Please remove Underground Breakthrough from existence.

Comments

  • Hawxxeye
    8039 postsMember, Battlefield 3, Battlefield 4, Battlefield Hardline, Battlefield, Battlefield 1, CTE, BF1IncursionsAlpha, Battlefield V Member
    Hawxxeye wrote: »
    The guys who are good at camping are always the winners in this map regardless of side.
    This demo man at 2:43 is how I feel like when I try to play the objective and  attack on this map:image

    can we get that feature, Vote on scramble player?
    If only we could
  • Violent_Rumble
    444 postsMember, Battlefield 3, Battlefield 4, Battlefield, Battlefield 1, Battlefield V Member
    Remove it? So because you don't like it, it should be removed?

    Man grow up. Just don't play it, Stop trying to ruin everyone else's fun.
    This ^
    If you don't like it don't play it
  • jroggs
    1238 postsMember, Battlefield 4, Battlefield, Battlefield 1, CTE, Battlefield V Member
    Remove it? So because you don't like it, it should be removed?

    Man grow up. Just don't play it, Stop trying to ruin everyone else's fun.

    Underground isn't bad in a "this isn't my favorite and I'd rather play other maps" way. It's bad in a "holy crap this is a genuinely miserable experience that is practically a war crime against fun" way.

    And you may have noticed DICE has precedent for removing unliked content from BFV.

    Personally, I'd rather see the map get fixed rather than deleted. If that's not going to happen, then retain it for private games or a separate self-contained 24 hour playlist for the people who do like it for some reason. But yes, absolutely remove it from the standard map rotations.

    Oh, and telling someone to "grow up" because you don't agree with them isn't the most mature move, either.
  • ackers75
    2652 postsMember, Battlefield 3, Battlefield 4, Battlefield Hardline, Battlefield, Battlefield 1, Battlefield V Member
    How do you get such a poor frame rate on a map that’s basically full of corridors?
  • Hawxxeye
    8039 postsMember, Battlefield 3, Battlefield 4, Battlefield Hardline, Battlefield, Battlefield 1, CTE, BF1IncursionsAlpha, Battlefield V Member
    Remove it? So because you don't like it, it should be removed?

    Man grow up. Just don't play it, Stop trying to ruin everyone else's fun.
    This highlights the lack of choice on the map rotation among other things
  • R1ckyDaMan19
    556 postsMember, Battlefield 3, Battlefield 4, Battlefield, Battlefield 1, Battlefield V Member
    I'd remove Operation Underground completely given how pathetic the performance is on this bad boy

    This. I loaded it up this morning after having to reinstall the game just to get the update and was shocked how bad fps drops were, no other map in the game gives me fps drops like that.
  • mf_shro0m
    2362 postsMember, Battlefield 4, Battlefield Hardline, Battlefield, Battlefield 1, Battlefield V Member
    The last sector is beyond stupid. There's 500 tickets, one flag, only one real direction to attack from and all the exits have blind corners and light so bright attackers can't see anything out the doors. It's a literal shooting gallery.

    DICE themselves knows it's badly balanced, because they gave attackers 500 tickets on such a small map.

    I have never seen the "winning" team just quit when they have over 300 tickets on the final sector until today. It was 32 v 32, and by the time we were down to 250 tickets it was 22 v 32. It took 20 minutes or more ON JUST THAT SECTOR to get down to those 250 tickets and we were making 0 progress. What a joke of a map.

    Also, as an unrelated sidenote Spotting Flares are utterly useless on this map because they don't work indoors (they have a range of like 1m), and the scope is too long range to use effectively in a CQB map. Basically Recon is at a complete and total disadvantage with weapons that are weak in CQB and gadgets that are actually useless. At least the weapons are a personal choice, but gadgets should be at least somewhat viable regardless of the map.

    They need to tweak the contrast for sure but the last sector isn’t that bad if the attackers’ squad leaders use their smoke with decent efficacy
  • mf_shro0m
    2362 postsMember, Battlefield 4, Battlefield Hardline, Battlefield, Battlefield 1, Battlefield V Member
    Claypole1 wrote: »
    On one game of Breakthrough, as defenders we lost the first objective in about 60 seconds, and managed to take hardly any tickets from the attackers. We put up some resistance underground, but with 600 tickets to play with, and a rather soft final objective, winning wasn't really option.

    On another game, as attackers, we really struggled to take the first objective, but it made for quite an epic battle. It probably cost us a couple of hundred tickets, but we still ended up winning the match with plenty to spare.

    It's a bit of an odd "re-imagined" map. The above ground, outdoor sections are not true to the original. The underground section is too small, and serves to just as a flavour of the original. As already mentioned, Conquest just feels like Frontlines, with most of the match taking place around B. 

    I do think the BF5 graphics let this map down a bit, the tube trains look like they are rendered as background scenery. 


    However, it's not a bad map, and certainly doesn't deserve to be 'removed from existance'.


    Personally I really like the outside parts. The underground bit could be a bit bigger and there needs to be more attacking routes for A but overall I’m liking the diversity of the map.
  • larry_54235
    270 postsMember, Battlefield 3, Battlefield 4, Battlefield Hardline, Battlefield, Battlefield 1, CTE, Battlefield V Member
    jroggs said:
    It's not just Breakthrough. My review of Operation Underground for BT and Conquest: It's bad. So very, very bad.

    Let's start with Breakthrough. The attackers get 600 tickets and there are three secto- hold on. 600 tickets? SIX HUNDRED TICKETS? For three sectors of BREAKTHROUGH? Holy mother of God.

    The first sector is fought on the streets with one objective, and the defenders stand zero chance of defending. The next sector is fought in the tunnels with two objectives to capture. This is potentially the best or worst part of the map; more on that later. Once the attackers win here, the last sector is fought in a plaza of what looks to be a NatSoc party headquarters.

    My first round was as the attackers. We pretty much steamrolled the defenders and finished with about 550 tickets left. This is pretty stupid, but it was a mercy compared to what happened when I played on the defending team.

    The attackers immediately overran us in the first sector, but their attack stalled on the second sector, allowing us to dig in. The limited number of paths allowed 32 of us to pretty much defend just two rooms. And we did. FOR 45 MINUTES. Not including the start of the match, it was a 40 minute stalemate. We didn't even run out the attackers' tickets. We straight up ran out of time. It was so astoundingly boring that I don't think I will ever willingly play this map again in this mode until they fix it.

    Up next was Conquest, what we all were waiting for. And this was probably the biggest disappointment. It's almost completely linear, with just three objectives. Only one of those objectives is underground, and in a completely baffling design choice the other two objectives literally touch the out-of-bounds team spawns. It's practically a Frontlines match, in the worst way. And how many tickets for this three objective infantry-only map? Why, 900 of course!

    My team captured A and B immediately. Once more, stalemate set in and pretty much nothing changed in terms of objectives until the very end of the match. Even when I broke through the chokepoints, it was only to run outside into a blinding sun where an MMG camper hiding well behind the front lines or an enemy jogging from the rear objective usually cut me down. That underwater passage serves pretty much no purpose, as it's underneath B and runs perpendicular to the map. Halfway through, I already felt like I never wanted to play Underground ever again on any mode.

    Bad players will describe this map as having "explosive spam." That's inaccurate. It's an EVERYTHING-spam map. Grenades, AT rounds, smoke, ammo, health, revives, and lots and lots and lots of spraying bullets. Some people might love this, and you'll see some people start posting "epic flanks" where they snuck through and killed a ton of enemies looking the wrong way. But it's an overall brainless spam session.

    DICE needs to take this map down and rebuild it. They need to open up more avenues of approach and attack, add more objectives and move the team spawns back, and for the love of God lower the number of tickets.

    What a disappointment.
    I hear you on the 3 flags thing. There should be 5 flags.  This would spread the fighting out.  A tank for either side on the top side of the map. Where you enter the underground for conquest their seams to be allot of space above the subway unused. Just my 2 cents.
  • RamFrog
    121 postsMember, Battlefield 3, Battlefield 4, Battlefield, Battlefield 1, Battlefield V Member
    For that last challenge ( 20 000 score in Undderground) I thought that the flare gun was way to go. My team was defending on breakthrough and I just spammed the flares. Effectively the whole enemy team was spotted for the whole game. They never took the first sector and I got the Madsen lmg and was second on the scoreboard with only a few kills. I won't be playing breakthrough on this map again.
  • Hawxxeye
    8039 postsMember, Battlefield 3, Battlefield 4, Battlefield Hardline, Battlefield, Battlefield 1, CTE, BF1IncursionsAlpha, Battlefield V Member
    RamFrog said:
    For that last challenge ( 20 000 score in Undderground) I thought that the flare gun was way to go. My team was defending on breakthrough and I just spammed the flares. Effectively the whole enemy team was spotted for the whole game. They never took the first sector and I got the Madsen lmg and was second on the scoreboard with only a few kills. I won't be playing breakthrough on this map again.
    I got like 18500 points just that round I decided to flare spam here. I ended up on the top of the scoreboard making a mockery of the kill farmers
  • A_al_K_pacino_A
    1200 postsMember, Battlefield 4, Battlefield, Battlefield 1, CTE, Battlefield V Member
    Like the rest of the game it's poorly balanced.

  • trip1ex
    5332 postsMember, Battlefield 3, Battlefield 4, Battlefield, Battlefield 1, CTE, BF1IncursionsAlpha, Battlefield V Member
    looks like fun.

    I enjoyed  Metro quite a bit in BF3 at least with 32 players in Rush/Conquest.  
  • A_al_K_pacino_A
    1200 postsMember, Battlefield 4, Battlefield, Battlefield 1, CTE, Battlefield V Member
    trip1ex wrote: »
    looks like fun.

    I enjoyed  Metro quite a bit in BF3 at least with 32 players in Rush/Conquest.  

    It's ok but the ticket count is stupid. If they think 600 tickets is the correct amount something else is wrong.
  • A_al_K_pacino_A
    1200 postsMember, Battlefield 4, Battlefield, Battlefield 1, CTE, Battlefield V Member
    And I'll add, and this isn't a game problem, about 2 people actually want to defend on the final sector. Everyone is in the station trying to get a few kills while the objective is being lost.
  • GRAW2ROBZ
    2641 postsMember, Battlefield 3, Battlefield 4, Battlefield Hardline, Battlefield, Battlefield 1, Battlefield V Member
    jroggs said:
    It's not just Breakthrough. My review of Operation Underground for BT and Conquest: It's bad. So very, very bad.

    Let's start with Breakthrough. The attackers get 600 tickets and there are three secto- hold on. 600 tickets? SIX HUNDRED TICKETS? For three sectors of BREAKTHROUGH? Holy mother of God.

    The first sector is fought on the streets with one objective, and the defenders stand zero chance of defending. The next sector is fought in the tunnels with two objectives to capture. This is potentially the best or worst part of the map; more on that later. Once the attackers win here, the last sector is fought in a plaza of what looks to be a NatSoc party headquarters.

    My first round was as the attackers. We pretty much steamrolled the defenders and finished with about 550 tickets left. This is pretty stupid, but it was a mercy compared to what happened when I played on the defending team.

    The attackers immediately overran us in the first sector, but their attack stalled on the second sector, allowing us to dig in. The limited number of paths allowed 32 of us to pretty much defend just two rooms. And we did. FOR 45 MINUTES. Not including the start of the match, it was a 40 minute stalemate. We didn't even run out the attackers' tickets. We straight up ran out of time. It was so astoundingly boring that I don't think I will ever willingly play this map again in this mode until they fix it.

    Up next was Conquest, what we all were waiting for. And this was probably the biggest disappointment. It's almost completely linear, with just three objectives. Only one of those objectives is underground, and in a completely baffling design choice the other two objectives literally touch the out-of-bounds team spawns. It's practically a Frontlines match, in the worst way. And how many tickets for this three objective infantry-only map? Why, 900 of course!

    My team captured A and B immediately. Once more, stalemate set in and pretty much nothing changed in terms of objectives until the very end of the match. Even when I broke through the chokepoints, it was only to run outside into a blinding sun where an MMG camper hiding well behind the front lines or an enemy jogging from the rear objective usually cut me down. That underwater passage serves pretty much no purpose, as it's underneath B and runs perpendicular to the map. Halfway through, I already felt like I never wanted to play Underground ever again on any mode.

    Bad players will describe this map as having "explosive spam." That's inaccurate. It's an EVERYTHING-spam map. Grenades, AT rounds, smoke, ammo, health, revives, and lots and lots and lots of spraying bullets. Some people might love this, and you'll see some people start posting "epic flanks" where they snuck through and killed a ton of enemies looking the wrong way. But it's an overall brainless spam session.

    DICE needs to take this map down and rebuild it. They need to open up more avenues of approach and attack, add more objectives and move the team spawns back, and for the love of God lower the number of tickets.

    What a disappointment.
    I hear you on the 3 flags thing. There should be 5 flags.  This would spread the fighting out.  A tank for either side on the top side of the map. Where you enter the underground for conquest their seams to be allot of space above the subway unused. Just my 2 cents.
    That's probably my only gripe.  3 flags is a bit lite.  I do love the multiple hallways on each side of the tracks for flanking.  BF3/BF4 metro hardly had any flank routes and made it a bit of a stalemate till you got the jailbreak to enemy base.
  • Squad_Cohesion
    910 postsMember, Battlefield 3, Battlefield 4, Battlefield, Battlefield 1, Battlefield V Member
    trip1ex said:
    looks like fun.

    I enjoyed  Metro quite a bit in BF3 at least with 32 players in Rush/Conquest.  

    I think its outright stupid of DICE we dont get 32p, 24p on this map.
  • Desyatnik_Pansy
    1484 postsMember, Battlefield 3, Battlefield 4, Battlefield, Battlefield 1, Battlefield V Member
    My only major problem with the map is the lighting on the final sector trying to leave the metro. IIRC BF3 Had the same problem back in the day but you had 3D Spotting, T-UGS And auto-spotting when firing an unsuppressed gun. Arguably it's better that we have more options to actually leave the metro than BF3 But it's still not enjoyable running blindly into the unknown. Otherwise I enjoy the map on both CQ and Breakthrough from the few games I've played.
Sign In or Register to comment.