What if teams were allowed to form alliances for 32v32?

randomly assign 4 different teams of 8 players to a league division then play division vs division. Done.

Donaramu

TeamWarfare Vet

2011-10-14 12:59

Originally posted by: mx+b
Originally posted by: [SYN] juggernaught
What if teams were allowed to form alliances for 32v32?

randomly assign 4 different teams of 8 players to a league division then play division vs division. Done.

not a bad ibea. +1 4 me

.c.recon

TWL Member

2011-10-14 14:00

logistical nightmare.

Uber_Duber_Soldat

TWL Member

2011-10-17 19:40

If TWL doesn't do 12v12, then battlefield is forever doomed. TWL is the only site who consistently has supported the BF community, and the 12v12 ladders/leagues that were open for the first season of BF2 was the best competition battlefield has ever seen. I'm tired of this gayass 8v8 horseshit and the lame ass excuses teams have for not enjoying 12v12. If TWL put up a legitimate 12v12 tournament, it would fill up.

MadChild

Competition ManagerNA Game OperationsBattlefield Series

2011-10-17 22:26

There will be a 12v12 ladder.

There may be a 12v12 league. Depends on how popular the ladder is.

There may be a 12v12 Tourney.

There may be a 15v15 ladder, league, and tourney... you never know.

The launch tourney is 8v8. Its the most common format, and the easiest for teams to get rosters for.
Post edited by MadChild at 10/17/2011 10:27:34 PM

TWL|MadChild
TeamWarfare Competition Manager
Email: madchild@teamwarfare.com
IRC: #teamwarfare, #twl_bf

-Bull-

TWL Member

2011-10-17 23:43

Originally posted by: Uber_Duber_Soldat
lame ass excuses teams have for not enjoying 12v12. If TWL put up a legitimate 12v12 tournament, it would fill up.

I'm not really sure about the lame ass excuses, I will however say it is very difficult to field a competitive team for 12 v 12. If you are a newer team, or a team coming from another game it is even worse. Sometimes people forget what made 12 v 12 work in the past. It was highly supported from day one eg: Sponsored Tournaments, Multiple supported leagues who had a knowledgeable staff, a very big community not just willing to compete but support the game, map modders, etc..

Now if a repeatable league were to set the bar or get things in motion to nudge the community in a certain direction it would indeed get a lot of interest from clans / teams. This however cant just be the only support, you have to keep the interest otherwise it will phase out as it did in the past. So that leaves us with the question how...

Now don't get the wrong impression on what I am about to say. From a business point of view, 12 v 12 is the worst format there is possible. Most people do not take into consideration how much $$$ it costs to support a 12 v 12 team. If that team has no sponsors, you can basically forget about any long travel LAN tournaments unless that team has a really strong financial backbone. I do not know that many in this community that would be able to do. As far as sponsored tournaments go... Would sponsors prefer spending a small amount of $$$ with a small team, 5 v 5 / 8 v 8 and 8 v 8 is even considered big to them, or a freeking outrageous amount of $$$ on a big team 12 v 12. Anyone know what the format was at G-Force?

You ever wonder why console got that million $$$ tourny.... was it because EA hates us PC gamers!!! or is it more cost effective. I wont go into the whole we are in a recession blah blah blah, but yea we know that is there to. That being said and wasting your time having to read this here we are again with a game with a lot of opportunity, but not a lot of backing for 12 v 12.

Me personally I prefer 12 v 12 over any format made available. I will support it in anyway possible, but if leagues / tournaments do not support it so that it is beneficial to my team, how do I justify more less any team justify playing a format that wont be supported, when other formats will... give my players lollipops & reach arounds, so that they don't leave my team to go play on a 8 v 8 or 5 v 5 team that is playing for computer parts, $$$, going to LAN's?

Anyways I was not trying to bash you in any way Uber_Duber_Soldat but just try and shed a little light on the matter. I truly hope 12 v 12 makes a comeback, it is by far one of the most exciting and fun format the BF series has to offer. Plus shooting down airplanes from the ground just makes me rock hard =)

Post edited by Bull-nL at 10/17/2011 11:45:45 PM

Uber_Duber_Soldat

TWL Member

2011-10-18 00:10

Originally posted by: Bull-nL
Originally posted by: Uber_Duber_Soldat
lame ass excuses teams have for not enjoying 12v12. If TWL put up a legitimate 12v12 tournament, it would fill up.

I'm not really sure about the lame ass excuses, I will however say it is very difficult to field a competitive team for 12 v 12. If you are a newer team, or a team coming from another game it is even worse. Sometimes people forget what made 12 v 12 work in the past. It was highly supported from day one eg: Sponsored Tournaments, Multiple supported leagues who had a knowledgeable staff, a very big community not just willing to compete but support the game, map modders, etc..

Now if a repeatable league were to set the bar or get things in motion to nudge the community in a certain direction it would indeed get a lot of interest from clans / teams. This however cant just be the only support, you have to keep the interest otherwise it will phase out as it did in the past. So that leaves us with the question how...

Now don't get the wrong impression on what I am about to say. From a business point of view, 12 v 12 is the worst format there is possible. Most people do not take into consideration how much $$$ it costs to support a 12 v 12 team. If that team has no sponsors, you can basically forget about any long travel LAN tournaments unless that team has a really strong financial backbone. I do not know that many in this community that would be able to do. As far as sponsored tournaments go... Would sponsors prefer spending a small amount of $$$ with a small team, 5 v 5 / 8 v 8 and 8 v 8 is even considered big to them, or a freeking outrageous amount of $$$ on a big team 12 v 12. Anyone know what the format was at G-Force?

You ever wonder why console got that million $$$ tourny.... was it because EA hates us PC gamers!!! or is it more cost effective. I wont go into the whole we are in a recession blah blah blah, but yea we know that is there to. That being said and wasting your time having to read this here we are again with a game with a lot of opportunity, but not a lot of backing for 12 v 12.

Me personally I prefer 12 v 12 over any format made available. I will support it in anyway possible, but if leagues / tournaments do not support it so that it is beneficial to my team, how do I justify more less any team justify playing a format that wont be supported, when other formats will... give my players lollipops & reach arounds, so that they don't leave my team to go play on a 8 v 8 or 5 v 5 team that is playing for computer parts, $$$, going to LAN's?

Anyways I was not trying to bash you in any way Uber_Duber_Soldat but just try and shed a little light on the matter. I truly hope 12 v 12 makes a comeback, it is by far one of the most exciting and fun format the BF series has to offer. Plus shooting down airplanes from the ground just makes me rock hard =)

Exactly my sentiments pretty much. I understand the difficulties 12v12 has in terms of popularity, feasibility and sponsor support, but in the end: so what. As long as websites like TWL do 12v12 for fun, then that's all I care about. Those people who care so much about winning $$ at lans can still do that, but there's no reason 12v12 can't also happen successfully simultaenously. I know 12v12 will never be the dominant format, but all I'm saying is it should be given the support it deserves in the fun leagues that TWL always puts up.

TV-12

Competition StaffNA League AdminBattlefield Series

2011-10-19 01:20

Originally posted by: MadChild
Actually, we are thinking about doing something similar to BF2c.

AOWC has generously provided TWL with a 64 person server, and we are thinking about running a weekly 32v32.

might not be bad...be alot of ringer teams..but could be fun

Team 13 MVP

2011-10-19 09:31

Originally posted by: -Bull-

Me personally I prefer 12 v 12 over any format made available. I will support it in anyway possible, but if leagues / tournaments do not support it so that it is beneficial to my team, how do I justify more less any team justify playing a format that wont be supported, when other formats will... give my players lollipops & reach arounds, so that they don't leave my team to go play on a 8 v 8 or 5 v 5 team that is playing for computer parts, $$$, going to LAN's?

I want a lollipop. You can keep the reacharound though.
______________________________________________________________________________________________
HP-nL

Augustwemust

TWL Member

2011-10-19 09:55

Originally posted by: MadChild
Actually, we are thinking about doing something similar to BF2c.

AOWC has generously provided TWL with a 64 person server, and we are thinking about running a weekly 32v32.

That sounds great, would be awesome to do something weekly like that with the community.

rivaL panda

TWL Member

2011-10-19 11:17

It's not 2001 anymore. Big team battles are a thing of the past. 8v8 has been the best Battlefield format and will continue to be the best.

Kyle..

TWL Member

2011-10-19 11:26

Originally posted by: TV-12
Originally posted by: MadChild
Actually, we are thinking about doing something similar to BF2c.

AOWC has generously provided TWL with a 64 person server, and we are thinking about running a weekly 32v32.

might not be bad...be alot of ringer teams..but could be fun

Also could be a good way the community players get to no each other better.