@cso7777 wrote:
@Forkbeard84A funny thing is that if you stay and defend an objective (that is being contested over and over), you are often called out as a camper...
Good point and ironic isn't it? Right now the way the point system works, your team takes an objective and it ticks red as the enemy comes in and your team just zergs away. No one even tries to hold the objective for a beat. Its better to just lose it and take it again later. More points that way. Thats a big reason why everyone zergs.
@Forkbeard84 wrote:
@cso7777 wrote:
@Forkbeard84A funny thing is that if you stay and defend an objective (that is being contested over and over), you are often called out as a camper...Good point and ironic isn't it? Right now the way the point system works, your team takes an objective and it ticks red as the enemy comes in and your team just zergs away. No one even tries to hold the objective for a beat. Its better to just lose it and take it again later. More points that way. Thats a big reason why everyone zergs.
The lack of leadership/comms between squads is also factor.
There will always be gunho players that go searching for action, the problem is that once those run off others follow looking for kills.
Headless chicken always gather in the centre(not just geographical) to fight each others zerg.
Commander could at least try to split in different directions or ask to stay and defend.
If you have following commanders orders worth more points then attack/defend or kills, become less an issue.
What DICE fear is a boring game, to much focus on defence can lead to much waiting both stay at flags collecting points.
Offence play at least leads to action. This is why DICE has focused on offencive which has help create the zerg.
Not excited at all. EA too busy being woke to deliver a good game. Rampant cheating but at least you can hear girlie screams as the aimbotter mows down 130 kills in a round. Progress! This franchise is circling the drain.. if BF6 is just a rehash it's over.
@DingoKillr wrote:
@Forkbeard84 wrote:
@cso7777 wrote:
@Forkbeard84A funny thing is that if you stay and defend an objective (that is being contested over and over), you are often called out as a camper...Good point and ironic isn't it? Right now the way the point system works, your team takes an objective and it ticks red as the enemy comes in and your team just zergs away. No one even tries to hold the objective for a beat. Its better to just lose it and take it again later. More points that way. Thats a big reason why everyone zergs.
The lack of leadership/comms between squads is also factor.
There will always be gunho players that go searching for action, the problem is that once those run off others follow looking for kills.
Headless chicken always gather in the centre(not just geographical) to fight each others zerg.
Commander could at least try to split in different directions or ask to stay and defend.
If you have following commanders orders worth more points then attack/defend or kills, become less an issue.
What DICE fear is a boring game, to much focus on defence can lead to much waiting both stay at flags collecting points.
Offence play at least leads to action. This is why DICE has focused on offencive which has help create the zerg.
Your last paragraph is something I've been pondering too. The point scoring system supports losing objectives and then capturing them back and that does create a very offensively focused and maybe exciting game so reprogramming for a defensive game could be problematic. I just don't know. Maybe the Zerg is necessary just to keep the game exciting.
Anyways good point.
I feel one of the biggest challenges Dice faces with conquest is acknowledging that the game mode was designed for game rules first laid out two decades ago. Back when flags were your team's only or primary source of spawning or where flags would provide your team with more assets, there was a massive emphasis on not just taking flags but also holding on to them. The necessity for holding flags wasn't just to tick down the tickets, it was to maintain command of the Battlefield for your team. The flags were literally the front lines of the games.
The rules of the game have however changed over the past 20 years but conquest's design is pretty much the same today as it was way back then. We have squad spawning now, vehicle spawning, spawn beacons. We have seen a drastic decrease in vehicles spawning at flags. We have now, a situation where flags contribute almost nothing to the core gameplay. They are no longer a source of resources and no longer an indicator of the map's battle lines.
What I feel Dice needs to do is take a look at the game mode itself and think of how they could update it for modern Battlefield rules and make it relevant to the core gameplay. They have already done this for Conquest Assault. A game mode that worked well with the older rules that it was designed around but never really worked well with frostbite Battlefield games. Breakthrough has essentially become the spiritual successor to conquest assault, providing that attack/defend gameplay but designed with modern Battlefield rules in mind.
This isn't to say I think they should scrap conquest and just create a whole new game mode entirely. What I think they need to do is update the game mode itself to accommodate what the core gameplay of Battlefield has become.
@Noodlesocks wrote:I feel one of the biggest challenges Dice faces with conquest is acknowledging that the game mode was designed for game rules first laid out two decades ago. Back when flags were your team's only or primary source of spawning or where flags would provide your team with more assets, there was a massive emphasis on not just taking flags but also holding on to them. The necessity for holding flags wasn't just to tick down the tickets, it was to maintain command of the Battlefield for your team. The flags were literally the front lines of the games.
The rules of the game have however changed over the past 20 years but conquest's design is pretty much the same today as it was way back then. We have squad spawning now, vehicle spawning, spawn beacons. We have seen a drastic decrease in vehicles spawning at flags. We have now, a situation where flags contribute almost nothing to the core gameplay. They are no longer a source of resources and no longer an indicator of the map's battle lines.
What I feel Dice needs to do is take a look at the game mode itself and think of how they could update it for modern Battlefield rules and make it relevant to the core gameplay. They have already done this for Conquest Assault. A game mode that worked well with the older rules that it was designed around but never really worked well with frostbite Battlefield games. Breakthrough has essentially become the spiritual successor to conquest assault, providing that attack/defend gameplay but designed with modern Battlefield rules in mind.
This isn't to say I think they should scrap conquest and just create a whole new game mode entirely. What I think they need to do is update the game mode itself to accommodate what the core gameplay of Battlefield has become.
Either updating or going back closer to roots. If I have understood right from other thread there is speculation next title going back to squad leader spawning.
