Operation Metro Conquest

Should we remove Operation Metro Conquest?

  • Leave it on

    Points: 35 39.3%

  • Take it off

    Points: 41 46.1%

  • No opinion

    Points: 13 14.6%
  • Total voters
    89
Status
Not open for further replies.
I vote keep it on. Its nice to have a map where there is no vehicles and you can just have a massive infantry battle thats heated and intense.

For people leaving I dont think its that big of a deal. There was time playing the other night where one side won handily but the next round the team got destroyed came back and won pretty easily too.

I dont think there is a good enough reason to take this map off the server. Like I said its nice to have a map where there is no vehicles and things can just be settled by the infantry alone. The massive fire fights are fun and even if one side loses you can get some nice amount of points by throwing down ammo and medic packs.

So I vote to keep it on the rotation. Hopefully if we get another 64 person server we could try 64 person metro on Rush.


Another option to try would be to take it off the hardcore server and not the regular server or vice versa.
 
voted take it off... as much as i enjoy infantry battles (and i do) this one tends to get stuck at 2 or 3 choke points and just tends to lose some of the fun when theres a million people all shooting into the same 2 or 3 areas. Theres no way to advance, no way for it to become anything other than a stalemate. And that is not what I am looking for when I play conquest. I am looking for strategy and teamwork, and that map on conquest has neither.
 
I don't know. It is an RPG fest, but there are 3 points of entry to the 2nd point. If you can manage to break just one of them, you will win the map.

I vote to keep it on for the time being, and we revisit this in a month after the community has begun to take sides on which maps are better than others.
 
I found a 32 player 24/7 server. Having less people makes a huge difference. The B point changed hands several times, and we actually captured A at one point.
 
Take it off. If i want to have a game full of rpg spam and grenade deaths ill go play COD. I've played metro conquest probably 4 times total on our hardcore server and you literally can't get past the choke points. Trust me I've tried, died way to many times to crossfire from both sides.
 
I still haven't played it in Conquest, but my vote to keep it on stands strong. In Rush yesterday, it was SO nice to have a changeup with no vehicles, no fighting over them, and true shooting fun. Yes, I prefer Battlefield over Call of Duty. However, every map but Metro has vehicles. It gives players a chance to just use guns (it is an FPS, after all), as well as forcing you to use teamwork to attain points (Rush included).
 
PBJ said:
I still haven't played it in Conquest, but my vote to keep it on stands strong. In Rush yesterday, it was SO nice to have a changeup with no vehicles, no fighting over them, and true shooting fun. Yes, I prefer Battlefield over Call of Duty. However, every map but Metro has vehicles. It gives players a chance to just use guns (it is an FPS, after all), as well as forcing you to use teamwork to attain points (Rush included).
Click to expand...

The key word is "Conquest" when was anything about rush ever said?:angry: If you have never played it please don't post an opinion till you have.:chair: Also in Metro Conquest there is no team work unless the whole US team is coordinated, which took about 10 eGO's being on it for it for us to win. My vote is to take it off as all it is is a Grenade/Rocket spam fest.
 
VeRtAg0 said:
The key word is "Conquest" when was anything about rush ever said?:angry: If you have never played it please don't post an opinion till you have.:chair: Also in Metro Conquest there is no team work unless the whole US team is coordinated, which took about 10 eGO's being on it for it for us to win. My vote is to take it off as all it is is a Grenade/Rocket spam fest.
Click to expand...

I voted to take it off but last night I played it on a HC 32 player server and it was much more manageable. With some good teamwork as US we managed to push them back to Alpha. Still it shouldn't be on the server.
 
The key thing people are missing here is that this is about the 64 player Conquest specific version of the map, not the 32 player or the rush variant. I'm pretty sure everyone knows that fewer players means less spamfest and typically higher probability of teamwork.

As for people saying it's great for points, well that's just stupid. Let's wait for our team to try and progress into enemy locations only to die while i just sit back and twiddle my thumbs with the defibs/ammo pack out. Congrats on being one of the most worthless teammates in the round.

Another little point about this map for those who might be familiar with games like LoL, WoW, and HoN. There are characters in those games known as "Anti-Fun" characters due to the way they're designed and played by the majority of players. Know what the players in those games think of those characters? They hate them, to the point of leaving games in some cases because of them. It ruins the game when they're in the round, it ruins the fun when they're in the round, and it ruins the feel of the game itself due to how that specific character was designed. The point of this is that Op Metro on 64 player conquest is the same thing, anti-fun. The majority of players that actually enjoy what this game is about (teamwork) hate this map more than anything out there right now, even mortars, which are pretty anti-fun too.

On top of all of this summation of what most people have already said, regardless of ANY amount of teamwork involved, you're not going to have a "good" round with all the spamming of explosives. If both teams are of equal "skill level" then whomever reaches B first and lobs the first explosive wins. That's a TERRIBLE design on DICE's part. Absolutely terrible. Why would we want a terrible map on our server?
 
And yet as bad as this map apparently is... the server was still full through both rounds of it...
 
Tiomat said:
And yet as bad as this map apparently is... the server was still full through both rounds of it...
Click to expand...

Servers are full due to the game not even being a month old. Everyone is wanting to play regardless of a situation, which is why someone earlier said to come back to this in a month or so and check it out again when there's less of a crowd, so to say. I'm partly in agreement with this, but still don't think 64 players on such a linear map will ever make sense. If rockets/nades/m320's were disabled then it would probably be amazing to play on, but we don't do that here at eGO, and probably never will on a public, non-event server, so with that being said, i'm quite happy the majority vote is to trash the map.
 
Currently theres 36 vs 31 I dont think thats a majority vote thats quite a squeaker vote... I hope the map stays for the time being due to 31 people still wanting to keep it. If it were more overwhelming to remove it then I could see it definitely being gone. However 31 of us including myself want to see it stay.
 
Tiomat said:
And yet as bad as this map apparently is... the server was still full through both rounds of it...
Click to expand...

This is true, very true. I was in a round on US side and we pushed the Russians all the way back to their main. So what I am trying to say is this it depends on your team. US side has won only at least 5 times while I play that map. I still stand by my opinion to take it off but wait until we see pubbers and ourselves think it's 100% bore to play.
 
TheAngryPanda said:
The key thing people are missing here is that this is about the 64 player Conquest specific version of the map, not the 32 player or the rush variant. I'm pretty sure everyone knows that fewer players means less spamfest and typically higher probability of teamwork.

As for people saying it's great for points, well that's just stupid. Let's wait for our team to try and progress into enemy locations only to die while i just sit back and twiddle my thumbs with the defibs/ammo pack out. Congrats on being one of the most worthless teammates in the round.

Another little point about this map for those who might be familiar with games like LoL, WoW, and HoN. There are characters in those games known as "Anti-Fun" characters due to the way they're designed and played by the majority of players. Know what the players in those games think of those characters? They hate them, to the point of leaving games in some cases because of them. It ruins the game when they're in the round, it ruins the fun when they're in the round, and it ruins the feel of the game itself due to how that specific character was designed. The point of this is that Op Metro on 64 player conquest is the same thing, anti-fun. The majority of players that actually enjoy what this game is about (teamwork) hate this map more than anything out there right now, even mortars, which are pretty anti-fun too.

On top of all of this summation of what most people have already said, regardless of ANY amount of teamwork involved, you're not going to have a "good" round with all the spamming of explosives. If both teams are of equal "skill level" then whomever reaches B first and lobs the first explosive wins. That's a TERRIBLE design on DICE's part. Absolutely terrible. Why would we want a terrible map on our server?
Click to expand...

The thread is an open thread Panda they can say what they want and put in there input also. And as for 64 vs 32, rush or conquest. I can understand the rush part but the 32. The vote is on our conquest server who says its going to stay 64 or change to 32. It isnt specified in the survey. Complain all you want that our conquest is 64 im just stating what i see.

There are many points that can be made here. But i must say the map needs to be around a bit longer. Game hasnt been out a week and we are already trying to get rid of a map. I would understand why but i dont think that is a smart move on Leaderships or our part. Ahhh crap i lost the mood to be a prick. Keep the map. I know it may suck but maybe the spamming will calm down once the Newness rubs off. ( inless your playing against Kerak)



DEPUTYDAWG8025
 
DEPUTYDAWG8025 said:
The vote is on our conquest server who says its going to stay 64 or change to 32. It isnt specified in the survey. Complain all you want that our conquest is 64 im just stating what i see.
Click to expand...

The conquest server is going to stay 64 slots. We MAYBE will add a 32 slot conquest server if we get a 4th server but that will be decided if/when we get one.
 
Status
Not open for further replies.

Similar threads

Ric
  • Article Article
Don: The Quiet Force Driving EdgeGamers Forward
Replies
13
Views
2K
GardenGroveVW
GardenGroveVW
xJDx
  • Article Article
ClearRP 2.5 - 6th June 2026
Replies
2
Views
438
Burnsie
Burnsie

Latest posts

Back
Top