Battlefield 1 adding 5v5 mode Incursions

A 5v5 mode named ‘Incursions’ is coming to Battlefield 1 [official site] to satisfy the bloodlust of that ‘digital sports’ rabble, EA announced today. Tch! 5v5 is over, gramps. Everyone’s Battling Royale now. But fine, fine you take that to testing next month.

More immediately, everyone who owns the Battlefield 1 DLC season pass today gets access to one map from the next expansion. Lupkow Pass is part of the ‘In the Name of the Tsar’ expansion due to launch in full next month. It has lots of snow, which sounds nice and cool on a day when everyone’s going on about that ol’ scorching sun doing a party trick.

Incursions mode will be “optimised for competition”, Electronic Arts say. It’ll go down on smaller maps, but it will still have vehicles. If you want to see for yourself, alpha testing sigups are now live on the mode’s page. The testing will start in September and initially be a little limited, as EA explain:

“Competitors will have to put their skills to the test in intense 5 vs. 5 matches, creating dramatic moments that include the signature Battlefield vehicle gameplay. Starting in September, players in the Closed Alpha will be able to choose from eight different kits (Trench Surgeon, Control Leader, AT Assault, Battle Mechanic, Mortar Support, Raid Leader, Shock Assault, Proximity Recon) on the modified Battlefield 1 Giant’s Shadow map, and rank up to gain access to improved weapons and abilities based on a combination of time and performance. The Battlefield 1 Incursions Closed Alpha is just the beginning of the team’s journey in crafting a long term-competitive experience in collaboration with the Battlefield community.”

As for Lupkow Pass, it’s a mountain pass with the risk of armored trains rolling in or Hussars armed with lances charging through. If you’ve got the DLC pass, you get to play today.

EA also today launched Battlefield 1 Revolution, which is the game and its season pass thrown into one box at a new lower price. It’ll run you £54.99, which is a tidy saving of £20 over buying them separately.

8 Comments

  1. Flopper says:

    I bought season pass and never made it past the vanilla game. Was bored after a month. Never doing that again.

    • syndrome says:

      Kind of interesting. Were you paid to say that? Because it doesn’t make any sense.

      Battlefield is Battlefield, no compromises were made to its formula since 2001. What did you actually expect?

  2. latedave says:

    Why would you say was he paid to say that?

    For the record I’ve loves the previous BF games but fuly agree with the cmoment above, bf1 is very dumbed down

    • syndrome says:

      I never said he was paid, I simply asked him if he was, because his comment doesn’t make any sense to me.

      People have every right not to like a game, but this guy bought a season pass for a game he wasn’t actually sure about — and that’s absolutely fine, people make mistakes, just bear with me — so if I told you that Battlefield hasn’t essentially changed since 2001 (or at least since BF 2142, which was released in 2007) and there were plenty of opportunities to learn what this game is, I find his statement completely nonsensical.

      He’s basically telling us that his own ignorance towards his purchases is somehow the game’s fault. In my mind this statement is so much a blatant lie, he’s either crazy or simply paid to say it, to make others believe that BF1 was somehow advertised differently and turned out shit instead. That’s absolutely not the case. It was never advertised as something else besides being a typical BF game set in the WW1 era. If you have imagined something else, and paid 80-90 bucks for something you didn’t like, that’s your problem, not ours.

      (Edit: Maybe I’m reading too much from his comment. Maybe he genuinely made a mistake and made a wrong purchase. If so, ok — THERE IS A REFUND as a possibility, no need to share that experience as important, it’s not related to this game whatsoever.)

      So while we’re at it, latedave, care to explain how exactly BF1 was dumbed down? Compared to what? Because mechanically and engine-wise it’s the best installment yet, and this is coming from someone who had played every single one of them (except BF4 because shitty and Bad Company because consoles), including many mods and whatnot.

      I’m not saying everybody should like the game, but if you don’t like it, can’t you simply state “I don’t like the game”? Why the false statements?

      • wengart says:

        Each game has its own feel. Of the new series Vanilla BF3 was pretty good. BF4 was a bit shit early but is actually worth having with some of the expansions. BF1 vanilla was pretty bad, but hopefully some of the newer maps salvage it because I like the setting. Even if the maps are relatively poor.

        • syndrome says:

          Only Suez was shitty enough in vanilla to say it out loud, almost all other maps are genuinely varied and beautifully done (The St. Quentin Scar, Sinai Desert, Ballroom Blitz, Fao Fortress, Amiens, Empire’s Edge), even Argonne Forest which is sooo Metro-like is quite manageable and well-balanced, and the only relevant issue with Monte Grappa was nadespam (which was somewhat fixed by changing how nades replenish). Suez was changed three or four times in the meantime to make it work. The only map in BF1 which is still a bit “shakey” is Giant’s Shadow, atm, though it’s not vanilla per se.

          In my opinion the maps are everything BUT the poor, considering every single map in the BF history ever. It’s true, not every BF title feels the same, but as someone who played 2142 to death, BF1 maps are so much better in every regard, except thematically which can’t be actually compared for obvious reasons.

  3. Zealuu says:

    It’s entirely possible to not like a game without being paid for it.

    That said, I like BF1. BF4 was a big letdown and never grabbed me the way previous titles had (most notably 2142, but also BC2 and BF3), but I’ve logged 200 hours in BF1. I much prefer medic as a separate class over engineer, buildings are properly destructible (none of that daft “levolution” stuff), and the free-form, horizontal variety unlock system is both sensible and accessible.

    But you have to play Rush. Rush is the only good mode.

    Not entirely sure what I feel about Lupkow Pass yet, but it’s at least a map with some verticality – attackers have to battle uphill (literally), which benefits defenders, but there are no obvious chokepoints.

    • syndrome says:

      32v32 Operations is probably worse than plain Conquest. Rush is better than both, I fully agree. But to me 20v20 Operations is the best of all.

      Frankly, BF tends to be the most tactical with fewer players. That was certainly the case with 2142. I liked its 24v24 Conquest the best.

      I’ll see what Incursions has to offer.