Battlefield 3: Armoured Kill

delly · 05-09-2012 2:33am

Logical Fallacy wrote: »

Okay, so here is the Alborz Mountain vid including my sweet ass double headshot/quad theft at the start.

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=zc-8017brEs

Logical Fallacy wrote: »

"Ah yeah, we're quad buddies"

"I'll have your quad"

lol, some classic lines in there

mozattack · 05-09-2012 9:06am

Okay, my initial comments after a good 3 hour blast last night.
I was on a 100% server which included team deathmatch, rush and conquest.
I played rush on Bender Dessert, Mountains and the Caspian Border II map (armored whatever), conquest on Mountains, Bender Dessert and Death Valley and Team Deathmatch on Mountains, Death Valley and Bender Dessert.
I had concerns about the game prior to launching because of the PS3 number of players but I knew that such concerns didn’t matter for rush so I was at least excited about playing that game mode.
The maps look great, they really do, they are big but detailed.

RUSH
The gunship dominates though and makes attacking on rush too easy. I played 6 rounds of rush (attack 3 times and defending 3 times) and the attack won each time. I was in the gunship using the cannon and the bombing gun and you can wreak havoc. My mate got around 14 kills in a row in 2 minutes while I got around 5 and a dose of kill assists. I think it ruins Rush in a way because once a MCOMM is armed there is no defending once there is an active gunship about – especially on some MCOMMs which are totally exposed.
Also the fact you can parachute down from the gunship makes attacking way too easy because you can now get in behind enemy lines so easy. You should only be allowed to do this on Conquest me thinks.
There are large gaps between MCOMMs but you quickly get there because there are sufficient vehicles about.
Overall Rush looks great and is a brilliant addition with my only concern being the gunship which is overpowered for that game mode.

CONQUEST
Before judging this I must admit that I don’t like Conq. on BF3 on maps such as Kharg Island and Operation Firestorm because it mainly is just running around.
Expect more of the same here to be honest.
I did enjoy it, but I can see myself getting very bored of it very fast.
I played 3 full games and I think I was MVP 3 times, if not just twice, and in all those 3 games I think I got no more than 10 kills. Each game was 17-20 minutes long so that is 10 kills per hour when my average in BF3 so far would be circa 65 kills per hour. That is very off-putting. On Death Valley I got 6,000 points (1,500 more than 2nd) and I all I had was 5-1 in kills!!!
There is a very simple solution… make each map 3 flags only and we are sorted. I don’t care that PC will have 64 players because PS3 will always have Rush to play but 24 players on 5 flags is shockingly dull and can so easily be avoided by reducing the number of flags.

TEAM DEATHMATCH
I don’t normally play this mode… (turns out I have only played 33 games from 375 hrs of playing) but I really enjoyed it last night. The maps we played on were in no way linear meaning enemies could be at any elevation and so it was very good.
Not sure would I regularly play this but I certainly wont ignore it as much as I have done so far.

Nuri Sahin · 05-09-2012 11:13am

Put in a decent session yesterday with a few of the lads from here. Some of whom have already had their rant (*cough* Brian *cough*). I was all ready to have one myself in the early hours but decided to sleep on it, Mixed thoughts. Those two words summed it up with me at least initially, though admittedly I'm leaning more towards the negative which is a shame as I played alright going by my scores and K/D.

Shame in the sense that the maps are beautiful as I already briefly commented on. Bandar Desert and Alborz Mountains, are IMHO, the best looking maps in the game. Dice did a cracking job with these two especially. I really cannot say enough positive things about these maps in the general sense (visually, layout and tactical routes are a plenty). So well done Dice on that. Had one my best BF3 moments attacking on Rush on that last MCOM up in the tower. Cleared out 6 people on that room with my P90 and Magnum and died to the 7th person but our team was able to push on, kill him and get the plant and we won with a few tickets remaining. Was buzzing after that match

Death Valley on the other hand, meh. Maybe it's the fact I've never enjoyed night maps for the most part in the past that I didn't take to it, but the layout of the map is a pain. It just feels like a cluster****.

Armored Shield, I only played one game and while is alright at best We played Conquest on this last night and lost by one ticket so perhaps that has tainted my view of it what with being the Win/Loss whore that I admittedly am.

The overall feelings though are summed up by saying that it was always going to suit PC over console. I imagine PC players will truly love this DLC, I know my feelings would be different if I had a gaming PC. T

The AC130/Gunship is a feckin' pain when defending on Rush especially, and me and the lads I play with are predominately a Rush player. Someone half decent in the AC130 will absolutely clean up and you'll more than likely spawn into it's fire a fair few times. I'm sure people are saying, oh but if a squad of you's or even just a couple of people are using Igla or a Stinger it's easy to take out, easier said than done tbh. It's easy to destroy in a jet, sure. But it's always a race to get to the jet like on any map and if a random gets it, it's a toss of a coin usually whether the guy has a brain or not. IF the AC130 was removed from Rush, I could see myself putting in a lot of hours into AK.

johnny_adidas · 05-09-2012 12:41pm

Personally think they should limit the AC130 to one vehicle per round of Rush
and one vehicle per capture of the control points in CQ.

Especially in rush it is difficult enough to concentrate on defending a point without constant death from above. That leaves the option for the attacking team to use it and the defending team to take it down quickly

mozattack · 05-09-2012 1:04pm

-Ade- wrote: »

The AC130/Gunship is a feckin' pain when defending on Rush especially, and me and the lads I play with are predominately a Rush player. Someone half decent in the AC130 will absolutely clean up and you'll more than likely spawn into it's fire a fair few times. I'm sure people are saying, oh but if a squad of you's or even just a couple of people are using Igla or a Stinger it's easy to take out, easier said than done tbh. It's easy to destroy in a jet, sure. But it's always a race to get to the jet like on any map and if a random gets it, it's a toss of a coin usually whether the guy has a brain or not. IF the AC130 was removed from Rush, I could see myself putting in a lot of hours into AK.

Exactly my thoughts on this.

ktulu123 · 05-09-2012 2:06pm

Sounds like the AC130 is a pain in rush. Not too worried as I don't really play rush in BF3. They should of done something like the attacking team has an AC130 station at each M-Com that the defending team can push out and destroy like they did with the drone thing in Bad Company 2.

hightower1 · 05-09-2012 2:16pm

is there any weapon unlocks with this? If so what weapons are there and whats involved in the assignments?

On xbox here and oddly there are servers showing up with AK maps on them and AK assignments for new tags that can be started to worked towards even now. Even the mobile artillery and tank destroyer are showing up in customize class screen.

ktulu123 · 05-09-2012 2:23pm

No new weapons in this, only new vehicles and unlocks for them

hightower1 · 05-09-2012 5:23pm

ktulu123 wrote: »

No new weapons in this, only new vehicles and unlocks for them

Fcuk that noise so. I only play rush and seems like rush on AK maps is ruined by the ac130 so with no new weapons Im out. Close quarters had no rush centric interest for me either so once I unlocked the weapons I stopped playing those maps. Havent actually played them since...not a single time.

mozattack · 06-09-2012 9:18am

Rush is completely unplayable on AK BTW. Now done around 14 rounds and attack has won each time...sometimes it is actually pointless going to disarm unless you attention is to be killed by the gunship for the 500th time! A great shame really but another serious boo-boo from DICE.

Some will say "quit moaning and take it out". Well if you dont have a skilled pilot defending it will take a few engineers to take it down with IGLA/Stinger and that is assuming that these haven't been killed by the tanks and choppers which are then given free reign to take control.

I had to play Con. so but in doing so I experienced my two fav. BF3 moments ever nearly;

1. Playing Armoured Shield Con. and was causing mayhem in a tank destroyer... i took out another tank, 2 lads on foot and was kicking ass. A swarm of javelins were coming after me (thank god for IR smoke) and the chopper was bombarding me. I was doomed... ...until i reversed at turbo speed while facing the chopper and BANG; 1 cannon = dead chopper = double kill. Some shot.

2. Playing Death Valley Con. and I was giving out about the noob up the building sniping so i had enough and I got into the Flanker and headed for them, parachuted out and landed on the building on a ledge immediately over a sniper. I saw his name, went to leaderboard and sent him a message saying "look around dick"... there was nothing so i went closer and he turned around only to meet my knife in his face... brill. I got a message saying "good one". His mates spawned in and we after me but i took those two out too by routine shooting.

It was unreal brillant.

Soby · 06-09-2012 1:45pm

Aye Rush needs sorting out . As does TS , too much waiting around. Needs Quads or else 12 tanks on each side for each person

dreamers75 · 06-09-2012 3:04pm

http://www.eurogamer.net/articles/2012-09-06-battlefield-3-armored-kill-review?sourceid=bf3-wp-ak-eg-review-2&utm_source=facebook&utm_medium=wallpost&utm_campaign=armored-kill&utm_content=eg-review-2

EG review

Logical Fallacy · 06-09-2012 7:05pm

This is my take on the Armoured Shield map and it's place for console players.

TLDW : It's ****ing poop.

ComeraghBlue · 06-09-2012 8:06pm

Very good points in your video. I despise these new maps for various reasons. What's your YT channel link & I'll sub

Logical Fallacy · 06-09-2012 10:07pm

ComeraghBlue wrote: »

Very good points in your video. I despise these new maps for various reasons. What's your YT channel link & I'll sub

Ah thanks dude, it's www.youtube.com/user/scannerbarkly (hope that okay Mods).

dreamers75 · 06-09-2012 10:14pm

PC BF players fapping over this DLC.

The maps look and play exactly how BF should work.

Road to Jalabad in next DLC please

hightower1 · 06-09-2012 10:21pm

I just cant see how Dice brought maps and items like this to console? As LF was saying its clear after 2 rounds that the maps and ac130 is flawed. Surely they played the game numerous times on all formats with full lobbies but yet still left the dlc as is?

Did no one at Dice stand up in a round table and say "lets take out the ac130 on rush and shrink the map size for conquest" ? It just seems like an obvious and almost intentional mistake. The reason I have to say intentional is because after hearing opinions and watching gameplay even I could echo the sentiments of ps3 players so surely to go the makers of the game could see the same flaws but yet still left it in....the only conclusion to be drawn is that it was intentional, to what end though god only knows.

dreamers75 · 06-09-2012 11:54pm

hightower1 wrote: »

I just cant see how Dice brought maps and items like this to console? As LF was saying its clear after 2 rounds that the maps and ac130 is flawed. Surely they played the game numerous times on all formats with full lobbies but yet still left the dlc as is?

Did no one at Dice stand up in a round table and say "lets take out the ac130 on rush and shrink the map size for conquest" ? It just seems like an obvious and almost intentional mistake. The reason I have to say intentional is because after hearing opinions and watching gameplay even I could echo the sentiments of ps3 players so surely to go the makers of the game could see the same flaws but yet still left it in....the only conclusion to be drawn is that it was intentional, to what end though god only knows.

You got Close Quarters, it evens itself out tbh. Try playing Scrapmetal with 64 players its get boring after about 10 minutes.

Brian_Zeluz · 07-09-2012 1:41am

dreamers75 wrote: »

hightower1 wrote: »

I just cant see how Dice brought maps and items like this to console? As LF was saying its clear after 2 rounds that the maps and ac130 is flawed. Surely they played the game numerous times on all formats with full lobbies but yet still left the dlc as is?

Did no one at Dice stand up in a round table and say "lets take out the ac130 on rush and shrink the map size for conquest" ? It just seems like an obvious and almost intentional mistake. The reason I have to say intentional is because after hearing opinions and watching gameplay even I could echo the sentiments of ps3 players so surely to go the makers of the game could see the same flaws but yet still left it in....the only conclusion to be drawn is that it was intentional, to what end though god only knows.

You got Close Quarters, it evens itself out tbh. Try playing Scrapmetal with 64 players its get boring after about 10 minutes.

Hang on so you're saying that Armoured Kill being s##t evens out Close Quarters being s##t?

BlitzKrieg · 07-09-2012 1:56am

hightower1 wrote: »

I just cant see how Dice brought maps and items like this to console? As LF was saying its clear after 2 rounds that the maps and ac130 is flawed. Surely they played the game numerous times on all formats with full lobbies but yet still left the dlc as is?

It's probably the opposite that happened.

They probably had too many games of rush with the gunship and by the 500th or so round they had found what they thought was a balance for it to be in RUSH. Forgetting that they had to do 100's of rounds to get the feel of a battle with the ac130 overhead.

I take most complaints of online balance with a pinch of salt for the first week or two because you need to give that time for people to get a feel for how new things work and adjust for it.

Not saying anybody is wrong (I dont have bf3 on ps3 so I dont know what its like yet) just that I will not be surprised if the ac130 goes from death machine to deathtrap over the next few weeks.

Logical Fallacy · 07-09-2012 3:32am

lol, uppity PC players on reddit and Youtube are trying to hurt my feelings because I play on a console.

I'm just telling them to enjoy the wait for the DLC.

hightower1 · 07-09-2012 3:33am

dreamers75 wrote: »

You got Close Quarters, it evens itself out tbh. Try playing Scrapmetal with 64 players its get boring after about 10 minutes.

Not quite sure what point your making mate?
Am I missing something?

I cant fathom as to why they released DLC for consoles thats clear to anyone - isnt playable on the format.

Are you saying they will release it because people will buy it? I dont agree if thats the case, its counter productive to ship unsuitable DLC (as with any product) to people as it drastically reduces future re investment. For what I want out of battlefield though so far BTK has been the only dlc I have actually used regularly. I dont touch CQ and can see AK being the same unless they bother to balance rush on it.

All in all thus far premium has been a big let down for me, CQ felt like it was trying to beat COD at its game style and failed. AK seems like its trying to play to Battlefields strong suits but fails at that with extremely poor balancing decisions. If aftermath and endgame dont deliver then TBH I doubt I would invest in a premium service for bf4. ATM I am already doubting I would take such a service again seeing as I could have saved myself cash by only buying DLC maps that I actually want.

Logical Fallacy · 07-09-2012 3:34am

BlitzKrieg wrote: »

Not saying anybody is wrong (I dont have bf3 on ps3 so I dont know what its like yet) just that I will not be surprised if the ac130 goes from death machine to deathtrap over the next few weeks.

The thing about the AC-130 is that it's both a death machine AND a death trap...it just depends on what mode you are playing.

hightower1 · 07-09-2012 3:37am

Logical Fallacy wrote: »

lol, uppity PC players on reddit and Youtube are trying to hurt my feelings because I play on a console.

I'm just telling them to enjoy the wait for the DLC.

I always thought xbox vs playstation fanboys were sad and ignorant but my got PC fanboys take the cake. Leave 'em off, theyll soon be distracted trying to fix a frame rate or crash out issue while all you have to do is pop a disk in and hit your early dlc.

danniemcq · 07-09-2012 7:59am

hightower1 wrote: »

I always thought xbox vs playstation fanboys were sad and ignorant but my got PC fanboys take the cake. Leave 'em off, theyll soon be distracted trying to fix a frame rate or crash out issue while all you have to do is pop a disk in and hit your early dlc.

.... must resist,,,,,,

Nuri Sahin · 07-09-2012 10:40am

Just to echo what hightower has said, I'm really disappointed in the Premium service and feel it's been 50 euro down the drain thus far. Close Quarters and Armoured Kill, while both are at the opposite end of the spectrum. they are too much of whatever they are trying to achieve.

As I stressed before, CQ is CoD on drugs IMHO. Far more running around like a maniac. AK I've already made my point so I won't go too much into it but to say LF has it right in how he commented on the AC130, it's a double edged sword tbh. Either your team is looking up in the air, trying to destroy that, the viper, the jet etc.... and then the tanks and infantry clean up or vice versa, focus on tanks and infantry while death from above rains down on your team. Pick your poison essentially.I said the AC130 should be removed from Rush, but if that doesn't happen, the airdrop option on Rush should be removed. What is the point in trying to hold a defensive line in say oh, 8 out of 10 games??? There is none.

mozattack · 07-09-2012 11:08am

CQ is pure muck.

I like AK, it is something different and surprisingly I prefer CQ than Rush because i though CQ would suck and Rush would rule but the latter is ruined with the gunship

*around 22-25 rounds played now on Rush, attackers 25, defender 0. No lie

True more players on Conquest would be good but it aint happening so why cry about it. I think 32 v 32 would be too much anyway and once you have a vehicle it actually doesn't matter.

Sometimes no being in a firefight every 2 seconds is a welcome change.

dreamers75 · 07-09-2012 1:03pm

Brian_Zeluz wrote: »

Hang on so you're saying that Armoured Kill being s##t evens out Close Quarters being s##t?

CQ is for consoles due to small maps and small playercount.

AK is for PC with large maps and large playercount. Seemingly its not **** on PC......

Didnt think i had to explain that, honestly didnt. But there yah go.

Brian_Zeluz · 07-09-2012 2:00pm

dreamers75 wrote: »

CQ is for consoles due to small maps and small playercount.

AK is for PC with large maps and large playercount. Seemingly its not **** on PC......

Didnt think i had to explain that, honestly didnt. But there yah go.

Considering you're original post didn't imply what you've just said I'm very glad that you did explain it in a courteous non sarcastic manner.

Also could I borrow that crystal ball of yours which tells you how good unreleased dlc is on PC?

dreamers75 · 08-09-2012 1:27am

Brian_Zeluz wrote: »

Considering you're original post didn't imply what you've just said I'm very glad that you did explain it in a courteous non sarcastic manner.

Also could I borrow that crystal ball of yours which tells you how good unreleased dlc is on PC?

Sorry for expecting a level of intelligence with console players, my bad.

Battlefield 3: Armoured Kill

Comments