BF3 wasnt a " Bad game " like COD arena But BF2042 is a true Comb [ Edited ]

[Stew360]

@DuaneDibbley
We sadly do not have stats as it is for now . And i wish i could see it . but i can tell you this i have between Mastery 40 to master 90+ on 90% of all infantry weapons and i dont have yet Tier 1 on all the vehicles at all on many i am not yet half way and assist also count ..

But here some infantry only gameplay i think i can handle infantry pretty well .

https://youtu.be/Pucm8BLDWI8?t=22

https://youtu.be/Pucm8BLDWI8?t=22

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=-qaT4DTeyjw

[Blackidus]

@Stew360I never heard that complaint about BF3 myself, biggest gripe I had whas the blue filter, that whas it. Never saw it as a COD clone and I for one hated Metro and don´t see the apeal of those grind maps, but I know other people like them so I let them have their fun over there while I played Kharg Island for example whas one of my favourites.

BF3 is also one of the few games that actually got a armour focused DLC with "Armoured Kill", I think Dice made a good variety of maps for all kind of players in BF3. But I guess you only have eyes for the infantry focused maps in BF3.

And I could agree about Manifest and Discarded having a few good infantry focused capture points. But you need cver inbetween the objectives as well. When you as infantry in 2042 have to move between objectives there is no cover, you have to cross open fields to get to your next objective (except Manifest maybe when you are not being farmed by hellis)

Good large maps from previous games have some kind of pathway for infantry in between objectives that has a lot of cover. Even Galicia wich many see as an open field had alot of paths for infantry to get around behind and in cover. You had the river, trenches and craters to use as cover.

[Stew360]

@Blackidus Kaleidoscope the worst map ever still for D1 F1F2G1 that are very infantry focus and even B1 B2 is normally dominated with foot soldiers still and tank get EMP , Hacks and M5 recoiless non stop in a blink of an eye lol

Now that peoples got use to the game vehicles gameplay is way harder than playing infantry Both require insane amount of team work to pull off anything .. But i still find playing as infantry easier than playing in vehicles in most maps .. Peoples that are still playing the game are not the Day1 clueless player .. They know how to EMP , hacks , EMP drones and so on .. Sundance Pulse EMP C5 wingsuits and so on

The only thing is infantry need a skillfull rocket with a bit more projectle velocity and we need less Lock on spam

Every maps have a lots of infantry base area . things are not perfect between capture points tho and its not far from balanced but many areas are problematics but so were many area in caspian border for exemple and many others BF maps trough history .. Yet peoples only complain about 2042 because they are now " forced " into map rotation while before many of those who complain now were playing 1 map 24/7 ..

The main problem with 2042 is not just the game , its also the kind of players who play it .. They do not want to learn , adapt , try new things .. They want confort , ease of use . no need to learn anything new .

In 2042 i forced myself using a lots of weapons i found terrible at first . then i played with them until i got mastery 40 + And i have discovered that almost every weapons are really good even the Vcar lol

I hated the 880 for my first 200 kills after that i was loving it etc..etc..

Same goes for a lot of vehicles .. hated the Hokum , Hated the 120mm tank and so on and once use to it , it grew on me and i was performing better and better ..

Same for maps there was many maps i found terrible before i knew the flow of the maps ,. the way to use the terrain etc.. but i end up loving pretty much every maps even if Breakaway and kaleidoscope remain the worst to me ..

But i still love parts of those 2 maps i dislike the most .. there is a lot of good in those maps .. fighting in discarded D1 D2 C1 is really amasing as infantry and so on

[NiCeDiCe90]

@Blackidus We have to admit here that BF3 maps were pretty much designed for specific game modes. Coming from BC2 you could clearly see what they had in mind for the maps.
So maps like Metro or Damavand peak are nice on Rush 32p and were not meant to be played CQ 64p... But players asked for it so it became a thing.
That's ok for me but we can't blame Metro for being a bad map when it's most popular mode is not the intended way to play it.
It's an actual awesome map on rush 32p that can compete with BC2 Maps without a doubt.

[Stew360]

@NiCeDiCe90Its the same thing with Conquest maps being used for " breaktrough " it simply " break the maps ...

BF2042 was clearly designed for Conquest in mind and its the way BF2042 is the most fun 128 players conquest .. Even the 64 players maps feel wrong and does not offer the same experience at all and its why i exclusively play 2042 128 players conquest .

Those maps could also work for BF2142 " Titan mode " , but still i find some areas of the maps problematics between objective .. but there is also part of the maps that are insanely amasing .. like D1D2 C1 part in discarded is so good . Manifest as a whole is good to me a lot of double points bases are great in many maps ..

But suprisingly conquest maps used as " Hazardzone maps " were working great for that game type 

[Blackidus]

@NiCeDiCe90 Yeah agree with you there, Metro works when played on Rush.

I kind of miss that map mentality they had back then in BFBC2 and BF3 when you had maps designed for specific modes and player numbers. If you design a map specific for a mode it will probably be really good for that mode, but if you design it for multiple modes It mostly becomes mediocre at best for all modes. But of course there are some golden ones that work good for all modes.

[DuaneDibbley]

@Blackidus

Metro works very well on Rush but also on CQ. The problem is the player number. With 24 players, Metro is a really enjoyable experience, even though a kind of intense one. With 32 it depends on the teams and CAN be good sometimes (especially the BF4 version of it)
But whoever thought it would be a good idea to put 64 players on this map must have been completely out of his/her mind.

[Blackidus]

@DuaneDibbley Oh really? I never tried it with less players.

[filthy_vegans]

I agree with the general point here - BF2042 is nowhere near as bad as is often suggested. I actually rather enjoy it.

I also agree with the idea floated above that the game requires players to relearn certain core mechanics. It does not play exactly like BF4, and the return of helicopters and electronic warfare after BF1 and BFV add back a layer of complexity to the infantry experience.

As for the M16 being the meta weapon in BF3, I would disagree - I have 16,000 kills with the AN-94, it was easily the most flexible weapon with its superior range and accuracy over other assault rifles and decent enough RoF in closer quarters. If I knew I was going into sustained CQB, I'd take the ACW-R or MP7 any day.

[CantGetRight]

Im with you Stew but I think it's a losing battle here on these forums now. I also enjoy your topics.   Very engaging. But people  have already made up their minds about this game especially here on these forums that come here everyday and it's really not fun anymore to be here reading about a game you like because all you see are hate/toxic posts.