{{
`${userDetail.user.displayName}${userDetail.user.cachedBungieGlobalDisplayNameCode ? `#${standardizeBungieGlobalCode(userDetail.user.cachedBungieGlobalDisplayNameCode)}` : ""}`}}
{{getUserClans()}}
5/25/2017 5:10:40 AM
35
This whole "4v4 because competitive" argument is such a joke. 4v4s are just to reduce the lag, nothing else.
And you're absolutely right about the DS desaster.
English
-
Read this new post. Spread the word! Keeping the pressure on. LMFAO! https://www.bungie.net/en/Forum/Post/227427275/0/0
-
4v4 wouldn't do shit. I was playing doubles yesterday and was getting sniped through objects when everyone waa green.
-
Because the playerbase is down and there is still an insane amount of SBMM.
-
I honestly think you're vindictively drawing a line there. They almost certainly didn't solely consciously intend 4v4 to solve lag, but it's clear it indirectly does so. But don't claim Bungie did it maliciously cause unsubstantiated, that's just so much sodium chloride
-
Activision made an insane amount of profit last year. Why do you think that is?
-
It isn't because they try to rob people for fake online things. No not all. /s
-
Read this new post. Spread the word! Keeping the pressure on. LMFAO! https://www.bungie.net/en/Forum/Post/227427275/0/0
-
/s = sarcasm?
-
Yup. Welcome to the internet.
-
It's just logic right here. There's no point other than that to go down to 4v4s. This game isn't competitive and 99,9% of the playerbase don't want to play it competitively all the time.
-
If D1 was exclusively 6v6 with no 3v3 or 2v2 modes their reasoning sounds logical to reduce the lag. Weak, but at least logical. The issue their logic is flawed and quite frankly idiotic because the lag issues are very prevalent in trials, elimination, salvage, skirmish, and doubles all of which are an even lower player base. Unless they have some "magic bullet" coding/algorithm they couldn't figure out for the past three years, then we are going to see much of the same.
-
Read this new post. Spread the word! Keeping the pressure on. LMFAO! https://www.bungie.net/en/Forum/Post/227427275/0/0
-
Less players so less chance to encounter a player with shit connection. The lag will still be REAL however
-
Less players in a match will not affect the total amount of players with a shit connection or tick rate.
-
Not total amount, you mean the percentage of players with shit connections stays the same.
-
Less players in a lobby means better possibilities to avoid laggy players and it means faster matchmaking times.
-
Didn't help Trials...and that was 3v3.
-
Trials has way less lag than 6v6s though.
-
Not from what I played
-
Then you've played shit.
-
Don't be getting mad at me because my Trials experience was laggier than yours.
-
When you play Trials and nothing else...of course your Trials experience is the worst. But 6v6s always had the most lag for sure.
-
[quote]Less players in a match will not affect the total amount of players with a shit connection or tick rate.[/quote] But it will affect the total amount of players or teams with a shit connection to other players. 6v6 is two teams from mexico 4v4 is three teams from mexico
-
Exactly my point. 4v4 will not solve lag issues at all....nor reduce the chance of lag affecting the match. In fact I highly suspect the opposite given the fact that 3v3 had more lag issues and more severe lag issues than 6v6. But as a rule of thumb....reducing the number of players in a match will not reduce the overall number of people with bad connections or tick rates. It will only distribute them over more matches.
-
You're joking, right? 6v6 have WAY more lag problems...
