*** Battlefield 1 ***

snips86x said:
Not really sure what to make of that video to be honest. My first gripe is they added ****ing shotguns!! Secondly, feels too COD like :(
Click to expand...

added ?

Battlefield games have always had shotguns. They've always been great fun to play. BF does shotguns like no other.

Just checking back, even battlefield 1942 had shotguns !
 
Last edited:
its a pity they can't make a situation where the two armys are fighting each other, pushing a front backwards and forwards, rather than just have individuals running around indipendantly bumping into each other with most players just doing their own thing which would never happen in a real war. Thats what I don;t like in BF4, especially the compact maps
I suppose you could do that if you were all set up with communication though on a special server
 
phil-k said:
its a pity they can't make a situation where the two armys are fighting each other, pushing a front backwards and forwards, rather than just have individuals running around indipendantly bumping into each other with most players just doing their own thing which would never happen in a real war. Thats what I don;t like in BF4, especially the compact maps
I suppose you could do that if you were all set up with communication though on a special server
Click to expand...

conquest is battlefield's most popular game mode by far. They'd be mad to change it.
 
phil-k said:
its a pity they can't make a situation where the two armys are fighting each other, pushing a front backwards and forwards, rather than just have individuals running around indipendantly bumping into each other with most players just doing their own thing which would never happen in a real war. Thats what I don;t like in BF4, especially the compact maps
I suppose you could do that if you were all set up with communication though on a special server
Click to expand...

They could, but unfortunately players will be players and as evidenced by the guy who sits around sniping for an entire match while the enemy capture flags near him, players on the average server will always do their own thing, esepcially if it ends with them having a good K/D, even if it meant their team losing 600-0
 
phil-k said:
its a pity they can't make a situation where the two armys are fighting each other, pushing a front backwards and forwards, rather than just have individuals running around indipendantly bumping into each other with most players just doing their own thing which would never happen in a real war. Thats what I don;t like in BF4, especially the compact maps
I suppose you could do that if you were all set up with communication though on a special server
Click to expand...

It would be a rubbish game if it was just firing across no man's land from trenches though with the occasional charge into withering machine gun fire. In game world it would just equate to spamming grenades and mortars
 
Tombstone said:
They could, but unfortunately players will be players and as evidenced by the guy who sits around sniping for an entire match while the enemy capture flags near him, players on the average server will always do their own thing, esepcially if it ends with them having a good K/D, even if it meant their team losing 600-0
Click to expand...

sniping should be difficult if its to easy you end up with a sniper team and they always loose.
 
I take it there are no objective modes in the style of Enemy Territory, etc. ? I dunno why Dice doesn't do anything like that other than they seem to struggle even with simple gameplay mechanics so it might cost them too much ongoing time mopping up hapless bugs in something more complex than capturing a flag.
 
Rroff said:
I take it there are no objective modes in the style of Enemy Territory, etc. ? I dunno why Dice doesn't do anything like that other than they seem to struggle even with simple gameplay mechanics so it might cost them too much ongoing time mopping up hapless bugs in something more complex than capturing a flag.
Click to expand...

That has always been what capture the zone has always been before really for all games as full territory control maps were difficult to execute.

Conquest in the battlefield series actually does what you are on about though no? It is where one team is moving forward to capture enemy territory and in doing so the defending team falls back to another rally point.

Operations takes Conquest and actually improves the idea by the two teams moving maps as if it is a new battle for the next portion of territory you are fighting over.

Not saying all the game modes are rather generic but they are at least pushing the base play a little with their game modes, more so than most FPS do.
 
HazardO said:
It seems to me that DICE Stockholm and DICE LA fundamentally disagree on how BF games should play. DICE Stockholm keep on making the same decisions again and again about how weapons should handle, fire rates, sway, spread, suppression etc, and it's not until DICE LA come and fix it that people for the most part are happy. It smacks of arrogance from the Stockholm team IMO.



Still alive then! ;)
Click to expand...

haha - yeah, just about ;)

Sorry I've not been around, not feeling BF at the moment so been playing other games. I'm sure my mojo will return at some point lol
 
Ah I see, so something more like below.

Mode: Sabotage

- Airfield, Remove the enemy air presence by destroying the air field. Complete this by destroying the radio tower, the planes and the fuel trucks on the map.

- Tank hanger, soften the enemy by removing their heavy vehicles support. Complete this by destroying all the vehicles on the map.

- Bridge, by destroying the local bridge over the raven you can disrupt the enemy supply and reinforcement chain. Hold the location for 'X' amount of time to allow for the demolition team to set up charges to blow the bridge, must defend the explosives for 'X' time as the defenders can counter attack and the ticket count switches.

- Rail road, remove the threat of high speed movement of supplies by destroying the train track. There are 3 key locations that would hamper the enemy (the main station, the storage depot and the barracks) but they are heavily defended. As the attacker you have to destroy at least one of these locations where the train track passes through but which point to do you choose. Has the enemy left anything undefended.

This could allow for different maps to be used with multiple objectives, multiple locations to complete the task or purely 'X' number of targets to be taken out. The defending team have to defend themselves for 'X' time until reinforcements arrive or the attacking team ticket count (lives) run out.

These sort of game modes would be good and if enough different game styles and maps are made it's great but objective based missions for mp can become stale quickly if done wrong.
 
Last edited:
Rossi~ said:
I like that, suppression should be a heavy thing in these games IMO. Less "arcade" like.
Click to expand...

When it comes to semi-competitive MP FPS, no game should have anything like that nor have random bullet deviation spread in your first 1-2 shots even when not suppressed imo*.

If they must add some kind of suppression... then only add the random sway, which players can counter but I can't stand the blur + vignette effect/reduced FOV where you can't counter it at all other than fight through it or run and hide to wait it out.

Bad company 2 didn't have any suppression at all and to me, that was the best battlefield game "overall" for infy play, it just came down to the player besting another player because of aim/accuracy and gun tactics i.e. tap/burst fire + recoil control.



*don't know about others but I'm noticing that scout/recon/sniper seems to be the most popular class BY FAR in this game now, I wonder if this is largely down to them and their bolt sniper rifles not being effected at all by the random deviation bullet spread....

Mynight said:
I still can't get used to the guns aim :(. It's bad when you go 2-9 and still end up top 10 :D.

Spawning in on teammates under fire needs to be stopped. Getting bored of just about beating someone to get shot by their mate having just spawned in :(.
Click to expand...

Spawning in on your squad seems broken for me, I am hovering over the squad guy to spawn, says he is in a firefight so I can't spawn yet when that disappears and I can see him moving about perfectly fine, the option to spawn on him disappears completely.... More often that not, I just have to spawn on a flag.

And yup, PTFO really rewards you big time now, seen people with 20+ kills in the bottom of the leaderboard where as people with only a few kills are in the top 3 lol.... With kills not counting towards the ticket bleed at all now, it really is pointless worrying about k/d + kind of defeats the purpose of reviving people other than to help with attacking or defending a flag...
 
Last edited:
Mynight said:
I still can't get used to the guns aim :(. It's bad when you go 2-9 and still end up top 10 :D.
Click to expand...

It really isn't

Its a team based objective orientated game. Capturing and defending flags is just as vaulalbe to your team as the slayers who just go round killing everything.

Its good that you can progress up the leader board by methods other than killing. Anything to dissuade people from camping in a tower sniping trying to whore their K: D ratio.
 
~>Dg<~ said:
oooh nice to know.squad is good but i been waiting for vehicles before diving back in.:D

back onto Battlefield they are making it into a TV show
Click to expand...

Vehicles should be in later this month. They look stable based on the latest playtest.
 
Fr0dders said:
It really isn't

Its a team based objective orientated game. Capturing and defending flags is just as vaulalbe to your team as the slayers who just go round killing everything.

Its good that you can progress up the leader board by methods other than killing. Anything to dissuade people from camping in a tower sniping trying to whore their K: D ratio.
Click to expand...

They should remove KD altogether in conquest. Something that Squad does well. It's a nice surprise when you see your kills at the end of the game :)
 
I don't agree in removing KD from conquest, and I do think kills should count towards winning the round too, but the balance does need to be towards teamwork and objectives. The thing is BF is an FPS, so the killing thing is always going to be an important part of the gameplay.

They started to get this right later on in BF4 IMO, by giving much more points to team/squad work, and attacking or defending flags. I'm rarely the best fragger in a round where I get the mvp (often not even in the top 5 for kills).
 
Last edited:
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top Bottom