Conquest Assault gots to go.

«1
ProAssassin2003
1806 postsMember, Battlefield 3, Battlefield 4, Battlefield Hardline, Battlefield, Battlefield 1 Member
Does anybody truly like this for Conquest. All I have seen is its just a Nightmare and ruins the fun of the maps it is on.

Comments

  • IG-Calibre
    938 postsMember, Battlefield 3, Battlefield 4, Battlefield, Battlefield 1 Member
    oh well, at least when all the flags are taken it's over, rather than being spawned camped in the UCB until the tickets run out.
  • bapman63
    930 postsMember, Battlefield 4, Battlefield Hardline, Battlefield, Battlefield 1, CTE Member
    Not a fan but at least they tried something new.
  • IG-Calibre
    938 postsMember, Battlefield 3, Battlefield 4, Battlefield, Battlefield 1 Member
    new to you maybe, but not battlefield.
  • CH1R0N83
    642 postsMember, Battlefield 3, Battlefield 4, Battlefield Hardline, Battlefield, Battlefield 1, CTE Member
    Could be better on cape helles but I quite like it on legoland and zeebrugge. Doesn’t feel like quite as much of a merry go round as regular conquest.
  • Foot_Elite_Tomei
    306 postsMember, Battlefield 3, Battlefield 4, Battlefield Hardline, Battlefield, Battlefield 1, CTE Member
    It has same problems as regular conquest: If your team don't play smartly, you get wrecked by the enemy. Defending is relatively easy for semi-competent team but once they start to lose foothold it can turn into nightmare really quickly for them.
  • Ploodovic
    1021 postsMember, Battlefield 4, Battlefield Hardline, Battlefield, Battlefield 1, CTE Member
    In the traditional Conquest Assault, the ticket bleed only happens when one team has all the flags; as soon as the attackers neutralize a flag, the initial bleed stops. The way the ticket rules are now, in both Conquest and Conquest Assault, you get points for every flag you hold, and if you hold more flags than the other team, your tickets counts faster than theirs (without taking kills into account).

    In Battlefield 1 the attackers in Conquest Assault get a ticket head start, and this is supposed to make up for the fact that the other team has all the flags, when the round starts. I’ve been keeping an eye out for the scoring, and basically, the attacker’s ticket head start give them roughly a 3–3½ minute window to cap at least half of the flags, before the score is even. If they haven’t taken half of the flags by then, the head start is gone, and the defenders now have the ticket advantage.

    The upside for the attackers is, if they manage to all-cap, the defenders can’t spawn on any flag, only squad mates and vehicles. So, even if you’re down a couple of hundred tickets, as attackers, if you all-cap and kill all the enemies, you still win. This is where the Conquest Assault game mode is at its best, but this rarely happens, unless the defending team is severely underperforming.

    A solution would be to bring back the traditional ticket rules for Conquest Assault, where you only need to neutralize one flag to stop the ticket bleed. After that, it’s about the kills, until one team takes all the flags, and the ticket bleed starts again.
  • CHAMMOND1992
    588 postsMember, Battlefield 3, Battlefield 4, Battlefield, Battlefield 1, CTE Member
    It definitely needs to go. Even more disappointing is that one or two of the apocalypse maps are conquest assault.
  • disposalist
    7227 postsMember, Battlefield 3, Battlefield 4, Battlefield, Battlefield 1, CTE, BF1IncursionsAlpha Member
    It's the way those maps were designed. They wouldn't work as plain conquest. It's a nice change.
  • GVlXxf
    312 postsMember, Battlefield 3, Battlefield 4, Battlefield, Battlefield 1 Member
    edited February 12
    Does anybody truly like this for Conquest. All I have seen is its just a Nightmare and ruins the fun of the maps it is on.

    what do u want to compare with? COD , if so , i really love BF conquest mode than COD TDM( in COD term, it's called conquest, but just a TDM mode in BF1, 12VS12)
  • WetFishDB
    1538 postsMember, Battlefield 4, Battlefield, Battlefield 1 Member
    I don't enjoy the mode, but that isn't my main issue with them - it's that they've been lumped together on Conquest servers - and they are a different (albeit similar) game mode.

    As a game mode I find them very frustrating as most of the game play on them ends up being pretty one sided with LOTS of running from one end of the map to the other just to try to find someone to kill or a flag to defend. Attacking is a bit more fun, but in that scenario it seems most flags go relatively undefended (probably as the enemy is on the other side of the map or too spread out etc). Legoland Shite is the worst. It's actually a very linear map gameplay wise, and involves waaay too much walking (which is still quicker than the 'naval warfare').
  • PottyScottie
    246 postsMember, Battlefield 3, Battlefield 4, Battlefield Hardline, Battlefield, Battlefield 1, CTE, BF1IncursionsAlpha Member
    Does anybody truly like this for Conquest. All I have seen is its just a Nightmare and ruins the fun of the maps it is on.

    It sucked when they brought it back in bf3 and it still sucks now.
  • trip1ex
    3502 postsMember, Battlefield 3, Battlefield 4, Battlefield, Battlefield 1, CTE, BF1IncursionsAlpha Member
    Adds variety. But mostly plays the same.

    As attackers you have to cap a flag or two early on and as defenders you gotta be careful not to lose all your flags otherwise it's Conquest.

  • Sixclicks
    3886 postsMember, Battlefield 3, Battlefield 4, Battlefield, Battlefield 1 Member
    edited February 12
    I like it when it works... unfortunately it doesn't most games. Usually one team ends up completely dominating the other. Most often the attacking side since they get such a big initial ticket advantage. Although I've also been on games where the attacking side doesn't even make it to land (usually due to the attacking team being potatoes).
  • CS-2107
    1380 postsMember, Battlefield, Battlefield 1, CTE, BF1IncursionsAlpha Member
    It depends. Some games, you have the attackers just unwilling or unable to attack and the game turning into a boring mess of a sniper fest. Some games, the defenders get overrunned immidiatly. And some games are actually really good and intense.


    I didn't like it on Cape Helles at all, but I haven't seen that map in a long time either, so I guess I'm not the only one disliking the map/mode. But on Zeebrugge and Helgioland the mode works quite well most of the time.
  • IG-Calibre
    938 postsMember, Battlefield 3, Battlefield 4, Battlefield, Battlefield 1 Member
    Cape Helles would be so much better if there was only one plane spawned by ownership D.
  • LieutenantVixen
    210 postsMember, Battlefield 4, Battlefield, Battlefield 1, BF1IncursionsAlpha Member
    Conquest Assault can't be balanced unless ticket drain is low enough that it's basically irrelevant.

    Operations is a better way of handling an attacker-defender style of gameplay.
  • x_Undaunted_x
    3725 postsMember, Battlefield 3, Battlefield 4, Battlefield, Battlefield 1 Member
    I'm not a fan of it either.
  • MarxistDictator
    4270 postsMember, Battlefield 3, Battlefield 4, Battlefield Hardline, Battlefield, Battlefield 1, CTE Member
    Its not bad on the TUTI maps but it makes Caporetto/The Somme a ridiculous spawn trap from the gate that only really competent teams will break out of.


    Dice removed a landship and added a tank hunter to the Somme just to ensure the British get spawn trapped 85% of the time.
  • TheEagleEmpire
    23 postsMember, Battlefield 4, Battlefield Hardline, Battlefield, Battlefield 1, CTE Member
    Also the fact we are being force feed Conquest Assault on DLC maps I paid for! TO have it as another mode maybe but the fact we cant even play new maps on the most popular mode Conquest is ridiculous!
Sign In or Register to comment.