-
Hey, guest user. Hope you're enjoying NeoGAF! Have you considered registering for an account? Come join us and add your take to the daily discourse.
Battlefield 1 |OT2| "All Quiet on the GAF Front"
- Thread starter iRAWRasaurus
- Start date
I'm so conflicted on how much I like the map. On one hand it looks gorgeous and the layout itself isn't bad at all.
On the other the complete lack of vehicles makes it play a bit slower than I'd like even at 32v32 and really makes me sad, considering so many maps neglect vehicles in this game.
Also think a few points need some cover. I'm always feeling exposed on this map considering snipers can be used pretty much anywhere effectively.
Jack Scofield
Member
Whoa. When searching for a Conquest game just now it gave me three matchmaking options:
Any Map
Base Game
They Shall Not Pass
If I matchmake into Any Map, does that mean the server is running ALL maps? Or is it randomly placing me into either of the two other options?
Any Map
Base Game
They Shall Not Pass
If I matchmake into Any Map, does that mean the server is running ALL maps? Or is it randomly placing me into either of the two other options?
It's randomly placing you into either of the two. Only rented servers can have maps from different released in one rotation. I hate that DICE doesn't provide any mixed servers.
Chuck the Bean
Member
I don't want to derail the thread but I've been watching a lot of streaming recently and I'm really liking what I see. I played the beta when it launched and enjoyed myself and now I'm on the fence if I should buy the 80$ package with all the DLC.
How are servers on xbox? Are games easy to find? Is cooperative play good or is the game plagued with griefers? Is the learning curve too high? Also, will it have longevity (good for another year or so?)
What is the actual consensus about the game right now?
Thanks Gaf!
How are servers on xbox? Are games easy to find? Is cooperative play good or is the game plagued with griefers? Is the learning curve too high? Also, will it have longevity (good for another year or so?)
What is the actual consensus about the game right now?
Thanks Gaf!
Battlefield will always have longevity, at least the non-DLC maps. There's a lot to like about BF1, but DICE just does bad decisions sometimes that baffle everyone playing the game. Anyway, learning curve is the lowest in the series history, which is a good thing, but still kinda high compared to other games in the genre; you will die a lot. There aren't a lot of griefers or not, the worst you will find are casual players that only care about their kill/death ratio and do almost nothing to help your team win the game, which can be really frustrating when you are stuck in one part of the map and the enemy team is nonstop.
Chuck the Bean
Member
Thank you WillyFive
Chuck the Bean
Member
Albino_Yeti
Member
I agree. Even if it was just one of the original maps with a night-time filter. It would help keep things interesting for those who don't have any of the DLC.
That being said, I may splurge on the Russian DLC, despite my wallet telling me I shouldn't.
Chuck the Bean
Member
Thinking about it, pretty much the hardcore players will have the DLC so as a noob, I'll get destroyed!
Anyway, I still wanna play this. And 80$ for base game and all DLC seems like a reasonable price. I know I will enjoy the campaign to...
Edit: just read the other thread where people who bough the season pass talk about Revolution and they are rightfully pissed off... I didn't know all DLC are not all out yet.,,
SlimySnake
Flashless at the Golden Globes
So i am being forced to play Conquest on this new map... my most hated game mode, and I am not sure if I like it just yet. My first game was a disaster, i started 8-17 before going on a good streak to end at 26-20 but we lost the game at the very end which pissed me so much. i feel like there are too many damn flags on this map and its far too random. i was in an insane struggle to capture and defend flag D and after 2-3 minutes managed to repel the enemy attack. I look up and we had lost all the other flags. Like wtf is the point of Conquest? Just run around capping flags? how is that fun?
The other round started with me getting bombed while capturing the first flag along with five other people. But i decided to defend flags this time around and easily topped the leaderboard with kills and score with a 3.5 kdr. So maybe you arent supposed to run around capturing flags? I have no idea how to play Conquest.
Played some frontlines on Ballroom blitz and it kinda sucks. maybe its my ping which has been in the 100s since the july update, but i am losing firefights i should be winning, i cant get any good flanks going, the enemy teams seems to know where i am at all times. its bizarre.
The other round started with me getting bombed while capturing the first flag along with five other people. But i decided to defend flags this time around and easily topped the leaderboard with kills and score with a 3.5 kdr. So maybe you arent supposed to run around capturing flags? I have no idea how to play Conquest.
Played some frontlines on Ballroom blitz and it kinda sucks. maybe its my ping which has been in the 100s since the july update, but i am losing firefights i should be winning, i cant get any good flanks going, the enemy teams seems to know where i am at all times. its bizarre.
Psychoward
Banned
SlimySnake
Flashless at the Golden Globes
lol there is no operations and i cant find a rush or frontlines game on this map. Conquest is the only game mode on the server browser.
The Janitor
Member
Being good at this game isn't even fun anymore, I get accused of hacking almost every round lol.
I really like the new map so far. Reminds me a lot of a mixture of the Last Stand maps.
I think DICE has been pretty consistent wth maps in BF1 so far. Obviously I miss the verticality of BF4 but it's not realistic in BF1 so all things considered they're working pretty well with the setting.
I think DICE has been pretty consistent wth maps in BF1 so far. Obviously I miss the verticality of BF4 but it's not realistic in BF1 so all things considered they're working pretty well with the setting.
Psychoward
Banned
It's more that Conquest is your most hated game mode lol
That was an issue with BF4 as well; these games still have way too big a skill gap inside individual servers, which is the fault of the game's terrible matchmaking system. You should be getting placed with players of your skill, but instead the game pits high skilled players with less skilled ones which leads to a terrible experience for both.
EatChildren
Currently polling second in Australia's federal election (first in the Gold Coast), this feral may one day be your Bogan King.
I miss the old conquest scoring system so much 
I adore this game, but every now and then mid match when I'm in a heated contest to capture or hold a point my brain reminds me that it doesn't even really matter.
I adore this game, but every now and then mid match when I'm in a heated contest to capture or hold a point my brain reminds me that it doesn't even really matter.I'd quit playing Battlefield if they added skill based matchmaking. Worst thing to happen to shooters.
Hackusations don't stop in Overwatch or Siege with their skill based matchmaking anyway.
Memnoch
Member
I've been playing bf1 since day one. I'm curious to know the difference because I haven't noticed it.I miss the old conquest scoring system so much
Gnome Scat
Member
It's all multiplayer.
In Conquest the score system used to count down instead of up in previous Battlefield games.
So you'd start with 1000 tickets, and it would slowly bleed down if your team had less capture points than the opposing team, as well of course whenever someone used a ticket to respawn. Whichever team hit 0 tickets first would lose the round.
In previous Battlefield games, Conquest's scoring system was based on how many tickets (aka lives) your team had. Each team would start with a set number of tickets (like 2,000 for example), and anytime someone in your team spawned in, it would cost your team one ticket. When the enemy's ticket count got to zero, you win. If your ticket count got to zero, you lose.
So if you kill a guy, you are forcing the enemy team to spend one ticket to respawn the player. When your team controlled the majority of the objectives on a map, it would 'burn' tickets for the enemy team, so the more objectives you controlled and the more enemies you killed, the faster your enemy team's tickets would deplete and your team could win the game.
With BF1, they removed the ticket system for a points based system; where both teams start with zero points, and then gain points as they capture flags or kill enemies. Theoretically, it should work similar to the previous system, but in practice it actually removed the core dynamic of Conquest, where each team could make a massive comeback as they try to conserve their tickets (via reviving people or sticking together to hold objectives); replaced instead with people just going around in circles to get more points. In BF1 you can predict which team is going to win 10 minutes before the match is over for the most part; which removes a lot of the fun of conquest that it used to have.
Why?
Psychoward
Banned
Yeah there was zero reason to change how conquest worked and I have no idea why they did. I've pretty much never seen a comeback no matter how much a team deserved it.
Thanks!
I guess I'll just look into getting the base game then. I think I've seen it on sale a couple of times on PSN.
I'm Spartacus
Member
Anyone else experiencing rubber-banding?
Never had it on BF1 before and yet this week I had it happen quite a bit, particularly on Lupkow Pass (but not exclusively).
Never had it on BF1 before and yet this week I had it happen quite a bit, particularly on Lupkow Pass (but not exclusively).
People keep focusing on the counting up vs. down, but that's really only psychological. The real difference is that you used to only score flag based points when you had more flags than the other team. Now you score flag points even if it's 1 flag to 4 flags, and it sucks. Revives and kills still count against the score, so that's basically unchanged, except how they score revives have shifted in timing.
Albino_Yeti
Member
Just out of curiosity, for those of you who bothered with the single player campaign, which story was your favorite?
Mine was easily the Aussie's followed by the Italian's.
The American pilot one was my least favorite because
.
I wanted to like the Lawrence of Arabia one, but
The opening story with the American infantryman was kinda cool, but it was way too short.
Mine was easily the Aussie's followed by the Italian's.
The American pilot one was my least favorite because
he is a complete douche for pretty much the entire story. And those Brits believed he was English because he said some stereotypical British words? Boo.
I wanted to like the Lawrence of Arabia one, but
it placed way too much emphasis on stealth, which is not what I play Battlefield for. Same goes for the British tank one. Most of the story is you sneaking around outside of the tank.
The opening story with the American infantryman was kinda cool, but it was way too short.
Run a Network test on your PS4 and see what your upload is looking like.
Although once in a while the servers will have some issues, but it's fairly smooth most of the time.
My favorite was definitely the pilot; it had the best and most complete story of them all, and it had the best and most complex main character. The one in the tank was also a good premise, but it's writing was really simplistic and shallow, it was an outline of a finished story instead of being the actual finished story.
Psychoward
Banned
They all sucked. The hellfighter one being 5 minutes long was a shitty bait and switch. I guess my favorite was the tank one since it was the longest and had the most variety.
The plane one felt too Hollywood and the flying controls weren't the same as the mp, the desert one re-used Sinai desert like 3 times and I don't remember the others well enough.
The plane one felt too Hollywood and the flying controls weren't the same as the mp, the desert one re-used Sinai desert like 3 times and I don't remember the others well enough.
Because every match becomes a wannabe gamebattles clan match at my skill level and I don't take the game seriously enough to have fun in that environment. I like to goof around or try bad weapon combos and that's not possible if it matches me with people around my skill level.
TimeEffect
Member
Is it just me, or does Battlefield GAF die out quickly? Rarely seems like many play it.
Anywho, I sold this game because... I just got frustrated with teammates and class balance. I want to see more Support, I want to draw out ammo from them without having to beg them since no one drops it, I want to see support get better tools that Recon had, etc.
For the most part... that's still the same, right? I kind of want to repurchase the game.
I also sold the game because of the DLC. Too frustrating to buy DLC, and then not be able to play with friends or have the DLC die out when the next one hits, etc.
Hearing they are selling a complete edition already, so maybe this will alleviate those issues...
Anywho, I sold this game because... I just got frustrated with teammates and class balance. I want to see more Support, I want to draw out ammo from them without having to beg them since no one drops it, I want to see support get better tools that Recon had, etc.
For the most part... that's still the same, right? I kind of want to repurchase the game.
I also sold the game because of the DLC. Too frustrating to buy DLC, and then not be able to play with friends or have the DLC die out when the next one hits, etc.
Hearing they are selling a complete edition already, so maybe this will alleviate those issues...
Yep, it's a bad system. Makes it almost impossible to come back if you're losing.
If only DICE had true single player with bots, this wouldn't be a problem. And even then, you could just use the server browser to go to a match with new people to mess around.
As it is now is perfect. You jump into a match and there's a huge range of skill among everyone. Once in a while you'll be up against a really good clan or something and that's fun too. Being able to play around a lot while still having the occasional game where I have to try my ass off is how I like my shooters.
I guess I thought you were saying they should go to a strict skill based system. That type of thing only truly benefits competitive players or people that can't take the occasional butt kicking from someone way better than them imho. I know lots would disagree with me but that's how I see it.
I don't like Frontlines at all, but there are a bunch more maps on Frontlines now though.
Meccs
Member
Well I preferred the conquest in previous BF games. Not so much in BF1. Frontlines is the right amount of action and map size for me.
I rarely play it because there is always a queue of several people on the few populated servers, which is sad because i would play it more often otherwise.
I'm Spartacus
Member
Link or source?