What's so great about Operations?

«1
KriZ_Rul3Z
278 postsMember, Battlefield 3, Battlefield 4, Battlefield, Battlefield 1, BF1IncursionsAlpha Member
Operations is a popular mode in the game, and will be making a comeback in BFV. It is my favorite mode in BF1, because it is the closest to BF4's rush mode we have.

But what's the hype all about? Isn't it just a worse version of BF4's rush mode? Let's look at its unique features and compare with BF4 rush:

- Multiple maps: no big issue there, though with the balance issues this results in either A) the second map never being played, or B) in the rare case that the attackers make progress, the defenders having to take a huge steamroll for 2 maps instead of BF4's 1 map, after which teams could be rebalanced.
Winner: BF4 rush

- Multiple waves: I don't see any advantage over BF4's rush, with a big downside that games can take ages without the attackers making any progress. BF4 rush was a lot shorter and more intense.
Winner: BF4 rush

- Capping zones: getting lots of enemies in a point is rather lame compared to the thrill of a single guy rushing to the MCOM to charge it, the entire team rushing in to defend the charges etc... blowing up MCOM's in BF4 rush was a lot more intense, with lots more strategic options and challenges.
Winner: BF4 rush

- Behemoths: ... need I say more?
Winner: BF4 rush


Just my opinion, I don't see what the big deal is. It's a fun mode, but only because we don't have the better alternative from before anymore.

Comments

  • MissCommissar
    403 postsMember, Battlefield 3, Battlefield 4, Battlefield, Battlefield 1, CTE, BF1IncursionsAlpha Member
    BF4 rush - boring, usualy unbalanced, has nothing interesting behind (history and storywise).

    Operations are great, they toally feel like a real war action, speically in WWI surroundings.

    Small and fast gamemods are really boring and in my view belong to CoD, not to Battlefield.
  • dA_9_eL_81
    1443 postsMember, Battlefield 3, Battlefield 4, Battlefield Hardline, Battlefield, Battlefield 1, CTE Member
    KriZ_Rul3Z wrote: »
    Operations is a popular mode in the game, and will be making a comeback in BFV. It is my favorite mode in BF1, because it is the closest to BF4's rush mode we have.

    But what's the hype all about? Isn't it just a worse version of BF4's rush mode? Let's look at its unique features and compare with BF4 rush:

    - Multiple maps: no big issue there, though with the balance issues this results in either A) the second map never being played, or B) in the rare case that the attackers make progress, the defenders having to take a huge steamroll for 2 maps instead of BF4's 1 map, after which teams could be rebalanced.
    Winner: BF4 rush

    - Multiple waves: I don't see any advantage over BF4's rush, with a big downside that games can take ages without the attackers making any progress. BF4 rush was a lot shorter and more intense.
    Winner: BF4 rush

    - Capping zones: getting lots of enemies in a point is rather lame compared to the thrill of a single guy rushing to the MCOM to charge it, the entire team rushing in to defend the charges etc... blowing up MCOM's in BF4 rush was a lot more intense, with lots more strategic options and challenges.
    Winner: BF4 rush

    - Behemoths: ... need I say more?
    Winner: BF4 rush


    Just my opinion, I don't see what the big deal is. It's a fun mode, but only because we don't have the better alternative from before anymore.

    Dude... you´re clearly comparing apples & oranges. You can not compare Operations with Rush across two entire different games for obvious reasons...
    That like saying my stationcar is trash because it cant get 0-100 km/h in 2.7 seconds like a Ferrari 599 GTO.

    Truth is... Rush gamemode was murdered in BF1 by the devs... maybe on purpose to get the playerbase into Operations? Either way get your tinfoilhats out.....
  • Zz_Nabu_zZ
    319 postsMember, Battlefield 3, Battlefield 4, Battlefield Hardline, Battlefield, Battlefield 1, CTE, BF1IncursionsAlpha Member
    Operations are just big shoke points were everyone spam explosives, no thinking needed.
    When you see the most played map on BF3/BF4, Metro and Locker, it's not a surprise this game mode is popular.
    I just stay away from it.
  • Sword-of-Cyric
    351 postsMember, Battlefield 3, Battlefield 4, Battlefield Hardline, Battlefield, Battlefield 1, CTE, BF1IncursionsAlpha Member
    edited May 17
    Nothing. A boring soul crushing grind you are forced to do if you want 100% codex completion.

    I'd like to grind 1 ops BP per day, but never get better than 1 every three days, because i can not stand playing this #####

    I'd prefer a "send a video banging your head against a wall till you bleed" requirements over having to mindlessly semi-afk endure operations to grind the russian axe
  • von_Campenstein
    5611 postsMember, Battlefield 3, Battlefield 4, Battlefield, Battlefield 1, CTE Member
    It's a target rich environment.
  • azelenkin0306
    372 postsMember, Battlefield, Battlefield 1, CTE Member
    Operations is popular because people only have to pay attention to one direction. Easy mode for campers and Snipers. If you want to go on Massive Kill Streaks with little effort you play Operations.

    Agree and disagree. CQ in BF3 and BF4 worked fine, because there were no any historical background behind these battles. Every map was an arena, where two teams fight for points. In BF1 almost every map has a historical background and thus Operations is the most authentic mode for this era.

    What's the point of Conquest in BF1 battles - to charge from trenches and then come back, because some smart **** jumped out of the plane and captured the base flag.

    Campers are everywhere, even in TDM. Agree, than in OPs it's easier to farm and DICE has provided all necessary tools to do it - narrow capture zones, Sweet Spot for Scoped rifles, flat open maps and objectives (for example, 2nd sector on Fao Fortress or the whole Galicia), Ilya Muromets, Mortar trucks and etc.

    I really liked OPs, but with all DICE's updates and tweaks currently it's frustrating to play. But IMHO even in its current state, OPs is much better than Conquest.
  • azelenkin0306
    372 postsMember, Battlefield, Battlefield 1, CTE Member
    edited May 17
    Zz_Nabu_zZ wrote: »
    Operations are just big shoke points were everyone spam explosives, no thinking needed.
    When you see the most played map on BF3/BF4, Metro and Locker, it's not a surprise this game mode is popular.
    I just stay away from it.

    I like this mode, because it is the most authentic mode for this era. The WW1 battles were fought like that: charge, push, retreat, charge and etc. What's the point of calling maps with historical names, if you're running in circles on it capturing some stupid flags?

    And I am really curious - what kind of thinking is needed in CQ? Jump out from the plane and capture the base flag/flank a bunch of noobs/take fast car and drive the enemy's base flag?

    Please correct, if I am wrong, but IMHO Conquest is just a big TDM arena with flags. In Ops you at least have some goal to achieve, like capture the fortified position or bunkers filled with soldiers

    I am not saying that OPs is perfect, but at least it's much more rewarding than CQ.

    IMHO, the biggest problem with OPs is that they were designed based on previous TTK without zero-skill bombers and Mortar trucks. Also, some OPs were definitely designed for 40 players, not for 64.

  • TheGM86
    588 postsMember, Battlefield 3, Battlefield 4, Battlefield Hardline, Battlefield, Battlefield 1, CTE Member
    Because it is better than Walkquest.
  • Narfiam
    24 postsMember, Battlefield, Battlefield 1 Member
    edited May 17
    I mainly play operations because is the closest thing to war with a defined front line. Conquest mode is people running like headless chickens and being killed so often from behind, in addition many games become a carousel to capture points. Take A, run to B, take B, run to C, Take C, enemie team is taking A because almost nobody stay and defend, etc. etc. and reset the loop. In operations sometimes happens but is a bit less annoying IMO due the more defined front line. I only play conquest to play some maps that are not presents in operations, like Passechendaele.
  • NLBartmaN
    1768 postsMember, Battlefield, Battlefield 1, CTE Member
    The great part: it "feels" like war with the front line and I like the feeling of giving it all I got to take or keep a sector.

    On Conquest you can just avoid the danger and move with your Platoon to another flag, you can't do that on Operations, if you want to win or keep up your stats, you need to jump into the action.

    On Operations you can really make a difference if you change strategy or weapon, you see the whole battle change place and tactics when some player or squad is trying a different road and strategy.

    Seeing 200 tickets gone in minutes without taking any ground and taking the last sector with only a couple of tickets left by changing strategy is just great fun.

    The game mode has it flaws and can be annoying if no one is willing to attack or defend (should be some changes that "motivate" people more to do that) but still the best game mode for me.
  • KriZ_Rul3Z
    278 postsMember, Battlefield 3, Battlefield 4, Battlefield, Battlefield 1, BF1IncursionsAlpha Member
    The point of the thread wasn't to discuss conquest vs. operations. I wanted to see what was so special about operations compared to the old style rush of BF4 that in my eyes is a lot better than operations.
  • CS-2107
    1384 postsMember, Battlefield, Battlefield 1, CTE, BF1IncursionsAlpha Member
    Operation is great in therms of the whole feeling. Music, sounds, everything is on point. The problem I have with the mode, is that it is unbalanced and the defenders always have the upper hand on all maps. On some more than on others, but there is no single map that is easy to win for the attackers or at least challenging for the defenders.
    But the mode has over conquest, that it gets the action all into a small zone for 64 players, which is hectic and completly awesome.
  • gzcnrtr
    19 postsMember, Battlefield 3, Battlefield 4, Battlefield, Battlefield 1, CTE Member
    Operations is popular because people only have to pay attention to one direction. Easy mode for campers and Snipers. If you want to go on Massive Kill Streaks with little effort you play Operations.

    Thats how battles are fought u know. Conquest is too random and rush has fewer players.

    Operations are the best thing ever happened to bf series. Can’t wait for BFV ops.
  • Goofy-The-Sc0t
    1124 postsMember, Battlefield 3, Battlefield 4, Battlefield Hardline, Battlefield, Battlefield 1, CTE Member
    Ive prefered Frontlines over Ops since they released it with TSNP, just feels a bit more strategic and less meat-grindery to me....... not that im saying thats a bad thing, each to their own :) 40 player Ops was better imho
  • marcanthony421
    46 postsMember, Battlefield 4, Battlefield, Battlefield 1, CTE Member
    Operations allows you to feel like your fighting uphill if youre attacking or like you must hold the line on defense. Yes, most games are unbalanced and it gets very grindy but thats only due to a dwindling player base. Back when ops were first added to the server browser I had some of the most fun games I’ve hard in BF1. I’m talking struggles over every inch. In a brand new game, full player base, ops will be amazing.
  • trip1ex
    3503 postsMember, Battlefield 3, Battlefield 4, Battlefield, Battlefield 1, CTE, BF1IncursionsAlpha Member
    edited May 17
    Operations is a worse version of Conquest. I never looked at it as a worse version of Rush too. But it makes sense. Good job OP.

    From reading the official BF:V page, it looks like Operations in BFV will mix up flag caps and mcoms ( and maybe more) from sector to sector and iterate and evolve what Frontlines did with flags as objectives first and then at the end for the finale it switched the objectives to Mcoms.
  • theONEFORCE
    2685 postsMember, Battlefield 3, Battlefield 4, Battlefield Hardline, Battlefield, Battlefield 1, CTE, BF1IncursionsAlpha Member
    GoofyMC123 wrote: »
    Ive prefered Frontlines over Ops since they released it with TSNP, just feels a bit more strategic and less meat-grindery to me....... not that im saying thats a bad thing, each to their own :) 40 player Ops was better imho

    If camping in previous sectors is strategic, then yes, Frontlines is strategic.
  • MUH_Cwywardwaah
    1065 postsMember, Battlefield 3, Battlefield, Battlefield 1, CTE, BF1IncursionsAlpha Member
    TheGM86 wrote: »
    Because it is better than Walkquest.

    You mean ZergQuest
Sign In or Register to comment.