andytheadequate wrote:Completely agree. BC2 definitely got better as we were left with "veterans". For the most part, people knew what they were doing. With BC2, I played mainly Conquest at the start because a couple of dodgy players on your team wasn't completely devastating, unlike it Rush.
I think a lot of the problems with it is that we are comparing it to BC2 towards the end, where the bugs were generally ironed out and everything had been balanced and tweaked. The players were nearly all experienced and generally quite good and knew how to play. Whereas on BF3 there are still a lot of idiots (Give me some fucking ammo you fucking moron support class!) and there are a lot of bugs/ balance tweaks that need looking at.
At one point in BC2 Rush was absolutely awful as nearly every game involved people simply blowing up the MCOMs with RPGs from miles away. Luckily they fixed it. Hopefully BF3 will be the same.
But towards the end, I played Rush most of the time because the matches were more dynamic imo and you mostly had decent teams.
I also think 5 flags would be too much on most maps. I wouldn't mind 5 flags on some though, just to mix things up – I really enjoy the one with 5 on B2K, although that is Conquest Assault.
I just wished DICE had increased the console numbers from 12 per team to 16 – surely that was achievable?
My blogs – http://retrogt.com/blog/author/danny