The trailer looks awesome.
Agree! Can't wait to play it! :)
You guys probably imagine us freaking out over other devs games or trailer. Never forget, we are gamers in the first place. That's what sparked the urge to join this industry. We love good games. The more the better. And as much as we like to give other devs a reason push a bit further, as much do we love those other devs to give us a reason to push a bit further.
64 players was perfect
Are you f**king high?
Would you reduce it to 32?
I think there should possibly be some more really small fortifications that the attackers can build, like foxholes or trenches. But other than that, love this mode.
It needs more maps though, Arras would be good.
Cool! Will look into it!
What part of Arras?
More fortification ladders/ramps are probably the right call for this mode. This way defenders can actively blow them up and stop the advance of the position and give more of a fortress style fight than just standard breakthrough imo.
Cool, will see what I can do.
It's amazing overall. But it hurts when you take it away :(
I'm sorry. :(
Read moreI personally had a lovely time with it.
The most fun thing to me was how Devastation flowed as an attacker. Every time I attacked I would start as Recon, popping flares and shooting from the left of the overturned train. That angle that can peek both Vickers and everything else if you just keep strafing into the open and it was amazing how each round played so similarly. The outside fortifications on that map are such a trap for the defenders, it's incredible. It's a shooting gallery at the start.
I seriously haven't had that much fun donking heads with my Enfield in a long time. And my point here isn't just the fun sniping, but after I (and my team) break the spirits of the defenders, they stop returning to the Vickers, and they stop holding the first points outside the church, falling back to safety when they realize that they aren't going to counter snipe me. And at that point C is almost always open to attack due to how you closed off that side door with...
And at that point C is almost always open to attack due to how you closed off that side door with the truck outside, which is my FAVORITE thing about Devastation Fortress.
Haha, I wasn't super sure about that, but I'm super happy that you liked that aspect of it! :)
I will say that I think it should be a 2 round mode like Halo's assault. There should be ties like if both teams only capture 2/3 of the objectives or if both attackers win. I didn't really care though so much about actually winning/losing, because I was having such a blast either way.
Yeah, that would be awesome! It would need a new actual game mode though and that increases complexity, but still - I like the idea!
Thank you for an awesome feedback post - if you ever recorded one of your games I'd love to see it just to see all your cool and inspired approaches! Just doing your part in showing why the BF community is just ...
Read moreRead moreNot really my type of mode, however what did get frustrating the most for me was keeping an eye on people sneaking around. Just due to the nature of public games you can see people getting by, with your team unaware, then you are 1 vs 4 on C flag in Hamada.
I'd love to see them as three seperate 'sectors', so it felt like you were making headway, instead of a sneaky group being able to retake all around you when pushing on offense. This would then allow me to properly play as part of the defense and experience that 'fantasy', rather than being the castle guard that gets stabbed in the back by the heroes trying to stop a flank all the time.
If I don't try, then we just lose it anyway.
It felt a lot like Battlefield 1 operations.
I think making it based on time rather than tickets might be an idea too, perhaps 5-6 minutes per point, but any time you have left is added to the next flag.
Absolutely loved the fortifications, though having a lot ...
I wanted to nail the "they'll attack A first 99% of the time, but you can't be 100% sure, so you're kept a bit on edge" dynamic, but I might not have been perfectly successful with that.
But you'd rather have more certainty about where people are, than the aforementioned dynamic?
Read moreIt feels like a small conquest assault. In my case i like or dislike the mode depending on the specific players each round because you get different results according to how they play (beyond winning or losing). When its balanced in that way it feels good, fast action and relatively close to spawns which means you can try risky stuff without having to walk million miles to an objective if you die. The resupply stations are well placed i guess and the buildable stuff too.
I would like more buildable things like foxholes for the attackers. Lets say you capture A and you fortify something between A and B or C as sometimes its very easy to recapture points that just got captured cause the forces left are not enough to effectively defend it till other people get there unless you wipe the defenders and get there with more than 1 or 2 squads which also is situational as a lot of people tend to just lay down and try shoot stuff instead of advancing.
I like the verticalit...
Where in Arras would you want it?
I'll see what I can do about foxholes and trenches, thanks!
The only problems I had: impossible to win as an attacker in Hamada. And spawn points in Devastation at least are messed up - no matter where you decide to spawn, you go all the way back to the base. Good points: fortifications, and it is very dynamic. Would love to see in other maps. Church on Arras seems a good fit, and flags C-B in Panzerstorm too.
Yeah, I've heard a lot of comments about balance and about the spawning on Devastation. :) Thanks for the suggestions, C-B could be cool!
Well said on the fortifications. We need more of it and in creative ways. Would really add to the map and make it more diverse.
If you ever have time, I'd love to hear more specifically what made you like certain parts of them - sorry for taking so long to respond, it might be hard to remember now that it was a week ago.
Thanks regardless!
Read moreThe fortification additions to Devastation were fantastic. I really enjoyed the depth they felt they had and wouldnt mind some sections for the cathedral interior appearing in conquest (especially scaffolding). Hamada was fun, but I cant say adding any fortifications to that section of the map in CQ would change anything (theres not a lot of combat there).
Overall I found the game mode fun, but I wouldnt say it was balanced. As it should, it inherently favors defense. In order to overcome the defense the attackers need to work together. This means maintaining a good balance of medics throwing smoke, assaults knocking down fortifications, and recons putting up spawn beacons and flares. Not once did I see attackers win, and I think its because the teams just never could work together to hold all 3 points.
The only other nitpick is Hamada with the aircraft. As a defender I should have used a fighter plane, but running a bomber is just so much more effective...
Thank you for your feedback! :)
I like the last suggestion of the plane setup. Defenders having a lot of AA will also just increase the fortified position feeling, I think.
Read moreFirstly, thanks for coming here to chat! It's really nice to feel part of the process.
Personally I think Fortress is a much better outlet for the "everything exploding 24/7" urge than Grind (for a few reasons) and think it would be a great rotating mode in the future.
Things I love:
• The initial charge. Even though big wave charges are more of a WW1 thing it's something I had missed a bit since BF1. The moment all the MMG players open up on you in Hamada had me think "this would make a good practice for a Normandy map." In that way the fantasy totally works.
• The option for flanks. One issue I had with Grind was that the maps were VERY narrow. Fortress has some interesting maps where you can get break outs down the side and really break up the enemy line. I found this was a winning strategy almost every time I happened.
• A fresher use of existing maps. We all want new maps, you might have been told this before. But the w...
Thank you for such an expertly written feedback post!
I agree about the scoring system - its not a perfect fit for this mode, but I didn't want to have people have to learn new rules and a new mode just for this.
On the note of maps: I tried other maps (Arras was one of them) but it wasn't great - a lot of the attacker/defender fantasy comes from having really separated behavior and roles between them, and once the map allows too much chaos and intermixing it quickly becomes muddled and attacker/defender becomes a bit too similar.
I definitely felt I found the formula after working with it for a while though, so not saying its impossible, just saying its not super easy to build something like this everywhere.
Read more100% agree that the tank is ineffectual at aiding the capture of objectives B and C. I find that I am able to really turn the tides for the attackers heading toward A at the beginning before heading to resupply, next I move to the far right still in the safe zone and I'm able to help control the defenders trying to slow our right flank toward B/C, finally I can reload again and either push hard (and likely die) towards B/C or regroup in the safe zone if we've somehow lost A.
As soon as you enter the defender's zone, the tank is met with overwhelming fire from defender assaults. Normally I'm not one to hold back and stay in the safe zone hill-humping, I'm a PTFO ride-or-die tanker... usually. For this game mode with this tight of a linearly constricted map, moving a tank into enemy territory is almost impossible without heavily coordinated support from fellow attackers (pfft. and good luck getting that effort from 31 other blueberries). I think that what I'm describing is a...
Thank you for the comment! :)
Great game mode.
On Hamada, remove planes, and add trenches for the attackers to move up slowly but without getting shredded.
Devastation could use some other routs of attack, the train is too open. But the edited fortifications are great and should be imported to conquest.
(Also, rotate Grind, Fortress, and Rush every 3-4 days so that we can play them without having to wait long, and without watering down servers)
Would you remove all planes or keep only the attacker planes?
Definitely can agree on all points. The planes are just too much for Hamada. Devastation needs some more cover or another way.
This is the first game mode I’ve really enjoyed since they added time-limited Rush.
Where do you think the cover should be?
About ticket counts, could you make it so that if you actually get to the end of the timer before Attackers tickets run out, it counts as a win for the Defenders instead of a draw?
Happened twice to me on half empty servers... in any given mode it's way harder to defend when the server is not full, and playing a full 15-20 minutes of small skirmish only to get a draw is under whelming.
Good point - I'll see what I can do. Thanks!
But not too many more tickets, I felt 200 was close to being right. You don’t want to encourage people to hang back by having so many tickets they don’t worry about rushing, need to have some urgency. Also if it’s a roll by defenders don’t want the game to last for super long.
I agree, I think I'll increase them a tiny bit, but not too much.
Squad up!!
Please follow the format below:
Platform: PC/PS4/XB
Name: manimal_prime
Region: eg; Americas
All other threads regarding clans, discord servers, friend finders will be removed and redirected to this thread.
Also check out:
Read more External link →You're delusional if you expect any reward for this. Mark my words.
Downvotes wont make it any less true btw.
I get a reward. Passively. I get to level things which some of us actually like doing. Just because you don't, doesn't mean it's wrong or delusional.
What do you progress to then? What's the magic number you set your eyes on? 'ah, finally I am level 24672, I have always dreamed of that goal!'
If we based it on that, according to you all MMOs, RPGs and DND should remove leveling.
devtrackers.gg