Why so many crybabies- squad conquest

Comments

  • parkingbrake
    3202 postsMember, Battlefield 3, Battlefield 4, Battlefield, Battlefield 1, Battlefield V Member
    Sw0rdmouse wrote: »
    Battlefield's niche has always been large, epic battles, with an emphasis on a mix of infantry and vehicle combat.

    Tiny maps with 8v8 feels like a CoD match to me. And if I want to play CoD, I'll go play CoD. *shrug*

    Yeah, that's how we think of BF, big maps and lots of vehicles. But the reality is that some of the most popular servers in this franchise ran small maps, infantry-only. A lot of players love TDM, and while the purists love to sneer at that game mode and those players, clearly EA thinks their money is just as good as anybody else's. So if servers running Noshahr Canals TDM or Locker TDM 24/7 are always full, wouldn't it be foolish for the game developers to ignore that?

    I have enjoyed Squad Conquest so far, it's kind of nice not being bombed before you can get out of your spawn, and being able to flank and cap a flag forcing the opposing team to turn around which takes the pressure off your team. It's not much different than Domination really, and while that might infuriate the purists who think any map smaller than Firestorm or Silk Road are blasphemy, if enough players like it then it should stay in the game.
  • SirBobdk
    5096 postsMember, Battlefield 3, Battlefield 4, Battlefield, Battlefield 1, Battlefield V Member
    This wouldnt be a topic of discussion if not because of the assignment.
  • buster518
    66 postsMember, Battlefield 3, Battlefield 4, Battlefield Hardline, Battlefield, Battlefield 1, Battlefield V Member
    buster518 wrote: »
    It's not that I'm in love with this game mode I definitely prefer domination or even regular conquest I just find the community really toxic hating on it because they arent used to it
    buster518 wrote: »
    It seems like alot of people who dislike the game mode are coming from conquest which is a pretty casual game mode and just arent used to a more focused competitive game mode where individual skill matters more as well as working as a team. Coupled with challenges that players are forced to do in the mode they arent used or just too casual for leads to more hate for the mode.
    buster518 wrote: »
    No I'm calling the cry babies cry babies because instead of giving constructive critacism they call the game mode trash in the forums after being out for only one day.

    I can't begin to tell you how wrong these statements are.
    .
    1. You all assume that players don't like it because they're not good enough or they're just bad/not used to it. It's almost as if people can have a bad impression of a new thing, even if they're good at that new thing. They can also have a good impression of that new thing, even if they're bad at that new thing. Opinions do not align with skills. For instance, I am pretty good at strategy games, but I don't enjoy playing them. I'm also pretty bad at competitive shooters and I don't really like them. I'm also pretty bad at COD Zombies, but I enjoy playing it.
    2. It's crazy to me how @buster518 is saying the community is "toxic" just for saying they don't like it. It's almost as if everyone's entitled to an opinion on something, especially if they don't like it.
    3. It's weird that you say it's because they aren't used to it then make the assumption that all these players are coming from conquest. No. Some of us came from Frontlines. Others from Domination, Breakthrough, everything. Conquest is the closest we have to Squad... CONQUEST. It plays out the exact same way, just on a 16v16 scale instead of 64v64 (difference in scale of 4x)
    4. What I find the worst about this entire thread is you sit there wanting actual constructive criticism while calling those that *you* don't believe gave constructive criticism "crybabies" and "toxic". When in reality the only toxic thing here is you acting like it's an attack.
    .
    We are literally just saying we don't like/don't prefer the game mode. We don't have to justify that. Sure, it would help if we did, but we don't have to. In fact, nobody has to. But when it comes down to it, criticism doesn't help something that's fundamentally broken. At this point, most players are complaining about a few things; lack of players, the fact you have to play with friends in order to be successful (many players play solo and get matched with randoms), and the mode feels like Domination with vehicles. So what else are they supposed to do? "Constructively critique?" I don't think it's possible for something to change when it's core idea is what people don't like.

    1. I'm not assuming anything all of this is based around what I have seen in the forums and my understanding of the game over thousands of hours and 170+ into this one. There is clearly a trend happening in this situation, that being, players are forced into a game mode clearly built more competitive and they are in there to do a challenge. Unlike all the other modes this game mode is the most reliant on you as a player and your individual skill because of the small teams that is just the statistics of the matter. If you want to be successful you really have to contribute far more than you would in CQ that is a fact.
    2. People can have whatever bad impression they want about the game mode but that doesn't make the game mode bad that's the difference, it's just bad for you. Not every game mode is built for your playstyle or skill set I think we would be seeing a very different reaction from people if they weren't forced into it because many people probably wouldn't even play it or try it a couple times and stop playing it. The same thing many people already do to the other game modes, play them a couple times and then stick to what they like. People also are getting more annoyed and salty while playing it because they have to be in there for the challenege and that leads to misdirected hate at the game mode. I've seen plenty of people critique it saying it's not for them and needs improving and I'm mainly calling out the ones calling it a bad game mode because it isnt. Just like every game mode in this game it needs improvement.
    3. You're logic isnt vary good here and shows your lack of understanding. Because you compare the two modes with the 8v8 vs 32v32. You say that like it isnt a massive difference those numbers completely change how the game is played and built.
    4. I think it's clear why you dont like the game mode and it's because you think it playes the exact same as conquest. You are playing the game mode very very wrong.
    5. You say that you have to play with friends to be successful but have you put any thought into why you think that? Gee is it because it's a more complex competitive game mode that benefits far more than the others for team play. Wow that sounds just like every style of compedive ranked like play, you dont go into a ranked game mode with randoms if you arent confident in your ability to carry or just dont care if you loose and get a bad team or get a good one.
    6. Your way of comparing game modes is baffling. Youre more focused on how they share conquest in the name or that this game mode and domination have three flags "so they are similar" critiquing and saying that its domination 2.0 with vehicles is so lazy and shows you dont understand how they are very different in how the games play out.

  • ITS_BOB_GNARLY
    2190 postsMember, Battlefield 3, Battlefield 4, Battlefield, Battlefield 1, Battlefield V Member
    DICE, seriously... What are you guys doing... If you're not going to test your game properly, PLEASE bring back the CTE so we can do it for you!

    For one thing, how can you not set an appropriate AFK timer kick for Squad Conquest? I've already played multiple games of this 8v8 mode where one team has 1 or 2 players idling AFK for the whole match. It seems to work fine in regular Conquest where it doesn't matter as much, but not Squad Conquest for whatever reason.

    If you're going to force players to play Squad Conquest to unlock a weapon, try to make it as painless as possible next time.
  • Hawxxeye
    7089 postsMember, Battlefield 3, Battlefield 4, Battlefield Hardline, Battlefield, Battlefield 1, CTE, BF1IncursionsAlpha, Battlefield V Member
    Squad conquest is a stat-pading heaven where a team of mostly friends/platoon can nonstop onesideldy farm random enemies.
    Small teams does not mix well with random matchmaking.
    The mode itself is fine but the balance is making it feel so bitter to the losing team
  • aRrAyStArTaT0
    786 postsMember, Battlefield 4, Battlefield, Battlefield 1, Battlefield V Member
    buster518 wrote: »

    1. I'm not assuming anything all of this is based around what I have seen in the forums and my understanding of the game over thousands of hours and 170+ into this one. There is clearly a trend happening in this situation, that being, players are forced into a game mode clearly built more competitive and they are in there to do a challenge. Unlike all the other modes this game mode is the most reliant on you as a player and your individual skill because of the small teams that is just the statistics of the matter. If you want to be successful you really have to contribute far more than you would in CQ that is a fact.
    2. People can have whatever bad impression they want about the game mode but that doesn't make the game mode bad that's the difference, it's just bad for you. Not every game mode is built for your playstyle or skill set I think we would be seeing a very different reaction from people if they weren't forced into it because many people probably wouldn't even play it or try it a couple times and stop playing it. The same thing many people already do to the other game modes, play them a couple times and then stick to what they like. People also are getting more annoyed and salty while playing it because they have to be in there for the challenege and that leads to misdirected hate at the game mode. I've seen plenty of people critique it saying it's not for them and needs improving and I'm mainly calling out the ones calling it a bad game mode because it isnt. Just like every game mode in this game it needs improvement.
    3. You're logic isnt vary good here and shows your lack of understanding. Because you compare the two modes with the 8v8 vs 32v32. You say that like it isnt a massive difference those numbers completely change how the game is played and built.
    4. I think it's clear why you dont like the game mode and it's because you think it playes the exact same as conquest. You are playing the game mode very very wrong.
    5. You say that you have to play with friends to be successful but have you put any thought into why you think that? Gee is it because it's a more complex competitive game mode that benefits far more than the others for team play. Wow that sounds just like every style of compedive ranked like play, you dont go into a ranked game mode with randoms if you arent confident in your ability to carry or just dont care if you loose and get a bad team or get a good one.
    6. Your way of comparing game modes is baffling. Youre more focused on how they share conquest in the name or that this game mode and domination have three flags "so they are similar" critiquing and saying that its domination 2.0 with vehicles is so lazy and shows you dont understand how they are very different in how the games play out.

    1. You are assuming things. Unless you're about to tell me it wasn't you who said "alot of people who dislike the game mode are coming from conquest which is a pretty casual game mode and just arent used to a more focused competitive game mode where individual skill matters more as well as working as a team." right? You didn't say that at all and you definetly didn't assume where people come from. To make things worse, you're assuming that players from such game modes, like conquest as you mentioned, are not skillful. Once again, an assumption.

    .
    2. People can have whatever thought they want, good or bad. But when a somewhat majority of the players on forums and reddit are talking about how bad it is, and the mode is not even played for pleasure, it's likely the mode right? Not to say people can't like it but, my guess is that it will end up like domination; overhyped at the beginning then steeply falling off about 2 months after it's release. We don't play battlefield for small scale battles. And you're right, we probably would be seeing different reactions if people weren't forced into it. Probably because then you'd atleast have the option to opt in and play. Therefore, players that are wanting a casual experience or play solo aren't shoehorned into a shoe that doesn't fit. Also, if you're going to keep blaming the players for the hate that the game mode got, please consider; there's a reason people don't like the mode itself. Yes, they're annoyed and salty. Yes they have to be in there for a challenge. No these do not correlate 1:1 on the scale of reasons for disliking things. They don't hate it because they have to be in there for a challenge. They have to be in there for a challenge leading them to realize the game mode isn't good.
    You can lead a horse to water but to tell the horse the water is good while it's not drinking is dumb.

    .
    3. Your* logic. You're = you are. Your = possessive.

    .
    Also, my bad. I did get the numbers off. The scaling, not so much. It's still a 4x difference. The logic is there though. The game mode is the same. Nearly everything is the same about the game modes. Only difference is the 8 players vs 32 players per team. Other than that, it's extremely identical and to say they're completely different game modes is simply incorrect. Just because it might be played differently doesn't mean it's not the same mode. To me, it feels like playing on an empty conquest server. Boring.
    .
    4. It's more that I find it boring. Again, it's like an empty server.
    .
    At this point, you're just ignoring my 4 original points. You started off keeping in line with the points, but now we're on point 5 and I only had 4. Anyway;
    .
    5.Yes. Of course I've put thought into it. And it's because the teams are so small inner communication (voice coms) is much more effective than 8 people using type to chat on the other team. The voice coms team will win in almost every case. Tactics are important here simply because the team size. But tactics are also important for squads in normal conquest, or any game mode for that matter. Also, lose = to not win. Loose = not tight. Not trying to be mean here, just sort of tips on english if you aren't native.
    .
    Also, look, another assumption. It's almost as if you think I haven't thought through my opinion here and now you're just trying to pin me on non-existant points lol. Also, it's not competitive ranked play, so don't act like it is.
    .
    6. Me comparing game modes makes sense in this case. They share the name conquest. They have the same appeal as conquest. They're just on a small team scale. It's literally conquest. How people play the game mode doesn't help anything.
  • SirTerrible
    1713 postsMember, Battlefield 3, Battlefield 4, Battlefield Hardline, Battlefield, Battlefield 1, CTE, Battlefield V Member
    Hawxxeye wrote: »
    Squad conquest is a stat-pading heaven where a team of mostly friends/platoon can nonstop onesideldy farm random enemies.
    Small teams does not mix well with random matchmaking.
    The mode itself is fine but the balance is making it feel so bitter to the losing team

    i dropped a 50+ kill round and the next most on my team was 5. yeah, 10x difference from 1st to 2nd. we lost by 3. im not still heated.
  • IGF_Demonies
    1 postsMember, Battlefield, Battlefield 1, Battlefield V Member
    My problem with this gamemode is a one, key word: "Teamwork". Around 70-80% of the time, I lose games in this mode tremendously (0-120, 0-80, etc.) only because the team will not stick together... Of course, teamwork is important. It is in every mode, always was, always will be. But the pressure on teamwork is way too high in this mode. If you have this one or two guys who don't want to stick together, you lose. I hate how the mode is connected to progression... I'd rather play the normal conquest, since it isn't as hard on teamwork as this one is. I often end up losing with enemy having all 3 points captured, only to realize that their whole team is made up of lvl 50s (probably friends, which is another problem imo.) while my team has people of lvls 10-30 at most... It's really annoying, and I wish the new war theaters weren't so fixated on it. Stop forcing me to play your ¯\_(ツ)_/¯, Dice. I want to play the game and progress, not play the single worst mode (imo) in the game. That's all from me.

    P.S. If you say that I'm "just crying" and that I should "git gud", I mostly am the top person in my team and sometimes even in the whole match. I'm playing the objective, doing my duties as leader if I am one.
  • buster518
    66 postsMember, Battlefield 3, Battlefield 4, Battlefield Hardline, Battlefield, Battlefield 1, Battlefield V Member
    buster518 wrote: »

    1. I'm not assuming anything all of this is based around what I have seen in the forums and my understanding of the game over thousands of hours and 170+ into this one. There is clearly a trend happening in this situation, that being, players are forced into a game mode clearly built more competitive and they are in there to do a challenge. Unlike all the other modes this game mode is the most reliant on you as a player and your individual skill because of the small teams that is just the statistics of the matter. If you want to be successful you really have to contribute far more than you would in CQ that is a fact.
    2. People can have whatever bad impression they want about the game mode but that doesn't make the game mode bad that's the difference, it's just bad for you. Not every game mode is built for your playstyle or skill set I think we would be seeing a very different reaction from people if they weren't forced into it because many people probably wouldn't even play it or try it a couple times and stop playing it. The same thing many people already do to the other game modes, play them a couple times and then stick to what they like. People also are getting more annoyed and salty while playing it because they have to be in there for the challenege and that leads to misdirected hate at the game mode. I've seen plenty of people critique it saying it's not for them and needs improving and I'm mainly calling out the ones calling it a bad game mode because it isnt. Just like every game mode in this game it needs improvement.
    3. You're logic isnt vary good here and shows your lack of understanding. Because you compare the two modes with the 8v8 vs 32v32. You say that like it isnt a massive difference those numbers completely change how the game is played and built.
    4. I think it's clear why you dont like the game mode and it's because you think it playes the exact same as conquest. You are playing the game mode very very wrong.
    5. You say that you have to play with friends to be successful but have you put any thought into why you think that? Gee is it because it's a more complex competitive game mode that benefits far more than the others for team play. Wow that sounds just like every style of compedive ranked like play, you dont go into a ranked game mode with randoms if you arent confident in your ability to carry or just dont care if you loose and get a bad team or get a good one.
    6. Your way of comparing game modes is baffling. Youre more focused on how they share conquest in the name or that this game mode and domination have three flags "so they are similar" critiquing and saying that its domination 2.0 with vehicles is so lazy and shows you dont understand how they are very different in how the games play out.

    1. You are assuming things. Unless you're about to tell me it wasn't you who said "alot of people who dislike the game mode are coming from conquest which is a pretty casual game mode and just arent used to a more focused competitive game mode where individual skill matters more as well as working as a team." right? You didn't say that at all and you definetly didn't assume where people come from. To make things worse, you're assuming that players from such game modes, like conquest as you mentioned, are not skillful. Once again, an assumption.

    .
    2. People can have whatever thought they want, good or bad. But when a somewhat majority of the players on forums and reddit are talking about how bad it is, and the mode is not even played for pleasure, it's likely the mode right? Not to say people can't like it but, my guess is that it will end up like domination; overhyped at the beginning then steeply falling off about 2 months after it's release. We don't play battlefield for small scale battles. And you're right, we probably would be seeing different reactions if people weren't forced into it. Probably because then you'd atleast have the option to opt in and play. Therefore, players that are wanting a casual experience or play solo aren't shoehorned into a shoe that doesn't fit. Also, if you're going to keep blaming the players for the hate that the game mode got, please consider; there's a reason people don't like the mode itself. Yes, they're annoyed and salty. Yes they have to be in there for a challenge. No these do not correlate 1:1 on the scale of reasons for disliking things. They don't hate it because they have to be in there for a challenge. They have to be in there for a challenge leading them to realize the game mode isn't good.
    You can lead a horse to water but to tell the horse the water is good while it's not drinking is dumb.

    .
    3. Your* logic. You're = you are. Your = possessive.

    .
    Also, my bad. I did get the numbers off. The scaling, not so much. It's still a 4x difference. The logic is there though. The game mode is the same. Nearly everything is the same about the game modes. Only difference is the 8 players vs 32 players per team. Other than that, it's extremely identical and to say they're completely different game modes is simply incorrect. Just because it might be played differently doesn't mean it's not the same mode. To me, it feels like playing on an empty conquest server. Boring.
    .
    4. It's more that I find it boring. Again, it's like an empty server.
    .
    At this point, you're just ignoring my 4 original points. You started off keeping in line with the points, but now we're on point 5 and I only had 4. Anyway;
    .
    5.Yes. Of course I've put thought into it. And it's because the teams are so small inner communication (voice coms) is much more effective than 8 people using type to chat on the other team. The voice coms team will win in almost every case. Tactics are important here simply because the team size. But tactics are also important for squads in normal conquest, or any game mode for that matter. Also, lose = to not win. Loose = not tight. Not trying to be mean here, just sort of tips on english if you aren't native.
    .
    Also, look, another assumption. It's almost as if you think I haven't thought through my opinion here and now you're just trying to pin me on non-existant points lol. Also, it's not competitive ranked play, so don't act like it is.
    .
    6. Me comparing game modes makes sense in this case. They share the name conquest. They have the same appeal as conquest. They're just on a small team scale. It's literally conquest. How people play the game mode doesn't help anything.

    Again not assumptions. When there is a majority of playes who play conquest because that is easily the most played game mode and then you take the minority which is highly skilled or pro players. That is how it works in video games the majority Is dominated by people who are not high tier skilled players and the majority of users play in conquest those are both facts. Or are you going to tell me every single person plays good or that conquest is not the most played..
    The fact that you still say an 8 team to a 32 team is not a massive difference again shows your lack of understanding.
    It's not ranked play but shares common themes more than other game modes hence why people are not used to it especially in battlefield.
    Domination died down what? It seems like alot of players are unaware of the Esports scene that bf4 had for so long and all the clan battles that took place long after the game died down and with private servers into bf5 if we get them that will be the only community left around besides like millsims and that is exactly what happened in bf4 so your absolutely wrong here about dom dying when in reality it had a community of clans but of course you didnt knoww that because you assume to know things you dont. The only community's left around were try hard dom players and millsims.
    You might aswell say frontlines is just like breakthrough at this point and tdm like every game mode and rush like breakthrough as well your way of comparison is lazy.
    And you are basically acknowledging while also ignoring why team play is better in point 5. Squad play arent required in other game modes because the minority of good players are carrying you by being at the top of the leader board while the majority is under doing their own thing however in squad conquest that minority to carry the team is no longer there and it falls to you and your squad.

    It's simply minority vs majority
    Simple fact that the majority is not highly skilled or good
    Majority plays conquest
    I'd like to see you say either of those two statements are wrong as they are practically the thesis of my argument.
    I'm not saying good players dont exist in other game modes its just that those good players are at the top of the board and in a 32 v 32 there are many who just end up contributing far less then the guy at the top did.
    And is squad CQ you have to become that minority good player to succeed

    I'm not saying the game mode is perfect but there is a clear trend of dislike based on the fact that the majority has to become that minority of good players if they want to win because they arent getting carried by the 4 or 6 or players at the top of the leader boards in CQ
  • buster518
    66 postsMember, Battlefield 3, Battlefield 4, Battlefield Hardline, Battlefield, Battlefield 1, Battlefield V Member
    Would love to see ur stats @Sprinkles298 ;)

  • dazzaw17
    45 postsMember, Battlefield 3, Battlefield 4, Battlefield Hardline, Battlefield, Battlefield 1, BF1IncursionsAlpha, Battlefield V Member
    Trouble with this mode Ive found is, you either have all 3 points and win by loads (rarely happens for me) or the enemy has all 3 and your team gives up and you lose by loads.
  • pebjesus
    199 postsMember, Battlefield 4, Battlefield Hardline, Battlefield, Battlefield 1, Battlefield V Member
    It actually works fine, still 16 player would be ideal in my opinion.

    Its like usual, dice getting ¯\_(ツ)_/¯ done, 80%

    Pat
  • V2Face
    2687 postsMember, Battlefield 3, Battlefield 4, Battlefield Hardline, Battlefield, Battlefield 1, CTE, Battlefield V Member
    edited January 2019
    Squad Conquest is trash game mode and a check in the box for DICE. It’s essentially Domination with two tanks, dreadful. It exacerbates how terrible players are and how non existent the balancer is. Almost every match I hopped in was a stomp or a steam roll. You cannot play this mode without a squad of friends and now that I got my medic weapon, this mode is dead to me. I would have preferred capture the flag or destroy bases.
  • CSO7777
    1718 postsMember, Battlefield 3, Battlefield 4, Battlefield, Battlefield 1, CTE, BF1IncursionsAlpha, Battlefield V Member
    edited January 2019
    Coming from conquest, this is a totally other game (felt like a variant of domination). I've played 5-6 rounds thursday and almost all the matches very unbalanced.

    In a game-mode like this skill-balancing is pretty important, otherwise it can pretty quickly become stomps.

    Also it seemed like zerging was the way to go and if both teams do this, well it will not be very much fun (unless the 'zergs' meet once in a while).

    The maps also seemed off somehow. Arras was especially awful with a lot of camping and lone-wolfing (in the games I played, which was only 2 on Arras), there was too much cover somehow.

    But perhaps when players learn to play the game-mode things will improve. We have to play it to unlock weapons in this week and in one of the upcoming weeks as well I think.
  • SirTerrible
    1713 postsMember, Battlefield 3, Battlefield 4, Battlefield Hardline, Battlefield, Battlefield 1, CTE, Battlefield V Member
    Rotterdam Squad CQ is hilariously unbalanced. One side gets basically instant access to two flags and then the other side is stuck trying to push 3 lanes that are super easy to defend. Could be a decent mode if DICE put some decent thought into it.
  • GeneralXIV
    286 postsMember, Battlefield, Battlefield 1, Battlefield V Member
    I admit squad conquest isnt my favorite mode in the game. I think part of the problem is that Im forced to play it to complete the tides of war, rather than being able to discover it in my own time and play it whenever I like. Its like... idk, playing the mode to unlock things rather than unlocking things while playing the mode?

    I think the other part of the problem for me is the game mode itself. Ive played quite a few games by now to unlock the gun and Ive only ever had two scenarios

    Scenario 1: Team 1 is able to gain all 3 flags and push Team 2 back to their spawn. A few people on Team 2 quit, leading to an a game that cant be won. Team 1 wins without any issues (Ive never been on the receiving end of this, but when your team has all of the flags its quite boring. You never see any enemies tbh)

    Scenario 2: Team 1 gains 2 of the flags. Whenever Team 1 moves to take the final flag, Team 2 take one of theirs. This leads to endless running between flags which are immediately recaptured when you leave the area.

    It just doesnt strike me as particularly varied or interesting. Now I have the gun, I probably won't play it again unless I have to for other challenges.

    Tbh, Im hoping they will be a little more creative with future game modes. Instead of making conquest tiny... idk. If they took the skiing from the singleplayer they could have a mode like capture the flag on skis. That would be fun. Or an all-plane dogfight mode. Just something to add more variety?
  • Prep768
    3470 postsMember, Battlefield 4, Battlefield Hardline, Battlefield, Battlefield 1, CTE, Battlefield V Member
    Lone wolfing this mode is not the way to go
    We had 6 of us on either side - t bagging is not dead
  • moosehunter1969
    1108 postsMember, Battlefield 3, Battlefield 4, Battlefield Hardline, Battlefield, Battlefield 1, CTE, Battlefield V Member
    buster518 wrote: »
    It's not that I'm in love with this game mode I definitely prefer domination or even regular conquest I just find the community really toxic hating on it because they arent used to it
    buster518 wrote: »
    It seems like alot of people who dislike the game mode are coming from conquest which is a pretty casual game mode and just arent used to a more focused competitive game mode where individual skill matters more as well as working as a team. Coupled with challenges that players are forced to do in the mode they arent used or just too casual for leads to more hate for the mode.
    buster518 wrote: »
    No I'm calling the cry babies cry babies because instead of giving constructive critacism they call the game mode trash in the forums after being out for only one day.

    I can't begin to tell you how wrong these statements are.
    .
    1. You all assume that players don't like it because they're not good enough or they're just bad/not used to it. It's almost as if people can have a bad impression of a new thing, even if they're good at that new thing. They can also have a good impression of that new thing, even if they're bad at that new thing. Opinions do not align with skills. For instance, I am pretty good at strategy games, but I don't enjoy playing them. I'm also pretty bad at competitive shooters and I don't really like them. I'm also pretty bad at COD Zombies, but I enjoy playing it.
    2. It's crazy to me how @buster518 is saying the community is "toxic" just for saying they don't like it. It's almost as if everyone's entitled to an opinion on something, especially if they don't like it.
    3. It's weird that you say it's because they aren't used to it then make the assumption that all these players are coming from conquest. No. Some of us came from Frontlines. Others from Domination, Breakthrough, everything. Conquest is the closest we have to Squad... CONQUEST. It plays out the exact same way, just on a 16v16 scale instead of 64v64 (difference in scale of 4x)
    4. What I find the worst about this entire thread is you sit there wanting actual constructive criticism while calling those that *you* don't believe gave constructive criticism "crybabies" and "toxic". When in reality the only toxic thing here is you acting like it's an attack.
    .
    We are literally just saying we don't like/don't prefer the game mode. We don't have to justify that. Sure, it would help if we did, but we don't have to. In fact, nobody has to. But when it comes down to it, criticism doesn't help something that's fundamentally broken. At this point, most players are complaining about a few things; lack of players, the fact you have to play with friends in order to be successful (many players play solo and get matched with randoms), and the mode feels like Domination with vehicles. So what else are they supposed to do? "Constructively critique?" I don't think it's possible for something to change when it's core idea is what people don't like.

    It’s the people saying it’s trash or garbage he’s getting at. They don’t like it therefore it’s garbage. That’s toxic whatever way you look at it. Personally I like it it makes a nice change. It took me, not a good player, about 3 hours to unlock the gun, It’s hardly a chore.
  • Astr0damus
    2904 postsMember, Battlefield 3, Battlefield 4, Battlefield, Battlefield 1, CTE, Battlefield V Member
    full951 wrote: »
    some times when it's just your sqaud and there's not a big team around to pin the loss on. people don't like it

    In another thread regarding the Squad Death Match mode (5 vs 15 or in other words, each squad is against the other two 5 man squads) I said I would love for that mode to come back. That was hecka-fun. I have nothing against small modes.. but Squad Conquest with vehicles when most are playing medic doesn't seem that fun to me. That's all.. more power to you if you like this mode. I took slight offense at OP calling big-CQ "casual mode"... that descriptor is whack. To me, Casual mode is TDM... like CoD, run around corners and whomever fires first wins.
  • Astr0damus
    2904 postsMember, Battlefield 3, Battlefield 4, Battlefield, Battlefield 1, CTE, Battlefield V Member
    buster518 wrote: »

    I can't begin to tell you how wrong these statements are.
    .

    THIS IS A LONG ONE BUT IF ANYTHING READ POINTS 4,5, AND 6.

    @Sprinkles298
    1. None of this is an assumption. It's based on my thousands of hours experiance and 170+ in BFV as well as reading through many forums straight up condeming the game mode who then also will say something like "I'm sticking to CQ" or what have you. People say all the time that CQ is casual and people who play it and love it say its causal. Its shouldn't be news to anyone that conquest is extremely casual so when a challenge forces a mass of people into a game mode that is clearly more competitive in the way it is built it is no wonder that we are seeing a bunch of threads saying it sucks complaining about team balancing all of a sudden. If you guys cant acknowledge a skill gap then you'll never get better. Dice themselves have said they have issues keeping/aquiring new players because of the learning curve. And as many people say conquest is the niche that draws new people in so yes its casual.

    Bruh... some modes are simply not fun for some people.. it's not about casual vs. skill. For instance, the Supply Drop mode was one I played only once, because I could quickly see how fun it was for weirdos to hide somewhere and wait for player after player to try to make it to the ONE objective on the map. It was like Crocodiles in the river waiting for the Zebra to cross. It was like shooting fish in a barrel or whatever euphemism you want to use. Extremely fun for the camper to aim at the supply drop and wait for someone to come into their kill-zone, but extremely frustrating to be the team that has to actually secure it.
    How fun could it be if you know the enemy has to come to the exact GPS coordinate 526327554 ? That is the pure definition of casual to me.
    It was a turkey-shoot.

    Squad Conquest has some of those same attributes, the capture points are so small, and there are only three, so you know exactly where to train your scope if you are the sort that loves to lay on rocks and camp.

    But as I said in the previous post.. if you like it.. good! Play it until your heart's content.. my only objection is that Large CQ is not casual (at least not to me).

Sign In or Register to comment.