Upcoming Rush tweaks next week


As anyone following me on twitter (twitter.com/gustavhalling) knows I have been very busy collecting feedback about the gunship in Rush the last 2 weeks and we have already made improvements yesterday, changing its spawntime from 60 to 90 seconds.

I am not finished yet however and late next week (19-20th) we are pushing out a new server with these tweaks.

Gunship initial spawntime tweaked from 15 to 60 seconds

  • This will fix the issue where gunship gunners can target defenders before the round starts

Gunship spawntime tweaked from 90 seconds to 120 seconds.

  • This will give defenders more time to “breath” before the gunship is respawned again.

Gunship “moving forward” delay between bases tweaked from 15 to 30 seconds

  • This will fix the issue where the attackers can parachute drop to the next base before the defenders can reach it

This is the 2nd step in balancing up the game mode which proves that the community are just much better at owning up on the servers than our in-house testing is =)

There is no shame in saying that the Gunship have been overpowered after launch but its not because we dont test it before hand.
As always even that we test 5 days a week at DICE + 60-80 QA for months YOU guys/girls play more hours together the first 2 hours after we release a new expansion!



You are free to comment in this thread but keep it to the point and I will moderate “spam” or just plain non constructive critisim also known as “whining”.
This is my personal blog and my twitter is my personal account and I will not tolerate it as “official forums” might and you will be blacklisted from the site. 



  1. Thanks for your support.

    Ohw, btw, are you aware of the strange serverlag/stuttering that was -in my perception- started after the last server patch?
    Alot of people are experiencing it reading on battlelog.

  2. Thanks Gustav for the honest feedback. Its refreshing to see companies being straightforward with communities. As an Ex-QA tester I fully agree, the userbase just do things in-house dont think of, even when we think like them!

    Lookign forward to seeing this live.

  3. Jack Larsson says:

    I wouldn’t say the Gunship is overpowerd. It is more underpowered in the way that it can’t take much damage. An aircraft can easily take it down. The Gunships ati-air guns on the top is turning to slow. Something else that has bothering me is all the people crashing their jet into the Gunship, it takes a lot of damage. Also you guys should take a look at Bandar Desert rush. Feels like US has a lot of tanks while RU have on tank and getting blown to peices all the time. Last thing, would be nice to have a mini-map while firing the mobile-artillery and to see it in Tank Superiority as well. Note that my opinions is only based on the Xbox 360 version.

    Also thanks for an awesome expansion!

  4. Leki says:

    Well these changes will lessen the problem but not fix it. The problem with the gunship is that it is too easy and requires no skill at all to get kills. With the thermal view you just spot the white dots from across the map and click on them to get an easy kill!

    It is no fun at all to play on the ground as infantry getting insta killed from anywhere on the map even after you respawn.

    If You want to balance it remove thermal view from the gunship or tone down the splash damage so you actually have to aim to get kills.

    With these changes the gunship could get a bit more health added to it to balance it from planes/choppers attacking it etc.

  5. Russell Ping says:

    As always even that we test 5 days a week at DICE + 60-80 QA for months
    YOU guys/girls play more hours together the first 2 hours after we
    release a new expansion!- Sounds like you need some more testers….. im more than willing to help out.

    As always cheers for the update.

  6. sean says:

    Don’t think any additional tweaks are/were needed. AC130 is almost a non factor as long as team is willing to work together, load engi with stinger/igla. Gunship is very vulnerable to top down attack from jets/helis as well.

  7. Ryan Warren says:

    How will this fix the spawn killing and the para dropping right over the mcomms? The Gunship needs to be removed from rush or make tweeks like: remove para drop option, increase cannon reload time. Last night I watched 6 stingers launch at the gunship at one time which was great that we were using team work, but then we were plowed through by tanks and c4 dropping para troopers.

  8. Austin Mccoy says:

    what about how easy it is for jets to kill the AC130, they can take it down in one run and the gunners cant even hit them because of the blind spot

  9. Alex Laime says:

    Excellent improvements. This will give defenders a fighting chance to setup a D.

  10. Alec says:

    Either the Gunship weapons need some more damage and splash (against ground, and AA guns are WAY too weak), or the Gunship needs more damage resistance. The fact that the AA guns are limited to the top half, yet it takes forever to take out incoming air vehicles, while the Gunship loses health at an alarming rate is just ridiculous. It needs to have more strength, either weapons or just health.

  11. I dont think changing spawn times is enough for RUSH… the problem is not the AC130 itself (it can be taken down easly if you dont get spawnkilled), the real problem is that attackers got shitload of vehicles compared to defenders and to that they also got AC130 that’s a killing machine and a COM parachute point

    I think there has to be some drastic change to make these RUSH maps really enjoyable and playable

    I already said my idea: remove it or make it so that it spawns when attackers got like 25 tickets left or something, and it can only spawn once per base

    Something like that would be acceptable in my opinion because RUSH is not CONQUEST, all enemy team is in one place, not all around the map… the way AC130 works in RUSH has to change without any doubt

  12. Brian Roller says:

    These tweaks all sound great, but you might also want to give the RU side more vehicles.

    Also, why is it that all rush maps have the US attacking?

  13. . says:

    How on earth did the proximity defense bug make it through QA? All someone had to do was use it once while sitting still. It’s not even random, you lose health or die every time it’s used when not driving.

  14. Shehzaan says:

    really need the minimap when inside the mobile artillery gunner seat!

  15. I hope you realize by doing this you are eliminating the amount of teamwork needed to play the game properly. All you needed to do was take paradrop out and leave the rest alone. One jet strafe maybe two can take a gunship out without problems.

  16. With every update this game gets worse. Shame on you.

  17. Aaron Haynes says:

    Thank you for addressing this problem so quickly. I think the gunship should only appear 1 or 2 times per base, and a 4-5 minute respawn timer would lead to more balanced games. I believe part of the problem is that most engineers on AK rush equip the Igla throughout the game in order to be effective against the gunship, but that choice leaves them ineffective against the enemy armor which is free to storm the base. A long respawn time allows for engineers to unequip the Igla between gunship attacks. For me, 2 minutes is too short a break to have me unequip and re-equip the Igla. Attackers already have a nice armor advantage, so please make the gunship much less prominent than an average vehicle and allow defense more than 2 minutes of breathing time. Thanks for listening!

  18. Marcin Looms says:

    2 weeks and You come with this ? If removing this damn plane is not an option then remove the para drops. c4 from the sky, attackers behind defenders all the time. And what about vehicles ? Why artillery is only on armored shield ? Why US gets tons of vehicles while RU gets 1 tank/tank destoyer ?
    And how the hell your QA could miss bugs with proximity defense, launching smoke as a gunner in artillery or switching seats in AC-130 ? IMO rush was:
    a) never tested
    b) tested by people who have no clue how to play this game

  19. Sean says:

    Gustav, please consider making it a server option, and putting the power in the hands of the players. It would be great to allow admins to be able to turn it off, or change the spawn time. Obviously as you can see, people want a variety of settings for the gunship. The only way to please the majority would be to allow for complete customization. Thanks for your time.

  20. SmoothBlue says:

    It’s not the that makes it problematic but rather how armor is spread out between the teams. Take Armoured Shield rush for example
    2 tank destroyers
    1 mobile artillery
    1 attack heli
    1 gunship
    1 MBT
    1 Heli

    Without the Gunship the defenders would still have a hard time since they can’t compete with the amount of armor the attackers get. Look at this from a consol perspective. About 5 out of the 12 defenders are defending engineers trying the shoot down the gunship and heli with IGLA. This makes it so that the defense focused on the ground is too week the protect against the armor the attackers have. Removing the gunship wouldn’t solve anything since the attackers still have a armor advantage on the ground. Two tank destroyers paired with artillery and a heli will still completely out gun the defence. The point i’m trying to make is that the Gunship isin’t the issue that makes Rush somewhat problematic.
    Fixing this issue is simple.
    1. Remove the AC-130. highly requested and requested against. This would put the defending focus on the ground more making it easy to defend. This idea is not necessary
    2. Remove one tank destroyer and heli from attackers. This allow the defence to defend more easily while there is still and AC-130
    3. Give Defence mobile or stationary AA. This would shift the attackers AC-130 and heli away from the T-90 and infantry allowing the defence to dig in more before the attacking armor arrives. This would allow less IGLAs from engineers and strengthen the defence.
    What do you think?

  21. Martin Peach says:

    Changing the respawn timers wont fix anything people will still sit and wait for it to respawn.
    All DICE had to do was remove the paradrop function and lower the RoF on the howtizer combined with a 120sec respawn and the gunship would be balanced its as SIMPLE as that.
    But thats only half the problem with AKs rush mode the imbalance of tanks between attacker and defenders mean anychanges to the gunship wont make it any less one sided
    All that Q and A and AK rush mode made it to release this broken is a bit of a joke dont you think.

  22. James Mourby says:

    The one problem with the gunship is that in RUSH it has a different damage mechanic than in Conquest. In CQ you can shoot almost on top of a person and they are damaged… but ok. In RUSH, you can shoot ‘near’ them and you kill several people in a MUCH larger radius.

    This makes it very easy to clear a path to MCOMS, especially on servers where friendly fire is off. It also makes it very easy to defend an MCOM as you just need to shoot in the general direction and no-one can get near.

  23. Red_kl says:

    suggestion about AC130:
    problem #1 – ac130 is kinda op against ground, place it x2 higher and gunners will need to think more about bullet path and it will be not so easy to hit the targets on the ground.
    problem #2 – gunship is very weak against air, what if just place second AA on rear or under rear, so gunship will be able to push back jets from sides (top AA) and from back (rear AA). Jets will need to attack gunship just in face, but it’s going with some speed + jet has own speed, so it will be not so easy as it is atm to take gunship down.
    I hope you read this, and thnx for trying to fix gameplay -_o.

  24. Jared Edmund says:

    This whole thing would be solved if Defenders got the AC-130 and the Attackers got a Mobile AA.

  25. TylerDurden says:

    I think that if this update doesn’t even things out. You should really look into removing the Paradrop; it’ll be less stressful on the defenders not having them have to worry about watching their backs every 2 seconds. On a sidenote, the AC130 doesn’t circle around the MCOMs in the last base of Alborz Mountain, it circles around the attackers spawn, it never moves up. this is something you should look into.

  26. Martin McNeill says:

    Is there any plans on rebalancing the heli/FIM92/IGLA situation? Patch 1.06 works ok for the AK maps on Xbox, but this is not the case for the older maps like Oman, Caspian, Kharg on conquest because of spawn trapping and spawn killing air vehicles in there deployments.
    Can some form off spawn protection against FIM92/IGLA be introduced for air vehicles during there take off or repair stage?

  27. lee martin says:

    maybe give them the ac130 once for every set of bombs, about 3 minutes in

  28. Javi says:

    Hi there Gustav and thanks for listening to the community. I’ve played more than 3000 rush matches and the AC130 totally breaks the flow of this game mode. I understands its not an issue on Conquest but on Rush its almost unplayable.

    Have you guys considered removing it? In my opinion it not belongs to Rush.

    Anyways thanks for such an amazing expansion!!! Its helping me spread the BF3 word :D

  29. Aaron Peet says:

    there really wasnt a problem yes it was hard to defend but if you had any kind of team work the ac-130 didnt have time to do anything before it was shot down i havent lost a defender game since the first day AK came out. just a bunch of whinning cry babies cant handle the heat and dice listens to everything and that ruins the damn game sad to say but look at our weapons they suck now and so will the 130

  30. WhiteMoose says:

    Maybe it’s time to do Patch Test Servers? Your game testers can’t even understand that attackers reaching Mcoms faster then defenders is a bad idea..

  31. DeeTwo says:

    (All PC/Rush). I can see what is trying to be done with the Gunship and yes with competent teams it is enjoyable/challenging to play with because it gets/needs the whole team acting as one. Unfortunately reality gets in the way, most pub teams aren’t competent (and don’t want to be), its usually 5-6 (out of 16) people doing most of the hard objective based “work” per team while the rest cannon fodder around them keeping their KDRs up, which in standard Rush can still work out (ish) as you have them as a buffer to work off to do the stuff that needs to be done. The Gunship bypasses all of that though, even if you bring the Gunship down within 30-40 seconds of it spawning/being spotted and kill off most of the para-drops you then have the nutty amount of armour on your face which you have little chance of dealing with because you’ve been dealing with the Gunship.

    It doesn’t need to be removed (well, maybe it should if you’re going to leave the armour imbalance the same), but it shouldn’t be a standard always spawning part of the map like an Apache. Give it them at 50-60 tickets and/or 20 tickets remaining, something ‘set’ so it’s an impact item that the attackers can push into and the defenders can set against.

    I’m not asking for it to be balanced to the lowest skill level, that’d be silly, just for those of us who actually bother trying to play for the objective to have a chance without having to make sure the teams are stacked in our favour.

    Other than that good job, the new maps are awesome :)

  32.   says:

    Mr. Halling, all these spawntime tweaks are meaningless when most servers these days are running instant vehicle spawn timer, that means AC130 is in sky 100% of the round. These are server owners desperate to keep their servers populated, even if it means catering to noobs and destroying the flow and rhythm of the game that the designers intended. And I assume DICE’s internal testing servers use the default, unmodified Vehicle Spawn Delay setting of 100%, rather than Instant.

    To standardize/normalize the BF3 gaming experience and level the playing field, the default “100%” Vehicle Spawn Delay server setting should be a REQUIREMENT for a server to conform to Normal gametype. If a server owner would still like to run instant vehicles, that’s fine but then his servertype should become Custom. Because right now instant-vehicle respawn turns the game into a circus and effectively makes destroying an enemy vehicle or aircraft meaningless.

  33. Good news, but I think with a good teamplay it’s totaly possible to win rush in defense. I done several times with my team with 200% tickets. Each player had a role to defend MCOMs. Thanks for that exceptionnal expansion pack ;-)

  34. Craig Tuohy says:

    Just take it out of Rush altogether. Absolutely nobody is arguing FOR its inclusion except for the developers. Its great in Conquest, but breaks Rush completely.

  35. Craig Tuohy says:

    All of this is such a shame because the maps are stunning. But Rush has clearly not been playtested. An AC130 AND an Amtrac, against defenders with 1 tank destroyer…

  36. Jimkel says:

    Armored Shield is the biggest problem in terms of attacker
    defender balance. I believe the main source of the problem is the AC-130 and
    the lack of vehicles for the defender

    Vehicles on AShield


    1 tank, 1 chopper


    2 Tank destroyers 1
    mobile artillery 1 chopper & the AC-130

    Any combination of the following could help the balance for
    RUSH mostly regarding the ac-130:

    Remove or restrict the paradrop feature to the 180 degrees
    closest to the attacker spawn or some varient

    Remove the thermal view from the AC-130.

    Something must be done to prevent the AC-130 spawn killing
    the defenders particularly on A Shield. Witnessed one guy go 53-3 using this
    method on console. He would use the stronger cannon right on the spawn and then
    finish survivors with the gun. Increase reload time between cannon shells?
    Reduce splash damage on infantry? Reduce accuracy or cannon round speed? Change
    the flight pattern? Better spawn points for defenders? I’m open to suggestions
    on these points as long as they fix the spawn killing.

    Give the defenders some way to bring the ac-130 down other
    than IGLA/Chopper. On Ashield, consider adding AA gun or jet?

    Some have suggested limiting the AC spawns per bombsite or
    at a certain ticket remaining. I like this idea, maybe 50 if two bombsites
    remain 25 if one bombsite remains.

    Balance the vehicles; SmoothBlue makes a good suggestion to
    remove one tank destroyer from the attackers on Ashield. Spawn time tweaks seem
    like a quick effortless way to fix a problem that is ruining an entire game
    mode for an expansion. Please make all of your work on creating these maps
    worth it by improving their playability. Many of the suggestions focus on AS,
    but apply to the other maps as well.

  37. TylerDurden says:

    So I just got back from playing after the “fix”. Rush is STILL broken. I played for about 3 hours in different rooms and defenders NEVER won. I know you said you won’t take out the Gunship from rush, but you have to understand this thing is making rush on AK unbearable. I think removing paradrop would alleviate the problem, but I don’t think it will fix it. Gunship is still OP on rush even after your fix.

  38. Lutz says:

    Hi Gustav, perhaps it’s already too late but I had an idea how to balance AK Rush without removing the gunship.
    It was often mentioned that Attackers are in advantage due to a variety of tanks and aircrafts (including the AC-130), which makes it very difficult for the defenders to do their job. A lot of defenders choose to be an engineer and use Stinger or IGLA. That’s a good choice to take down the gunship – but a very bad idea when it comes to fighting against MBTs or IFVs. So they are focused on air defense a lot and will be crushed by vehicles and enemy infantry.

    Now my idea: The gunship should belong to the DEFENDERS!
    Brillant – isn’t it?

    This will take great effect on the AK Rush Gameplay. Defenders won’t look in the sky anymore – they will concentrate on the attacking ground forces (as ist was before Armored Kill was released). They will be able to deal with approaching tanks by spreading fire from the gunship. The only question that’s left without an answer: will it then be possible for the attackers to move forward to the MCOMMs? But since the spawn time is set to 120 seconds, I think there will be a chance to take down the stations.

Leave a Reply

View in: Mobile | Standard