In the Battlefield 1 Incursions Closed Alpha? If you're unable to see the forums, log out and log back in.
Having trouble accessing the forums? Try logging out of the forums completely - clear cache, cookies, and temp files - then restart the browser and log in. Thanks!

Why quitting games in Conquest will save your life.

13»

Comments

  • Wikingjaeger
    76 postsMember, Battlefield 3, Battlefield 4, Battlefield, Battlefield 1 Member
    Need Quit ratio on Tracker!

    This should be a thing, but should be a difference between "Quit" and "Server Disconnect"
  • realistalive
    606 postsMember, Battlefield 3, Battlefield 4, Battlefield, Battlefield 1, CTE, BF1IncursionsAlpha Member
    Need Quit ratio on Tracker!

    This should be a thing, but should be a difference between "Quit" and "Server Disconnect"

    brb pulling the ethernet cable out whenever I want to quit but don't want it to count as one.
  • fisknyllet17
    1015 postsMember, Battlefield 3, Battlefield 4, Battlefield Hardline, Battlefield, Battlefield 1 Member
    Need Quit ratio on Tracker!

    This should be a thing, but should be a difference between "Quit" and "Server Disconnect"

    brb pulling the ethernet cable out whenever I want to quit but don't want it to count as one.
    Haha
  • HuwJarz
    1302 postsMember, Battlefield 4, Battlefield, Battlefield 1 Member
    Jeez. What a thread.

    Som interesting arguments nevertheless.

    I do feel the need to defend @Khronikos here. He is making a reasonable point. I'm sure that we can all agree that rank alone is a pretty poor proxy for skill. However, his point, which in my opinion is very valid, is simply that players that have reached higher ranks, on average will be better players than low to ranked players.

    This has to be true on average as these guys have payed the game more, have more situational awareness etc. In most things in life, the more you practice, the better you get. It's that simple.

    Notwithstanding that, it I see a pretty crap attribute for balancing.

    I for one feel that BTR or skill is pretty much as good as it gets right now as a single attribute, but you may remember that I have previously posted an idea to add weightings for Platoons too, to avoid players that are using mica etc to have a weighting attached too. This would enable platoons to play together and minimise the number of stompings

  • Khronikos
    854 postsMember, Battlefield 3, Battlefield 4, Battlefield, Battlefield 1, CTE Member
    I guess my last vehicle online game I played to death was Warhawk. And that was truly the best online game I have ever played.

    I just wish BF1 scratched the itch I have for air combat. But it doesn't. I know some people love the planes but I find the controls aggravating and not really all that great to be honest. The tanks are more fun but EXTREMELY limited, and people camp the tank spot all game.

    All of that adding up along with not much pub communication and team imbalance leads to a mode that to me offers little gain. I don't feel like I am improving my gun game while playing Conquest unless I am in a tank. And that is nearly impossible sometimes. 30m a piece and a couple games later and my gaming time could be gone for the day. For what? I have to be careful when deciding to play this mode.
  • skoopsro
    305 postsMember, Battlefield 4, Battlefield Hardline, Battlefield, Battlefield 1, CTE Member
    The fact is conquest is more popular than tdm in the bf franchise for a reason. most people find it more fun for many different preferences. Are there issues with conquest, yes, but for the majority of players tdm is for warm ups, getting your daily scraps in quickly, and k/d padding. TDM IS EASY. And very much repetitive. You already know how every map is gonna play out as soon as the match starts. I can only have the same gunfights so many times over and over again before it gets BORING and is time for more action and chaos. And whoever said a player cant carry 31 players but can carry 11 is EXACTLY right. And it sums up tdm perfectly.

    OP i still have you on my ignore list, and will continue to, but for someone who "doesnt even really play battlefield very much anymore" you sure do spend alot of time on the battlefield forum. I dont get why anyone would do that. Ok we get it, ylu like TDM, like youve said many times before. Go play then and stop trying to get a rise out of people who dont like the same (boring) game mode as you. Maybe thats why you spend so much time on the forum?
  • andusciass_51tk
    168 postsMember, Battlefield 3, Battlefield 4, Battlefield, Battlefield 1 Member
    Loqtrall wrote: »
    And, really, rank doesn't mean anything. I've seen rank 110 players who suck something awful. You can be bad at the game and you'll still rank up from playing.


    LOL -that could easily be me.

    Level is all about grinding.

    To play well is about other things.
    I'm no frequent sight on the top half of the scoreboard.
    I can end up say 25th with a Worthless KPM and I still played a really good game.

    So, score and stats really means nothing.

    The guy I play with most frequently has an abysmal K/D almost every game and never uses the mic but when my friends play with him/her it takes like 5 minutes before they are almost in love and send him/her a friends request.
    He's always on the highligts despite that K/D and placing somewhere say 7-15 on the scoreboard.

    I flank and spot.

    He's a medic (or support, always with repair tool and ammobox) who won't hesitate to run through fire to revive a squadmate.
    He/she will EVEN follow the Defend command.

    You can also end up at the top of the scoreboard with an awesome K/D, capped threehundred flags and have contributed nothing to your team.


    So OP, there are two pieces of advice (apart from the obvious "don't like it -don't play it") I'll give you.

    They are about the teamplay part of CQL.


    1) Squads.

    If randoms don't play the objective or follow/give orders take command of the, or start a new, squad.
    If you've got a squadboost- use it.
    Then kick any player who won' follow orders, supply, heal, revive and such.
    It won't take long before you've got a well working squad.


    2) Platoons.

    Join one.

  • skoopsro
    305 postsMember, Battlefield 4, Battlefield Hardline, Battlefield, Battlefield 1, CTE Member
    @andusciass_51tk whats your medic/repair tool using team player friends psn? lol but seriously.......
  • andusciass_51tk
    168 postsMember, Battlefield 3, Battlefield 4, Battlefield, Battlefield 1 Member
    @skoopsro Don't he/she is mine!!!

    Add me, Andusciassus, if you like and you're bound to meet him/her.

    I'm in Sweden and play quite often.
  • Teamplay_1988
    48 postsMember, Battlefield 3, Battlefield, Battlefield 1 Member
    I remember on a ghost recon game 10 years ago, your rank would go up and down depending on how well you played in a match. Which made sense.

    Cod started all this prestige rubbish and every other game copied it.

    If the ranking went up and down according to how well you played, perhaps more people would put more effort to play the objectives?

    At the moment the cq matches are in the majority very insipid. Two good teams fighting it out is a rare sight. Mostly one sided demolishments and that's with those "every ones a winner" behemoths
  • Khronikos
    854 postsMember, Battlefield 3, Battlefield 4, Battlefield, Battlefield 1, CTE Member
    edited August 15
    skoopsro wrote: »
    The fact is conquest is more popular than tdm in the bf franchise for a reason. most people find it more fun for many different preferences. Are there issues with conquest, yes, but for the majority of players tdm is for warm ups, getting your daily scraps in quickly, and k/d padding. TDM IS EASY. And very much repetitive. You already know how every map is gonna play out as soon as the match starts. I can only have the same gunfights so many times over and over again before it gets BORING and is time for more action and chaos. And whoever said a player cant carry 31 players but can carry 11 is EXACTLY right. And it sums up tdm perfectly.

    OP i still have you on my ignore list, and will continue to, but for someone who "doesnt even really play battlefield very much anymore" you sure do spend alot of time on the battlefield forum. I dont get why anyone would do that. Ok we get it, ylu like TDM, like youve said many times before. Go play then and stop trying to get a rise out of people who dont like the same (boring) game mode as you. Maybe thats why you spend so much time on the forum?

    Why would you reply in a thread when you have me on ignore list? So pointless, so ridiculous, and so pretentious.

    This whole idea that TDM is for warmups is also pretentious as heck. No, you don't just have the same gunfights when you have two evenly matched, high ranking teams in TDM. The notion that TDM plays out any worse than your random terrible match in Conquest is beyond stupid. The fact is TDM fights can be amazing when you have the right players. There is constant action.

    TDM is easy? Ah ha, that must be why I never see anyone in TDM going 80-0 or 128-2. Conquest must be so tough for some of these campers. OH YEAH. Try TDM in the DLC servers alone and you won't be BS'ing me about how easy it is in every match.

    No, you make BF1 as easy as you want to by cheesing the game and using squads to pillage the terrible team balancing algorithm. THAT is what is easy about BF1, and I'm sorry to tell you this but BF1 is EASY for elite squads in every single mode.

    No one said Conquest is completely terrible. In theory, it can be the greatest mode out there. But there are many problems that hold it back, namely the fact that tanks and vehicles are too rare, and the matches play out in a fairly predictable manner due to many of the maps just being straight lines.

    Yes, maybe Conquest on average is really fun if you have your whole platoon on one team and you are all communicating, but we've already went over that. That is not what this thread was about. The thread is about the fact that 64 player Conquest really doesn't even improve your infantry gunplay all that much, and all in all it can in fact be a gigantic waste of your time depending on how you perceive your time in life.

    Even when playing on a good squad in Conquest you really are not guaranteed much if anything in the game. The vehicle allotment is still terrible, and makes me not even want to touch the mode a lot of the time.

    I too like a large scale match now and then. The problems have been reiterated multiple times: people playing alone in a 64 player match are at a severe disadvantage because of terrible team balancing and extremely poor social communication in pubs. Vehicles are constantly being fought over by high rank campers. Et cetera.
  • HuwJarz
    1302 postsMember, Battlefield 4, Battlefield, Battlefield 1 Member
    Khronikos wrote: »
    skoopsro wrote: »
    The fact is conquest is more popular than tdm in the bf franchise for a reason. most people find it more fun for many different preferences. Are there issues with conquest, yes, but for the majority of players tdm is for warm ups, getting your daily scraps in quickly, and k/d padding. TDM IS EASY. And very much repetitive. You already know how every map is gonna play out as soon as the match starts. I can only have the same gunfights so many times over and over again before it gets BORING and is time for more action and chaos. And whoever said a player cant carry 31 players but can carry 11 is EXACTLY right. And it sums up tdm perfectly.

    OP i still have you on my ignore list, and will continue to, but for someone who "doesnt even really play battlefield very much anymore" you sure do spend alot of time on the battlefield forum. I dont get why anyone would do that. Ok we get it, ylu like TDM, like youve said many times before. Go play then and stop trying to get a rise out of people who dont like the same (boring) game mode as you. Maybe thats why you spend so much time on the forum?

    Why would you reply in a thread when you have me on ignore list? So pointless, so ridiculous, and so pretentious.

    This whole idea that TDM is for warmups is also pretentious as heck. No, you don't just have the same gunfights when you have two evenly matched, high ranking teams in TDM. The notion that TDM plays out any worse than your random terrible match in Conquest is beyond stupid. The fact is TDM fights can be amazing when you have the right players. There is constant action.

    TDM is easy? Ah ha, that must be why I never see anyone in TDM going 80-0 or 128-2. Conquest must be so tough for some of these campers. OH YEAH. Try TDM in the DLC servers alone and you won't be BS'ing me about how easy it is in every match.

    No, you make BF1 as easy as you want to by cheesing the game and using squads to pillage the terrible team balancing algorithm. THAT is what is easy about BF1, and I'm sorry to tell you this but BF1 is EASY for elite squads in every single mode.

    No one said Conquest is completely terrible. In theory, it can be the greatest mode out there. But there are many problems that hold it back, namely the fact that tanks and vehicles are too rare, and the matches play out in a fairly predictable manner due to many of the maps just being straight lines.

    Yes, maybe Conquest on average is really fun if you have your whole platoon on one team and you are all communicating, but we've already went over that. That is not what this thread was about. The thread is about the fact that 64 player Conquest really doesn't even improve your infantry gunplay all that much, and all in all it can in fact be a gigantic waste of your time depending on how you perceive your time in life.

    Even when playing on a good squad in Conquest you really are not guaranteed much if anything in the game. The vehicle allotment is still terrible, and makes me not even want to touch the mode a lot of the time.

    I too like a large scale match now and then. The problems have been reiterated multiple times: people playing alone in a 64 player match are at a severe disadvantage because of terrible team balancing and extremely poor social communication in pubs. Vehicles are constantly being fought over by high rank campers. Et cetera.

    @Khronikos

    You've provided some interesting insight into this thread, but this is not it imo. Just breaking down your last paragraph.............

    Team balancing, I agree, but that isn't unique to conquest. It's terrible in all modes

    Poor coms. This game is intended to be played in a squad. The facilities are provided and work. If you choose not to, your experience will be worse. I have no sympathy. This is not a single player game, that is designed to reward teamwork. Those that do, SHOULD ans are rewarded with better scores and wins.

    Vehicles. Please god, no more vehicles. There are enough. Battlefield always had fights over vehicles, largely by a mixture of genuine class experts, but also KD whores. That doesn't mean there aren't enough. It just means supply exceeds demand. Soissons had vehicles removed as it was impossible to play as infantry. The balance is now better across most maps. I can't think of a single map that would be improved by more vehicles.

    Conquest is not a waste of time. It is still the best game mode imo, and I love the longer games and strategy that a good squad can exert.

    Anyway, opinions are like a holes. Everyone has one, including me.
  • skoopsro
    305 postsMember, Battlefield 4, Battlefield Hardline, Battlefield, Battlefield 1, CTE Member
    @skoopsro Don't he/she is mine!!!

    Add me, Andusciassus, if you like and you're bound to meet him/her.

    I'm in Sweden and play quite often.

    Will do!!i was gonna ask for your name also! Just wanted to joke around a bit first lol
  • Khronikos
    854 postsMember, Battlefield 3, Battlefield 4, Battlefield, Battlefield 1, CTE Member
    edited August 15
    Look, I should note I really do enjoy more than a few Conquest maps. Don't get me wrong Verdun and a couple of the others are infinitely better Conquest maps than TDM maps.

    There are no vehicles in the Verdun map, and it's fairly excellent because of not only that but because it actually does require strategy and tactical ambition to win. Soissons is great in both modes. But then you have trash like Argonne and Suez in Conquest, maps that are infinitely better in TDM IMO.

    Notice I wanted more vehicles but also that they were weaker or easier to destroy. I wish planes controlled differently. I know some people enjoy them, but I just can't get into it with a controller anyway.

    Tanks are pretty cool, but again I rarely get one, so the only idea to solve people hoarding them is to make them more available and weaker. Just making them available to one person and powerful is enormously stupid. I hate it. I hate that I cannot drive a tank when I want to.

    I know some people like to paint me as someone that hates large modes, but it is not the case.

    I really enjoy good teamwork, and you can find great teamwork in pubs. But the HORRIBLE TEAM BALANCING makes me sick up inside.

    When work your butt off for 15 minutes for some random dudes to quit on your team and make the game JUST unwinnable because you don't have enough bodies with the game not adding anyone? Nah man I don't have time for it.

    I will quit those games every game. In fact, to make my time more efficient I get better and better at spotting a failing team. I will admit because of team switches and mid match BS it is hard to spot in this game sometimes in 64 player teams. And that sucks, because I don't have 30m to waste as a working/schooling adult that has a lot more games to play and a lot of different hobbies including books, film, and music.

    I won't stand for this game wasting my time. A close 30m match where you are on the edge of your seat is not a waste of time. This game in 64 player is often a waste of my time though.
  • skoopsro
    305 postsMember, Battlefield 4, Battlefield Hardline, Battlefield, Battlefield 1, CTE Member
    edited August 15
    @andusciass_51tk psn request sent, let me know if you didnt get it, since i ised the phone app not the ps4
  • HuwJarz
    1302 postsMember, Battlefield 4, Battlefield, Battlefield 1 Member
    Khronikos wrote: »
    Look, I should note I really do enjoy more than a few Conquest maps. Don't get me wrong Verdun and a couple of the others are infinitely better Conquest maps than TDM maps.

    There are no vehicles in the Verdun map, and it's fairly excellent because of not only that but because it actually does require strategy and tactical ambition to win. Soissons is great in both modes. But then you have trash like Argonne and Suez in Conquest, maps that are infinitely better in TDM IMO.

    Notice I wanted more vehicles but also that they were weaker or easier to destroy. I wish planes controlled differently. I know some people enjoy them, but I just can't get into it with a controller anyway.

    Tanks are pretty cool, but again I rarely get one, so the only idea to solve people hoarding them is to make them more available and weaker. Just making them available to one person and powerful is enormously stupid. I hate it. I hate that I cannot drive a tank when I want to.

    I know some people like to paint me as someone that hates large modes, but it is not the case.

    I really enjoy good teamwork, and you can find great teamwork in pubs. But the HORRIBLE TEAM BALANCING makes me sick up inside.

    When work your butt off for 15 minutes for some random dudes to quit on your team and make the game JUST unwinnable because you don't have enough bodies with the game not adding anyone? Nah man I don't have time for it.

    I will quit those games every game. In fact, to make my time more efficient I get better and better at spotting a failing team. I will admit because of team switches and mid match BS it is hard to spot in this game sometimes in 64 player teams. And that sucks, because I don't have 30m to waste as a working/schooling adult that has a lot more games to play and a lot of different hobbies including books, film, and music.

    I won't stand for this game wasting my time. A close 30m match where you are on the edge of your seat is not a waste of time. This game in 64 player is often a waste of my time though.

    OK. I think we get it! :wink:
  • Gforce81
    2103 postsMember, Battlefield, Battlefield 1 Member
    If TDM had the exact same size maps Conquest does, then we can talk.

    I very much dislike feeling like I'm shoehorned into a smaller area just for the sake of gamemode.

    They always seem to pick the oddest areanas for TDM as well. I was blown away when I played TDM on Mount Grapes with a friend on his request, and for TDM you only get to play in the Concrete bunker, and small outside area surrounding it. Why not up in the hills? Why not use some of the tunnel/bunker networks? Why not incorporate the road some? I was amazed they picked THAT out of everything on the map to be the spot
  • skoopsro
    305 postsMember, Battlefield 4, Battlefield Hardline, Battlefield, Battlefield 1, CTE Member
    Gforce81 wrote: »
    If TDM had the exact same size maps Conquest does, then we can talk.

    I very much dislike feeling like I'm shoehorned into a smaller area just for the sake of gamemode.

    They always seem to pick the oddest areanas for TDM as well. I was blown away when I played TDM on Mount Grapes with a friend on his request, and for TDM you only get to play in the Concrete bunker, and small outside area surrounding it. Why not up in the hills? Why not use some of the tunnel/bunker networks? Why not incorporate the road some? I was amazed they picked THAT out of everything on the map to be the spot

    I was suprised the first time i played that on tdm also, but after thinking about it, were else woukd you play? The top of the mountains? Pretty lame of an area. The only other possible location woukd be the church area. And its ONLY the church and a couple barns. The way the map is now its actually really big, theres a ton of area to play on, but most people just dont. The bunker network is very underutilized and the lower part of the hill with the trenches is also never played on. Its mostly snipers(like most tdm) sitting on the top of the hill and a couple guys with either the model 10, hellreigel, or automatico in the forts. The current map offers the most possabilities. The options are just not utilized in tdm. They are more in war pidgeons and donination.
  • Khronikos
    854 postsMember, Battlefield 3, Battlefield 4, Battlefield, Battlefield 1, CTE Member
    Gforce81 wrote: »
    If TDM had the exact same size maps Conquest does, then we can talk.

    I very much dislike feeling like I'm shoehorned into a smaller area just for the sake of gamemode.

    They always seem to pick the oddest areanas for TDM as well. I was blown away when I played TDM on Mount Grapes with a friend on his request, and for TDM you only get to play in the Concrete bunker, and small outside area surrounding it. Why not up in the hills? Why not use some of the tunnel/bunker networks? Why not incorporate the road some? I was amazed they picked THAT out of everything on the map to be the spot

    Monte Grappa is not really a great map in TDM. It's okay and not the worst. I generally do not like any of the Monte Grappa maps.

    Prise I think I can warm up to if you have a good team. Fort is another Nivelle map bad in both small and large modes. Gross. being shoehorned into an area is good when your full map sucks dude.
Sign In or Register to comment.

Howdy, Stranger!

It looks like you're new here. If you want to get involved, click one of these buttons!