Do we need or really want 64 man servers? I mean a 32 man server is a little easier to manage, also we will need at least one private/match server when the game becomes match ready.
Public - 32 Players, $41.55 / mo
Private - 16 Players, $19.15 / mo
20 bucks cheaper than one 64 man server, cost effective and it will give us a idea of how active this game will be in the 73rd.
I suggest we start slow and low.
agreed i say a 32 man server and wait on the private untill some competition is close. no need to have one when competition is another 3 months away at least
in BF i've always enjoyed a 64 man server more than i have a 32. I say we take a poll, and see what happens, and if need be, take donations prior to purchasing.
The reason I posted this as a 64man server is, ask anyone who has been playing the Battlefield series for a long time will say 64man servers are the only way to go. The only way you can enjoy a 32 man server is if there is an urban enviornment with less vehicle usage because there are more firefights. But when you have a large wide open map and its only 16 on 16, its no where near the same as 32 on 32.
i have found in the past that 64 man servers are a bit laggy weather they have corrected this prob not sure but i always found that 32 man run smoother this is just my 2 cents
