Mchart
Supreme [H]ardness
- Joined
- Aug 7, 2004
- Messages
- 6,552
All the servers rotate through all the maps. You’ll be lucky to find a server running a single map.
![[H]ard|Forum](/styles/hardforum/xenforo/logo_dark.png){kind=logo}
Battlefield V
- Thread starter Blade-Runner
- Start date
a few months ago I could find many servers all playing the map I wanted on conquest. if I wanted to play arras. I could pick from maybe 20 servers that were currently on arras in the rotation. now theres 1-5. pretty sure the servers are put up based on demand. so its looking like the game has lost alot of players in the past few months.
Mchart
Supreme [H]ardness
- Joined
- Aug 7, 2004
- Messages
- 6,552
It’s inevitable with any of these modern games that don’t have real dedicated server support.
I recently started playing this game thanks to Origin pass. Playing solo is utter chaos. I haven't seriously played BF since BF3 with my friend on comms. What I don't understand is how I keep winding up on losing teams all the time as my record is 1 win 12 losses. What's also frustrating is considering how rusty I am and much older, I am still easily top 5 in points every map (i only play 64 player servers). I have no idea what the other people on my team are doing.
you get put on losing teams cause players left that team
Last edited:
Flogger23m
[H]F Junkie
- Joined
- Jun 19, 2009
- Messages
- 14,359
Only found two servers today with TDM, US only. Yes there are other modes, but I hated the vehicles (and their grinding). Still confused with how the whole battle coins thing works. Did some daily challenges which should give me about 200, yet I still only had 250 on tap to use after the match ended and I exited to the main menu. Wanted to upgrade the French MAS rifle but looks like either the battle coins didn't allocate properly or there are different sets of battle coins or whatever the hell they are called.
And suddenly, I remember why I always play for an hour and then don't touch it for a few months. So much stuff is damn convoluted and confusing. Really, I just want a Thompson SMG and FG-42.
And suddenly, I remember why I always play for an hour and then don't touch it for a few months. So much stuff is damn convoluted and confusing. Really, I just want a Thompson SMG and FG-42.
to get those 2 guns you will have to put some hours into medic and support. which I dont think should take too long if you give ammo and health. I'm sitting at 140k company coin. I think get like 1000 sometimes from a round of conqest. the tommy gun is one of the best medic gunsOnly found two servers today with TDM, US only. Yes there are other modes, but I hated the vehicles (and their grinding). Still confused with how the whole battle coins thing works. Did some daily challenges which should give me about 200, yet I still only had 250 on tap to use after the match ended and I exited to the main menu. Wanted to upgrade the French MAS rifle but looks like either the battle coins didn't allocate properly or there are different sets of battle coins or whatever the hell they are called.
And suddenly, I remember why I always play for an hour and then don't touch it for a few months. So much stuff is damn convoluted and confusing. Really, I just want a Thompson SMG and FG-42.
heres some gameplay, looks great. I'm wondering though, do both teams get access to the same guns? thats one thing that has always bothered me is that everyone is shooting the same weapons. in past BF games you eventually learn the sounds, you'll know where enemy gunshots are.
The next Battlefield game won't be out until mid-2021 at the earliest
Electronic Arts wants to wait for the next generation of consoles...
https://www.pcgamer.com/the-next-battlefield-game-wont-be-out-until-mid-2021-at-the-soonest/
Electronic Arts wants to wait for the next generation of consoles...
https://www.pcgamer.com/the-next-battlefield-game-wont-be-out-until-mid-2021-at-the-soonest/
Flogger23m
[H]F Junkie
- Joined
- Jun 19, 2009
- Messages
- 14,359
That sucks but maybe it will result in something more well developed. Then again they mention it will be based around live service crap, which likely means little content at release like BFV regardless. I can't say I care for BFV at all really, so I will continue to play BF4 assuming people still play it in 2020 or 2021.
You can get it for free if you enable security 2 factor.
Comixbooks
Fully [H]
- Joined
- Jun 7, 2008
- Messages
- 22,011
Damn I might be I'll be a old man once that lauches I hope it's Modern this time and goes full force with all the Bell and Whistles that BF4 used. I bet Camelot Unchained won't be out by then. Baldurs Gate 3 will be launched by then I suspect.
supastar1568
Limp Gawd
- Joined
- Jul 19, 2006
- Messages
- 470
Battlefield: Civil War...do it Dice...do it...
Comixbooks
Fully [H]
- Joined
- Jun 7, 2008
- Messages
- 22,011
I wanted to pick up that War of Rights game on Steam it looked really good actually but I was burned by Post Scriptum so I didn't pick it up.
I knew the game wouldn't last as fun as it looked.
wake island comes in dec
Thanks I'll have to do that tonight.
Master_Pain
Supreme [H]ardness
- Joined
- Apr 13, 2007
- Messages
- 4,947
All I want is my BF2 version of Oman back...
IdiotInCharge
NVIDIA SHILL
- Joined
- Jun 13, 2003
- Messages
- 14,675
I'd like a 'Battlefield: Revisited' where they take all of the old maps and upgrade them for the newest engine.
Still don't know why that's not a thing; there's stuff in BF3 I'd like to play, but I have to find BF3 servers to actually play it.
Perhaps have an Origin tier where one can 'request' a particular map / setup out of the EA servers in rotation? Maybe need a squad or two worth to join in, then it's persistent and listed until your group logs off>?
Give it to EA to find all of the stupid ways to try and make money instead of actually leveraging their assets to provide value...
Funny, this is EXACTLY what I have wanted from DICE since forever. A "Battlefield: Generations" with all the best maps on the latest Frostbite engine. Example a way bigger Kharg Island, with added things like attack boats or whatever else. There are those maps you played the shit out of and just miss, and wish they were updated graphically.
And I know some people don't like what seems like proliferation of subscription services, but damn, I'd definitely pay a monthly or yearly fee for a maintained, updated, modern Battlefield with drip-fed content.
Unfortunately, their number crunchers probably still show an advantage for new, annualized $60 retail box titles that throw out what previous titles got right, and start over.
Flogger23m
[H]F Junkie
- Joined
- Jun 19, 2009
- Messages
- 14,359
I liked Kharg Island on BF3, not sure if it was in previous games. Personally I'd be happy to go back to a $50 Premium pass if the content was high. My suggestion to prevent player base fragmentation:
- Give everyone maps.
- Give people who pay for Premium some extra weapon variants that are cosmetic only. Keep it classy, there are dozens of M4 configurations to do as an example so you can add cosmetics without turning the game into a circus.
- Maybe some slight variations of weapons or vehicles that have very minimal gameplay changes as long as they are balanced properly.
Might have to drop the price a bit, but it is better than a half finished game at launch while they trickle content out.
IdiotInCharge
NVIDIA SHILL
- Joined
- Jun 13, 2003
- Messages
- 14,675
People pay to play MMOs. Those have massive amount of content in a different format, however, there are many that put the same or more hours that your average raiding MMO'er does into games like Battlefield.
EA could charge, if the content were there, plain and simple.
Master_Pain
Supreme [H]ardness
- Joined
- Apr 13, 2007
- Messages
- 4,947
They redid Oman, but it was quite a bit different from the original and I didn't really like it. They need to stop changing stuff. And do away with attachment unlocks...
IdiotInCharge
NVIDIA SHILL
- Joined
- Jun 13, 2003
- Messages
- 14,675
Well, they could update the original and release a new version.
So far this hasn't been too bad -- the base weapons are pretty effective (sometimes among the best), and the unlock systems do provide a sense of 'progression' alongside various equipment unlocks and vehicle unlocks. And for the community as a whole, any performance differences due to unlocks happen in the first month and quickly taper off.
Got mine too, thanks again!
I am not even sure if I am going to use mine.
Comixbooks
Fully [H]
- Joined
- Jun 7, 2008
- Messages
- 22,011
Pacific maps have way too much foliage and camping to be any fun at least for TDM.
One benefit of waiting (besides new console tech allowing more advanced engine stuff for PC version) is this will give more time for the BR game style to hopefully die down, and I say that as someone who loves playing Apex. I'd pay full retail for a modern reskin of BF3/BF4 at this point. I enjoyed BF1 and put about 100 hours in, but haven't been able to get into BFV much yet. The new maps are OK, have had some fun playing them at least. Also disappointing no one uses VOIP ever, and I assume without private servers there are no communities that play with Discord (i.e. SEC8 in the BF3/4 days was so good for playing the objective, communicating etc).
It's also mind blowing how DICE/EA keep screwing stuff up like server browser, private servers (not having at launch and taking 12-18 months to implement), no auto balance for teams etc.
Are people using DX11 or DX12 these days? I think I am still on DX11 due to launch issues but was reading some stuff on Reddit that supported DX12 and disabling forward frame rendering if you have a rig to drive a high/consistent frame rate. May give that a try tonight.
Sounds like the new patch/TTK changes are causing an uproar though.
Sounds like the new patch/TTK changes are causing an uproar though.
(1) They released too many titles in too short a time span. If they wanted longevity they should have gone the CS route and released one per decade. Instead they tried to milk it with a release every 2-3 years. Unlike CoD they didn't have a massive console following who will blindly buy all their games.
(2) They were too authentic with the "X weapon type was not available in X year/decade". Gamers don't care. They want a capable and fun to use AR, Shotgun, SMG, Sniper Rifle and care less about realism within the time period. Move authenticity to a specific game mode and give the playerbase functional and fun weapons to use.
Flogger23m
[H]F Junkie
- Joined
- Jun 19, 2009
- Messages
- 14,359
Did you play BF1 or BF5? All kinds of out of place weapons, failures and limited prototypes that had tiny production runs. Ironically in the case of BF5, last I checked, some of the most prolific weapons of the period were not in the game yet WWI era prototypes or other crap was. Did they ever add the M1 Garand?
BF3/4 were a bit different. In BF3 you had weapons limited to each faction until you reached a certain rank. In BF4 that was gone and all weapons could be used at the start once unlocked which I preferred. Interestingly, the vehicles are still faction based.
I think it was the same in bf2 as bf3. US had the m16, iraq or whoever it was had the ak for assault class. I don't like how its been since. its straight up lazyness from the devs. doesn't feel like there are two teams, feels like you're just fighting against the players on the other part of the scoreboard. wish they would remake bf2 on the latest engine. like wake island, imagine how many people want to play strike at karkand again?
Flogger23m
[H]F Junkie
- Joined
- Jun 19, 2009
- Messages
- 14,359
Personally I prefer how it is in BF4. BF isn't hyper realistic and I don't mind having many weapons. If we went to limiting weapons to certain sides they it wouldn't make sense to use the majority of the weapons in game. You'd have, at best, three different rifle families for the US team as an example. I think they should keep the vehicles team specific though.
For more realistic games like Red Orchestra/Rising Storm I think it makes more sense.
chameleoneel
Supreme [H]ardness
- Joined
- Aug 15, 2005
- Messages
- 7,580
In my opinion, one of Battlefield's biggest problems is that there are way too many guns and too much class crossover due to all of the upgrades/attachments/guns. The game would play a lot better if each class was severely limited on weapon choice, amount of grenades, no attachments and upgrades, and those weapon choices had a whole lot less crossover between classes.
As great as BC2 is ----- the beta was even better. Because it limited each class to two or 3 weapons and upgrades/attachments were severely limited or non-existent. This made each class role incredibly clear, with very obvious shortcomings. Forcing you to play close to other players with different classes, if not actually role with a balanced squad. And the moment you faced a situation not meant for your class----you had your pants down.
As great as BC2 is ----- the beta was even better. Because it limited each class to two or 3 weapons and upgrades/attachments were severely limited or non-existent. This made each class role incredibly clear, with very obvious shortcomings. Forcing you to play close to other players with different classes, if not actually role with a balanced squad. And the moment you faced a situation not meant for your class----you had your pants down.
IdiotInCharge
NVIDIA SHILL
- Joined
- Jun 13, 2003
- Messages
- 14,675
Eh, each class has its own specialties. Crossover weapons do not include rockets, machineguns, recon kits, repair kits, medic kits, ammo etc.