Yes, by Rush I really meant; Breakthrough / Rush / Grand Operations, any other kind of attack / defense team based game, and I have no qualms with FFA, TDM and Gun master being available.
However the bread and butter is large team battles ala Conquest / Rush or a variation of these.
In regards to conquest being boring - a lot of this comes down to map design / game design. BF2042 has maps where you can be running a much greater distance before getting into Battle, and less structure to the maps. As a result of this there are less engagements in the area between flags. Couple this with terrible spawn placing and spawn logic (ie no checking if you are spawning next to an enemy) and a lack of smaller vehicles (ie there is only a couple quad bikes and pick up trucks I've seen) and you have a less exciting, more frustrating version of Conquest.
I've been playing BF since the Codename Eagle and the BF42 wake island demo, and with every release conquest becomes further simplified.
To give you an idea, in BF42 there were flags which were neutral that could only be captured by one side, you could also set up flags in custom maps to start on one side and only be captured by the other side (cannot be taken back). This way you could force a flow of combat - like in the Omaha map.
Similarly there were maps where one team has a main base whilst the opposing team has no main base so if they lose all flags and all players die they lose the game regardless of what the tickets were - the only map we see that in now is Wake Island in each of the versions.
Further to this flags had individual point values and time required to capture so holding a specific flag could be equal to holding 3 flags somewhere else - This is something that has been brought back somewhat with sectors, but it hasn't worked out in practice as people will gravitate towards sectors with multiple flags in close proximity for the sake of combat. So a single flag to control a sector might be worth a whole lot more than a sector with multiple flags close together, but no one can be bothered going to it because its in the middle of nowhere.
In earlier battlefield games they were structured so the most hotly contested flag would generally be worth the most but if you captured enough of the peripheral flags you could turn the flow of tickets; forcing a team with a strong defensive position to the leave their defense and go on attack. These features and good design gave the maps structure so there was always an ebb and flow of combat / team play.
The difference is maps now are essentially symmetrical placement of flags and vehicles between teams with little variation beyond placing a flag on a rooftop, or inside a building. This makes a lot of the conquest maps feel the same between them, so there ends up being little variation in gameplay. Essentially in BF2042 (and a lot of Battlefield maps in the last decade) there is little in the way of a goal or theme that goes a long with it that makes the map different from other maps. To give you an idea of what I mean
Wake Island - hold the island or push the opposing team off the island
Omaha beach - capture the beach, move through fortifications and capture the village
Kharkov - hold the hill and get artillery dominance
Monte Casino - push up hill against a heavily fortified Italian force with lots of fixed artillery culminating in a battle in a destroyed Monastery was essentially a castle.
Operation Market Garden - Paradrop in behind enemy lines whilst another portion of your team mounts an attack on two bridges to make their way into a town
Midway - Large naval battle with multiple ships on each side and an atoll in the middle.
I could keep going on and on, but essentially a lot of the maps had an obvious objective or tied into a theme and this was all done with conquest game modes.
Sure some of the maps were unbalanced, but they strived to play and feel different which is a far cry from the current map selection.
