Changing Up Rush Mode [Speculation]


While we wait for the next big event, the news for Battlefield 4, especially multiplayer, is really slow.  What do we do when there is no news?  We feed the speculation monster!

One thing I see discussed everywhere we gamers come together to talk Battlefield is how can Battlefield 4 be tweaked to encourage more public server team play than we saw in BF3. Commander Mode, VOIP, and changes to the squad perks system all indicate DICE is working in this direction.  So far, DICE has only shown some conquest gameplay via the trailers, E3 reveal, and Alpha gameplay.  This leaves rush mode open to speculation, and the community has certainly been doing that.  Many have discussed how to change up the Rush Mode in Battlefield 4 to encourage more team play, and to make it more fun in general.  I have read many of the ideas out there, and I wanted to go over a few.  Granted, the ideas people are presenting may be too late to impact Battlefield 4, but we can hope that DICE already had these ideas themselves, or can make some quick changes if we, the community, suggest something they love.  If nothing else, maybe Bad Company 3 could see them.

  1. More points for PTFO (arming, disarming, taking out opponents nearby, etc.).  I think this is a must, especially for the supportive tasks, such as taking out opponents nearby.  Battlefield 3 has a lot of unsung heroes, such as the MCOM cover fire support, and the transport driver.  It would be nice to see things like these get more points to encourage more ‘role play’.  Also, unless it is a well-balanced round in which the MCOM is armed and disarmed many times, very few in a round even get the opportunity to get arming/disarming points, despite their best efforts (granted, arm/disarm should still be greatest reward for greatest risk).
  2. Update the scoreboard to be more rush specific.  This would entail listing more than just K/D, such as arms/disarms, defends, etc.  This would be nice, but it is not a must.  Those who are so focused on topping the scoreboard and looking good that this will sway them to play differently are hopefully few.  I personally feel that having a scoreboard more tailored to the specific gametype being played is a very good idea because it would be nice to see in a glance why the soldier who is 0-5 has the most points.
  3. Exclusive rush maps - I really like this idea.  I know it is more costly to make more maps, but there is a difference in the style of pushing and flanking that is fun on rush versus conquest.
  4. Add more MCOMs per “section”.  This would mean that, instead of having two MCOMs at once, there is three or four instead.  This could add to the intensity, making the teams spread a little more thinly (especially on 64-player servers, as most people seem to feel 32 players should be the max for the BF3 iteration of rush).  However, I don’t know that it will address any more core concerns than player count, although it may make better use of conquest-style maps, but that is just pure speculation.
  5. Change up the MCOM arming procedure, such as making it more active (requires a sequence of button pushes or actions rather than holding a button), or requiring two people to arm.  These are interesting ideas, though I don’t know if they will address the core of the matter.  Instead, I think these might just make it more difficult to get it armed or disarmed, which many may not like.
  6. Get rid of MCOMs and use different objectives, such as parts of the map.  I LOVE this idea! First of all, it would make rush more immersive.  This could also mean that every objective has a different way of being taken out, which could give attackers more options to be creative, and defenders a bigger task than, lie at the end of this hallway with an LMG on a bipod.  A common example used for Battlefield 4 is, if Siege of Shanghai has a rush mode for that map, the skyscraper is an objective.  Now, taking out the objective is no longer a matter of sneaking in as infantry, arming, and then grenade spamming the armed MCOM.  The attackers have a couple options, as they need either a recon to plant C4, or tanks in position to fire on all four destructible columns.  The defenders can  raise the bollards and defend their controls to prevent tanks from approaching the tower, as well as stopping sneaking recons.  In my mind, that makes the rush gameplay sound more dynamic.  This would also mean they can incorporate the ideas of “Levolution” into the objectives themselves.  If the attackers succeed at this step of the map, they change the entire surface of the map from here on out.  This can be incorporated in many more ways, both significant and subtle, so that every realistic objective has some impact on how the game/map plays out.

bf4-commander-tabletAnother question to which I have seen no answers is whether or not Commander mode will be incorporated into rush, or if it will be conquest-only.  I would be curious to see how Commander would be added to rush, if they choose to do so, and what impact that could have.  Commanders could potentially be a boon in giving top-down orders to the squads for better positioning and flanking.  However, I fear that if commanders have their special tools, there will be many crying OP.  Also, you no longer have capture points to enable/disable these tools.  If rush mode does not have commander, how will mixed mode servers work; will the commanders just be kicked? There are a lot of considerations and possibilities here, and I for one am eager to learn more.

What do you think the Battlefield 4 rush mode will bring?  Share with us in the comments or on our forums!

Josh, aka "Heplinger", is a father, PC gamer, and geek who enjoys the speculation and analysis of Battlefield content, as well as the discussion of the hardware behind it. He is content producer for Heplinger Gaming on YouTube, posting Battlefield and other gaming content.
  • Piet Loor

    Jets and attack heli’s in BF3 really ruined rush mode, since no counters (stingers and soflam+jav were useless with the ECM spam and orbithovercamping) Hope they wont ruin rush BF4 as well.

    • DF

      I agree, wish they would have more “Infantry Only” rush games. Even tanks can ruin it (especially on vehicle instaspawn servers). One of the reasons Rush in BFBC2 is still the preferred game for Rush is because the vehicles weren’t as powerful and unbalancing as they are in BF3 (Rush only – otherwise BF3 vehicles are great).

      • Magilla187

        i wholeheartedly disagree with both of you guys if they remove the vehicles from BF4 RUSH mode then it wouldn’t be BF4 what they need to do is balance the vehicles on rush for the defenders and attackers which would make much more sense then removing the vehicles completely

        • Heplinger

          I agree. I think it just takes careful planning in terms of the balance of vehicles and map layout. I will add to this and say that, if they do in fact bring back alternative MCOM destruction from BC2, they really need to be careful about the map layout and MCOM placement to prevent indefensible across the map MCOM attacks.

      • Piet Loor

        Yea, inf only rush really rocks. Stay away from the vehicle servers, as DICE never balanced BF3 for air – ground.

  • DF

    I agree with 1, 2, and 3, possibly 4 (depending on number of players – does make sense for 64 player games)
    Disagree with 5, most times it’s hard enough to just get in there for the 1 1/2 sec it takes to arm it.
    6 sounds good but this has been tried before (Quake: Enemy Territory and the original ET, and other games too). This sounds funny, but it just makes things too complicated as these other attempts found out – Q ET had a dumb as nails tutorial, but it was still too much for your average gamer :)

  • Dwyane Booker

    rush commander mode, booby traps after the first mcom. i dont play alot of rush lol just a thought.

    • Heplinger

      That is an interesting idea. It would be fun to be a commander and spring a trap on the other team as they push forward.

  • motleylue86

    I know the reboot of the medal of honor franchise kinda sucked but one thing that i know they did really well was taking the Rush game mode and turning it into Combat Mission. instead of just blowing up a few objectives the attacking team actually had to blow up a barricade so tanks could move up and then destroying a hangar door so they could move into position and be able to destroy the enemy air command tower.. just a thought but i think turning Rush into Combat mission would be a big plus.