BF4 or BF3 - The poll is back again!

[Spreez]

As much as some people are in favor of doing both games Razy, not everyone will be on board due to lots of problems that are sure to occur. Until all the details can be discussed and ironed out, this is nothing more then a good idea. Instead of just pushing that it is a good idea. We need to construct a format in which it works. That takes time and lots of thought/trial/error/revising.

For now I would suggest working on this concurrent to the next campaign so we can continue the talks and come up with a solution to all the questions.

[CognitoCon]

Considering that we haven't really even begun campaign system stuff, this might be an acceptable time to pursue this idea. All we've done so far is look at the map pool for BF4 and it's looking like it's going to be pretty small, so including BF3 maps would be handy.

EDIT: This is my opinion if that wasn't abundantly clear.

[InsanityRocks]

I don't hold the same view as you do, Cog; please don't speak for me.

I feel trying to accommodate BF3 into this campaign would require some extra effort on my part to ensure I have the right people in the right positions. I also think it affects how I structure my Army and the people I'd like to draft.

This is not a decision I'm taking lightly, by any stretch.

And as it has been alluded to several times: there are details to iron out before, with any confidence, a decision can be made.

[CognitoCon]

I wouldn't dare speak for you, don't you worry your little head.

[StarfisherEcho]

Let's just put up a poll. Biggest problem is that a dual campaign will screw army balancing completely, since different people are going to show up for BF3 and BF4 - lots of admin overhead for everyone - but let's hear the voice of the peeps before declaring it impossible. And when the gun glitch ruins everything again, we'll just be back to BF4

Poll Options:

1) BF4 only
2) BF4 with BF3 Black Ops
3) BF4 on EU and BF3 on NA (or vice versa)
4) BF3 only

Pick two.

Earliest a poll like this could happen would be the weekend, probably, it will take some time to get sign offs. But I'm personally always in favor of a vote on this sort of thing.

[CognitoCon]

I also think a poll would be a good idea.

[RazY70]

Edit: never mind

[o1oo1]

just make the poll a mandatory part of campaign signup, otherwise some people will not vote and some people who vote wont take part in the campaign. AFter the signup you still have your usual 2 month setup process

[A Docile Sloth]

The problem with a signup poll is that people may end up not playing anyway. Someone who signs up and chooses BF3 may not play if the campaign ends up being BF4 or vice versa. But the HC and officers won't know that and draft them. You can't just not draft them as there may be people who vote for BF3 but would still play in a BF4 campaign. The result is screwed up numbers problems.

If people don't vote, that's on them for not voting.

Either way you do the poll, you will run the risk of someone voting who then doesn't play in the campaign.

[o1oo1]

what ?

1) BF4 only
4) BF3 only

cover that clear as day

[styphon]

Simple one for me. I stopped playing because of BF3, it sucked big donkey balls IMO. I didn't buy BF4 for a long time because of BF3, and only bought it now because it was on offer and I missed you guys . BF4 is better than BF3, it's far from perfect but it is better.

[A Docile Sloth]

what ?

1) BF4 only
4) BF3 only

cover that clear as day

Not really. I may pick 4 as I would prefer to play an only BF3 campaign. However, I would still be happy to play a BF4 campaign.

Fisherman, for example (I hope you don't mind me using you Fisherman), may pick 4 as he only wants to play BF3. He would not play a BF4 campaign.

If the campaign was BF4 and HCs draft everyone who signed up, I would play but Fisherman wouldn't show up. This would screw with numbers.
If the campaign was BF4 and HCs only drafted those who voted for BF4, I would not get drafted but would be willing to play. Again, screwing with numbers or forcing a second draft which is a real pain the neck for HCs, officers and TAs, not to mention the delays a second draft would cause.

[o1oo1]

well if you cant tell difference between "i will ONLY play bf3" and "i prefer to play bf3" then you should perhaps look at

2) BF4 with BF3 Black Ops
3) BF4 on EU and BF3 on NA (or vice versa)

i think one of those or even both has your preference included in them or you should suggest better poll questions if these dont adequately cover the options.

[StarfisherEcho]

Didn't the original poll already cover options 1 and 4? Also not quite sure why pick two? And lastly, can someone explain that sign off thingy and, if I may ask, who's doing the signing off?

1) The original poll is essentially a tie and does not include a mixed game campaign option. It doesn't help in figuring out if people want to do a mixed campaign, and doesn't show a clear community preference towards one game or the other (in fact it shows just the opposite). So it's not really actionable as is.

2) Pick two so that we get a better view of preferences. I'd rather do an instant runoff vote, but this is the best we can do given our forum technology.

3) Senate is discussing this and trying to figure out the costs involved. For example, if there's a cost to swap servers back and forth, then the only viable way to do this is pick one server and have it be BF3 for the duration of the campaign. That creates fairness issues - what if your preferred game is always on the server where you lag? Are you going to play that campaign? Also campaign problems - no more finishing maps after the break, you'll have to wait a week to continue. And the aforementioned army balance issues.

We want to have a solid view of the drawbacks written up before we move forward with the poll. We don't want people making a snap decision that ends up ruining the next campaign, at least not without having considered all the issues.

[RazY70]

Thanks for the explanation. I'm still not entirely sure I understand the reasoning, but it's not that crucial.