Re: Why is K/D so highly reagrded in BF? It's NOT the ONLY Team STAT...

@DAYLEET "no idea wtf he's talking about"

We can close the thread now, solution offered. Lol

@UP_SunnyTheWolf We've got 4 pages and 18 years of CQ that disagrees with your blanket statement. Maybe you misspelled Deathmatch....

@ZombieP1ow And maybe you mistook a FPS as a building simulator.

@UP_SunnyTheWolf and maybe you can't see the logic of the argument from @ZombiePlow "We've got 4 pages and 18 years of CQ that disagrees with your blanket statement"
I'll be able to get a higher score only taking points and protecting them, than you worrying anout K/D
Battlefield to it's core is an objective-based FPS.
Not all FPS games are even about combat, or do you only know one kind? I know what the S stands for, but the genre has evolved to be more about the FP

@DAYLEET If the formula for who wins the round in Conquest is based 60% on kills and 40% on flag capture, or whatever the percentages are, then both one’s kills and deaths matter - in other words, one’s K/D.

@psylentrage76 How is this an argument:

"We've got 4 pages and 18 years of CQ that disagrees with your blanket statement"

The length of this thread has no bearing on the validity of my earlier point, and the age of the franchise is another example of the same thing.

Do you honestly think that when Dice started developing the original BF1942 - they thought to themselves: "how do we build a team based multiplayer game about capturing flags/areas on a map?" And then decided to put in shooting the opposing team just to spice things up..?

Like I said, at its core Battlefield is a FPS in which the gameplay loop fundamentally leans on killing the opponent. Different gamemodes facilitate this gameplay loop, as in the example of conquest - by directing players to focus their gameplay on certain parts of the large maps, so that the gameplay loop stays active and engaging. This is what the various objects are for in the different modes.

Vehicle gameplay (combined warfare) is the unique part that BF1942 introduced to the masses and undoubtedly is what made it such a popular FPS, but that aspect is still very much a part of that same gameplay loop I am talking about.

The great thing about BF, and what is very much a part of that "sandbox" DNA is that the are a multitude of other actions, than just killing the opponent, a player can take that can help their team be victorious. (Mind you, BF wasn't even the first multiplayer FPS to have such supporting tasks - Return to the Castle Wolvenstein comes to mind as an earlier example.) Nevertheless, even the fact that those supporting tasks can be the difference between winning or losing doesn't make them them most important part of the game.

I like to think that I'm a team player, and since BF1942 I've always mained the classes that I feel can contribute the most to that aspect of the game - medic and support in their various incarnations. And I'm no stranger to being a wrench monkey for the whole round while going negative on my K/D, but I would never claim my repairing was more important than the killing that vehicle was able to do.

Opposing views are good, and it's great that this franchise has various aspects to its gameplay that people can value to varying degrees, but I still repeat it like a parrot that in its heart the Battlefield franchise is about killing the opponent.

I am willing to change that view if you are able to present me with a compelling case to the contrary - and no, nothing stated in this thread already constitutes as such.

@psylentrage76 Also, I forgot to address this:

"Not all FPS games are even about combat, or do you only know one kind? I know what the S stands for, but the genre has evolved to be more about the FP."

What on earth does this have to do with the Battlefield franchise? The fact that various games use a first person point of view and have little to no combat in them has nothing to do with the discussion at hand, since at their core those games have a very different type of gameplay loop to BF.

@UP_Hawxxeye I don't know why the narrative in this thread has become placing high K/D players who'll always sacrifice team goals to preserve their high ratio on one side, and placing altruistic team-first players who'll always sacrifice themselves for the betterment of the team on the other.

Surely most people fall somewhere between these two outliers?!

Also, I'm yet to be convinced that the underlying gameplay loop isn't about getting kills regardless of the gamemode.