[Discussion] Retrospective over the lack of portable mortars in BFV
7952 postsMember, Battlefield 3, Battlefield 4, Battlefield Hardline, Battlefield, Battlefield 1, CTE, BF1IncursionsAlpha, Battlefield V Member
As we all recall, DICE did not give us proper portable mortars in BFV which were one of the staples for every main game since BF3 at least.
.
They said they wanted less indirect fire.
.
So now with the knowledge of what BFV ended up being, do you think that the portable mortars would had helped the game or hindered it?
.
.
Personally I believe that the loss of some of the indirect fire made it easier for a team to be on the side of the defenders of an objective in the game modes that have that Attacker vs defender format. It is a lot harder to be an attacker than a defender (when the teams are balanced enough) because the defender just has to hide from most of the direct fire and wait for the attacker to expose themselves while they try to reach the objective. It would had been a lot more interesting if on those infantry only Breakthrough maps one could strike some otherwise well entrenched defenders with some mortars which creates a breach in their defensive line.
.
I understand that there are concerns about overuse and camping etc but I still believe it was a loss of the strategic options we could have in a game about warfare.
I think that people can camp just fine already with their rifle if they chose they want to play that way so it is not that big a loss if we could have mortars on the next BF game
.
TL:DR: I miss mortars and the positives they could bring to the table and I hope DICE will reconsider their exclusion in the next game.
.
.
What are your opinions and concerns on the subject? Would mortars be one of the ingredients to make battlefield more strategic again?
1
Comments
It all sounds good on paper. But it´s always, and I really mean ALWAYS the people who abuse something in a way, the devs didn´t intend or maybe even consider. And if it isn´t a mortar, it´s the obligatory map border sniper, or more like a pack of those who will make the attackers suffer.
Nuff said
Mortar could have been useful against campers, we had the Piat but it needed a great arc to be a better indirect weapon. The problem with squad call-in is its like using a shovel(Artillery) or a sledge hammer(V1) to hit a nail and they are also to late in a round if an attacker to make a difference.
As a pickup it could be good if it is meant as a long range weapon. As a gadget with a low blast, high damage could have worked well against stationary target.
Arc height and method of target is an issue. The apex needs to be sufficient to allow for a reasonable range. As for targeting a small map with a solid circle crosshair could work as it would make pin point targeting of infantry hard, but allow for targeting of vehicles or areas.
In BF3/4 mortars were less annoying. UCAV was more dangerous and effective compared to regular mortar.
I’m sure they’ll include one in BF6 but that drone view has to go imo
Gadgets that can be abused for camping, while dealing "random" deaths are not really good for the game and are only making the game less fun to play.
V2/arty-strikes in BFV does the same as mortars, they are way to common and just brings the game-play to a halt. Often they are also a big part of the stomps, the winning team can just keep spamming any objective a loosing team is trying to take.
DerDoktorMabuse Counter sniper is how I use the mortar 90% of the time and BF5 in my opinion was worse off for its absence.
This was in BF3 because of whinging!
It also created far greater problems than it cured considering the regularity that spawn traps occurred in that game. It meant that the trapped team couldn't deploy Mortars to pop smoke to cover a break out (ammo types were selectable in that game and not a separate 'gadget') but the trappers could pound them with impunity!
Bad decision!
It should also be noted that BF3 Mortar range was a tad excessive.
BF4 Mortars could be operated 'remotely' which again, was a bad decision but other than that were OK.
BF1 Mortars, even with 'drone view' were not that bad as their range was relatively short compared to previous iterations because OHKs from full health were very rare. The 'drone view' only helped if the target remained stationary.
Oh, and unless you can see the enemy or are at least aware of their presence, pretty much every death can be considered 'random', so that is a pointless argument!
As some above stated, BFV has suffered to much from the input of tryhards and the persuit of competitive e-sports resulting in a no fun, hardcore lite game that (relatively) few enjoy.