Not Planned [BF4] Switch it to Hardcore

[4g0tt3nSou1]

While battlefield has a spot in my heart that can't be broken or forgotten, it isn't without its flaws. The base game health for a player is lowkey a little BS. In what world would be shot by a literal 50 cal not kill someone when you hit them center mass?
This isn't the best argument in the whole world, but I just love hardcore, it is just more fun IMHO.

Changing it would balance the game a little more, and make it a little more skill-based, as you can't play with the mentality that ur going to tank hits. It just helps keep it more balanced as it helps make the players feel more mortal.

 

[4g0tt3nSou1]

That, and upping the tick rate would be nice

 

[Beemermarine]

Switching to hardcore will most likely empty the server. Hence why it isn't done. Upping the tick rate cost more money, which maybe done in the future IF the server continues it's present success

 

[RipplyTiger151]

Personally, I don't think Shanghai is the map to put Hardcore on. Maybe we could have a separate hardcore server if BF4 continues to pick back up?

 

[Legend]

Personally, I don't think Shanghai is the map to put Hardcore on. Maybe we could have a separate hardcore server if BF4 continues to pick back up?

Yes.

Our original Shanghai server was #1 in the world as a normal nonhardcore server. We know it works and it’s silly for us to venture off of that course. The servers also pretty successful right now.

We can explore other options as the server continues to grow.

 

[4g0tt3nSou1]

I mean you bring up completely fair and valid points. To me it just feels like a singular experience.

If you are worried about having it in separate category, I believe you can edit the health modifier to hardcore setting (60) without changing it completely to the hardcore ruleset. I mention this just because I've taken the issue with DICE since its release that nobody just shrugs off a . 50 ad keeps on going. I'm not asking for realism, just a little more balance, as right now it really just feels like in some cases like I either shouldve died or they shouldve died. From both sides it feels like weird.

In any case you guys are correct, dont start from tried and true, though I would like to know what exactly you guys are looking for in terms of numbers to see if it's successful. It seems that the server fills nicely and maintains it throughout, I haven't seen it empty. How close is another server and what are you guys planning to release next?

 

[4g0tt3nSou1]

As an alternative, would it be possible to have a plugin that votes it, and if it receives like 80 percent, enable hardcore for next round?

 

[Artimus]

I think changing the server in any way, accept upping the slots, would be a bad idea. How can you improve on full all day long?

 

[b t]

I think changing the server in any way, accept upping the slots, would be a bad idea. How can you improve on full all day long?

I wanna play devil's advocate here and just say that a successful server doesn't mean changes cannot be explored. Think about the most successful companies or games in the world. Exploring changes is helpful and healthy in case the environment of that institution changes eventually. Your point is still fair though.

 

[RipplyTiger151]

In any case you guys are correct, dont start from tried and true, though I would like to know what exactly you guys are looking for in terms of numbers to see if it's successful. It seems that the server fills nicely and maintains it throughout, I haven't seen it empty. How close is another server and what are you guys planning to release next?

I believe "successful" at this point is making sure that it continues to keep filling up consistently. I'm thinking a more CQ server is what will be explored next.

I wanna play devil's advocate here and just say that a successful server doesn't mean changes cannot be explored.

For the handful of rounds I've been able to play while home this weekend, the server has been pretty solid and I haven't seen a lot of all-capping or team/skill issues. I think any changes that should be made should be performance-wise. Doing game mode changes could deter people from playing.

 

[Custom Stats]

The only change that I could see being beneficial would be increasing the ticket count so that games last a bit longer. Completely switching the mode on a server that is trying to develop just wouldn't make much sense.

 

[4g0tt3nSou1]

I think changing the server in any way, accept upping the slots, would be a bad idea. How can you improve on full all day long?

Respectfully, that's not a great mindset. Full all day long is great, exactly what BF4 needs; but it doesn't mean perfect.
Eventually, you reach a point of diminishing returns, but there is most of the time room for improvement.

Personally, I think we could do with having more gamemodes added, like TDM and rush, one of each to every 5 or so rounds wouldn't be terrible( if you do it right, and space it apart, you'd see minimal change in player count). I have suggested upping the ticket count in the past, that is a great start, that likely will have absolutely 0 impacts on player count. Tickrate would be another, but as Legend and others stated, that's to come if we keep it going strong.

chat commands, different plugins, maul is coming soon from what I hear.
Some servers like adjusting the vehicle respawn rate as well.

All things that are valid suggestions, so I wouldn't say we couldn't improve.

a successful server doesn't mean changes cannot be explored.

All the points you all have listed are valid though, so I get it.
All I can say is keep an open mind and hear change out.

 

[4g0tt3nSou1]

For whatever reason, the servers have tanked, and it hasn't been at the hand of suggestions like this. Now that we have nothing to lose, why not experiment with a new formula. I've outlined some decent settings, map pools, and modes in this and one other thread, where someone was talking a partnership when I thought they were talking about suggestions to the server.