Originally posted by Kalfireth
Perhaps it's just personal preference, but in BF2 it seems like if you're stuck with a bad team then you're destined to get your ass kicked no matter what your skill level. I don't call that fun. They've tilted the balance far too much infavour of landslide victories.
I must agree that in BF2 teams quality has gained a far more greater factor when deciding the victor for the round (one reason could be the increased number of flags... hmm?). I mean in BF1942 (and DC) if you could hold one single flag for the entire round (like me and my friends usually did in Desert Shield

), the rest of team might be good enough to hold the second flag leaving only the third one for the other team if at all. Usually that brought us to the victory.
In BF2, if the rest of the team is not good enough to capture flags at all or hold the ones captured, one signle good squad is unlikely able to hold the team together.
No I don't mean that me and my friends are superior to the others

, it's just that when we have/had our moments it's quite depressing to see the rest of the team screw up (in BF2).
Of course teamplay is what BF2 is for, but if the team sucks then there goes the play.
But still, I think BF2 prettymuch owns my gaming time for the time being
