Battlefield Bad Company


Recommended Posts

I'd never have guessed that no matter how long you gave me lol.

Can't wait to try out Conquest, it's gonna be so good with no restrictions where you can go :D So who is all playing then?

I'm in definitely. I'm once again calling a spot in the squad...calling "shotgun". :laugh:

yeah that was cheesy. lol.

I'll be on late tonight and tomorrow. GT is soLoredd. Hopefully I can string some good games together and improve myself.

One thing I'm still getting really used to is squad play. I would love to get more strategical but a lot of the squads I've played with online are just free-going so I end up following them and covering.

What time is the update supposed to be out?

Woo, met another face from Neowin, LOC :D Good game man, you too AJ (Y)

Hope you join us in Conquest mode tomorrow etc. Sorry I had to go but it's 3:30am here and I never even realized.

Yep, I already talked with LOC today via PM, and he will be playing tomorrow as well. Good people indeed. :yes:

I have a feeling we will inevitably be dealing with to many people for forming just one squad tomorrow, so just keep that in mind everyone. I know pretty much for a fact at least 7 of us are definitely going to be playing.

Well, since there will more than likely be a full squad tomorrow night, theres the option of getting into a game, then just sending out invites through the dashboard. At least there will be a good chance everyone will be on the same team, just not the same squad. And we could always launch private chats between players. Being that we've all played with each other so much in the past few weeks, its probably safe to say we know what the other person is thinking...

Or at the very least, the routes they take through the maps, the vehicles they get in, and the classes they choose to play as.

Woo, met another face from Neowin, LOC :D Good game man, you too AJ (Y)

Hope you join us in Conquest mode tomorrow etc. Sorry I had to go but it's 3:30am here and I never even realized.

Yeah I joined you through the friends list thingie, I figured what the hey since my PC was at the time being scanned for icky viruses or spyware and all :D

And what were you smoking???? Good game? Neither of the two maps I played with you did I even get a single kill! lol I for some reason or another couldn't hit a thing for about an hour there...it was weird.

Yep, I already talked with LOC today via PM, and he will be playing tomorrow as well. Good people indeed. :yes:

I have a feeling we will inevitably be dealing with to many people for forming just one squad tomorrow, so just keep that in mind everyone. I know pretty much for a fact at least 7 of us are definitely going to be playing.

Yep, can't wait for the download to go live, on Live....heh. Man I hope it comes out EARLY instead of later today. A surprise download right now would be ideal :D

Got mine updated. I thought it would be a game update (when you start the game) but instead its on Marketplace. I'm out of the loop LOL. There is a game update available as well though.

I went and bought me a new headset, the official 360 one. Not sure I like it though, compared to the old one I had. Having the mic control hanging from your ear kind of sucks. I much preferred the button/volume on the 360 gamepad. I spent about 2 hours playing, although it wasn't Conquest. This game irritates me sometimes - nobody on my team was defending crates. People are out in the woods running around like blind bats and the enemy is just going to town on us. And there was no communication at all! Maybe I take it too seriously haha.

File is only 80MB so however long that would usually take you, took me a few minutes to get

went online and no one has a clue how to play it seems, just treating it as a giant deathmatch game, with no one defending flags or even attempting to capture them :(

File is only 80MB so however long that would usually take you, took me a few minutes to get

went online and no one has a clue how to play it seems, just treating it as a giant deathmatch game, with no one defending flags or even attempting to capture them :(

hehe....all that means is for us here to start a squad and start owning

went online and no one has a clue how to play it seems, just treating it as a giant deathmatch game, with no one defending flags or even attempting to capture them :(

Funny, sounds exactly like the old Game-mode :laugh:

But the servers didn't work at the time I updated, so haven't tried it yet. Me and Munky will go test it out in an hour or so.

I hopped on shortly after downloading mine. Got to agree with Belgarath that nobody seem what do to. People just running around in Tanks/Heli's and blowing people up. I kept taking flags (30 points for flags, 10 for assisting) and defending them (pretty boring if you don't defend one in the "middle" of map), but nobody else really tried anything other than killing. A squad working together can do some serious damage in defending or attacking.

Aw man what a disappointment :(

They've cut down the size of all the maps, so although they've opened up new areas, they've taken probably half of the map away.

Because of that, all the flags are really close together, except maybe Harvest Day which is an ok size and the locations are better.

With the cut down in size of the maps, everyone is using the Demolition and shotguns, as most of the time you are in CQC.

Another change to the flags from previous BF games, they have removed the base you start with as a non-capture base. So each and every flag can be captured. And so that leads onto the next point..

If you can capture all the flags, the other team doesn't have a chance to make a come back. Sethos and I played one match where it lasted all but 1 minute and a half.

And, you still play the map two times per round, except you switch ends.

There doesn't seem to be a very high population on Conquest, when Sethos and I played a little earlier we switched between Oasis and Acension 3 times in a row (N) Also the teams were half full at best of times.

This topic is now closed to further replies.
  • Recently Browsing   0 members

    • No registered users viewing this page.
  • Posts

    • The quantum search for Time's origin had an equally mind-boggling conclusion by Sayan Sen Image by Steve Johnson via Pexels A theoretical study from researchers at the University of Surrey suggested that the direction of time may not be fundamentally fixed in certain quantum systems. The work, published in Scientific Reports, examined how the “arrow of time” could emerge from microscopic physics and found that time-reversal symmetry can remain intact even in models used to describe processes such as energy loss and thermalisation. The arrow of time refers to the observed one-way direction from past to future in everyday life. In macroscopic processes, this is easy to see. Spilled milk spreads across a table and does not gather back into a glass, and heat flows from hotter objects to colder ones. These processes shape the common sense idea that time moves in a single direction. However, at the level of fundamental physics, many equations do not prefer a direction of time. Time-reversal symmetry means that the same physical laws can describe a system whether time moves forward or backward. This has made it difficult to explain why irreversible behaviour appears in the large-scale world even when the underlying rules do not require it. Dr Andrea Rocco, Associate Professor in Physics and Mathematical Biology at the University of Surrey, described this contrast: "One way to explain this is when you look at a process like spilt milk spreading across a table, it's clear that time is moving forward. But if you were to play that in reverse, like a movie, you'd immediately know something was wrong – it would be hard to believe milk could just gather back into a glass. However, there are processes, such as the motion of a pendulum, that look just as believable in reverse. The puzzle is that, at the most fundamental level, the laws of physics resemble the pendulum; they do not account for irreversible processes. Our findings suggest that while our common experience tells us that time only moves one way, we are just unaware that the opposite direction would have been equally possible." The study focused on open quantum systems, which are quantum systems that interact with a surrounding environment. This environment, often described as a heat bath, can exchange energy and information with the system. The researchers used this framework to study how a direction of time might appear even when the underlying physics does not enforce one. A key part of the analysis involved the Markov approximation. This is a simplification used in many models where the system is assumed not to retain memory of its past states. The idea is that changes depend only on the current state, not on earlier history. This is commonly used when studying thermalisation, which is the process where a system settles into equilibrium with its environment. The study also used concepts such as master equations, including the Lindblad and Pauli equations, which describe how probabilities of different quantum states change over time. Another related model discussed was quantum Brownian motion, which describes the random-like movement of a quantum particle interacting continuously with its environment. In these descriptions, a “memory kernel” can appear, which is a mathematical term that accounts for how past states influence current behaviour. The researchers found that applying the Markov approximation did not break time-reversal symmetry. Even when the system interacted with an effectively infinite heat bath, the resulting equations of motion remained symmetric in time. This meant that the same mathematical description could, in principle, run forward or backward in time without contradiction. The study further showed that standard frameworks used in open quantum systems, including quantum Brownian motion and master equations like the Lindblad and Pauli forms, could be written in a time-symmetric way. These equations are typically used to describe processes that look irreversible, such as dissipation and thermalisation, but the results suggested they can also be interpreted as allowing evolution in both time directions. Thomas Guff, Research Fellow in Quantum Thermodynamics, said: "The surprising part of this project was that even after making the standard simplifying assumption to our equations describing open quantum systems, the equations still behaved the same way whether the system was moving forwards or backwards in time. When we carefully worked through the maths, we found that this behaviour had to be the case because a key part of the equation, the "memory kernel," is symmetrical in time. We also found a small but important detail which is usually overlooked – a time discontinuous factor emerged that kept the time-symmetry property intact. It’s unusual to see such a mathematical mechanism in a physics equation because it's not continuous, and it was very surprising to see it appear so naturally." The researchers also noted that deriving a one-way arrow of time from time-reversal symmetric microscopic dynamics remains an open problem across fields such as thermodynamics, statistical mechanics, particle physics, and cosmology. Their results suggested that some standard descriptions of irreversible behaviour in open quantum systems may be better understood using a time-symmetric formulation of Markovianity. According to the study, processes such as thermalisation, which are usually treated as irreversible, could in theory be described in a way that allows evolution in either time direction under the same rules. This does not imply that time reversal occurs in everyday life, but rather that the underlying equations do not strictly enforce a single direction. Overall, the findings suggested that the perceived direction of time may emerge from how physical systems are modelled and approximated, rather than from a fundamental asymmetry in the laws themselves. The researchers noted that this perspective could have implications for ongoing work in quantum mechanics, thermodynamics, and cosmology on the origin of time’s arrow. Source: University of Surrey, Nature This article was generated with some help from AI and reviewed by an editor. Under Section 107 of the Copyright Act 1976, this material is used for the purpose of news reporting. Fair use is a use permitted by copyright statute that might otherwise be infringing
    • A bit premature... 100% Marketing. Bizarre.
    • A $300 price hike is insane! No one is going to want to pay that much!
    • Since the 1st one flopped, there is really no reason to make another one. It's just losing money left and right.
  • Recent Achievements

    • Reacting Well
      BizSAR earned a badge
      Reacting Well
    • First Post
      AndreaB earned a badge
      First Post
    • Week One Done
      Huge Trailer earned a badge
      Week One Done
    • Week One Done
      Classifyskilleducation earned a badge
      Week One Done
    • One Month Later
      eurospharma62 earned a badge
      One Month Later
  • Popular Contributors

    1. 1
      +primortal
      580
    2. 2
      +Edouard
      182
    3. 3
      PsYcHoKiLLa
      75
    4. 4
      Michael Scrip
      71
    5. 5
      neufuse
      64
  • Tell a friend

    Love Neowin? Tell a friend!