" @Ahmad_Metallic said:

" i dont understand ?  "

TF2 style, when you can't just capture any point.  You need to capture one that you can connect to.   "

" @KaosAngel said:

" @Ahmad_Metallic said:

" i dont understand ?  "

TF2 style, when you can't just capture any point.  You need to capture one that you can connect to.   "

Right.  In vanilla BF2 you could just hop in a jeep or whatever, completely avoid the battle and go capture some random undefended flag miles from the action (because really, who wants to sit at the back and defend bases just in case somebody does that?), then somebody from the other team would have to go all the way over there and recapture it, usually without a shot being fired (which felt like playing whack-a-mole on the map).  If they make it so you can only capture flags next to flags you already hold, then you'd end up with a proper frontline being fought over. "

Battlefield? 
 
Is that like Call of Duty?

" @Jimbo said:

" @KaosAngel said:

" @Ahmad_Metallic said:

" i dont understand ?  "

TF2 style, when you can't just capture any point.  You need to capture one that you can connect to.   "

Right.  In vanilla BF2 you could just hop in a jeep or whatever, completely avoid the battle and go capture some random undefended flag miles from the action (because really, who wants to sit at the back and defend bases just in case somebody does that?), then somebody from the other team would have to go all the way over there and recapture it, usually without a shot being fired (which felt like playing whack-a-mole on the map).  If they make it so you can only capture flags next to flags you already hold, then you'd end up with a proper frontline being fought over. "

are you kidding me? what felt better than you being able to flee the baseraping without getting killed, make your way to a flag and then 2 people spawn on you and hop into another car and drive to another flag, and bam 2-3 out of the 6 enemy flags just became yours ? that totally revives the balance of power/advantage and brings the battle to its knees again.. being restricted to only a couple of flags which are closest to you (or whatever) sounds like it could totally destroy a losing team's chances of another rise  OR, what felt better than you baseraping the other team, dying, noticing a flag going neutral during your respawn time, spawn really close to it and find the fucking weasel who captured it and end his life, bringing harmony to the galaxy again ?   come on, man. you're killing Battlefield by changing radical and essential characteristics of it. let TF2's laws apply to TF2. "

i want it to not suck haha am i right

" @Jimbo said:

" @Raymayne said:

" I think Battlefield belongs on consoles personally, you just don't get the same amount of community fun and brilliant online integration with a PC as you do on an Xbox. So personally I want to see the game be announced as a console exclusive, it's time to bring the series home where it belongs. "

lol. "

I lol'd too. "

" Plus there's some strategy to it.  Let's say your squad captured a point behind the front line deep in enemy territory.  Now your whole team can spawn there and force the other team to fight on two fronts.  It's not just "hurp, durp, I don't want to fight so I'm going to take random flags." "

" i want it to not suck haha am i right "

Seeing as this is coming out on consoles I think we'll be lucky to see even 32v32... :( But I agree with everything else the OP said should be there!

" @Ahmad_Metallic said:

" @Jimbo said:

" @KaosAngel said:

" @Ahmad_Metallic said:

" i dont understand ?  "

TF2 style, when you can't just capture any point.  You need to capture one that you can connect to.   "

Right.  In vanilla BF2 you could just hop in a jeep or whatever, completely avoid the battle and go capture some random undefended flag miles from the action (because really, who wants to sit at the back and defend bases just in case somebody does that?), then somebody from the other team would have to go all the way over there and recapture it, usually without a shot being fired (which felt like playing whack-a-mole on the map).  If they make it so you can only capture flags next to flags you already hold, then you'd end up with a proper frontline being fought over. "

are you kidding me? what felt better than you being able to flee the baseraping without getting killed, make your way to a flag and then 2 people spawn on you and hop into another car and drive to another flag, and bam 2-3 out of the 6 enemy flags just became yours ? that totally revives the balance of power/advantage and brings the battle to its knees again.. being restricted to only a couple of flags which are closest to you (or whatever) sounds like it could totally destroy a losing team's chances of another rise  OR, what felt better than you baseraping the other team, dying, noticing a flag going neutral during your respawn time, spawn really close to it and find the fucking weasel who captured it and end his life, bringing harmony to the galaxy again ?   come on, man. you're killing Battlefield by changing radical and essential characteristics of it. let TF2's laws apply to TF2. "

Exactly.  The way TF2 does it only works because of how linear the maps are.  And linear maps are something people generally want to stay away from in the core Battlefield franchise.  Plus there's some strategy to it.  Let's say your squad captured a point behind the front line deep in enemy territory.  Now your whole team can spawn there and force the other team to fight on two fronts.  It's not just "hurp, durp, I don't want to fight so I'm going to take random flags." "

" @B0nd07 said:

" @Ahmad_Metallic said:

" @Jimbo said:

" @KaosAngel said:

" @Ahmad_Metallic said:

/Snip

No it's "hurp durp I'm going to drive across the map alone and cheaply take the undefended flag, which is only undefended in the first place because defending flags miles away from the fight is fucking boring and nobody wants to do it".  Nothing about doing that took any skill or guile at all, it's just that defending against it was too mindnumbing for anybody to bother with.  It wouldn't be so bad if it actually required a whole squad to do it, because at least that would be a meaningful sacrifice from the actual battle. "

I would like to be able to use a Mouse and Keyboard.

" I would like to be able to use a Mouse and Keyboard. "

" @Jimbo:  i can see now that we're totally different Battlefield fans.  sounds to me like you punched the monitor (or even ragequit) everytime someone made their way to a flag and interrupted your pleasant baseraping.. "

"   Yeah it sucks to constantly be on the lookout, but at the same time that's battlefield.  "

" I usually just took five minutes out of the fun part of the game to drive around playing whack-a-mole with the flags and think about how much better the game would be if they designed this scenario out of it.  Then I ragequit. "

"with all the friendliness in the world, i'd like you to know that baserapists like yourself were the worst part of my Battlefield experience      "

"One way they could fix that is tailoring map sizes to the number of players"

Why are you using the same avatar as that astroforce person. It's really confusing.

" Why are you using the same avatar as that astroforce person. It's really confusing. "

" 

@jtman54179

 said: 

"One way they could fix that is tailoring map sizes to the number of players"

That's actually something they did in BF2 and would be great if they brought it back.  Basically, there were three versions of each map; one designed for up to 16 players, one for 32 players, and one for up to 64 players. "

" @Azteck said:

" Why are you using the same avatar as that astroforce person. It's really confusing. "

I think he's trolling.  First he was being an obnoxious Halo fanboy, now he's trying to make fun of astroforce. "

" @Azteck said:

" Why are you using the same avatar as that astroforce person. It's really confusing. "

I think he's trolling.  First he was being an obnoxious Halo fanboy, now he's trying to make fun of astroforce. "

" @Hailinel said:

" @Azteck said:

" Why are you using the same avatar as that astroforce person. It's really confusing. "

I think he's trolling.  First he was being an obnoxious Halo fanboy, now he's trying to make fun of astroforce. "

That's pretty damn pathetic of him. "

" @Azteck said:

" Why are you using the same avatar as that astroforce person. It's really confusing. "

I think he's trolling.  First he was being an obnoxious Halo fanboy, now he's trying to make fun of astroforce. "

" @Azteck said:

" @Hailinel said:

" @Azteck said:

" Why are you using the same avatar as that astroforce person. It's really confusing. "

I think he's trolling.  First he was being an obnoxious Halo fanboy, now he's trying to make fun of astroforce. "

That's pretty damn pathetic of him. "

Don't talk about things you don't know, also stay on topic. "

" @KaosAngel said:

" @Azteck said:

" @Hailinel said:

" @Azteck said:

" Why are you using the same avatar as that astroforce person. It's really confusing. "

I think he's trolling.  First he was being an obnoxious Halo fanboy, now he's trying to make fun of astroforce. "

That's pretty damn pathetic of him. "

Don't talk about things you don't know, also stay on topic. "

Says the hyperactive, hype-driven maniac determined to show everyone that he's not a Nomura fanboy. "

" @Hailinel said:

" @KaosAngel said:

" @Azteck said:

" @Hailinel said:

" @Azteck said:

" Why are you using the same avatar as that astroforce person. It's really confusing. "

I think he's trolling.  First he was being an obnoxious Halo fanboy, now he's trying to make fun of astroforce. "

That's pretty damn pathetic of him. "

Don't talk about things you don't know, also stay on topic. "

Says the hyperactive, hype-driven maniac determined to show everyone that he's not a Nomura fanboy. "

Sorry, what are you doing here exactly?  I don't think you even play Battlefield games do you?  Are you only here to insult people and derail the thread? "

" @Ahmad_Metallic:@B0nd07: I don't understand what you mean by 'baserapists'.  Do you mean the bulk of the two teams who are fighting each other for control of the flags?  That was the worst part of the game for you and driving around capturing undefended flags was the best?  What?  "

Steamworks because as I have found out by being in bombing runs is hard to find friends and severs.

" Steamworks because as I have found out by being in bombing runs is hard to find friends and severs. "

Battlefield is always funnest when maps are fresh and you don't know every nook and cranny like the back of your hand (unless of course you're a lazy sniper). I know it won't be in Battlefield until BF5 at the earliest, if ever at all, but I want proceduralized maps that have differences every time. Instead of crafting and iterating a few maps to perfection, put all that effort behind scripting different types of templates. 
 
Start with something small like the city map Oasis in CQ and have the server choose which walkways are walled off and doors/windows are bricked up. Then maybe a small community of roads and houses placed with certain requirements (such as upstairs window facing the center of the map, picket fences separating them and hugging the road, etc...). I want to see proceduralization work in a first person action game that isn't so free-focused like Minecraft.
 
I would also like to see the third faction put to use, if one exists this time. Vanilla BF2 had three factions, but only two could ever be fighting over territory at once. I want up to 1v1v1 in conquest mode. It would also be a way to raise player count without giving the commanders extra squads to support and direct.

" @rb_man said:

" Steamworks because as I have found out by being in bombing runs is hard to find friends and severs. "

This would be amazing, but...let's be honest here...its' not gonna happen.  No matter how much DICE loves PC, this will never happen. "

" Battlefield is always funnest when maps are fresh and you don't know every nook and cranny like the back of your hand (unless of course you're a lazy sniper). I know it won't be in Battlefield until BF5 at the earliest, if ever at all, but I want proceduralized maps that have differences every time. Instead of crafting and iterating a few maps to perfection, put all that effort behind scripting different types of templates.   Start with something small like the city map Oasis in CQ and have the server choose which walkways are walled off and doors/windows are bricked up. Then maybe a small community of roads and houses placed with certain requirements (such as upstairs window facing the center of the map, picket fences separating them and hugging the road, etc...).  "

"  I would also like to see the third faction put to use, if one exists this time. Vanilla BF2 had three factions, but only two could ever be fighting over territory at once. I want up to 1v1v1 in conquest mode. It would also be a way to raise player count without giving the commanders extra squads to support and direct. "

@Jimbo: Teams that made a solid front line right outside the other team's base (or often in the other base), making it nearly impossible to make a break for any point.  And what you want to do with the TF2 style of locking the points would make sure it was impossible for the underpowered team to make a break.  That would ruin the experience for the majority of players.  The "wack-a-mole problem" is not a problem at all.

" @B0nd07

@Jimbo: Teams that made a solid front line right outside the other team's base (or often in the other base), making it nearly impossible to make a break for any point.  And what you want to do with the TF2 style of locking the points would make sure it was impossible for the underpowered team to make a break.  That would ruin the experience for the majority of players.  The "wack-a-mole problem" is not a problem at all.

If you've ended up in that bad a position then you deserve to lose the round. "

It better be BF3 and not BC3, that's all I ask.

 @MrKlorox said:

"  I would also like to see the third faction put to use, if one exists this time. Vanilla BF2 had three factions, but only two could ever be fighting over territory at once. I want up to 1v1v1 in conquest mode. It would also be a way to raise player count without giving the commanders extra squads to support and direct. "

now THAT, is an awesome idea. i thought about it earlier, but discarded it later because it sounded.. odd. still not sure about it working out, but it does sound amazing.. you'd have 3 big safe bases for 3 different factions, 64 players each, with maybe 10-20 flags to capture, on a wide ass map with all kinds of terrains..  that sounds so motherfucking grand i love it "

" @MrKlorox said:

" Battlefield is always funnest when maps are fresh and you don't know every nook and cranny like the back of your hand (unless of course you're a lazy sniper). I know it won't be in Battlefield until BF5 at the earliest, if ever at all, but I want proceduralized maps that have differences every time. Instead of crafting and iterating a few maps to perfection, put all that effort behind scripting different types of templates.   Start with something small like the city map Oasis in CQ and have the server choose which walkways are walled off and doors/windows are bricked up. Then maybe a small community of roads and houses placed with certain requirements (such as upstairs window facing the center of the map, picket fences separating them and hugging the road, etc...).  "

now why would u go n say sum'in stupid like dat boy ? 
 
just imagine playing the game and running into walls that werent there before, or chasing someone and going into a house (as a part of the chase) to knife a window and shoot them in the back, only to find its no longer a window 
that'd make us trip balls go ape-shit and not play straight... bad idea IMO  "

" MAG had a mode where it was three teams (32v32v32) on one map (Escalation)It'd be interesting to see that system    "

" @MrKlorox:  you really think gamers are that skilled and quick that they'd adjust to new buildings and doors/windows/etc  round after round ?  thats sounds confusing and exhausting, bro ! "

Let server operators choose between uncappable home bases (both roped off and in-bounds options), fully cappable home bases, and "double assault lines" rules (home base uncappable until the enemy holds all the standard capture points, then base can be captured which ends the rape). My favorite set is the double assault lines rule set I first played in Highway Tampa 2142.

" Let server operators choose between uncappable home bases (both roped off and in-bounds options), fully cappable home bases, and "double assault lines" rules (home base uncappable until the enemy holds all the standard capture points, then base can be captured which ends the rape). My favorite set is the double assault lines rule set I first played in Highway Tampa 2142. "

I'd love to see pilot-able ships and cruisers again. One of the most unique multiplayer shooter experiences  to me where everyone's working together and repairing the ship or ramming ships against ships or beaching the ship and everyone gets all mad its hilarious.
 
I really hope they make the experience feel grand again like bf1942 with all types of various vehicles. I really hope its just not bc2 with improved graphics and larger player limits.

" If anything 'my' system (apparently it was used in Joint Ops and Project Reality) would prevent one team racing forward and capturing all of the flags without a fight (though I'm not sure how you would do that unless the other team is asleep anyway), because they wouldn't be able to cap the flags near your base until they had captured a line of flags to those ones. "