domination is the norm now

Well, those days are truly over. 

I played over a dozen matches today and tried to keep track. It was actually easy, ONE was close (and had an actual recovery). 

As for the play style, I'm at the stage where if I'm with a team that does not seem to care about the obj at all, I actually quit and go for another match. It's sad but I'm not here to play deatmatch, there are other, better games for that. 

DICE actually tried to push for team play through their challenges and some of the new systems, but that has clearly not worked. There is definitely more they could do; after all, the scoreboard still displays kdr as the main stat right after score, but I don't see them trying stuff that could upset the remaining player base that seems happy to play a COD-like.

Yeah you're not alone on this. 

The other day I was on a team with a median average of level 215. The opposition was 312, which is a significant leap. Plus the enemy team had three people over level 500. 

With that kind of imbalance, it's just never going to be a long round. 

People tend to remember those good experiences because they were on the winning side and vice versa with the losing side/bad experiences. I don't play Escalation so I couldn't judge how those matches are.

That idea of match recovery would not even be relative at all if there was true balancing. I believe the massive injection of COD players (Most of them are corner campers) completely wrecked their balancing system. I say that because I notice that usually it's only a handful of players on the objective now a days. Over the years they lost alot of the veteran battlefield community. I say that because objectives would be crowded with players. Camping wasn't a thing in the community, everyone pretty much pushed, and there was a handful of snipers not doing much but now campers are rampant within the game. Maybe implement A.I. to separate players more based on more of those 'camper like' statistics? An even amount of campers on each side would make that game fair. I've played Battlefield for a long time and I can say for sure this is the worse balancing i've seen so far in the franchise. In the previous titles, 100-0 finish Conquest games where the norm and complete domination was completely rare unless you were going against a whole team on discord. Now it's the opposite. 

I don't have hard data and people tend to remember the really poor or really good experiences more, but yeah, it feels worst nowadays. I just shut down the game after three consecutive Conquest or Escalation games being completely one-sided. 

I'm really not sure what causes this. Obviously, it would be great if there were some balancing between teams, but it wasn't there before either and completely one-sided matches weren't so prevalent. 

What I do notice however is how difficult it can be to course-correct. Matches go one way and seldom recover. In Escalation, you're more likely to have a 3-1 than a 3-0, but that's just because of the model of that mode, it's not an actual recovery, just maintaining the - ultimately losing - status quo. Conquest easily goes 400 or 500-0. 

Thing is, recovering requires some serious team-play, and I don't see a lot of that. Snipers will continue staying on top of their perch rather than throwing their bodies at objs or changing class, tank drivers will happily continue sniping from HQ, etc. I haven't played a lot of the previous BF titles so I can't say if it were any different back then, but is players weren't acting any better back then, then I'm at a loss as to why matches are more one-sided now.