Discussion
London424 said:
I often find myself getting caught out as 'first man through the door'...so have to remind myself to squad up and take things slower.
It's amazing how much damage you can do if you've got 4 or 5 of you all going in the same direction firing at the same time.
And putting a gas grenade through a house window often helps...It's amazing how much damage you can do if you've got 4 or 5 of you all going in the same direction firing at the same time.
Jasandjules said:
London424 said:
I often find myself getting caught out as 'first man through the door'...so have to remind myself to squad up and take things slower.
It's amazing how much damage you can do if you've got 4 or 5 of you all going in the same direction firing at the same time.
And putting a gas grenade through a house window often helps...It's amazing how much damage you can do if you've got 4 or 5 of you all going in the same direction firing at the same time.
but i notice that people disappear soo quickly
im with a group of people then bang no one on mini map
just like my real life :-( hahahahah
Well I just nearly lost a game of operations. On Mount Grappa they got to the last sector which is just a single fort.
Thankfully there is a AA gun in a ridiculous location overlooking the flag and I just sat on it and cleared house
Never seen the end of a operations game get that close before.
Thankfully there is a AA gun in a ridiculous location overlooking the flag and I just sat on it and cleared house
Never seen the end of a operations game get that close before.
housen said:
Jasandjules said:
London424 said:
I often find myself getting caught out as 'first man through the door'...so have to remind myself to squad up and take things slower.
It's amazing how much damage you can do if you've got 4 or 5 of you all going in the same direction firing at the same time.
And putting a gas grenade through a house window often helps...It's amazing how much damage you can do if you've got 4 or 5 of you all going in the same direction firing at the same time.
but i notice that people disappear soo quickly
im with a group of people then bang no one on mini map
just like my real life :-( hahahahah
If you're on your own or on a rubbish squad where everyone goes and does their own thing it can seem like a really rubbish game.
CrutyRammers said:
Vantagemech said:
Im still crap, but trying to change the way I play. Dont run and gun like you could in BF4 as youll get picked off by an overpowered rifle.
Yeah that's killing me at the moment. I'm crap at the whole hiding in cover thing, but it's more key here than in 3 or 4.I remember setting up shop in the central alley on Grand Bazaar on BF3 with my LMG pointing one way and clay mores protecting my back from the other - used to be able to rack up kills like that, but on BF1 anytime I stand still for more than 30 seconds (even in cover) I seem to get someone shooting me in the back.
youngsyr said:
I remember setting up shop in the central alley on Grand Bazaar on BF3 with my LMG pointing one way and clay mores protecting my back from the other - used to be able to rack up kills like that, but on BF1 anytime I stand still for more than 30 seconds (even in cover) I seem to get someone shooting me in the back.
Grand Bazaar, Siene Crossing, Metro, Operation Locker- these were all infantry-based, chokepoint heavy maps that were very easy to lock down, leading to the inevitable grenade/m320/mortar spam stand-offs.I guess that is what they have tried to avoid this time?
I actually found them huge fun (particularly for the odd round of Team Deathmatch), as they were such a contrast to the majority of the larger, vehicle-heavy maps. In fact I'd go as far as to say they were some of my favourites! But they were not really ideal for promoting a fluid Conquest match.
Squirrelofwoe said:
youngsyr said:
I remember setting up shop in the central alley on Grand Bazaar on BF3 with my LMG pointing one way and clay mores protecting my back from the other - used to be able to rack up kills like that, but on BF1 anytime I stand still for more than 30 seconds (even in cover) I seem to get someone shooting me in the back.
Grand Bazaar, Siene Crossing, Metro, Operation Locker- these were all infantry-based, chokepoint heavy maps that were very easy to lock down, leading to the inevitable grenade/m320/mortar spam stand-offs.I guess that is what they have tried to avoid this time?
I actually found them huge fun (particularly for the odd round of Team Deathmatch), as they were such a contrast to the majority of the larger, vehicle-heavy maps. In fact I'd go as far as to say they were some of my favourites! But they were not really ideal for promoting a fluid Conquest match.
Seems it's very difficult to do that in BF1 - or at least I haven't identified the choke points yet.
youngsyr said:
Those were the maps that encouraged team work and strategy though, I'm not a big fan of the run and gun play style, I'd much rather identify a choke point or geographical advantage and make the most of it strategically.
They certainly encouraged it, but unfortunately 90% of players (on both sides) preferred to camp at the choke points spamming grenades as it was a pretty easy point/kill hoover, rather than working together as a group to flank around. I tended to find the majority of people played those maps specifically for that reason, not because they required coordinated flanks etc to make progress- they tended to be more interested in their personal kill count.I quite agree though, I've always preferred playing with a more cautious/tactical approach than simply run & gun. I always found that as long as you were playing with at least one other (decent) player on comms, you could generally have a huge amount of fun on those maps without getting drawn into the 'meat-grinder'.
Will be interesting to see how this compares when I'm finally able to get onto it next week!
p1stonhead said:
funkyrobot said:
Told myself I wasn't going to buy this. However, it does look good.
May see how long I can wait before cracking.
Actually, it could coincide with a new console purchase too.
Do it. Its the best battlefield for a long time.May see how long I can wait before cracking.
Actually, it could coincide with a new console purchase too.
Squirrelofwoe said:
youngsyr said:
Those were the maps that encouraged team work and strategy though, I'm not a big fan of the run and gun play style, I'd much rather identify a choke point or geographical advantage and make the most of it strategically.
They certainly encouraged it, but unfortunately 90% of players (on both sides) preferred to camp at the choke points spamming grenades as it was a pretty easy point/kill hoover, rather than working together as a group to flank around. I tended to find the majority of people played those maps specifically for that reason, not because they required coordinated flanks etc to make progress- they tended to be more interested in their personal kill count.I quite agree though, I've always preferred playing with a more cautious/tactical approach than simply run & gun. I always found that as long as you were playing with at least one other (decent) player on comms, you could generally have a huge amount of fun on those maps without getting drawn into the 'meat-grinder'.
Will be interesting to see how this compares when I'm finally able to get onto it next week!
CrutyRammers said:
You might prefer the operations games, where you're attacking or defending - it tends to gear around defensible positions a bit more.
I did always hugely enjoy 'Rush' on BF 3 & 4 to be fair, it had the objective element of Conquest with reduced vehicles and more defined 'areas'. Where as in Conquest you would painstakingly work your way from one objective to the next, only to find the entire enemy team had now spawned behind you and promptly shot you in the back!When the enemy flanked behind you on Rush I'd applaud it as I figured it took a reasonable amount of skill/effort to do so.
That said, I still loved playing Conquest- as long as I was squadded up with people I knew (ideally on comms). If I was playing alone though it was always Rush.
That Operations mode does look interesting!
Squirrelofwoe said:
CrutyRammers said:
You might prefer the operations games, where you're attacking or defending - it tends to gear around defensible positions a bit more.
I did always hugely enjoy 'Rush' on BF 3 & 4 to be fair, it had the objective element of Conquest with reduced vehicles and more defined 'areas'. Where as in Conquest you would painstakingly work your way from one objective to the next, only to find the entire enemy team had now spawned behind you and promptly shot you in the back!When the enemy flanked behind you on Rush I'd applaud it as I figured it took a reasonable amount of skill/effort to do so.
That said, I still loved playing Conquest- as long as I was squadded up with people I knew (ideally on comms). If I was playing alone though it was always Rush.
That Operations mode does look interesting!
I was determined to complete the campaign modes before going online (don't mock me, it's just what I do) but thought I'd see what options etc I had available online, 6 hours of conquest later and I haven't looked back 
I'll save campaign for next time PSN is down or an update is needed.
Operations is good then???
I'll save campaign for next time PSN is down or an update is needed.Operations is good then???
Lynchie999 said:
p1stonhead said:
funkyrobot said:
Actually, it could coincide with a new console purchase too.
Do it. Its the best battlefield for a long time.Gassing Station | Video Games | Top of Page | What's New | My Stuff