I think the new METRO operations in battlefield mode 2042 would be great. A map of such parameters is missing. Bandar desert was great too.
I'm just afraid it will be added to the portal mode. The portal is useless for me.
What do you think about the METRO?
Honestly I have not been in the Metro now for many months, but just checked and see my own Metro server is still running fully loaded 24/7 in BF4 !
And if players are having a blast, then why shouldn't EA/DICE make such maps as Locker and Metro available for those that wants such intense meat grinding CQC maps to have fun on!?
It would definitely be a welcome change to the otherwise big boring empty maps of BF2042, where we often need to spawn in and run literally for 5+ minutes before we can find the first enemy to engage with. 👍
Yes!!! Would love to see Metro, Grand Bazaar, and Operation locker return. Then I would play 2042 for a long time. I feel like the closest I can get on there is breakthrough in Manifest, maybe orbital maybe
No-explosives Metro for me vs Locker, but if even limited explosives are allowed then locker is more enjoyable just due to the bottleneck by the escalators on Metro.
Still sticking by ziba towers or scrapyard being better than either for straight infantry fights though. (thought again, no explosives improves it imo).
Edit: I also agree with Eliott above, it doesn't feel like CoD, coordinated pushes to break the deadlock on metro is a constant tug of war for those corners and doorways, never had that feeling in CoD.
Ziba towers is probably the closest due to the layout, and even that requires a much more methodical approach and shoring things up as a squad, or you just get steamrolled due to there being few places that don't have 3 or 4 entry points.
It's more twitchy than regular conquest absolutely, but not like CoD:
Never understood the appeal of metro. It was just a set of stairs that you fought over for 20+ minutes. There were a lot better infantry maps before and after Metro.
@Noodlesocks Breaking through that bottleneck was super satisfying/part of the appeal, and completely changed the dynamic of the map. I felt, as a lone wolf type of player, I could actually make a difference
@kregora wrote:
with friendly fire on
Interesting! I don't think it would appeal to the Metro Meatgrinder crowd. In fact, I think many, many players would be kicked for teamkilling with FF-on.
@sgtPoulton wrote:No, both Metro and Operation Locker were terrible cancer maps to take some attention of low life COD baby gamers. We don't need content like that in battlefield 2042 or any upcoming BF series. Sorry that my opinion
Well if the new feedback loop listens to reddit then we are guaranteed to get another Metro style map in 2042.
I enjoyed Metro in BF4 when it was one map in the 4 map DLC.
3 combined arms maps followed by a map where you could go crazy with your guns was enjoyable.
@TTZ_Dipsy wrote:I'm more of a Metro man but that's because I knew exactly how to take advantage of its flanks - Locker was a great map but it was so much larger and more open, it was easy for the enemy to eventually get around to ruin everything (you just couldn't trust your teammates after BF3 IMO).
It's be cool to see it make a triumphant return, but I also don't want to see it become a mere shell of its former self like Call of Duty's Nuketown
Same here, Lockers was too easy to flank and there was never that tug of war feeling you got with Metro fighting one flag at a time.
Lockers played more like a TDM match than a conquest match.
