Forums | Chat | News | Contact Us | Register | PSU Social |
PSU: Everybody run! Hes got a NERF gattling gun!
Forums | Chat | News | Contact Us | Register | PSU Social |
Home | Forum | Chat | Wiki | Social | AGN | PS2 Stats |
|
|
Thread Tools | Search this Thread | Display Modes |
2012-06-20, 05:00 PM | [Ignore Me] #1 | ||
Master Sergeant
|
As a little disclaimer before people flame me for no reason, I'm fine with the fact that there are three factions, and don't propose changing it (not to mention it will never happen).
---- So, why is it that there are three factions? Why not 2? 2 means even numbered teams and more players per team, not to mention easier map designing. Why did SOE go, in the original PS, with three factions? |
||
|
2012-06-20, 05:02 PM | [Ignore Me] #2 | |||
Master Sergeant
|
|
|||
|
2012-06-20, 05:04 PM | [Ignore Me] #6 | ||
Contributor Major
|
It doesn't even have to be a conscious decision on the other two teams' part. If one team gains a significant territory advantage, they naturally spread themselves thinner, making it easier for their enemies to engage them successfully and take some of that land back.
|
||
|
2012-06-20, 05:10 PM | [Ignore Me] #11 | ||
Major
|
If you look at COD or BF games, with 2 teams, if one side is under manned, or worse than the other team, they get spawn camped or vehicle camped and all kinds of camped, where as with 3, if team A is being camped by Team B, Team C will come along and steal all of Team B's stuff.
|
||
|
2012-06-20, 05:16 PM | [Ignore Me] #15 | ||
Brigadier General
|
Simple quesiton, simple answere:
The third faction makes things more interresting. If one faction dominates, the other two will sooner or later fight the dominate guy, evening out the situation. With two factions, you dont get that. If one is dominant, it stays that way forever, causing the loosing faction to loose even more players, making the entire situation even whorse. |
||
|
|
Bookmarks |
|
|