There's a big change with weekly missions. You now can do the weekly missions in Portal servers with bots. You have to go into Portal and host your own server. Just put a password on it.
CadWoman has a video on it.
Just use her codes to configure a server that works. Now, you can do your "25 hipfire kills" vs bots. This never used to work, but does now.
AA6HW8 - rush
AA6CS3 - team deathmatch
AAXJBK - conquest
CadWoman has a video on it.
Just use her codes to configure a server that works. Now, you can do your "25 hipfire kills" vs bots. This never used to work, but does now.
AA6HW8 - rush
AA6CS3 - team deathmatch
AAXJBK - conquest
Last edited:
The new AR RM68 in the battle pass is nasty. Like better than the SFAR nasty. Unfortunately it is level 40 on the pass (but free). Definitely worth grinding up to get it. I had a bunch of coins on my Xbox account so I bought a bunch of tiers which copies over to PC somehow. The LMG is solid, but nothing crazy.
It is really good at range but still does ok up close (still gets beat by SMGs but not terribly). If you mix in a headshot at range (and it has low recoil even with minimal attachments), it just deletes people.
It is really good at range but still does ok up close (still gets beat by SMGs but not terribly). If you mix in a headshot at range (and it has low recoil even with minimal attachments), it just deletes people.
A reference to "year 2" was spotted in Origin and backed up by the API. Could be nothing, but people are speculating we'll get more content after season 5. Player numbers are way up since the game went free on PS+ (and it is still on game pass). They should have done that ages ago.
Remember too you can now get those missions done in portal servers against bots (if they are set up properly). Those annoying ones like hip fire kills or melee can be done in a quick round against bots. If you've got a backlog of old missions, hammer them out in portal. Enter this experience code to start your own Rush server. Just remember to put a password on it and it will fill with bots and it will count. It does not work in regular bot matches, you have to go into portal and create your own server with the right settings.
AA6HW8
There's lots of other codes out there, but Rush works great except for vehicle challenges. I get my weekly missions out of the way so I can just play the game online and have fun.
AA6HW8
There's lots of other codes out there, but Rush works great except for vehicle challenges. I get my weekly missions out of the way so I can just play the game online and have fun.
One tip is avoid breakthrough. There's a thing where the defenders always lose. Everyone knows it, so all the good players exit out, which just leaves the defenders short handed the whole game.
The attackers end up with players with 100+ kills while the defenders don't even slow down the attack. I used to like the mode, but the community has sort of ruined it.
I don't know when it happened exactly, it used to be my favorite mode.
Was planning on playing the smaller modes again with less vehicles I had some fun on those last time I played this.
But that isn't what people want. Lol. We want a f***ing proper BF game that is all. Why is that so damn hard to grasp.
You watch, this entirely new way will be a COD clone.
. I don’t know why this is so hard for them to grasp. They have a basic formula that worked, they just strayed too far from it since BF V.I know the suits supposedly wanted a COD clone, and that’s apparently what caused the exodus that ruined 2042 initially, but I like BF b/c it ISN’T COD.
I know the suits supposedly wanted a COD clone, and that’s apparently what caused the exodus that ruined 2042 initially, but I like BF b/c it ISN’T COD.
I don't agree with the "since bfv" arguement. Really I feel like BF had eras where they dumbed the franchise down.
1942, BF:V, Battlefield 2, BF2142, IMO this was the peak of BF franchise, the game did have a learning curve with commanders, detailed and elaborate commrose, more structure, less of a run and gun game a lot more meticulous then the BF games of today.
BC1, BC2, 1943, dumbed down, downsized, and simplified for the console masses and controller.
BF3, BF4, hardkine, Same as above but to a lesser degree, they brought a bit more of the core of the game back but certainly not all of it in BF3 and 4. Hardline was ehhh, but still retains more core then the games of today.
bf1, bfv, 2042
these are basically all in the same category to me, very dumbed down with not many classes, CoD style gameplay with battlefield moments, not a ton of tactical play in these IMO, they leaned towards more of a GaaS model in these with seasons and such.
basically, bring back BF2 style gameplay and I'll be excited, but I think that's never gonna happen. This is also not me saying that all of these games are bad, I've had fun with most of them.
Last edited:
Where 2042 failed initially was that it went too big. You think "128 player BF game" and think, heck yes! However, it was just too big, too open, and too slow paced. I remember playing the beta on that giant orbital map and thinking, "this is kind of boring". It was "big" but not "epic". The game got better on smaller servers with smaller maps.
128 players felt like we'd just trade kills, and maybe your team won, maybe they lost. You were too insignificant to make a difference. It was an FPS game, not a Battlefield game.
Some other issues:
-Lack of destruction. Think of BF V at the end of a round of Narvik where an entire group of wooden buildings would be splinters and change the way the map played. That little town would be gone each and every round.
-Lack of squad system (finally coming next (last???) season)!
-Live service failure. A boring battle pass and limited progression don't keep people coming back. COD keeps me coming back with camo challenges, events, multiple season updates (even if those are thin). Few maps, few guns, few camos, few things to unlock.
-Classes. I don't think specialists were that bad, but I think with everything, they were an easy thing for players to target. I think solo specialists without any squad stuff felt weird and didn't play well.
-Don't forget the two gens of consoles splitting players too. Back then, PS5/XSX were still hard to find, so even people who wanted to upgrade couldn't play. It was the worst time to split a game. They should have just made everything 64 players for old gen.
128 players felt like we'd just trade kills, and maybe your team won, maybe they lost. You were too insignificant to make a difference. It was an FPS game, not a Battlefield game.
Some other issues:
-Lack of destruction. Think of BF V at the end of a round of Narvik where an entire group of wooden buildings would be splinters and change the way the map played. That little town would be gone each and every round.
-Lack of squad system (finally coming next (last???) season)!
-Live service failure. A boring battle pass and limited progression don't keep people coming back. COD keeps me coming back with camo challenges, events, multiple season updates (even if those are thin). Few maps, few guns, few camos, few things to unlock.
-Classes. I don't think specialists were that bad, but I think with everything, they were an easy thing for players to target. I think solo specialists without any squad stuff felt weird and didn't play well.
-Don't forget the two gens of consoles splitting players too. Back then, PS5/XSX were still hard to find, so even people who wanted to upgrade couldn't play. It was the worst time to split a game. They should have just made everything 64 players for old gen.
These dumbf***s will never learn. 2042 was that new way and that didn't turn out well. 2042 is a different game today thanks to patches that the BF community asked for.
In the generation of remakes and remasters, I'd love a Battlefield 2 remastered or reimagined in Frostbite engine. Battlefield 2 and Special Forces expansion. f*** that would be epic.
I'm in the minority but I think the game sucks now compared to what it used to be. Oh well, I'm done with it anyway.
All of above and a damn server browser please! Can't believe they still haven't sorted out the squad system too, the change they made is somehow even worse. I just hope they have a better direction going forward. The new maps give me hope as far as map design goes anyway.
They aren't capable of making a good BF game. That is obvious. EA are too busy chasing trends too. BF was a good game that stood out for being its own thing. That isn't going to happen when the company mandate is to chase trends.
The fact they have 2 former COD guys overseeing BF now really isn't going to help.
People forget though that 2042 isnt the first BF game to have 128 player servers, the earlier PC games supported just about whatever you wanted, although not "officially".
But I do agree, I feel like the 128 players was really just their way to differentiate PS4/Xbox one versions from the PC, PS5, Xbox Series versions with actually thinking tactically thinking about how that could be a bad/good thing.
One of the worst parts of 128 players is that it seems that they cannot pump out new maps because they are just so damn vast that it takes them a long time. We've gotten what, 4 new maps since 2042s release?
128 players is fine. Hell, they could have 1000 players. It is all about map design, and the maps in BF2042 are bad.....even the post launch ones. Even 64 player is bad in BF2042 maps.
Playing on the old good maps is the only way to play BF 2042 imo. Noshar Canals, Al Amein, Caspian Border, Arica Harbor, etc, just play better.
I agree with you that the maps are mostly bad, the more players they add into a game though the more strenuous it is on the CPU. Which is mainly why there's no 128 players in last gen and no 120fps mode on current gen consoles.
That is a different point of discussion.
128 players in of itself isn't bad. It isn't why 2042 is bad.
Yeah, the "walking simulator" meme was funny because it was true. You'd spend most of your time walking, hoping to get into a fight. Conquest was really bad. Breakthrough played ok when you forced everyone together, but even that was just kind of bland.
The maps were just far too open. They had no flow. You'd go 12 and 12, spending half the map running, trying to guess where the fight would be when you finally got there.
It is like they envisioned everything being centered around vehicles, but there weren't enough to make that work.
The maps were just far too open. They had no flow. You'd go 12 and 12, spending half the map running, trying to guess where the fight would be when you finally got there.
It is like they envisioned everything being centered around vehicles, but there weren't enough to make that work.