Battlefield Hardcore. Also Known As “Easy Mode”?

Posted: March 7, 2014 in Battlefield, Gaming
Tags: , , , , , , ,


Something that I have been seeing in Battlefield since the start of Hardcore Mode in Bad Company 2 is how it is “easy mode” and not really “hardcore”. I’ve seen it a lot lately that I thought I would post about it some and go ahead and get my thoughts out there on it as well.

First, I have always played both modes and if either regular mode or hardcore mode ever fell away forever, I would be fine. I play both modes to work on areas of my game that I feel are slacking or need improvements on. Both modes can help accomplish that.

Battlefield 4 hardcore mode has the following differences:

  • Minimap is disabled
  • Bullet counter and health hud is disabled
  • Hit indicator is disabled
  • Health is at 60%
  • On-screen sights are disabled
  • Bullets in a magazine are lost on reload
  • Regen health is disabled
  • Regen repair on vehicles are disabled
  • Battlescreen is disabled
  • No external camera in vehicles

There are probably a few more things, but you get the idea that a number of key features that someone could rely on are gone.


So with all these things turned off you might be thinking, “This does sound a bit hard and challenging, so why the “easy mode” comments?”. The answer is the health being at 60%. Even though there are many things disabled and the game actually plays more like Battlefield 2/142, the health makes it easy mode.

It’s about the KDR?

The debate rages on about kill death ratio and if it even matters. The funny thing about stats is that it matters if you want it to matter. I see in the Battlelog forums people that say PTFO and “its ONLY a game!” will then argue that hardcore is easy because of kills, so they don’t play that mode.

Now think about that for a minute. You are playing an online shooter with all kinds of other players with guns and tanks and everything else and you don’t want to play a game mode that suites your playing style. You WANT to be killed repeatedly for the “challenge”.Ā  You might be thinking “Yeah, that’s right! It’s about the honor and skill!” OK, I would agree with that, EXCEPT, when I check the stats of most these people that claim “easy mode”, they flat out suck at the game overall. Their KDR is low, their skill level is low, their team points are low, their win ratio is low. This isn’t always the case for everyone. Then I get to looking at their weapons and, if I can, the games they play. More times than not they’re play style is a camping style and a lot of times playing Recon with a sniper rifle. Another thing I see is people that use high ROF weapons and are run-n-gunning it. Two play styles that do not always work very well in hardcore mode.

I am the first that will tell you that I do not care how you play your game. I’ve wrote several different articles about that. I do have a problem with saying a mode is “easy mode” when you do not do well in whatever mode you play in or that your play style contradicts the mode. Sure, hardcore mode is easy when you are hiding in a corner waiting or if you are using a one hit weapon, such as a sniper rifle, or you are running around in the open. The thing is though is most the time the players’ stats do not show that. What they show are that these players were the VICTIMS in hardcore mode. They were the easy kill! The fodder or meat-shield. This is not always the case but that hardcore mode did not fit their play style. You know what? That’s OK! That is a valid reason to not play hardcore, or any game mode.

I don’t play conquest hardcore because it doesn’t work for me. I just don’t like it. I don’t know why, I just don’t. I don’t get owned in it by any means, it just doesn’t seem right. I think because I expect certain things in conquest since 1942 and its not in hardcore. I play mostly TDM and domination. Maybe its the vehicles? I don’t know, but it is OK.

It’s easy mode because everything is turned off?

This comes up once in a while where the argument is that everything can be killed or destroyed easily because there is no regenerative health, armor or mini-maps to warn others that they are in danger. When you think about that, I suppose it is easier to slip up on a tank that has no external camera or a mini-map to point you out for them to kill you. I can tell you as both a hardcore and normal mode player, it doesn’t really make a difference. The reason why is because even though these things are turned off for everyone, that includes you. It’s a level playing field. Most people that destroy vehicles can do it regardless of the mode. I LOVE blowing vehicles up and I can do it better in normal mode than I can in hardcore. Why? Because I have more health to take some hits if I get caught and because the drivers are not as “jumpy”. Vehicle drivers in hardcore mode tend to be a lot more alert because of the loss of their “eyes” on the battlefield. The tactics have changed and people adjust to the mode. They adapt and overcome the items turned off, making the attack much harder.

All weapons are OP?

This usually goes with easy kills argument that because health is at 60%, most weapons can kill in two to three hits, whereas normal mode is about 4 to 6, all depending on distance and what weapon you are using and blah blah blah. Sniper rifles are an instant kill in hardcore mode. So, yeah, that is correct. It’s hardcore. That’s the point of the mode. With no regenerative health you rely more on your team and using cover and checking corners and not making stupid rushes in the open. People claim that because of this they rack up TONS of kills and how there is no “balance” in the game and so it is broken.


Again, when checking stats most people are not racking up tons of kills and are usually hiding or camping. There is also a misunderstanding of what balance really is and people confuse balance with “fair”. Not always, but the term is not used correctly. Hardcore mode is not about balance, per se, it’s about greater consequences when you do not follow the foundational rules of FPS playing. Things like slowing down, staying together, checking your corners, watching your back, and so on have a greater impact. You can’t just run or hop your way out of a situation you put yourself into.

The damage is also mutual. The enemy is at 60% health, but so are you. You are just as easy to kill as the person you are killing. Again, it is a level playing field. People mention how recon sniping ruins the game mode. I’m sorry, but I have read enough forum posts in Battlelog to know that recon sniping is an annoyance in every game mode. Period. Yes, sniping is more powerful in hardcore, but you can counter snipe. You can also use other things more to your advantage to take out snipers. It is not a bed of roses for a sniper in hardcore mode. I know, I kill plenty of them.

The bottom line with all this is that regardless of the mode you play, there are advantages and disadvantages to them. You should play the mode(s) you want to play. I would also recommend you try other modes to get a feel for them and see what you think. You might be surprised that you like something other than normal conquest. Also, leave other people alone about their game modes. They bought their game as well and they do have the right to play what they like, even if its the easy normal modes. šŸ˜‰

  1. shockandawe says:

    I think 1 thing left out is that many people believe that the maps are never made with hard core in mind. I think of hardcore as a mini-game within battlfield but not the real thing. If the game was made for hardcore and the weapons and maps and vehicles were balanced around hardcore, I’d be all for it. I wouldn’t really play core mode if the game was designed and balanced around hardcore.

    • CptainCrunch says:

      I’ve heard that before as well. Some people mention the lack of cover on maps to get from one point to another. There is enough cover for regular mode to work fine, but in hardcore mode you cannot move. If the maps were designed more toward hardcore health, there would be more strategic locations and stop points.

      Yeah, I also agree that the hardcore mode is not really designed at all. You can tell that in the early months Battlefield 3 and 4; In the beginning certain weapons would not work as there were no reticules to aim with. In both cases they were patched in later, correcting the issue and making the weapons/gadgets useful again. Most the time DICE just lowers health and turns off maps and walks away from the mode, even though that turned off other features.

      Good comment. Thanks for posting.

  2. the right question is which mode is more realistic… and hardcore mode is by far more realistic than normal mode… 3d person camera to vehicles belongs to other games.. self repairing means less teamplay e.t.c.

  3. jimykx says:

    Hey Crunch! Still waiting for some new write ups! šŸ˜€ Maybe some thoughts/previsions on BF5?

    • CptainCrunch says:

      Hello Jimy!

      Yeah, Its been quiet. Been busy this winter and I’ve been disillusioned with some of the things that went in BF4. I was just thinking its time for my big “What should BF5 be like?” write up šŸ˜€ I will get that going.

Leave a Reply

Fill in your details below or click an icon to log in: Logo

You are commenting using your account. Log Out /  Change )

Facebook photo

You are commenting using your Facebook account. Log Out /  Change )

Connecting to %s