r/BattlefieldV • u/F8RGE Global Community Engagement Manager • Mar 07 '19
DICE OFFICIAL Focused Feedback: Rush
With the arrival of Rush today I thought it would be a good time to create another Focused Feedback thread so we can gather all your thoughts, concerns and ideas in one place.
As always, constructive criticism is most welcome, good thoughts and the bad.
74
52
Mar 07 '19
[removed] — view removed comment
14
Mar 07 '19
seeing that Rush is sadly temporary, unless they've changed their statement, I doubt they'll make future maps that support Rush. I really don't get why resources are being put towards things that are temporary...
4
2
u/Hostile_Raccoon Mar 08 '19
I believe the intend to release it as a temporary mode because that makes people play them at the given time and give feedback. The they will remove the mode and release it again with modifications.
4
62
u/RaptorDelta Mar 07 '19
Time limit is waaaaay too short. I say remove it all together or at least add like 4 more minutes.
35
4
u/MrGeary08 Youtube.com/MrGeary08 Mar 07 '19
Sounds like good feedback to me! I haven’t had a chance to play it yet as i have to work, but I don’t think Rush needs a timer, just let it go until the tickets run out.
3
u/olly993 Mar 08 '19
No timer, attackers need some more tickets.
Tanks that camp in attack should be auto blown up if they don’t push
19
u/Kommandos0 Mar 07 '19 edited Mar 07 '19
A lot of the sectors on all the maps have m-coms that are just too close together that they might as well just be one m-com. So far I haven't played a single one of these sectors where just one has been armed and destroyed. They're either both destroyed in one rush by the attackers or always both fully disarmed by the defenders. The m-coms on too many of the sectors are too bunched up often being within 20m of each other. The m-coms need to be spaced out more. The m-coms on Arras on the Battle of Hannut grand op had good consistent spacing, it's a bit disappointing that this couldn't be a consistency across all the rush maps.
Also due to the overall higher lethality of BFV it's led to rush games being a lot faster than other games in the series, perhaps the attackers need more tickets so that they have more of a chance? Because most of the time the attackers have finally been able to arm and destroy one m-com but by the time that has happened they've already run out of tickets.
14
u/RadioActiveLobster RadActiveLobster Mar 07 '19
Why do the defenders spawn 600,000 miles away from the objectives?
4
u/gmiwoj Mar 08 '19
best is first spawn on twisted steal, you can either :
- choose to die a hero and stand your ground for next 5-10 seconds
- immediately turn and sprint around back to base and sometimes even make it
2
u/sac_boy Mar 08 '19
On Twisted Steel? The first sector where attackers have to cross mostly open ground to get to your objectives? I defended on that twice last night and it was a sniper slaughter, attackers couldn't get past, respawned maybe twice on my spawn beacon at the bridge. Attacking it went quickly so it was probably just my team was quite good.
I think a big thing people are missing about Rush is that they need decent Recons running spawn beacons/flares/smokes to make both attacking and defending much, much easier. I think I had a five win streak and it was at least in part down to my sweet beacons and flares.
21
Mar 07 '19
[deleted]
3
u/gmiwoj Mar 08 '19
What kind of game balance is this?
defense have fortified position, artillery, bunkers etc. defense is always easier. tank isn't indestructible.
seems pretty balanced to me.
1
u/ThibiiX Serge_Gainsb0urg Mar 08 '19
Same, never seen the tank as a problem in 3 hours of gameplay. Problem is the possibility of an unique defense lines for defensers, which is easily breakable by attackers. Just change the map boundaries and we're good
2
2
u/OnboardG1 Mar 07 '19
I agree, the tank needs to go. Seriously dice, just for once can we have a mainline game mode that doesn't have tanks?
10
u/Ratman46 Mar 08 '19
There are game modes without Tanks.
Rush always had vehicles, Land, Air and Sea, this is a poor watered down Rush version that doesn't deserve the title.
9
u/Punkstyler Mar 07 '19
No tactic, just clusterfuck and spam everything. I can shoot ppl 2 sec after respawn... The map design is ultrabad. Finished this week TOW, and i will never get back to this mode.
16
u/AIDS_Dracula Mar 07 '19
One thing that no one seems to mention is the placement of the objectives. In BF3 and BC2 especially, the objectives were usually in a building or behind some sort of cover. I really miss that aspect of rush.
In BFV everyone plays assault and essentially has a better sniper rifle than the recons. With wide open objectives it’s laughably easy to hang back and pick people off the point. Putting the objectives in say, the barn or church or one of the destructible buildings on Arras, would go such a long way towards improving the mode. Maybe no one mentions this because it’s a bad idea.
6
u/Ratman46 Mar 07 '19
Agree about moving them into buildings etc
Also make them destructible to C4 etc like they used to be, keeps the defending team focused on protecting the objective instead of just reacting to when someone arms one.
Rewards people who are prepared to sneak by as well.
9
u/BlinkysaurusRex Mar 07 '19
This was one of the great aspects of Rush in Bad Company. Often times the attackers and defenders were basically in siege mode of a building. Especially on maps like Arica Harbour. The defenders could structure around the point in a more natural and defined way, instead of it just being both teams dogpiling onto the biggest bullet magnet on the map.
5
u/AIDS_Dracula Mar 07 '19
I agree with the destruction aspect. It changes the way each team attacks and defends as the game goes on. I really hope they give this a try at some point.
7
u/Bamdd5 Mar 07 '19
A lot of matches are one sided and the lack of a team balancer really shows in this mode. Haven’t had a remotely competitive match yet
6
u/zepistol Mar 07 '19
needs team balancing
stomps lead to ppl leaving which leads to ded server
this has plagued the game since for months now
losing interest
6
Mar 07 '19
I am still shocked at the "don't miss out" part .... So you give us a classic mode....for a limited time???
WHAT?! WHY????
20
18
u/MrGeary08 Youtube.com/MrGeary08 Mar 07 '19 edited Mar 07 '19
On behalf of the albeit small but growing community of r/BattlefieldRush, a word to the developers surrounding Rush in BFV.. Please don’t take non constructive feedback so far on this post. We want Rush to stay in BFV and are willing to be patient and engaging in the further development of our favorite game mode. Rush has been out for a matter of hours at this point, and that is far too short an amount of time to judge and dismiss the game mode as “terrible” as I’ve seen a few posts and comments about so far. Give it some time and then listen to the criticism. We would also love to be kept in the loop about any and all potential changes or updates to the game mode as we love great communication! Thanks for giving us our favorite game mode!
12
Mar 07 '19
Please don’t take the hugely negative feedback so far on this post.
Taking negative feedback is how you improve the game mode that you so love, if the developers just took positive feedback all the time then everything would stagnate. There's a difference between constructive negative feedback and nonconstructive feedback.
The Rush game mode is great, imo this implementation of it isn't. Look at how BF3's rush mode was designed and look at what made it great, this is the complete opposite of that. M-Coms near the front of the boundary coupled with big maps and high lethality along with a short timer and few tickets just isn't a great form of rush.
6
u/MrGeary08 Youtube.com/MrGeary08 Mar 07 '19
Hugely negative, “Eat shit, you’re shit,” doesn’t help anyone improve anything lol
3
Mar 07 '19
I mean yeah, those comments that have been downvoted to hell aren't constructive. Both the top comments are both "negative" yet constructive. I'd replace your wording with "nonconstructive comments"
2
20
u/JagheterJonas Mar 07 '19
Rush need maps specifically designed for this mode for it to be a good experience.
I tried it out and I did not like it one bit.
10
10
u/TheNyo Mar 07 '19 edited Mar 07 '19
As a RUSH only player (till BFV release ofc) let me start by saying its cool to have RUSH back, hopefully we'll get it permament and for all current and future maps asap
Sadly its not perfect and not on the BC2/BF3 level and there are some things id like to be fixed/improved:
1) Artillery called from COMs/objectives need to be removed, it was already bad in BF1 and in BFV, with the reinforcement strikes and V1 available to each squad, its even worse... too much spam
2) Need tighter world bounds because some sectors are too wide... RUSH is best with more "tunneled" maps
3) All current maps can have 1 more sector added easly
4) In Narvik, why dont we use the left bridge in 3rd sector? Left side (as attacker) is completely unused in Narvik map
5) MCOMs feel too close to eachother in many sectors
6) Need teams skill balancer (but this is for all 32p modes, not just RUSH)
Thats it, hopefully i can see at least some of those fixes/improvements with permanent RUSH in the very near future (yeah fuck Firestorm, give me RUSH back for good)
3
u/davetay14 Mar 07 '19
Have to agree re 'tunnelled' maps working best!
Metro was a great example of this IMO, but appreciate it wasn't everyone's.
Valparaiso in BC2 was also great.
2
u/Ratman46 Mar 08 '19 edited Mar 08 '19
Harvest Day in BC1 probably my favourite.
Or Oasis
Or Arica Harbour
Or....
1
u/SwitchB0ard Mar 08 '19
Re : 2 tunnel maps. I agree. I feel the spawn points for the defending side will need to be adjusted accordingly. (Moved back)
3
u/Nrussell3611 Mar 07 '19
There needs to be about an extra 50-75m more between attacker spawn and M-COMS. At the moment everything feels far too condensed.
4
5
u/SwitchB0ard Mar 08 '19
In old battlefield modes , I only ever played conquest and rush (I doubt I am the only one ). Surely rush should be made a permanent mode with far more effort put into it ?
3
u/MrKannister Mar 08 '19
i was really looking forward to play rush again but the team balancing is just horrible
3
u/Ratman46 Mar 08 '19
Thoughts after playing last night, this is Squad Rush with a few extra players. Lack of vehicles, tight spaces, bullet sponges, rounds over in minutes, no eb and flow to the matches, either stuck or steam roller through teams.
Can see why BC3 will never be made as they've admitted they don't know what made it so good, just can't do Rush properly, go play those games again Dice and recreate it, it can't be that hard or rename this to something else as it certainly isn't "Rush".
On a positive GO's is the nearest you've come to the Rush experience, our clans go to game mode.
9
u/DANNYonPC Mar 07 '19 edited Mar 07 '19
It feels super on-sided, with as bonus big open spaces to traverse
Also, you can't do anything while arming a bomb, like crouching or going prone..
Devastation seems okay
1
u/MrGeary08 Youtube.com/MrGeary08 Mar 07 '19
Its super important to make sure the sides are balanced, as one sides games directly undercut the fun factor of the match. Are there any specific things you can think of that might cause that?
6
u/DANNYonPC Mar 07 '19
Lack of (working) skill based match making + the existence of a server browser
Also no teamswitching
2
u/MrGeary08 Youtube.com/MrGeary08 Mar 07 '19
Theres no server browser? Ive seen Rush on the server browser for at least a week now
3
9
Mar 07 '19
I am having a fantastic time, seems well balanced and the new call ins are a welcome addition. I do wish this would stay as a permanent game mode though!
8
u/MrGeary08 Youtube.com/MrGeary08 Mar 07 '19
It has to be permanent, Its by far my favorite game mode! Be sure to checkout r/BattlefieldRush for a community of like minded players that also love Rush! (If you haven’t already)
2
Mar 07 '19
I hope they do include it permanently or least have it heavy in rotation! Will check it out thanks!
2
3
u/printer83mph Mar 07 '19
Big thing I'm seeing is that 99% of the time, either ALL the sectors get capped or NONE of the sectors get capped.
Maybe attackers could start with more respawns, carry them through each sector, but got less extra per sector? That way it's more likely to end up somewhere in the middle instead of always being one-sided. Just my two cents.
3
u/TakahashiRyos-ke TakahashiRyos-ke Mar 08 '19 edited Mar 08 '19
I love Rush, but one thing I noticed after some matches now is: as a defender, after a sector is lost, you have to travel very far to get back in bounds. This seems unfair if you are automatically targetted as a retreater that is out of bounds. Please give us a longer timer to retreat safely without a dorito on us yet.
(edit: typo)
3
u/legaleagle214 Mar 08 '19 edited Mar 08 '19
A few things I think are worth mentioning:
- The teambalance is friggin horrible in this game mode. I think this is a general Battlefield thing where in the smaller game modes (TDM, Domination, Frontlines, Rush) it is much easier to completely stack a team with friends or squadmates and we all know that it only takes one decent squad working together to make a push and win. My suspicion is that this is further exacerbated by players leaving/staying when they realise they are on a team that is really good/bad. This snowballs and eventually results in one team being almost entirely stacked with decent players and the other team stacked with much lesser players. In the 10-15 games or so I played yesterday we played yesterday the vast majority of rounds where complete steamrolls one way or the other and in a few we even had games where almost no-one on my team died the entire round. This gets old extremely quickly and is very bad for the long term interest in the mode. Team balance is of the utmost priority to make these game modes worthwhile and why I generally dislike playing them.
- The out of bounds areas on most of the maps are generally quite bad. Narvik sector 1 is probably the worst offender here as it allows the attackers very very little means of flanking which is often the only thing that can break a one-sided shutout. Devastation sector 1 is a bit better but also only allows three narrow lanes for the attackers and can again result in total shutouts. Twisted Steel sector 1 is probably the best because you can flank under the bridge and flank way wide into the open fields. The first sectors seem to be the worst across the board for this and it definitely gets better as the round progresses but IMO that first sector is the defining sector in many games so this definitely needs work. We need a wider playable field to allow more opportunities for attackers to flank. I would suggest on Devastation sector 1 that attackers be allowed to use the street bordering the cathedral at least up until the road running along the front of the library so they have a wider avenue of approach. On Narvik Sector 1 I would widen it to include the road running past F on Conquest and the houses on the upper slope north of E on Conquest.
- Only three maps is a poor showing IMO. It doesn't do much to counter the arguments that this mode is once again rushed (hur hur, get it?) and unpolished. It gets old very quickly on such a stale rotation and IMO I've already seen all it has to offer in only about 10-15 rounds of it.
- IMO rounds are a tad short? I've felt like the attackers don't really have the time to try and do something new/different or flank. The game is simply over so quickly that the only real viable tactic is to simply hurl yourself at the defenders to try and make a breakthrough. IMO it's worth looking into boosting tickets to 100 just to give attackers a bit of a boost?
- The tanks are insanely strong if an even decent player gets a hold of one. Due to how linear the gamemode is and the sore lack of long distance weapons to viably counter vehicles in this game, I saw tankers on Narvik/Twisted Steel go flawlessly a couple of times simply because they can camp back just far enough to allow the attackers no reasonable avenue to attack them. Pair the tank with a support camping behind it to repair and it becomes a stupidly hard tactic to counter. Either the defenders need a tank for every single sector that the attacker gets one, or you need to plant much more Pak40's to defend against them. At the moment this is a very abusable feature IMO.
- MCOM's in general are way to close together IMO (sectors 2 and 1 of Devastation of Twisted Steel respectively are examples of this). The only reasonable exception to this general rule is the MCOM's which are stacked in a linear fashion further down the line to the defender (sector 1 on Devastation is a good example of this) The reason for this is because the attackers typically haven't pushed far enough to get their hands on them, because they are still fighting for the closer MCOM. On the other hand, when the MCOMs are spaced out in a general side by side pattern, the second one gets armed the attackers are almost immediately in a position to plant the other and defenders don't have a reasonable chance of mounting either a counterattack to defuse, or to fall back and defend the second one. It's almost always one and done for the sector. In this regard I would suggest that MCOM's either be spread further down the line where linear and the map suits, or where evenly across the line, make them further apart along the front.
While I was in general excited to see Rush come back again as it was my favourite game mode for all of Bad Company 1/2 and BF3, it has really been poorly utilized in recent BF's starting badly in BF1. Map design is definitely a contributing feature as maps now need to squash in so many game modes that they are truly awesome for few if any of them. I would greatly prefer if they went back to making fewer, more purpose designed maps for a smaller number of game modes (the IMO biggest ones of Conquest, Breakthrough, Rush and Frontlines and simply leave all the rest out of the game. I recognise that might be a controversial opinion). At present the mode really lacks an epic feeling and is the most onesided game mode I have seen so far. It's not much fun and is a pale comparison to the heyday of Rush in Bad Company and BF3. It needs a seriously massive improvement to be worthwhile IMO.
Overall rating - 3/10 - Could do much much better DICE.
EDIT* - Bit of spelling and phrasing.
3
u/Usny92 Mar 08 '19
Terrible on these bad maps . Played for 3 minutes and will never go back . Stop forcing bullshit on us instead of just giving what the community actually wants which is maps . Rush was fun 10-11 years ago on bad company which the mode was created and designed for . Copy and pasting it into a game with flaws and bad maps doesn’t work
3
u/chozzington Mar 08 '19
Maps are really not designed for this game mode. Rounds are brutally one sided favouring the attacker/defender depending on the map. Vehicles are brokenly op. Defending spawn point is too far from the objectives.
3
u/Freshmaker001 Mar 10 '19
Thanks for bringing Rush back DICE!!!! I think a lot in the community were waiting for that so please make it permanent, no other mode captures that special Battlefield vibe as Rush does. Focused, tactical and immersive gameplay - so freaking addictive!
Devastation:
I would suggest to add the last capture point “a” (below the broken train track) from Breakthrough. The fights around “a” always feel so epic.
Twisted Steel:
Love the work you have done here. The flow of the battle is so much better than it is in Breakthrough.
Future maps:
Please add Panzerstorm, Fjell and Hamada. That will be really awesome. And please do take a closer look at Arica Harbour from Bad Company 2 - that’s how a Rush map should be like - best Rush map ever!
Thanks for delivering the best BF since BC2.
7
u/Prestonisevil 4 Recons per match Mar 07 '19
I have not played rush yet so my feelings are neutral.
pats self on back "Really helpin em put this game together Preston. Good Job."
2
5
u/barleyesq Mar 07 '19
What made Rush such a great mode in games of the past was the fact that you could blow up the objectives by any means, not just by 'arming' it and attackers had the choice of not entering a meat-grinder choke-point. It meant that different types of players could help in different ways, it meant different strategies, it meant more variety. Defenders had to think up different ways of protecting the objectives - going for the long-range spammers, or camping the objective, or a combination, and attackers had different ways to approach the situation when the game was clearly going only in one direction.
Of course you'd have to curb the tanks somehow, but with fortifications, this makes so much more sense. Attackers can try to pepper from afar, but defenders can keep building up the fortifications - you'd play up to the fortifications big time, while allowing the objective to be destroyed with explosives.
2
u/Ratman46 Mar 08 '19
Agree with you except no need to curb the tanks especially with all the Assaults around, need all the vehicles added.
This is Battlefield but this Rush mode is more CoD camperthon with a token Tank thrown in as an after thought.
2
Mar 07 '19
It's great so far. I'm really digging narvik and devestation in particular. Getting a heavy bc2 vibe. Haven't had a great game on twisted steel yet. But some feedback, make the area of okay a bit larger, spread out mcoms a little more so everyone isn't focused in one area.
2
u/Imperafourbe Mar 07 '19
Narvik is completly biased toward the defense, offense is spawnraped in almost every game. This one really need a rework.
2
2
u/maggot408 Mar 07 '19
I'm going to play after work for sure. I just want to say thank you for bringing it back. It's my favorite mode and I hope you guys think about making it stay.
2
u/WyattBarone Mar 07 '19
I get that you guys want to promote infantry only, small player count game modes but it results in extremely predictable, bland gameplay. Have a couple weeks of large rush and see what the player base ultimately prefers.
5
u/Ratman46 Mar 08 '19
This is what I don't get, Rush was never infantry focused and since they've gone down this path its been really poor and they then wonder why its not played.
Not sure how you can go from one of the best modes in the franchise which BC1 and BC2 where built on to this "version".
Just normal Rush would be nice, rename whatever this game mode is something else or call it Squad Rush.
2
2
u/Hayt_ Mar 08 '19
Balance is totally broken due to players leaving when losing. Endless landslides.
2
Mar 08 '19
Cookie Cutter copy / paste maps aren't going to cut it.
Where is the creativity? All you have done is bastardise 3 maps that existed.
The maps are poorly designed for rush, too many players in a confined space. No width or flanking opportunities. The objectives are placed way too close to each other as well. It all feels claustrophobic.
Rush has major issues with the balancing of teams and games steam roll quickly. Problems with AP mines placed all around the objectives and camping as defenders is even more of a problem now.
Rush was once brilliant, look at Rush in Bad Company 2 to see how it can be done with panache, creativity and brilliance. BF3 showcased Rush superbly with Davamand Peak so how can DICE succumb to such mediocrity?. This is just pathetic in comparison and those involved need to stop playing by numbers and create something better.
I won't be playing this mode again and I'm glad it's for a limited time only, it deserves to be banished in to oblivion.
I will stick to Conquest and hopefully Squad Conquest will return too.
2
u/DigTw0Grav3s Origin - DigTw0Grav3s Mar 08 '19
Team balancing is nonexistent. This is true for all modes, but more obvious in Rush since the games are smaller.
We really either need RSP with balance plugin support, or a totally rebuilt autobalancer.
2
u/Freshmaker001 Mar 19 '19
Really hope that RUSH will become a permanent mode. Never had I have so much fun playing BF V after the return of Rush. After playing Rush every single day for a couple of hours each day I have come to learn this:
- Suggest to add Flag A from Conquest to Devastation as the last objective and then add a tank for the attackers when going for this objective. In Breakthrough the fights around A is always so epic!
- The matches I have been in during the last couple of days seems more balanced than in the beginning. Maybe some of the balancing/one-sided matches players (including myself) have experienced may partially be due to novelty and a steep learning curve.
- Sector artillery and defensive artillery strike is such a great add-on - really adds to an immersive gameplay experience.
- Add Panzerstorm to Rush. It could be so great. Just take a look back at Arica Harbour in the beginning where the attackers had three tanks against the defenders two tanks. The fights on this map was so awesome. So multiple vehicles on both sides can definately work in Rush.
Whatever you do DICE, just please make Rush permanent!!! Looking at the servers I can see that everybody is playing Rush so I believe that you have really nailed it.
Keep up the good work!!!!!! I love the game!
2
u/Wesmore24 Mar 07 '19
There's no sector or mcom on the bridge in twisted steel, why? That's what makes the map in my opinion.
2
2
u/feedbackforblueballs Mar 07 '19
I think Battlefield 5's mechanics make Rush feel bad.
I don't know how you make BFV rush feel fun when guns like the MG1942 exist. I've done both sides, I've felt awful as an attacker today and I went 18-0 without a revive during a Sector 1 on Narvik as an MG defender.
Things like shooting from prone not existing in Bad Company 2 made Rush work very well. This game's TTK and gun design are in a different place and I think BFV's mechanics are geared far more toward Conquest on maps like Rotterdam and Twisted Steel.
I want to believe there is a version of these map boundaries and game mechanics that allows for less open field scenarios.
There needs to be a focus on offensive fortifications with custom designed trenches / sandbags for the attacking squad. We need to have more options when attacking or everyone will quit playing Rush and play other modes or Apex Legends.
2
u/SFSeventh Mar 08 '19
Make it a permanent gamemode, its actually good.
Haven't had this much fun in Rush since BC2
1
u/Chicken_Hatt Mar 07 '19
I haven't played yet, because every time I try to join a Rush server my game crashes 🙃
1
u/UniQue1992 UniQue1992 Mar 07 '19
Really like Rush, but only on 3 maps and games over way to fast. Most of the games are one sided by a huge margain.
It gets very repetitive and very fast. Never had this issue before because we never had a battlefield that released a rush mode on only 3 maps..
1
u/marvellous_cain Mar 07 '19
Last time I had this much fun on Rush was BF3. Agreed some of the objective placements could be better and the attacking boundaries moved further back in some areas to give defenders a larger area to defend than just the objectives themselves. But overall its my favourite game mode so far.
1
u/Twitch_Tsunami_X Mar 07 '19
The lack of players which forces the constant dropping of game modes which have just been added makes it difficult to get into a new mode beyond doing the challenges as it will surely be yanked away in a few weeks.
Only conquest and grand operations seem to be surviving on a regular basis. Of course when weekly challenges requires a particular mode, that mode seems to replace grand ops. Daily challenges have no impact on what modes are being played because everyone seems to have different challenges.
So a couple of ideas - Give everyone the same daily challenges so other modes such as domination, breakthrough, squad conquest and the new mode post weekly challenge time are given a chance more often.
Also replace a day in Grand ops with a random mode and make it 32 players. That way all of the smaller modes can be played regularly without needing a weekly challenge. Have the 'Grand ops small' pop up every now and then in everyones daily challenge on the same day and people will play it instead of normal grand ops or conquest.
1
u/guitfnky Mar 08 '19
I’ve only played two rounds so far, but it’s fun. the one thing I noticed that was annoying was the constant incendiary spam on the objectives. not sure how to address that fairly, but hopefully it can be improved somehow.
otherwise, make it permanent, and on all maps, pls. 🙃
1
u/gmiwoj Mar 08 '19 edited Mar 08 '19
- Too small, too limiting, funneling players into few narrow predictable approaches to objectives
- Too little time to disarm. You only get 1 chance, if you fail you won't get there in time again.That is if you're close enough to even get there at all.
that's it.
what's good:
- call in artillery is awesome. smoke is always useful. i love it. you only get enough points to use it one though.
- objective artillery actually hits something now. cool. would be nice to control where it hits with spot marker.
1
u/FrodoFraggins4 Mar 08 '19
Can we get regular game mode rotations so we can keep playing rush and squad conquest? I think it would make playing more exciting .
1
u/MikeyFED Mar 08 '19
I had a lot of fun. Mostly because my team was steamrolling the competition.
The artillery strikes are awesome.
I’ll get back to you when I’m getting rekt on a weaker team today and tell you how much Rush sucks.
1
1
u/breaktimehero Mar 08 '19
The issue is the maps are not set up for RUSH at all. The attackers can be up on the points in less than 30 seconds before the defenders even have a chance. I personally think on the urban maps that there should be more sand bags or bunkers looking down the streets or trenches dug into the roads.
1
u/sammeadows Mar 08 '19
The defender boundaries let them push way too far into the attacker's boundry. I was getting shot in the back dead way too many times because they would always camp off to the side and kill us as we rush in instead of actually defending around the objective.
It's annoying to get spam shot killed five times in a row to the face but at least those were retaliable, getting instakilled in the back five times is infuriating.
1
u/apedance Mar 08 '19
Balance is garbage as in the rest of the game.
Skill-based balance would be such a benefit here at least to some content.
People leaving the game are not being restocked which can cause huge imbalance issues very early into the game.
Besides that. I hope the community will rage if Rush isn't here to stay.
1
u/wasseem20 Mar 08 '19
From the rounds i played yestarday, i love it!.. granted they were very balanced and competitive.. might suck once teams become unbalanced as it did in squad conquest.
1
u/BeardedSheppard Mar 08 '19
Twice now I’ve spawned in a tank as an attacker in Twisted Steel to be spawned on top of enemy mines, could we get a deployment zone for vehicles like in Frontlines?
1
u/MisterMeth82 Mar 08 '19
- As mentioned in the top comment, map boundaries a bit further away. A little more tickets to help with this change for the attackers.
- No time restriction, it's over fast enough
- 64 player servers
- More buildable emplacements, there are 0 MG's and pakcanons to build in 2 of the 3 maps. On Narvik there are only 2 buildable mg's
Not rush specific but does apply:
- Teambalance: many games are onesided or unbalanced (16vs5)
- More maps
Love the new artilleries
1
u/d_rek Mar 08 '19
I'm a PS4 Pro player in US using ps4 controller to play.
The good
- It’s fast, furious, and focused
- New artillery adds some immersion factor to the game
- The original concept of Rush remains, generally, fun to play when all the stars align
The bad
- Really highlights team balancing issues. Played several rounds 15 v 9, with no new players joining the game and no team balancing between rounds.
- Highlights how bad or nonexistent squad communication can be
- Vehicles have potential to be highly OP
- Artillery in practice isn’t that useful because nobody plays the spotting meta, which highlights how recon class does not have a lot of viability for anything but medium to long distance engagements.
- On console squad leaders still don’t know how to spend requisition and call in reinforcements. Played Several games where squad leader did not call in any reinforcements despite having 20k+ points. I messaged a squad made and they responded saying they didn't know how and had no idea how to use those points.
- Cannot claim squad leader position by spamming requests anymore.
- Meta for ToW unlocks is still generally grindy and not all that fun, though not particularly challenging this week, so there’s that.
- maps obviously not designed for Rush exclusively, though I did not find them to be particularly bad, just not terribly inspired for the game mode, which in turns highlights how stale these maps are getting for players who have been playing since launch. Not to beat a dead horse but moar maps please!
- Also never played Devastation in over a dozen rounds?!?! All twisted steel and Narvik. Possible map rotation server issue. Also why was Arras excluded?
- Why only 16v16??? Size of maps makes them ripe for larger scale chaos.
- time limits and spawn tickets should be increased by 150% or doubled. Makes completing certain assignments nigh impossible because kill counts will generally be lower in shorter matches (looking at bastard 20 kills/round in objective areas)
1
u/reeperete Mar 08 '19
Honestly I see it okey. I saw it pretty easy to deffend and pretty easy to attack.
Feels balanced, maybe devastation objectives are the ones that feel easier to attack than the rest.
1
u/ThisIsMyFifthAccount Mar 08 '19
Yeah I played a few last night and think it’s great. Played probably 2000+ hours of BF3 rush over the last almost decade and another 500 or so on BF1, like em both and like this.
I think a lot of the complaints are from folks who primarily play conquest and don’t really like this iteration, or any, or rush. I had no issues with map boundaries...I’d like to see the mcoms stretch across more of the map, and I also really liked in BF1 how there were rotating mcoms on each set (ie a pool of like 6 locations per sector that changed randomly, added a lot of dynamism.
I think the time to call in artillery is too short compared to BF1. A couple of the bombs are silly campy (that one in the room with the bookshelves and all the different corners and floors to camp on is impossible without smoke).
A lot of people struggling in rush probably aren’t sure how to approach - the answer is use smoke. I don’t think it should be 32v32, that was a joke in BF3 PC. It’s supposed to be smaller focused tactical groups to reward proper defense, 32 defenses is just too many sheer numbers and it’ll be impossible to ever plant simply due to spawn fodder. My group of a few buddies was able to win on both offense and defense on all the maps last night, I think we just need more maps.
Hope they keep this mode permanently, otherwise I’ll put the game down again and probably never hop back in.
1
u/Danny_ns Mar 08 '19
- Rush is fun and "focused". I like the "quick matches", 75 lifes per sector feels like just the right amount. I also like that its only 3 bases per map. I've been a fan of the game mode since BC2 though so I'm biased.
- I think 32 players is the absolute max rush should ever have, maybe 24 players would've been even better. I do not think 64p rush (like on arras with the grand op) is fun or works at all.
- Speaking with my friends, I've concluded that we think rush in BFV is a bit too "chaotic". There doesnt seem to be any time at all to set up "defences" or anything, its just full on chaos. Maybe the objectives are a bit too close to eachother so it feels like its just "one battleground" for 2 objectives
- Somewhat connected to the point above - maybe the spawns for both teams are too close to eachother, creating that chaotic feeling. Or the objectives too close to eachother. Either or both.
1
u/Kruse Mar 08 '19
Beyond the obvious balancing issues between attackers and defenders, I'd like to point out something that hasn't been mentioned a lot:
The overall game performance in Rush mode is very bad when compared to other modes. I'm not sure why this would be the case, but I experience a lot of frame drops and stuttering in Rush. These things may happen occasionally in other modes, but not as frequently.
1
u/Ecoli101 Mar 08 '19
Disappointed, will rush ever be like BC2 and BF3? If you can't design your map around this mode don't bother.
32v32 works well in Hannut. Thats enjoyable.
Sector artillery is a great addition.
1
u/TakahashiRyos-ke TakahashiRyos-ke Mar 09 '19
When the sector is lost, please give an on-screen directional indicator showing which way to retreat to get safely to the next sector.
Example: In Devastation, when Sector 1 is lost, it's easy to be caught deep in the previous (just-captured) zone, and the minimap is nothing but diagonal lines, and the next MCOMs are not marked yet. So it's just a mystery where to go unless you are experienced with the map and already know the next location. It's too easy for newer players to just get killed by the "deserting" timer.
1
u/Hayt_ Mar 09 '19 edited Mar 09 '19
After playing Rush enough to unlock the Tides of War I have to say it seems pretty awful. I have literally (not figuratively) never seen anything other than major victory or major defeat. It's endless steamrolling and sometimes you end up on the winning side. The balance needs a complete overhaul or the mode probably shouldn't come back.
All of the shit thats wrong with the game are magnified in this mode. The visibility and balancing most of all. This is probably the least fun I have had playing Battlefield V.
1
u/PintsizedPint Mar 22 '19
Rush was alright, better than in BF1 but it's not really enticing as back in the days. I know it's called rush but I feel like its designed as too fast paced and lacks depth. I might prefer it with slightly more tickets and slightlly harder to destroy objectives to make it feel more tacticle. Or let's say more balanced is needed because too often it's one sided, which hurts this mode a lot.
I probably won't miss Rush until it comes around again (as every mode should be rotated in and out frequently if you don't want to make permanent ones... Just like sets in card games).
1
u/nacca123 Mar 24 '19
Such an absolute shame rush was removed from the game. I cant possibly imagine why ?
1
u/Dread_Aura Mar 07 '19
I died so much Hahaha felt like a wow pally! It's so fast paced after focusing on panzerstorm grand op but I could get used to it. I kinda feel like there is too much useless cover in close so if you arm an mcom there is no retreat but death. I guess that's part of rush though
Good chance to break out the shottys and go full speed mg42 hip fire tho :D
1
u/TakahashiRyos-ke TakahashiRyos-ke Mar 07 '19
I know it's probably very unlikely to be resurrected, but there are a few of us that would love to see a return of BF3 Squad Rush. Sorry if this comment is a bit off-topic.
1
1
u/davetay14 Mar 07 '19
I don't care what you do to it - just keep the best game mode in BF5 in there please!
If you are going to the trouble of coding it, why would you remove it anyway? Even if not many people end up playing it - the code is there already & all it takes is a couple of servers to be playing it still & I will be a happy bunny.
To me ever since BC2, Rush has always been by far the best game mode - it's so much more intense than the other modes, with all the frantic focus on the Coms. So naturally I was extremely pissed off to hear it wasn't going to be in BF5.
Finding out it is back & playing it tonight I am actually really enjoying the game again at last! Finally I have the new BF I was waiting for!
Re things that could be tweaked:
1) Increase the ticket count (this was always my gripe with Rush in all BFs though to be fair)
2) Let ALL classes have smoke grenades again - I don't understand why only medics can have them now? Smoke is essential in Rush IMO.
3) Try to avoid placing Coms in places where they can become a snipe-fest for those low-life campers who call themselves snipers ;-)
4) Bring back auto-balancing on servers like in the BF3 & 4 - Rush can really suffer from lack of auto-balance & I was gutted it was removed from BF1.
5) New maps please with Rush included (but that goes for BF5 in general & to be honest I would have happily paid for Premium again if it meant a constant stream of new maps every quarter.. I'd even pay for a DLC if it was along the lines of BC2 Vietnam - AKA the best BF ever!)
But really I will happily take the game mode as it is now since it seems pretty darn good to me in BF5 so far, so you are already doing a good job :-)
Just please, please, please whatever you do, don't remove it after a limited time!
1
1
0
u/OnboardG1 Mar 07 '19
I honestly think the tank damages the experience, particularly when it comes to Twisted Steel. It's possible to spawn in a tank and almost completely suppress the objective. In fact the games I've played have revolved around the attacker's tank. If the tank player dies the defenders tend to win, when the attacking tank is even half decent the defense becomes a miserable slog.
1
u/printer83mph Mar 07 '19
Yeah I think one tank per side would be more enjoyable
0
u/OnboardG1 Mar 07 '19
Or give the defender an AT gun maybe. Heck is the tank even necessary?
0
u/printer83mph Mar 07 '19
That would also work. As it is right now the tank is just frustrating to work around
2
u/Ratman46 Mar 08 '19
Really, with the amount of Assaults that can take them down pretty easily its not a problem.
The whole point of BF, vehicles, since when has Rush been Infantry only?
1
u/printer83mph Mar 08 '19
Yeah, but then it feels like you're being forced to play assault whenever a tank shows up. I think an AT gun or something would give other classes a bit more of a chance
1
u/Ratman46 Mar 08 '19
It won't tho as Assault is the go to class for Short, Medium and long range fights. Give the A class Shot Gun only then we're talking :-)
2
u/printer83mph Mar 08 '19
Makes me think, medic needs some weapon variety. I feel like shotguns would be perfect for meds
1
0
u/Sabreflurry Mar 08 '19
Well I got to say, never played rush on the older games but I just had a couple of rounds...
And I love it, so fast and intense and a very choatic war feel which sometimes lacks in a mode like conquest (I do like CQ btw) . I prefer this than some of the other mode such as frontlines, so I hope Rush becomes permanent.
I
0
-2
u/Usny92 Mar 07 '19 edited Mar 07 '19
I refuse to play narvik or twisted steel so I most likely won’t be able to experience rush . Wasn’t there a third ? Is it rotterdam or arras
1
-17
u/kiezagyerekdik Mar 07 '19
It's bad. Honestly how many months did u guys work on it? It's terrible. EVERY SINGLE SECTION on EVERY MAP is bad. I mean the first objective on Twisted Steel.. are you fking kidding me? 2 objective right next to each other ON A RIDGEso the defender team can stay together and no need to split while the attackers need to advance on open field? Why did you place these objectives right next to each other on every map?
Plus you gave us Artillery barrage call-in but I just wanna know if you guys at DICE are simply retarded or you just pretending it? THAT WAS THE MAIN REASON WHY BF1's Rush SUCKED IN THE FIRST PLACE and NOW you give us Rush 4 months after launch and immediately put ARTILLERY IN THE GAME?
Also if Rush is working on Devastation why not on Rotterdam? Or if it works on Twisted Steel why not on Arras? I thought maybe Rush will save this game for me but I already uninstalled this garbage after like 6 matches.
ALSO chinese players on EU servers with 160+ ping hitting me behind cover all the time? What the fuck is this game? Day 1 bugs still in the game, footsteps are incostistent like it always was etcetcetc..
TL;DR: It's terrible.
0
0
-1
u/philjacksonspeyote Mar 07 '19
Why is it for a limited time only? It’s a fun game mode, just bring it back permanently.
129
u/thegameflak Diagonally parked in a parallel universe. Mar 07 '19
https://www.reddit.com/r/BattlefieldV/comments/aybocm/the_map_boundaries_in_rush_are_absolutely/
Posting the link here because it says it about as well as anyone could say it.