Battlefield 3

**gopadres** · 11-13-2011, 07:03 PM

Re: Battlefield 3

Originally posted by Goffs

This

that beeping must be annoying for the guys flying the jets...

<iframe width="560" height="315" src="http://www.youtube.com/embed/9_bjUZGRIvs" frameborder="0" allowfullscreen></iframe>

This guy is good. Looks like I've got some lvling up to do...

**mikenoob** · 11-13-2011, 09:57 PM

Re: Battlefield 3

http://bf3s.com/player/173525393

I thought the rank breakdowns was pretty cool. The other stat site didn't have that. I'm assuming they take your SPM and try to estimate when you would rank up. My estimate for rank 34 is 44,949 points in 0.95 days or playing for another hour and 38 minutes straight. In order to get colonel service star 100, my estimate is 23,684,949 points over the next 499.51 days or I could simply just play for 860 hours and 41 minutes.

**AUChase** · 11-13-2011, 10:41 PM

Re: Battlefield 3

Jnes, I'm sorry dude.. I had to bail.

My internet has been having problems lately, and they are streaming something in the living room that's screwing my gaming up.

It only pisses me off, because I've been at work all damn day and they wait until I'm off work to watch it..

**erickonasis** · 11-13-2011, 10:47 PM

Re: Battlefield 3

after pllaying all week on MW3 and then finally playing a few games of this ...MW3 has trully made me appreciate this game a 10000 times more....MW3 has so much cheap stuff going on and the lag on the ps3 version is TRULY annoying and it not my connection

**av7** · 11-13-2011, 11:22 PM

Re: Battlefield 3

Originally posted by mikenoob

http://bf3s.com/player/173525393

I thought the rank breakdowns was pretty cool. The other stat site didn't have that. I'm assuming they take your SPM and try to estimate when you would rank up. My estimate for rank 34 is 44,949 points in 0.95 days or playing for another hour and 38 minutes straight. In order to get colonel service star 100, my estimate is 23,684,949 points over the next 499.51 days or I could simply just play for 860 hours and 41 minutes.

My quit % is rising with all the times I keep getting put into empty servers through Quick Match. Wish they had a filter to remove empty servers.

**canes21** · 11-13-2011, 11:25 PM

Re: Battlefield 3

Seriously, it is frustrating playing Conquest in this game. It's nearly impossible to carry a team like you can in Rush.

My Rush Record: 61-33
Conquest Record: 18-34

I don't understand how in the world the other team can have two jets in the air, a helicopter, and two tanks with 2 people each which totals out to 7-8 people in a vehicle away from bases, yet my team cannot capture nor hold a base after I(and my lone squad mate) capture it.

Me and my mate captured A, went on to B, captured B, looked down and saw the enemy had A,C, and D. Went back to A, took it, looked down and saw the enemy had B, C, and D. I mean, seriously?!?! How can a team of 12 players not hold onto one base? There is no reason me and my mate should be able to constantly get 1,500 more points than any other teammate. We're not gods, we're not amazing(well maybe we are

), we just capture and defend bases.

I really like Conquest a lot more than Rush. It just feels more Battlefield to me and is done a lot better in this than it was in BC2 or BC. It reflects more BF2 than anything, but I don't enjoy playing a mode where it's impossible to win with all the idiots online playing. Two games ago me and my mate had two random squad mates with us. All 4 of us were 1, 2, 3, and 4 on the team. The next closes player was over 1,000 points behind us. We all just kept spawning on each other and running around capturing bases.

At least in Rush me and him can run around together and plant a bomb, cover it, then move on, or defend one bomb an entire round. In Conquest, however, we're pretty much screwed when playing with randoms.

**mikenoob** · 11-13-2011, 11:42 PM

I need about 4 more wins to get a 3 W/L ratio! I haven't played this for awhile now since skyrim has owned me. I'm gonna play for a bit tomorrow, so any other ps3 players looking for some easy wins, send me a friend request preferably with the letters OS somewhere in the request. I play a split between conquest and rush. I'll play rush more if I'm playing with a friend or two. Conquest, I want a whole squad at the least.

Sent from my iPod

**gopadres** · 11-14-2011, 02:15 AM

Re: Battlefield 3

where the heck are the mobile AA vehicles? Are they in a certain mode or map?

**mKoz26** · 11-14-2011, 02:47 AM

Re: Battlefield 3

Originally posted by gopadres

where the heck are the mobile AA vehicles? Are they in a certain mode or map?

Noshahr Canals, Rush.

(I only play rush so that's all I know of)

**8iron** · 11-14-2011, 11:04 AM

Re: Battlefield 3

Originally posted by canes21

Seriously, it is frustrating playing Conquest in this game. It's nearly impossible to carry a team like you can in Rush.

My Rush Record: 61-33
Conquest Record: 18-34

I don't understand how in the world the other team can have two jets in the air, a helicopter, and two tanks with 2 people each which totals out to 7-8 people in a vehicle away from bases, yet my team cannot capture nor hold a base after I(and my lone squad mate) capture it.

Me and my mate captured A, went on to B, captured B, looked down and saw the enemy had A,C, and D. Went back to A, took it, looked down and saw the enemy had B, C, and D. I mean, seriously?!?! How can a team of 12 players not hold onto one base? There is no reason me and my mate should be able to constantly get 1,500 more points than any other teammate. We're not gods, we're not amazing(well maybe we are

), we just capture and defend bases.

I really like Conquest a lot more than Rush. It just feels more Battlefield to me and is done a lot better in this than it was in BC2 or BC. It reflects more BF2 than anything, but I don't enjoy playing a mode where it's impossible to win with all the idiots online playing. Two games ago me and my mate had two random squad mates with us. All 4 of us were 1, 2, 3, and 4 on the team. The next closes player was over 1,000 points behind us. We all just kept spawning on each other and running around capturing bases.

At least in Rush me and him can run around together and plant a bomb, cover it, then move on, or defend one bomb an entire round. In Conquest, however, we're pretty much screwed when playing with randoms.

One problem is that tanks can cap objectives. So one guy in a tank can undo what you are describing doing on foot with your squad. Didnt bf2 make you get out of the vehicle to cap a flag?

In general I feel like the maps are too big for conquest on the consoles. I presume they are the same maps as the pc, so with teams of double the size there is probably better and more coherent action. On ps3 it seems like the teams would have to actively conspire to have awesome conquest matches. Like, lets prearrange to fight over B. ive watched over B "truck" on Tehran highway for an entire match and not seen anyone even try to neutralize it.

I actually like squad rush games, more action and good teamwork really pays. But thats not really what a bf game should feel like. Theres a reason karkand is the legacy map they are bringing back, why didnt they design more maps like that?

**chia51** · 11-14-2011, 11:53 AM

Re: Battlefield 3

**Lieutenant Dan** · 11-14-2011, 12:01 PM

Re: Battlefield 3

Got on a roll yesterday!

Was in a great room on Rush, and racked up win after win! Moved up from a lvl 11 to 14, and had a blast. BF3 the way it's supposed to be played.

After that room started to break up, I moved on to Conquest and got a couple of wins THERE, and then that room dissolved so I played three rounds of TDM and won two of them.

Then, like w/gambling, decided to quit before the house takes me LOL

**steveeee** · 11-14-2011, 01:36 PM

Re: Battlefield 3

<object width="560" height="315"><param name="movie" value="http://www.youtube.com/v/hpMbvxIWE6I?version=3&hl=en_US&rel=0"></param><param name="allowFullScreen" value="true"></param><param name="allowscriptaccess" value="always"></param><embed src="http://www.youtube.com/v/hpMbvxIWE6I?version=3&hl=en_US&rel=0" type="application/x-shockwave-flash" width="560" height="315" allowscriptaccess="always" allowfullscreen="true"></embed></object>

**AUChase** · 11-14-2011, 01:53 PM

Re: Battlefield 3

I haven't beat the Campaign yet (I've been pacing myself with it), but I just beat Night Shift and I'm about to start 'Rock and a Hard Place'.

It's pretty good, so far. There have been a few frustrating moments early on, but It seems as if my time spent playing multiplayer has actually helped me with the campaign.. especially popping in and out of cover.

Eventually, I'll make a run at beating it on hard, for the trophy, but I'm going to wait.. because it seems like it would take forever.

**Lieutenant Dan** · 11-14-2011, 01:57 PM

Re: Battlefield 3

Originally posted by AUChase89

I haven't beat the Campaign yet (I've been pacing myself with it), but I just beat Night Shift and I'm about to start 'Rock and a Hard Place'.

It's pretty good, so far. There have been a few frustrating moments early on, but It seems as if my time spent playing multiplayer has actually helped me with the campaign.. especially popping in and out of cover.

Eventually, I'll make a run at beating it on hard, for the trophy, but I'm going to wait.. because it seems like it would take forever.

I'm also pacing myself thru the campaign. It's an okay campaign...like you said, with some frustrating bits but that's the norm for FPS campaigns in BF and COD. I really liked the jet level

Battlefield 3

Recommended Videos

Comment

Comment

Comment

Comment

Comment

Comment

Comment

Comment

Comment

Comment

Comment

Comment

Comment

Comment

Comment