5 v 5 is so much better than 32 v 32

seanfitzg
2 postsMember, Battlefield 3, Battlefield 4, Battlefield, Battlefield 1, Battlefield V Member
edited March 2020
Played 5 v 5 Rush last night on Fort de Vaux and it was superb.  I'm fairly new to BF1, so I'm no Pro, but this was such good fun.  So much better than Conquest, mainly because of the small amount of players that had to work together, rather than running around like crazy in the 32v32 modes. 



Post edited by seanfitzg on

Comments

  • disposalist
    8994 postsMember, Battlefield 3, Battlefield 4, Battlefield, Battlefield 1, CTE, BF1IncursionsAlpha Member
    edited March 2020
    It's only better if you get 2 good teams and the chances of that are not great with 32 and get much less with 5.

    I'm glad you had a good experience, but, not for me.

    In BF4 I loved Rush. In BF1 it wasn't so popular with me or most others and I think that was largely because of the smaller teams. With 20, even, all you needed was a few people not contributing and your team was screwed.

    Battlefield is all about large-scale, multi-discipline battles. Infantry *and* tanks, transport, planes, boats, etc. make BF one step ahead of the other shooters (well, it did until BF5).

    A small amount of players coordinating in Conquest (a squad!) is immense fun and can tame that chaos.
  • Titan_Awaken
    1344 postsMember, Battlefield, Battlefield 1, CTE, BF1IncursionsAlpha, Battlefield V Member
    A 5v5 mode was introduced through BF1 Incursions but it wasn't popular with the community so DICE shut it down. That should tell you all you need to know about the state of 5v5 in Battlefield. 

    Bottom line is that people come to Battlefield for the large 32v32 modes like Operations and Conquest. 
  • trip1ex
    5299 postsMember, Battlefield 3, Battlefield 4, Battlefield, Battlefield 1, CTE, BF1IncursionsAlpha, Battlefield V Member
    edited March 2020
    I feel you.  Not sure about BF1, but in BF4 on our Oblit server, we have fun when it's just 5v5.  When you get players that play for the objective and know what they are doing enough to get back into the action quick and you get to use vehicles more frequently on the vehicle maps and the enemy isn't constantly on top of you 24/7 so you can roam around more, it can quite a bit of fun actually.  These days I enjoy 8v8 - 10v10 type matches in Obliteration in BF4 more than when the server is full at 16v16.    There is more room to outthink players.  Whereas when it's overloaded with players, you can't really do as much of that because there is always someone watching from somewhere.  
  • Jagick
    14 postsMember, Battlefield 3, Battlefield 4, Battlefield, Battlefield 1, Battlefield V Member
    I disagree and I hope it remains gone going forward. Every new battlefield release skews more towards Call of Duty and I'm getting tired of it. This series has always been and needs to remain combined arms warfare with a large number of players, preferably on larger non-linear maps.
  • MogwaiWarrior
    971 postsMember, Battlefield 3, Battlefield 4, Battlefield Hardline, Battlefield, Battlefield 1, CTE, Battlefield V Member
    32V32 is the only way to go in BF. Sorry, but if you like 5V5 then you should stick to other games.
  • Skill4Reel
    393 postsMember, Battlefield 3, Battlefield 4, Battlefield Hardline, Battlefield, Battlefield 1, CTE, Battlefield V Member
    Team work has nothing to do with the amount of players that are on a server.  disposalist already said it.  Two good teams of 32 playing against each other is amazing.  I keep saying it over and over on these boards in hopes that DICE is listening, but they should be focusing on creating a ranked area for platoons where the team oriented players that have fun trying to win can constantly be on servers together. 

    I remember when Battlefield on consoles was 12 Vs 12 in conquest and how people were saying then how teamwork would be much better when the games were 32 Vs 32 as on PC.  Well...here we are three to four Battlefield games later with 64 player servers, and people are still complaining about a lack of teamwork in matches.  That is because player count has never been as important in creating quality matches as is having decent players on both teams.  Why is it so difficult for people to see that we need actual teams for a team game like this to be fun and rewarding.
Sign In or Register to comment.