Battlefield Bad Company


Recommended Posts

To say I am thoroughly disappointed is an understatement. :no:

How in the world they thought it would be a good idea to make your main base something that could be captured by the opposing team is absolutely beyond me. That was a mainstay in previous Conquest modes, no matter what, you always had your main base to fall back on if all of the flags were captured. GETTING RID OF THIS IS A HUGE ALTERATION TO THE GAMEPLAY ITSELF. Sorry for the all caps, but I am literally dumbfounded they chose to do this. Now that is completely gone, out of the 6 matches or so I played, half of them were over in about 4-5 minutes time, if that.

Seriously, I cannot comprehend why they chose to do get rid of always having a main base that could not be captured. :wacko: :crazy:

Granted I only played on my lunch break, and will give it another chance later on tonight, but my first impression is an extremely negative one.

I actually have been renting the game this entire time through Gamefly, I thought I purchased it but I never wound up doing so, and I may just send it back soon, as a Mode I really thought would add months of longevity to the game, appears to have been dramatically changed from past iterations, and it is now only a shallow shell of what it once was.

I hope something is wrong with the update, and they release a patch soon to fix this tragic oversight, but I think for whatever reason they thought it was a good idea to change the formula that has worked for them the past how many years now? I am just blown away, and obviously not in a good way.

So, is this mode like in BF2 then? I honestly can't remember the name of the BF2 mode but kills would decrease the team score and if you captured a flag, that area of the map would turn as a base for your team. Is that correct?

It is a bastardized version of that classic mode.

Thanks for the mini-reviews Andy/Larry. I've been curious as to how the gameplay is pretty much all day today.

I don't know what to think based on your reviews, as I do not have any expectations as to what Conquest was like on the PC side.

But from what you guys are saying, it doesn't sound too promising.

I'm not sure how much more of Gold Rush I can take. I mean I like the game mode and it plays well, but having played it for nearly 2 months now, it's getting old and I need a change. I was hoping they'd just include Conquest like it was in every other BF game, but its way different.

I can see myself playing a lot less now tbh, at least until they patch Goldrush and hopefully patch Conquest.

I think I might spend a bit more time playing the Battlefield Heroes beta

That was like getting tea-bagged in a dress :/

I hate how they tried focusing on certain gameplay elements like close quarters combat in Ascension and Oasis. The Shotgun has removed any chance of some fun and balanced CQB matches, that's for sure.

You also have to deal with extremely random spawns constantly, because the flags are pretty close together. Then you get the hang of the CQB, then you are suddenly thrown in this huge map and you have to drastically change play-style again ( Which is extremely annoying ).

What annoyed me the most was the problems we had in the beginning, like playing the same maps constantly and the bullet-lag I had throughout the game.

Don't think I'll be playing this game-mode again tonight, doesn't get any better until they at least fix a few things.

I'll stick to Goldrush (Y)

Thanks for the mini-reviews Andy/Larry. I've been curious as to how the gameplay is pretty much all day today.

I don't know what to think based on your reviews, as I do not have any expectations as to what Conquest was like on the PC side.

But from what you guys are saying, it doesn't sound too promising.

Do not get me wrong, it can still be fun to play, but it gets down to the quote I quoted below. One team can now truly completely dominate, and dominating means matches are over in minutes, literally.

One big problem I could see is the unbalanced teams, so you could have one team take all the flags within a few minutes. I agree it needs uncappable bases.

Still not sure what they were thinking getting rid of uncappable bases. Just seems so stupid to get rid of that huge, huge factor.

Over at the EA forums the knobs/noobs?can never remember which it is :), all think Conquest is amazing (well all 12 of them that post on there)

And in other news ...

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=qQCWbmOG2oM

.swf'>http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=qQCWbmOG2oM

.swf' WIDTH='425' HEIGHT='355' PLAY='TRUE' LOOP='TRUE' QUALITY='HIGH'>

Does the Youtube tag not work anymore?

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=qQCWbmOG2oM

Edited by BeLGaRaTh
Clan support/private rooms/team chat

Auto balancing on servers

Continued support against stats exploits

VOIP issue on PS3 (working with Sony on this)

Squads might be split up when joining a server as a squad. This is due to team balancing in the games that are being joined, and usually resolves itself in round 2.

/The Battlefield: Bad Company team

Have they put dates to these patches?

Over at the EA forums the knobs/noobs?can never remember which it is :), all think Conquest is amazing (well all 12 of them that post on there)

And in other news ...

Does the Youtube tag not work anymore?

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=qQCWbmOG2oM.swf

Here you go :p

You probably ain't kidding :rofl:

Fighting the urge not to tbh! But yeah I'll be on soon and give it another go. I've still to try End of the Line in Conquest. I doubt it's gonna change my mind much, but I'll play a few rounds of Gold Rush too.

I'm trying to think of another multiplayer game to fill the gap Conquest has left..

COD4 is just...meh, I couldn't get back into it when we played.

What about Halo 3 :woot: :p

Just had a quick 1 hour play in Conquest. Matches went from about 5 minutes to almost 10 minutes, just depends on the goal of the teams. I had one match last 4:23, reason being everyone just ran out into the middle and shot each other. Of course, you have the 1 or 2 players who know to go get flags (and they were on the other team LOL) so it went quick. The 10 minute game I was in was a lot of fun and there was a TON of jockeying for flags.

I don't mind the mode at all I just wish people would learn to play the right way. If I wanted a straight frag fest I would go get back into UT. Basically, it feels like my Gold Rush experiences. People don't defend at all - everyone is on the offensive but then they don't actually CAPTURE flags/detonate crates. I won't give up on the game because eventually this type of play will weed out.

As Larry and others mentioned, if they would just make the bases uncappable. One good example is the last match I was in. Red team had all positions captured save for one. Brilliantly (yet here is where the rub is) they took all their tanks and vehicles and lined them up on the last remaining blue position (yep, where everyone respawns). Eventually I just watched the bar tick down as lives were lost and there was no way to respawn at all. No squad, no base, nothing. Respawn, die. Respawn, die.

I think there is quite a few of us here who have played Conquest a lot in the past, and it certainly didn't help paint a better picture of the mode. Infact, being too good at the mode and you'll end up actually playing less. I'm not even kidding when I say both Sethos and I played a match which was 1.5 minutes long.

Yeah, I barely got done scratching my ass before we were done :|

But about filling the FPS gap, I have been wanting to go back to Halo 3 for a long time - Really miss the game.

Only thing keeping my from doing it is that god awful random game-mode selection. I hate playing some random matches with some messed up rulesets because that's someones idea of "fun".

Sure I can do play some matches without ranking up, but that's 1/3 of the fun in playing.

It is still like that, right? :p

This topic is now closed to further replies.
  • Recently Browsing   0 members

    • No registered users viewing this page.
  • Posts

    • A 13 billion year old secret about our Universe's origin was revealed by Sayan Sen Image by Pascal Küffer via Pexels Researchers at the Max-Planck-Institut für Kernphysik (MPIK) in Heidelberg had recreated a key chemical reaction from the early universe, producing results that could change scientists' understanding of how the first stars formed. The study focused on the helium hydride ion (HeH⁺), which is widely regarded as the first molecule to form in the universe. Scientists believe HeH⁺ appeared around 380,000 years after the Big Bang, when the universe had cooled enough for electrons and atomic nuclei to combine into neutral atoms in a period known as recombination. This marked the beginning of chemistry in the cosmos. Immediately after the Big Bang about 13.8 billion years ago, the universe was extremely hot and dense. As it expanded and cooled, hydrogen and helium became the dominant elements. Once neutral helium atoms formed, they could react with ionised hydrogen nuclei, or protons, to create helium hydride ions. Although simple in structure, HeH⁺ played an important role in the young universe. It was the first step in a chain of reactions that eventually produced molecular hydrogen (H₂), a molecule made up of two hydrogen atoms and now the most abundant molecule in the universe. Molecular hydrogen later became a key ingredient in the formation of the first stars. At the time, the universe had entered a phase often called the cosmological "dark age." Matter had become transparent to light following recombination, but there were still no stars or galaxies producing visible light. Several hundred million years would pass before the first stars appeared. For those first stars to form, large clouds of gas had to collapse under their own gravity. To do that, the gas needed to cool by releasing energy. While hydrogen atoms can help with this process at high temperatures, they become less effective below about 10,000 degrees Celsius. Molecules can continue the cooling process by releasing energy through rotational and vibrational motions. Scientists have long considered HeH⁺ a potentially important coolant because of its comparatively large dipole moment, a property that describes how electric charge is distributed within a molecule and allows it to release energy efficiently. The amount of helium hydride present in the early universe may therefore have influenced how easily the first stars could form. At the same time, HeH⁺ was constantly being destroyed. Under primordial conditions, its main destruction mechanisms were recombination with free electrons and chemical reactions with hydrogen atoms. These reactions ultimately helped produce molecular hydrogen, linking the formation and destruction of HeH⁺ to the chemistry that shaped the early universe. For many years, theoretical studies suggested that reactions between HeH⁺ and hydrogen atoms would become much slower at low temperatures. Scientists believed there was an energy barrier along the reaction pathway that reduced the chances of the reaction taking place in the cold conditions of the early universe. The new study suggests otherwise. To investigate the process, researchers recreated a closely related reaction using deuterium, a naturally occurring isotope of hydrogen that contains one proton and one neutron in its nucleus. When HeH⁺ collides with deuterium, it forms an HD⁺ ion and a neutral helium atom. This allows scientists to study the reaction in a controlled way while closely mimicking the behaviour of the original reaction involving hydrogen. The experiments were carried out at the Cryogenic Storage Ring (CSR) at MPIK, a specialised facility designed to recreate conditions similar to those found in space. Researchers stored HeH⁺ ions in the 35-metre storage ring for up to 60 seconds at temperatures just a few kelvins above absolute zero and merged them with a beam of neutral deuterium atoms. By adjusting the speeds of the two particle beams, the team measured how the reaction rate changed with collision energy, which is directly related to temperature. The researchers found that the reaction rate remains almost constant as temperatures decrease. In other words, the reaction does not slow down at low temperatures as earlier models predicted. “Previous theories predicted a significant decrease in the reaction probability at low temperatures, but we were unable to verify this in either the experiment or new theoretical calculations by our colleagues,” explained Dr Holger Kreckel of MPIK. “The reactions of HeH⁺ with neutral hydrogen and deuterium therefore appear to have been far more important for chemistry in the early universe than previously assumed,” he continued. According to the researchers, the reaction appears to be barrierless, meaning there is no energy obstacle preventing it from taking place efficiently even at very low temperatures. The findings support recent theoretical work led by physicist Yohann Scribano, whose group identified an error in a widely used potential energy surface, a mathematical model used to describe how the energy of a system changes during a chemical reaction. The error appears to have caused previous studies to significantly underestimate reaction rates under primordial conditions. The new calculations closely match the experimental results. Together, they suggest that helium chemistry in the early universe may need to be re-evaluated. Because molecules such as HeH⁺ and molecular hydrogen played an important role in cooling primordial gas clouds, the findings could help scientists build more accurate models of how the first stars formed. By showing that helium hydride was likely destroyed more efficiently than previously thought, the study offers new insight into the chemical processes that shaped the universe during its earliest stages and helped set the conditions for the emergence of the first stars. Source: Max-Planck Institute, EDP Sciences This article was generated with some help from AI and reviewed by an editor. Under Section 107 of the Copyright Act 1976, this material is used for the purpose of news reporting. Fair use is a use permitted by copyright statute that might otherwise be infringing.
    • "What an interesting smell you've discovered"
    • It could EASILY be 70 for the base game BUT + lots of FOMO to make it up to 100-120, like a few days Early Access, online money, pre-order bonus cars, weapons, missions, clothing, avatars or profile stuff, etc... And still WAY TOO MANY people would buy those and make Rockstar insane money.
    • Just to understand: your solution to getting rid of an online password manager is...another online password manager?
    • Cjam 2.5.0.0 by Razvan Serea Cjam is a lightweight and fast MP3 editor for Windows that lets you cut, join, and edit MP3 files without re-encoding. This means your audio quality remains untouched, and edits happen instantly. Cjam is ideal for quick, lossless edits—whether you're trimming music, combining tracks, or preparing audio for learning tools or podcasts. It features batch processing, scripting support, cue and playlist file handling, and a simple interface. Cjam is perfect for anyone who needs efficient MP3 editing without the complexity of full audio suites. Cjam requires a PC running Windows 10 or later and Microsoft .NET 6.0 or later. Key features for Cjam: No Re-encoding: Edit MP3 files without losing quality. Cut and Join MP3: Easily cut, trim, and combine MP3 tracks. Batch Processing: Edit multiple files at once for faster workflows. Scriptable Interface: Automate tasks with a custom command language. Cue and Playlist Support: Handle CUE and playlist files for seamless audio management. Fast and Lightweight: Quick processing with minimal system resources. Lossless Audio Editing: Ensure your edits don't affect audio quality. Simple User Interface: Clean, intuitive design for easy navigation. File Format Support: Works with MP3, Cjam-specific file formats (CJAMC, CJAMJ, CJAM). Cjam 2.5.0.0 changelog: Added clipboard-based import/export support for mp3DirectCut Added clipboard-based export support for REAPER Added support for naming IMP3 elements Changed the Reset behavior to preserve Undo/Redo history; use Shift key + Reset button to clear it Added a new command parameter (qcp) Added 8 new entries to lang.txt (main_c124-126, main_d150-151, main_m082, vme_c014, vme_d005) Fixed a bug where the il parameter was incorrectly applied when pasting VMP3s into the main list Fixed several other minor bugs Download: Cjam 2.5.0.0 | 1.4 MB (Freeware) Links: Cjam Home Page | Cjam Manual | Screenshot Get alerted to all of our Software updates on Twitter at @NeowinSoftware
  • Recent Achievements

    • Dedicated
      JuvenileDelinquent earned a badge
      Dedicated
    • First Post
      DrWankel earned a badge
      First Post
    • Reacting Well
      DrWankel earned a badge
      Reacting Well
    • Week One Done
      Supreme Spray LV earned a badge
      Week One Done
    • Week One Done
      Genuinetonerink- Dubai earned a badge
      Week One Done
  • Popular Contributors

    1. 1
      +primortal
      504
    2. 2
      +Edouard
      163
    3. 3
      PsYcHoKiLLa
      91
    4. 4
      Steven P.
      75
    5. 5
      Michael Scrip
      72
  • Tell a friend

    Love Neowin? Tell a friend!