So my comrades the time has come for Darkbrother26 to ask the question, what do you think is better for improving teamwork? Rush or Conquest?

I personally think Conquest is better because you have to work with your team to defend and capture points and utilize different classes to do this effectively. If you run around blindly you probably won't do good. I personally think Rush is a lot of camping on the defenders part and sometimes cheap tactics like C4 and UAV or any other vehicle and it can be annoying. I also like how both teams get vehicles in Conquest unlike Rush where only the attackers do thus sometimes making defenders rush their spawn just to steal the vehicles which can also be annoying. So that's my two cents what do you guys think?

Also, these are opinions so if you don't agree with what someo0ne said don't do this. DERP HERP I DONNO AGREE LOL TROLL LOL U MAD?

So once more, what do you guys think?

IMHO, RUSH and CONQUEST require different kinds of teamwork.

With Rush, as defender or attacker, you can work hard to reach certain points, take a breather and then push onto the next objective. I kinda like the tempo rush provides in that way.

With Conquest, it's almost non-stop action jumping around the map to secure or retake objectives. As such, I find conquest to be a greater mental fatigue and thus a little less enjoyable. I understand how the pace of conquest would lead to building/refining team skills, and it's also possible to slow the temp of conquest thru proper map management of just 2 objective locations.

I'd be willing to play a little more [13] conquest even though I enjoy rush more.

I like conquest more because its more team based. Rush can be focused more about points and just i think that in Conquest people have a different attitude to teamwork since you cant overdose on points with C4/UAV or C4/M-COM. I love boths because i grew up on Rush and then when i was more skillfull i switched to conquest a little bit because i was more focused and wanted to be with people who knew about teamwork.

I started playing Conquest and I enjoy it because its fast paced and even when you think your safe an enemy can and most likely will sneak up on you. Now Rush is fun but I would enjoy it more if in Rush instead of attackers having a certain amount of respawns make it into a 20 or 30 minute match. When ever I play Rush I feel well rushed unless I am on defense. I have to watch my deaths. They are both fun game modes I just would like Rush to change. Ah well what ya gonna do beside yell at EA hahahaha

Like byte said, it really is a different kind of team work.

Rather than all rushing a single objective, I think of conquest as a means of spreading your forces thin. Area denial is very apparent here as enemy teams hold the objective with a squad DM flair. Communication, attacking, and defense big picture principles are analogous to rush, so IMHO, good rush players make good conquest players. It just takes some more practice.

Darkbrother26 wrote:

So my comrades the time has come for Darkbrother26 to ask the question, what do you think is better for improving teamwork? Rush or Conquest?

I personally think Conquest is better because you have to work with your team to defend and capture points and utilize different classes to do this effectively. If you run around blindly you probably won't do good. I personally think Rush is a lot of camping on the defenders part and sometimes cheap tactics like C4 and UAV or any other vehicle and it can be annoying. I also like how both teams get vehicles in Conquest unlike Rush where only the attackers do thus sometimes making defenders rush their spawn just to steal the vehicles which can also be annoying. So that's my two cents what do you guys think?

Also, these are opinions so if you don't agree with what someo0ne said don't do this. DERP HERP I DONNO AGREE LOL TROLL LOL U MAD?

So once more, what do you guys think?

I agree with Crazy and Byte, but I also do have to add to the original post that in rush its not always only the attackers who get the vehicles. For example, Laguna Presa, Defenders get majority of the vehicles such as light tanks and ATVs and attackers start with UAV, Patrol boats and Jet skis to try and rush the base and gain access to the more powerful ground vehicles. I have been in a few game senarios on this map in which if you are able to keep the attackers from taking the first base and aquiring land vehicles the game is simple and easily yours. This isn't the only map with attackers not heavily outfitted with armor, but I think you get the idea. I personally like both game modes and only prefer one over the other depending on my mood at the time.

Darkbrother26 wrote:

So my comrades the time has come for Darkbrother26 to ask the question, what do you think is better for improving teamwork? Rush or Conquest?

I personally think Conquest is better because you have to work with your team to defend and capture points and utilize different classes to do this effectively. If you run around blindly you probably won't do good. I personally think Rush is a lot of camping on the defenders part and sometimes cheap tactics like C4 and UAV or any other vehicle and it can be annoying. I also like how both teams get vehicles in Conquest unlike Rush where only the attackers do thus sometimes making defenders rush their spawn just to steal the vehicles which can also be annoying. So that's my two cents what do you guys think?

Also, these are opinions so if you don't agree with what someo0ne said don't do this. DERP HERP I DONNO AGREE LOL TROLL LOL U MAD?

So once more, what do you guys think?

Both are poor crucibles in which to refine the purest awesome. The single best way to learn teamwork in my opinion is Squad Deathmatch. Fire & Movement as a Squad, Fireteam and Battle Pair is all about situational awareness and communication and in both Conquest and Rush these two skillsets are not emphasised enough.

Conquest and Rush are however good places to build leadership abilities. Rush is excellent at building a more strategic view of the battlescape, perfecting ambush skills and Conquest punishes weak decision making, order/counterorder failure and bad medic / supply logistics management.

P.S. Hardcore largely removes the teamwork from the game.

Both game types require completely different strategic teamwork to achieve success.

As bytehoven said, Rush can be more lenient on your level of stress and thinking capabilities. Rush is more of a straight forward game type anyway, if you're attacking or defending the objective is quite repetitive which therefor makes it a bit easier to keep focus on what's happening on the map at all times.

With conquest it truly is a non-stop action experience because you always know that your enemies are going to be trying to take something that's yours, which separates the two quite well. If you're playing attackers on rush the only thing you need to worry about is destroying alpha and bravo before you run out of respawns, the enemies aren't running to what you already own because they have nothing to take other then killing you and you're team so they usually camp. Conquest definitely requires the most attentiveness because if you own all the base locations you really have no clue which one the enemy will attack first to take over, you can only assume. I'd say Conquest requires more spread out teamwork then Rush because if you're team cannot correctly place themselves across the map your enemies will just walk right through what you have and take it from you while you keep dying because you don't have any backup.

Personally, I like Rush, only because I enjoy blowing down objectives and making sure no one blows mine down in separate rounds. Usually rush games are more time consuming which I also like, gives me more time to learn how my enemies work and allows me to better predict what their next move will be.. which is always fun

Technogician wrote:

As bytehoven said, Rush can be more lenient on your level of stress and thinking capabilities.

I may have spoken to soon. Based on some arse paddling we have recently taken as attackers and defenders, RUSH can be just as stressful.

Bytehoven wrote:

Technogician wrote:

As bytehoven said, Rush can be more lenient on your level of stress and thinking capabilities.

I may have spoken to soon. Based on some arse paddling we have recently taken as attackers and defenders, RUSH can be just as stressful.

Lol, well USUALLY it's more lenient but we all get those games where people are just too damn good.. but those are the best games to be in

I'm surprised no one has mentioned the most apparent difference between the two modes and that is the ability to spawncamp. With rush, you can push the attackers spawn with impunity as long as you have 2 or 3 people back far enough to handle the occasional arming. With Conquest as long as some one holds a flag, they can spawn there or their teamates, or their base. Its uncommon for all flags to be held and your able to spawn camp, although some maps are less forgiving at it than others. IMPO, I like conquest, because of the uncertainty of where the attack is gonna come from next. I think the hectic nature tends to lead to better squad cohesiveness. Rush can get boring very fast especially if your rolling. or frustrating very fast if your getting rolled.

I agree, I mean rush is great for when I started to play and now that I can see a more broad side ho it all I now prefer conquest for some of those very reasons Dtiger Posted above.