More news from Senior Gameplay Designer of Battlefield 3 Alan Kertz, Demize99, regarding game modes in Battlefield 3
Good, let's hope they stay there and leave the big boys to the proper objective modes!
win/loss ratio matters a lot more for me
ever notice that one guy in your squad on BFBC 2 who runs out reckless keeps using 40mm and if they have a mic sounds like a little girl when there a little boy cursing like he's a sailor? mute these people they're coming from COD
the most important thing is fun...not kdr or win-loss. people forget that sometimes.
@ lil Titan It's what happens when they "streamline for the masses" which is unfortunately full of mentally challenged and lazy people. Even I couldn't help it sometimes, not when everybody else is doing it too. I feel that if the developers DO force your hand a little bit instead of the "play our game your way" BS people would use team work a lot more. I worried little about my K/D in BF2, and I don't even think about it when I was playing the Project Reality mod. BFBC2 is a different story.
And it just so happens that winning or getting a lot of kills is also very fun. ;)
A lot of people don't understand why there is an emphasis placed on K/D in FPSs. For me, when I play Call of Duty or the recent Gears of War 3 beta, players that die often, hurt their team. They're just having fun but they're giving the other team kill streaks, increasing their score and reducing respawn tickets in the case of Gears of War 3. I'm not saying someone with a mediocre K/D does help his team but in a game mode like Team Deathmatch the objective is to die as view times as possible.
Well, in Halo objective game modes of anywhere from 4v4 to 8v8, its normally a very efficient strategy to keep one or two guys at a distance and focus on killing to defend/capture the objective while the rest of the team tries to take the objective. Killing has its place in objective too, one role out of several that contributes to successful strategy. Support guys(like the new Support class in BF3 that combines the medic abilities and ammo giving from the old Rifleman class), vehicle busters, vehicle operators, rifleman for distractions and killing, snipers for spotting and airstrikes, etc.
Nope. Players who want a good KD are actually drawn to OBJ modes as they can go around killing whilst other players are focusing on the obj, it makes it easier.
A lot of the people I have talked to on BC2 have stated that they wish BF3 would award zero points, or at least drastically reduced points for losing a objective based mode and I agree with them 100%. It would certainly keep people more focused on defending/attacking the objectives instead of screwing around trying to get kills. I think the guys that take the cake are the fools that will go to an objective in Rush mode and instead of arming the bomb, they will sit there with their ammo pack and C4 getting 50 point bonuses off it instead of arming first. Similarly, I have seen friendly defenders try to blow the Rush objectives with C4, I assume to prolong the match. Idiots.
I have a high 3 K/D in BO. But I do play the objective and have a lot of fun doing it. My W/L is low, but when your by yourself for the most part, your gonna lose more than you will win. Players that have a high K/D but don't play the objective can usall be beaten quite easily & when they go against a tem full of strong objective players who can also kill with ease, they get there ass kicked in
That's beside the point though Phinatic, they can be easily beaten, of course - I mean they aren't actually even going for the objective. But they do not care about the win, only KDR.
People take their Kill Death ratio way too seriously.
@ SpaceSquirrel agreed, I play as a medic quite a bit, therefore my k/d ratio is pretty horrible. But you look at the points i get for reviving and healing my teammates, and you can't argue I'm doing something right.
Exactly. I mostly play as an engineer and rarely finish lower then 3rd for my team. Yet most of the times my kd ratio is barely over 1. I get sick of snipers sitting back and not rushing objectives like the rest of us.
Well they have to have something to brag about in their pathetic lives since most that obsess and brag about it have no life. It's nice and all to know you are doing good at a game but the lengths that some of these kids go to to let everyone know and to brag about it like it is the biggest achievement in their whole life is just truly sad. Probably is their only achievement in life too because if you listen to some of them talk or the blogs they write it seems like they didn't do so well in school.
You.. Are one of those people ^^
And I don't expect my K/D to come above 1 for a while (not that I care that much). PC players straight spanked me D:
Welcome to the real world son! Don't give up you'll get better. BC2 PC is fun as hell isn't it. :)
Like the other guy said don't give up you will get better once you know the maps and you find a good group to run with. The better you play together with your team, the better you will play.
K/D needs to be wiped from existence. Only thing that matters is Win/Loss. 150 kills and no deaths and you still lose? whats the point???
It proves that the loss was most likely not your fault, barring anything you did toward the end of the match which may have directly resulted in the loss of your team. K/D ratios, while their importance may be exaggerated to obnoxious extend, provide a succinct and efficient method of judging the performance of a player. If you had 25 kills and 10 deaths in a TDM up to 50, then you did well. If you had 10 kills and 25 deaths, then you did poorly. If you're in the middle of a match and you have 5 kills and 0 deaths and the rest of your team is also on a positive K/D ratio then your strategy changes from offensive to cautiously holding a fort.
It may be a good way to judge a lone performance but in a team oriented game I dont think its important at all (aside from team deathmatch). A good W/L ratio is more important to me because I would rather have players that may have to sacrifice themselves to C4 a tank or run in to arm an objective rather than stay away and work on not dying. The only time that would be allowed is if we have someone flank hard and they stay hidden so we can spawn on that person.
10 kills and 25 deaths?that is so me^^and i don´t give a sh..t,i play for fun of playing.
@Spitfire_Riggz I agree; I want a team with players that aren't afraid to die for the sake of winning. You may have a nice k/d ratio, but losing can get old quickly, especially if it's due to selfish or cowardly team mates. @bloodybutcher Can you get a little better? Just a tad? If you end up on my team... Lol, I kid.
@ MidnytRain if i could,i would :P my gf always kicked my ass in bfbc2 online,she gets nervous when she´s watching me playing online soooo...i don´t see much chance of improvement o_O
When I play CTF in Halo I either stay in our base and defend it or go kamizake on the enemy's base so my teamates can get the flag. xD
Well, you could always be playing with your really good friend and get a great W/L even if you suck, but W/L doesn't reflect that. Also, you could be playing great and going for objectives, but it doesn't matter if your teammates suck and get killed all the time. Still, W/L doesn't reflect it at all. That's why I like to view W/L along with K/D to judge a player properly.
point being a lot of players SUCK hardcore on games...and being everything but free for all is team based what else do you have to prove yourself? In COD I constantly have to carry teams, and half the time its their fault I lose. Especially in domination when the team is too stupid to go try and grab another area, or you know run two feet over so we can capture it faster....That simple fact is also why Bad Company turned me away for a while. No one was working together, and it sucks when your team isn't and the other team is.
Completely a matter of perspective, and it's pretty annoying when people complain about people who worry about their KDR. I pay attention to my KDR because I like to know that I'm being efficient. If I'm dying more than I'm killing, I wouldn't feel like I'm helping my team or doing my part to push the enemy back, because I'm not even on the field more often than I would be respawning. That doesn't mean that it's more important than winning the match, but you got all these people proclaiming what's important and what's not. You can't put everyone in the same boat.
thats cod style. like in domination, guys that have like 30-1 and still lose. whats the point indeed.
I will sacrifice my K/D ratio to win the dam match. I wanna be able to talk trash when the match is over. 23/5 Who cares you FN lost you Looser. Someone with a 23 to 5 K/D didn't do anything to help their team win. If your doing objectives your gonna get killed end of story. same could be said for TDM, if you work closely as a team your K/D will all be equal but if your just being Solo your KD might be good but your teammates will be bad and you may loose the match.
Even in Call of Duty it's frustrating to play objective based modes (that's mostly the case on consoles though) when half of your teammates are running around to only get some kills while you're getting your ass kicked, trying to reach the objectives without proper cover...
well regardless there will always be campers who dont participate. and honestly the explosives is what really bug me about all of these shooters i wish there was one that's just about gun play no camping weapons, no noobtubing or any garbage explosives. just THE MAN AND IT'S GUN! im still buying this and TWISTED METAL. jesus october and november are gonna make me broke. forget christmas. edit: undercover noobtube canper i see.
'Camping weapon' ? Um.. if I wanted to camp, I could camp even with a knife.. not sure what you mean with the statement above. Ps: I disagreed, simply because I disagree.
Winning with a bad K/D = Pyrrhic victory - doesn't make me feel happy as I feel like I didn't contribute to the win at all. Face it, the K/D ratio tells the performance of the player, and is a basis of everything to come. If you just can't kill your way through to the objective, you lose. If you can't support your team while say, defending the objective, you're going to lose. Don't tell me getting killed 20 times while barely managing to get 5 kills doesn't piss you off. And all this is coming from an objective-playing gamer.
uhh it happens to me soooo much. i always get stuck with people who either cant kill or dont go for the objective. if you know you suck just go for the objective.
Agreed [now] :)
The only drawback to winning with a bad k/d ratio is your own ego. Actually, you don't have to get a single kill in BF to contribute to victory. Reviving, transporting, healing, repairing, cover fire, and depositing ammo can net you points *and* help your team win - all without killing anyone. I could care less if I die a lot. If I know I helped my team win, I'm happy, I had fun, and I feel important. ;)
I support your standing and I agree with your statement that ego is the only drawback. As a BC2 player myself, I do every single thing you named in your comment, but because I'm an egoistic SOB, I always try to maintain a good K/D while playing for the objective. It's quite an effective way of winning, I might add, provided you don't go hunting for kills but kill everything/one on your path to the objective.
Complete agree with both. One thing I must say, for some reason I've always liked to be the 'savior-kill/avenger guy' :) I don't know why, its just me. Now, unlike other players I don't sit around and wait for my teammate to get killed so I can 'avenge' him, no sir. I also like to get(kill) those who 'escape'. :)
I'd say it tells half the performance of a player..not sure about consoles but I'm pretty sure BC2 orders players in points rather than K/D when holding tab and people with the highest points most likely contribute to the overall objective rather than low-point scoring players with a good K/D. Then you have dominating players with great K/D's and topping the scoreboard. I like to compare BOTH to judge the performance of a certain someone
Personally I think its dumb they are going to make the same mistake AGAIN with yet another title. First off don't get me wrong. I'm buying both BF3 and MW3 and looking forward to both of them, so im not outright bashing it. However I always hated the fact BF has these super long game modes and not really much else to choose from. Rush takes a while, Conquest takes even longer, and TDM just gets boring after you play a few rounds. The game needs some more up paced modes like domination or CTF in COD, hell invent something new for all it matters. Yeah I know "this isn't for the same crowd" then tell EA to stop saying it is. You want to take COD down? You need to steal a couple pages from their book then.
I disagree. When Battlefield manages to get enough players in a match then it's always intense and fast paced.. depending on how you play. Where it falters is starting matches with massively unbalanced teams or not filling up squads properly. Then matches drag on forever as there are either not enough people on a large map, or you're the only person on your team and have to be cautious. If a match is going slowly then my team find ways to up the tempo, like baiting the enemy or systematically destroying cover to flush them out. It really is a game where the people playing dictate how each match is played. COD holds players' hands too much.
I've never ONCE been in a room where all squads were full. There are always 3 to 4 empty ones and I just can't understand it.
See but you guys probably talk on mics and what not. I don't like clans. I got out of doing that stuff when I left PC. I play with my friends when they are online, but I don't like depending on them to get on just to have a good time. In Bad Company I always had the issue of long drawn out games. I'm not saying there wasn't faster paced games where it was fun, I wouldn't buy it if it didn't offer that. However a majority of my games didn't have enough people, everyone was scattered too much so we were constantly searching for enemies, or one team just swept through the other team because one side works together and the other didnt.... If the maps in BF3 are set up more like that in 1943 thatd be a good start.
Most of the time it's a 2-3 man friend-squad that forgot to open the squad to public joining. It's very annoying.
You make a good point about shorter game modes, that would be convenient. But inventing something new would be better than stealing pages. DICE themselves said that "you don't beat CoD by trying to *be* CoD".
I play bad company like mad everyday and i never get bored. BF has large maps so its hard to get bored of them thats why cod needs so many map packs. Its just like how the ghost recon series has gone down hill. When the maps were massive you never got bored of them but when they went small for the graw series i got bored as hell and didnt want to play anymore. I played ghost recon and ghost recon 2 for years with the same maps and very few map packs but never got bored of the lvls because they were so large the match played out a diffrent way each time.
And i think BF should let you loot players bodies for extra xp to punish people who camp. The people who are always on the move and are taking the fight to the enemy should get more xp. And thanks the to Server admins with mods that limit 3 recons per team in bad company 2 good job guys.
There's a reason COD is more popular and more fun. Its quick pace action 95% of the time.
The only way to prevent these k/d loving bastards ruining objective missions(killzone 3 prime example of getting raped because your team is full of k/d whores) is to remove the k/d crap from objective missions.
I'm not liking the COD mentality that is infecting so many game designers nowadays. WTF was wrong with BF2?? All this "you can play our game your way this time" BS basically means they "streamlining" for the masses, which unfortunately is full of mentally challenged and lazy people. I feel that if the developers DO force your hand a little bit like in BF2 and to a larger extent Project Reality, instead of the "play our game your way" BS people would use team work a lot more. I worried little about my K/D in BF2, and I don't even think about it when I was playing the Project Reality mod. BFBC2 is a different story. Also not that I don't like TDM but watch FFA be added next.
I'm impressed with how much work is going into BF3 and in KEY areas of concern for many gamers such as dedicated servers and match balancing in the way of spawn camping prevention and k/d whores. It shows that this game is made by gamers for gamers. I wonder what DICE's first impressions were when they played COD and saw the beauty of the random spawns, painkiller, one man army and Commando.
Team Deathmatch is all about what team has the lowest amount of deaths and more kills...what i think would be cool is if they get the overall k/d ratio for teams...Nothing wrong with keeping kills up,deaths down,and getting objectives done,thats just a sign of a good player
My KD ratios so good i have like 3.2 all from sniping noobs
I was just kidding lmao. I dont even touch Recon unless it's with a shotgun or the G3.
I have 4.5 or something from sniping noobs with the UMP on hardcore mode lol.
Lol high five!
I see nothing wrong with K/D ratios, i mean if people want to keep track of them, then let them, it shouldn't bother those who are not into those sort of statistics
They completly ignore the objectives in team games. which is annoying and takes the fun away
They should remove K/D in objective games :D
This is great, that way the people who care about w/l can enjoy more down to the wire matches more often, and k/d people can go have fun shootin sh*t
To me kill/death ratio means nothing. If you play well, it is only natural that your K/D is never negative. You can focus on objectives, but in order to do so you must kill defenders that are in your way. Funny thing is, if I find myself going on a rampage and killing everybody, I have an urge to die purposely, aka go easy on them. This is why I never really like K/D only based games. I think I realized that I play games to have fun. It is not fun to kill players that can't give you a challenge. Also, I know that other players just want to have fun too. I give gameplay tips if I run into player who are raging cause I kill them too many times. If I keep killing them, it wont be fun for them. Like in BFBC2 Rush or conquest, if I get to the point where my team is just base raping them. I leave the game and find another server or switch to the losing side to try to break the encirclement cause it is more of a challenge.
"if I get to the point where my team is just base raping them. I leave the game" so... constantly? BC2 seems to be designed around base-rape.
I do hope DICE puts more than just TDM, conquest and Rush as game modes. A nice CTF mode.... Would be a nice edition.
A good K/d ratio doesn't mean you are good. I remember in the Killzone 3 beta this one dood had about a 10.0 K/d ratio, but all he did was camp in the same spot with a "turret" or whatever and an assult riffle. He would just stay crouched down and then go hide in the same spot. Then I started owning him in that match, the next one, etc. and brought his ratio down to about 2.0. K/d is cool, but I wish more people would really learn to enjoy teamwork, objectives, and fun on the console games. Maybe I should try playing some counterstrike again.