which game mode do you prefer?

[niii]

i give a pass on rush, i find it very frustrating. a meat grinding fest and too many bottlenecks in my opinion. i mostly played rush so that explains why i didn't stick that much with the game :)

but CQ and deathmatch are pretty good, i prefer the open front system (i'm voting for CQ, haven't played deathmatch enough yet).

the rounds in CQ seem to be too short though and i have to say i miss having a squad leader, it would have made things a little more interesting with one.

how about you, which mode do you prefer and why?

[Dax]

now we have admin rights and auto balance

Conquest all the way

[Speedstar]

rush mode

even teams and good squadplay! I only found that on Rush mode, not on conquest or deathmatch

[kurk_will_mutiny]

CQ would win if the maps were bigger.

[Kharak]

Cq maps are too small

[Speedstar]

the conquest maps are made for 16 players and not for 32 :think:
if they would be bigger the same solution like the old BF games "more player -> bigger map size" would be nice

[XxXButcher]

rush...
many other games have Conquest or Deathmatch,
rush is new and fresh :bar:

[GZap]

Rush but can be annoying when attackers are not rushing but I still prefer this to conquest.

Flags too close together on most maps on Conquest.

[Kharak]

Those here that have played Bad Company for Xbox, would see that the CQ maps in that game were much bigger than in this game and that has baffled me a lot...

I mean why would they make so small maps? Battlefield has always had huge maps and that´s been a part that makes it so fun :)

Hope they will be making some new and bigger maps... something like tampa :P

[Bert~Sinbad]

I love rush, it make for more dynamic games as long as the attackers attack
Cq annoys me a bit and for the same reasons as the others, the maps are simply to small (and if they are only designed for 16 then they should be blocked at 16)
also for some reason the only times I have seen players really playing like idiots is on Cq, I spent 10 minutes the other day with some idiot on my team repeatedly smoke nading me...... sigh
and then had the audacity to moan that players were not fighting... just sniping

[GZap]

I am finding more and more attacking teams not attacking.

Annoying.

Maybe if they built in a better scoring system for winning the game, the guys who are precious about their stats would try to win.

[niii]

also the option of limiting the number of the same class soldiers (let's say snipers for example) you can have in the same team, like Team Fortress 2 does, would be good.

[Kharak]

As G man said, I too see a lot of attacking teams not taking the initiative to actually attack the M-Com stations.

I personally think Dice on purpose made it so that if you come within 15 yards of the sniper rifle and get hit, then you die and that´s no matter where you are hit. I think they made it so, so that the snipers can attack and engage in close combat. They also made "no-scope" a lot more accurate than it was in the previous Battlefield games. Still I rarely see any sniper close to any M-Com. Besides everyone has pistols and they are overpowered so the snipers should be able to attack, without probs :)

But I still do prefer Rush because there are sometimes when both teams are packed with excellent players, the attackers attack all the time and defense is doing a really good job defending. I love it :)