Battlefield 6 ideas

Comments

  • armorcrazy
    30 postsMember, Battlefield 3, Battlefield 4, Battlefield Hardline, Battlefield, Battlefield 1, Battlefield V Member
    On the last comment, we already know it will be modern during the Korean War but if Dice can do it right it will still feel like Battlefield. I preferred the brighter graphics on BFV and not the dark BF1 and BF4 graphics but that’s not to say every map needs to be bright there needs darker maps but just not as many. Every game needs bright maps like BFV’s Iwo Jima and dark maps like BF1’s Prise de Tahure.
  • firedrakes
    1 postsMember, Battlefield 3, Battlefield 4, Battlefield Hardline, Battlefield, Battlefield 1 Member
    a vamp up bf3
  • Shy_pipo_ape
    284 postsMember, Battlefield 3, Battlefield 4, Battlefield Hardline, Battlefield, Battlefield 1, Battlefield V Member
    On the last comment, we already know it will be modern during the Korean War but if Dice can do it right it will still feel like Battlefield.
    Where is this information coming from?
  • OPSEC
    6 postsMember, Battlefield 3, Battlefield 4, Battlefield Hardline, Battlefield, Battlefield 1, Battlefield V Member
    On the last comment, we already know it will be modern during the Korean War but if Dice can do it right it will still feel like Battlefield. I preferred the brighter graphics on BFV and not the dark BF1 and BF4 graphics but that’s not to say every map needs to be bright there needs darker maps but just not as many. Every game needs bright maps like BFV’s Iwo Jima and dark maps like BF1’s Prise de Tahure.
    I'mma need a source on that statement.
  • OPSEC
    6 postsMember, Battlefield 3, Battlefield 4, Battlefield Hardline, Battlefield, Battlefield 1, Battlefield V Member
    Being Swedish and having studied the Swedish Armed Forces doctrine, organization, and equipment from world war one to modern day for 5 years, I would love for DICE to release a Battlefield title (or DLC) that portrays a fictional Swedish-Russian war set in the near-future. In this fictional conflict, NATO would intervene due to the strategic location of Sweden in Scandinavia and the Baltic Sea. Naturally I am not suggesting to make Sweden overpowered or to portray it as being able to single-handedly fight off a Russian invasion, as doing so is not part of the Swedish military doctrine.

    I find it unfortunate that DICE, as a Swedish company, has not (to my knowledge) explored making a game or DLC including the Swedish Armed Forces. It is also my opinion that it is not unreasonable that the Swedish Armed Forces would agree to a cooperation between it and DICE. The Swedish Armed Forces is notoriously understaffed and a Battlefield game exploring the Swedish Armed Forces and relatively realistically depicting it could help develop a public interest for the Armed Forces here in Sweden.

    On top of that, we have a lot of (in my opinion) interesting equipment in our armed forces, most of which is used internationally as well as nationally, exempli gratia; the M3 MAAWS and M136. The only really exclusive weapon we have is the Ak 5C and Ak 5D rifles, the former already having been portrayed in Battlefield 4 so that model could easily be reused and modified to become the Ak 5D.

    Sweden was already portrayed in Medal of Honor: Warfighter so I would presume those models could very easily be ported over to the next Battlefield game, as they did so with several weapons in Battlefield 4, despite the different game engines (MoH is Frostbite 2, BF4 is Frostbite 3).

    While I do hope that the Swedish military is somehow represented in the next Battlefield game, I am not expecting it to be for the simple reason that our armed forces rarely are in the spotlight on the international scene.

    In addition, Sweden has a very diverse terrain and climate, ranging from large, open fields in the south to mountains and taiga in the north.

    TL;DR:
    I want to see the Swedish Armed Forces in the next Battlefield game.
  • Shy_pipo_ape
    284 postsMember, Battlefield 3, Battlefield 4, Battlefield Hardline, Battlefield, Battlefield 1, Battlefield V Member
    edited December 2020
    As for spotting on core, I would prefer this:

    • Danger ping markers can be placed by nearby team mates and squad mates. If squad mates are far away, you won't see their markings. It's meant to replace callouts from those who don't use microphone.
    • Only recon can 3D spot with binoculars by manually pressing spot button while looking through scope. They have to themselves identify what's going on their screen.
    • Edit: Laser designator gadget or any other spotting gadget from recon won't reveal their location to those who they spot whether a vehicle or infantry.
    • Spot button has a little delay that it cannot be spammed.
    • Spotting flares or similar area of effect spotters only 2D spot on the minimap and larger tactical map. If you move under cover of an object and the spotting device isn't on line of sight to you, you will become unspotted. If you move inside smoke grenade or similar smoke screen and cut lines of sights to spotting device, you will become unspotted.
    • No weapon noise spotting, suppressors hide the hit direction where fire is coming from as well as lower bullet velocity as trade-off making moving targets harder to hit while remaining fully stealth.
    • Ground vehicles won't have any area of effect spotter upgrades. It's secondary seat's responsibility to spot surroundings for threats by danger ping markers. Recon air vehicles will specialize on spotting.
    • You will get alerted by what type of spotting is going on (3D spotting, 2D minimap spotting or danger ping marker). This way you can act accordingly and you will know that you weren't safely hidden even if you originally thought so. More accessible entry for newcomers.
  • Shy_pipo_ape
    284 postsMember, Battlefield 3, Battlefield 4, Battlefield Hardline, Battlefield, Battlefield 1, Battlefield V Member
    edited December 2020
    As for suppression (suppressive fire effect), I would prefer:

    • Machinegun fire from support machine guns, emplacement turrets and vehicle machine guns having highest suppression level.
    • Bolt action rifles having second highest suppression level closely followed by designated marksman rifles and battle rifles which have medium level of suppression.
    • Assault rifles having medium-low level of suppression followed by rifle carbines.
    • Submachine guns, shotguns and secondary pistols having least amount of suppression which is barely noticed.
    • Suppression is mainly visual causing character to start close their eyes seen visually as narrowing screen. Suppression also slows down non-supplied health regeneration speed but doesn't cancel it. No effect on gun handling.
    • Heaviest level of suppression which is cumulative by amount of incoming projectiles causes screen to get very narrow which forces you either fire blindly or retreat to cover. Heaviest level of suppression also slows down health regeneration speed most so keeping enemies suppressed is effective strategy for machine gunners.
    • Edit: No suppression based spotting. Spotting is recon (and recon-like) soldier class(es) role.
    • Edit: Continuous machine gun fire however increases heat level to the point where they can overheat limiting suppression capability.
    Post edited by Shy_pipo_ape on
  • Shy_pipo_ape
    284 postsMember, Battlefield 3, Battlefield 4, Battlefield Hardline, Battlefield, Battlefield 1, Battlefield V Member
    Maybe get rid of unlimited supply gadgets (pouches and crates) and let players supply from loot, stations, logistic vehicles and drops. This way medic wouldn't be no longer most prominent infantry class and support wouldn't be able to self-supply without switching a position and thus placing them in danger of running out of ammo in safe spot :)
  • CSO7777
    2063 postsMember, Battlefield 3, Battlefield 4, Battlefield, Battlefield 1, CTE, BF1IncursionsAlpha, Battlefield V Member
    Maybe get rid of unlimited supply gadgets (pouches and crates) and let players supply from loot, stations, logistic vehicles and drops. This way medic wouldn't be no longer most prominent infantry class and support wouldn't be able to self-supply without switching a position and thus placing them in danger of running out of ammo in safe spot :)
    Medic has become perhaps the most "useless" class in BFV, at least on larger maps, due to not having very effective weapons at range. While medic was overpowered in BF4 (they still run out of ammo pretty fast in BF4), the class has been totally decimated in BFV (only good for CQC).

    Medics in BF1 was hated (accused of camping) because they didn't have any CQC-weapons (at least until the Federov), but it was perhaps the best balanced medic-class in the latest BF-games (since BF3/BF4).

    In BF4, the problem was that giving the medic/assault the best weapons (ARs), made them overpowered. But giving them very "weak" weapons (SMGs) like in BFV, was not really a good solution either. I still think we need 'all-kit-weapons' (DMRs/shotguns etc), which gives all classes some choices for various ranges and then they can keep SMGs as main weapon for medics.
  • Shy_pipo_ape
    284 postsMember, Battlefield 3, Battlefield 4, Battlefield Hardline, Battlefield, Battlefield 1, Battlefield V Member
    CSO7777 said:
    Maybe get rid of unlimited supply gadgets (pouches and crates) and let players supply from loot, stations, logistic vehicles and drops. This way medic wouldn't be no longer most prominent infantry class and support wouldn't be able to self-supply without switching a position and thus placing them in danger of running out of ammo in safe spot :)
    Medic has become perhaps the most "useless" class in BFV, at least on larger maps, due to not having very effective weapons at range. While medic was overpowered in BF4 (they still run out of ammo pretty fast in BF4), the class has been totally decimated in BFV (only good for CQC).

    Medics in BF1 was hated (accused of camping) because they didn't have any CQC-weapons (at least until the Federov), but it was perhaps the best balanced medic-class in the latest BF-games (since BF3/BF4).

    In BF4, the problem was that giving the medic/assault the best weapons (ARs), made them overpowered. But giving them very "weak" weapons (SMGs) like in BFV, was not really a good solution either. I still think we need 'all-kit-weapons' (DMRs/shotguns etc), which gives all classes some choices for various ranges and then they can keep SMGs as main weapon for medics.
    I just want some radical changes to the gameplay inspired by changes made in V. I don't want the franchise to stop innovating and developing :)
  • trip1ex
    5330 postsMember, Battlefield 3, Battlefield 4, Battlefield, Battlefield 1, CTE, BF1IncursionsAlpha, Battlefield V Member
    CSO7777 said:
    Maybe get rid of unlimited supply gadgets (pouches and crates) and let players supply from loot, stations, logistic vehicles and drops. This way medic wouldn't be no longer most prominent infantry class and support wouldn't be able to self-supply without switching a position and thus placing them in danger of running out of ammo in safe spot :)
    Medic has become perhaps the most "useless" class in BFV, at least on larger maps, due to not having very effective weapons at range. While medic was overpowered in BF4 (they still run out of ammo pretty fast in BF4), the class has been totally decimated in BFV (only good for CQC).

    Medics in BF1 was hated (accused of camping) because they didn't have any CQC-weapons (at least until the Federov), but it was perhaps the best balanced medic-class in the latest BF-games (since BF3/BF4).

    In BF4, the problem was that giving the medic/assault the best weapons (ARs), made them overpowered. But giving them very "weak" weapons (SMGs) like in BFV, was not really a good solution either. I still think we need 'all-kit-weapons' (DMRs/shotguns etc), which gives all classes some choices for various ranges and then they can keep SMGs as main weapon for medics.


    I'd say medics are probably the most useful to a team  on a big map in BFV because few play them while playing the 16th sniper on a team on a big map is probably the least useful class to play.  ;)  







  • Popa2caps
    588 postsMember, Battlefield 3, Battlefield 4, Battlefield Hardline, Battlefield, Battlefield 1, Battlefield V Member
    What I disliked about BF5

    -Game loads into a single player mission (first load), without ever asking the user.
    -Too many visual effects running on MP maps.
    -Characters make too much noise (yelling, screaming etc).
    -Too much aim assist (users can spam ADS around bushes and lock onto someone, very easy and common).
    -Getting in and out of vehicles is slow (not needed animation).
    -Linear maps MP (a ton of places the user can't go or get to. Out of bounds locations).
    -Massively limited attachments and /or gadgets.
    -Machine Guns can't ADS without being prone and/ or mounted.
    -Limited health regen (75% max).
    -Reviving done without medic class gadget.
    -Only the squad leader gets to use the points.
    -Feels like Battlefront (very casual feeling)
    -Building tool

    What I enjoyed about BF5

    -Very easy to set controls (controller).
    -User is able to disable most video effects (Motion blur, DOF, Lens Flare etc).
    -DLC not behind paywall

    As you can see, I only liked some basic controls settings, and DLC not being locked out from everyone being able to experience, this is wrong. I think DICE changed mindsets when they started making Battlefront titles. They took a semi casual experience like Battlefield and made it full on casual. Using a MG in Battlefield 5 feels like I'm in Battlefront using the heavy class. They also oddly market their game engine like it's Gucci and/ or Giorgio Armani.  " Frostbite for Her, by DICE an EA subsidiary " Cool down the marketing Dice, I get it, the game is made by the same engine. It's almost a warning sign at this point. You see a game with the Frostbite logo, you can say the game will be dead in 6 - 12 months.

    What I would like to see for Battlefield 6.

    1. No classes
        If the game didn't have classes it should create a lot of possibilities for DICE the user and the game in the long run. One of those possibilities is DICE not updating one class because it has something over powered (less wasted resources on balance issues). DICE would spend more time on things like bugs, map updates, new in game items etc. Another aspect of removal of the class system would also let the user feel they have a choice. Choice in picking what they want, when they want should be the focus.

        (This could be taken a step further by either having two primary weapons and/ or allowing changing of attachments while ingame. If the user had access to 2 primary weapons, I would expect most would have a short range and long range weapon. This could help with people getting caught out in the open with the wrong weapon class. On the other side if users could use attachments while ingame, This could also do the same effect. I also wouldn't mind having both abilities. 2 primary weapons while also being able to change attachments on the fly could make users feel the need to play over making loadouts in the menu.

    2. No suppression type effects (visual blur, points etc).
      One major reason I dislike the suppression effect is it can show the location of players just by spraying loads of bullets. If BF6 is going to be a modern shooter, then someone with a machine gun with a suppressor can just spray countless bullets to find players.

    3. No scope flashlight visual effect (scope glint).
        This creates more issues than it fixes. I don't enjoy it on both sides.
       
    4. No aim assist (Controllers).
      I'm a controller user who can't stand this assist. I would rather play versus a mouse & keyboard user just because they miss more than an aim assisted controller user. I can't even try to play halo games because of how bad aim assist is. Anyone ever wonder why most Halo pros are only good at Halo? Aim assist...

    5. Vehicles spawn
      Vehicles should load on the map. Players should have to move to the location to use them. People should be in game to get something, not just menu camp.

    6.  Spotting
      Something like Apex Legends, Easy to use.


      I honestly just want a sandbox set in the modern era while also having iconic weapons and gadgets. Classes might be iconic to Battlefield, but it was at one point just common how games were made. It's been a while since the first time I started playing the series with Battlefield 2 modern combat for the first Xbox. I just want the same sandbox that game had.
  • Shy_pipo_ape
    284 postsMember, Battlefield 3, Battlefield 4, Battlefield Hardline, Battlefield, Battlefield 1, Battlefield V Member
    Popa2caps said:

    What I would like to see for Battlefield 6.

    1. No classes
        If the game didn't have classes it should create a lot of possibilities for DICE the user and the game in the long run. One of those possibilities is DICE not updating one class because it has something over powered (less wasted resources on balance issues). DICE would spend more time on things like bugs, map updates, new in game items etc. Another aspect of removal of the class system would also let the user feel they have a choice. Choice in picking what they want, when they want should be the focus.

        (This could be taken a step further by either having two primary weapons and/ or allowing changing of attachments while ingame. If the user had access to 2 primary weapons, I would expect most would have a short range and long range weapon. This could help with people getting caught out in the open with the wrong weapon class. On the other side if users could use attachments while ingame, This could also do the same effect. I also wouldn't mind having both abilities. 2 primary weapons while also being able to change attachments on the fly could make users feel the need to play over making loadouts in the menu.
    So you would like to see Battlefield turning into Call of Duty, basically? I hope that day never arrives. Classes are most unexplored component of the franchise :)
  • Popa2caps
    588 postsMember, Battlefield 3, Battlefield 4, Battlefield Hardline, Battlefield, Battlefield 1, Battlefield V Member
    Lotusninja_Akira said:
    So you would like to see Battlefield turning into Call of Duty, basically? I hope that day never arrives. Classes are most unexplored component of the franchise :)
    Actually I always thought Call of Duty has become more Battlefield in recent years then the other way around. Call of Duty started as a class mechanic type game just like everything in that time period, but it's definitely not the same game it was. Why should Battlefield suffer just because of nostalgia?

    Battlefield (to me) has nothing to do with classes, I look at that as a limitation. I always liked the series for its freedom i.e. Sandbox environments.

    Now that's only speaking for titles like Battlefield 2 Modern Combat, Bad Company 2, Battlefield 3 and Battlefield 4, I didn't get this same feeling for Hardline, BF1, BF5.

    I also don't look at the removal of classes as removing anything, but more as opening up the possibilities of the series. If DICE was clever, they could still have auto classes in the game.

    Let's say someone picks and equips attachments and weapons that one recognizes with a support class in current Battlefield titles. The game could automatically make their character a support class because that user picked those items.

    What this would do is open up for the user to be what they want, plus kind of keep the class system.

    I just never liked that I would be forced to use a certain class because it had a weapon I would use.
  • Shy_pipo_ape
    284 postsMember, Battlefield 3, Battlefield 4, Battlefield Hardline, Battlefield, Battlefield 1, Battlefield V Member
    Popa2caps said:
    Lotusninja_Akira said:
    So you would like to see Battlefield turning into Call of Duty, basically? I hope that day never arrives. Classes are most unexplored component of the franchise :)
    Actually I always thought Call of Duty has become more Battlefield in recent years then the other way around. Call of Duty started as a class mechanic type game just like everything in that time period, but it's definitely not the same game it was. Why should Battlefield suffer just because of nostalgia?

    Battlefield (to me) has nothing to do with classes, I look at that as a limitation. I always liked the series for its freedom i.e. Sandbox environments.

    Now that's only speaking for titles like Battlefield 2 Modern Combat, Bad Company 2, Battlefield 3 and Battlefield 4, I didn't get this same feeling for Hardline, BF1, BF5.

    I also don't look at the removal of classes as removing anything, but more as opening up the possibilities of the series. If DICE was clever, they could still have auto classes in the game.

    Let's say someone picks and equips attachments and weapons that one recognizes with a support class in current Battlefield titles. The game could automatically make their character a support class because that user picked those items.

    What this would do is open up for the user to be what they want, plus kind of keep the class system.

    I just never liked that I would be forced to use a certain class because it had a weapon I would use.
    Class system builds complementary synergy dynamic in the game where each class has a purpose and strengths & weaknesses. That's one of the reasons I like Battlefield over Call of Duty's create a class system. Create a class fits for a game which doesn't aim for co-operative experience. If Battlefield would want to evolve to egoshooter genre then abolishing classes would be right step to take.
  • Popa2caps
    588 postsMember, Battlefield 3, Battlefield 4, Battlefield Hardline, Battlefield, Battlefield 1, Battlefield V Member
    Popa2caps said:
    Lotusninja_Akira said:
    So you would like to see Battlefield turning into Call of Duty, basically? I hope that day never arrives. Classes are most unexplored component of the franchise :)
    Actually I always thought Call of Duty has become more Battlefield in recent years then the other way around. Call of Duty started as a class mechanic type game just like everything in that time period, but it's definitely not the same game it was. Why should Battlefield suffer just because of nostalgia?

    Battlefield (to me) has nothing to do with classes, I look at that as a limitation. I always liked the series for its freedom i.e. Sandbox environments.

    Now that's only speaking for titles like Battlefield 2 Modern Combat, Bad Company 2, Battlefield 3 and Battlefield 4, I didn't get this same feeling for Hardline, BF1, BF5.

    I also don't look at the removal of classes as removing anything, but more as opening up the possibilities of the series. If DICE was clever, they could still have auto classes in the game.

    Let's say someone picks and equips attachments and weapons that one recognizes with a support class in current Battlefield titles. The game could automatically make their character a support class because that user picked those items.

    What this would do is open up for the user to be what they want, plus kind of keep the class system.

    I just never liked that I would be forced to use a certain class because it had a weapon I would use.
    Class system builds complementary synergy dynamic in the game where each class has a purpose and strengths & weaknesses. That's one of the reasons I like Battlefield over Call of Duty's create a class system. Create a class fits for a game which doesn't aim for co-operative experience. If Battlefield would want to evolve to egoshooter genre then abolishing classes would be right step to take.
    I don't know of this "complementary synergy dynamic" you speak of. Every shooter I have ever played I always just looked at it like people controlling an ingame character, shooting at others.

    I don't read into video games at all, even if the developers intended for it (It's why I quit playing Apex because it had too much story/ lore lol). I could be missing your point, so my bad if I did.

    Understand I have played more Battlefield then Call of Duty currently  (I think I'm over 200K kills or something). Just because of this I'm not biased, Call of Duty has been fun the last couple of years to be honest, and more so than Battlefield has (my opinion). Even in that opinion, I don't wish for Battlefield to become COD and vice versa.

    I just don't see why removing a limitation (classes) would make Battlefield more Call of Duty. I always thought games should go with the times, not stay in the past. I also don't understand why Battlefield couldn't have an auto class system like I stated in my previous post.

    You pick from a list of gadgets and weapons etc, and the game just automatically assigns you a class. This way no items and weapons are locked behind a class system, plus people who like the classes can have it. Why wouldn't this work?
  • trip1ex
    5330 postsMember, Battlefield 3, Battlefield 4, Battlefield, Battlefield 1, CTE, BF1IncursionsAlpha, Battlefield V Member
    edited January 3
    Popa2caps said:
    Popa2caps said:
    Lotusninja_Akira said:
    So you would like to see Battlefield turning into Call of Duty, basically? I hope that day never arrives. Classes are most unexplored component of the franchise :)
    Actually I always thought Call of Duty has become more Battlefield in recent years then the other way around. Call of Duty started as a class mechanic type game just like everything in that time period, but it's definitely not the same game it was. Why should Battlefield suffer just because of nostalgia?

    Battlefield (to me) has nothing to do with classes, I look at that as a limitation. I always liked the series for its freedom i.e. Sandbox environments.

    Now that's only speaking for titles like Battlefield 2 Modern Combat, Bad Company 2, Battlefield 3 and Battlefield 4, I didn't get this same feeling for Hardline, BF1, BF5.

    I also don't look at the removal of classes as removing anything, but more as opening up the possibilities of the series. If DICE was clever, they could still have auto classes in the game.

    Let's say someone picks and equips attachments and weapons that one recognizes with a support class in current Battlefield titles. The game could automatically make their character a support class because that user picked those items.

    What this would do is open up for the user to be what they want, plus kind of keep the class system.

    I just never liked that I would be forced to use a certain class because it had a weapon I would use.
    Class system builds complementary synergy dynamic in the game where each class has a purpose and strengths & weaknesses. That's one of the reasons I like Battlefield over Call of Duty's create a class system. Create a class fits for a game which doesn't aim for co-operative experience. If Battlefield would want to evolve to egoshooter genre then abolishing classes would be right step to take.

    You pick from a list of gadgets and weapons etc, and the game just automatically assigns you a class. This way no items and weapons are locked behind a class system, plus people who like the classes can have it. Why wouldn't this work?
    The question isn't whether it would work or not.  It is how would it affect the game - good and bad.

    not sure being able to choose a sniper rifle plus rockets plus ammo box is great for the game if that's what you are wanting.  


  • Popa2caps
    588 postsMember, Battlefield 3, Battlefield 4, Battlefield Hardline, Battlefield, Battlefield 1, Battlefield V Member
    trip1ex said:
    Popa2caps said:
    Popa2caps said:
    Lotusninja_Akira said:
    So you would like to see Battlefield turning into Call of Duty, basically? I hope that day never arrives. Classes are most unexplored component of the franchise :)
    Actually I always thought Call of Duty has become more Battlefield in recent years then the other way around. Call of Duty started as a class mechanic type game just like everything in that time period, but it's definitely not the same game it was. Why should Battlefield suffer just because of nostalgia?

    Battlefield (to me) has nothing to do with classes, I look at that as a limitation. I always liked the series for its freedom i.e. Sandbox environments.

    Now that's only speaking for titles like Battlefield 2 Modern Combat, Bad Company 2, Battlefield 3 and Battlefield 4, I didn't get this same feeling for Hardline, BF1, BF5.

    I also don't look at the removal of classes as removing anything, but more as opening up the possibilities of the series. If DICE was clever, they could still have auto classes in the game.

    Let's say someone picks and equips attachments and weapons that one recognizes with a support class in current Battlefield titles. The game could automatically make their character a support class because that user picked those items.

    What this would do is open up for the user to be what they want, plus kind of keep the class system.

    I just never liked that I would be forced to use a certain class because it had a weapon I would use.
    Class system builds complementary synergy dynamic in the game where each class has a purpose and strengths & weaknesses. That's one of the reasons I like Battlefield over Call of Duty's create a class system. Create a class fits for a game which doesn't aim for co-operative experience. If Battlefield would want to evolve to egoshooter genre then abolishing classes would be right step to take.

    You pick from a list of gadgets and weapons etc, and the game just automatically assigns you a class. This way no items and weapons are locked behind a class system, plus people who like the classes can have it. Why wouldn't this work?
    The question isn't whether it would work or not.  It is how would it affect the game - good and bad.

    not sure being able to choose a sniper rifle plus rockets plus ammo box is great for the game if that's what you are wanting.  


    True, I'm not sure how it would change the game, good and/ or bad. Honestly though, BF5 is so bad (my opinion) Dice could just about do anything, and I'm not sure people would notice at this point.
  • armorcrazy
    30 postsMember, Battlefield 3, Battlefield 4, Battlefield Hardline, Battlefield, Battlefield 1, Battlefield V Member
    OPSEC wrote: »
    I'mma need a source on that statement.

    Sorry for misleading yall I should have said it’s more of a rumor but now I’m doubting that it’s even true if you listen to the theme concept (which I will link) it sounds more apocalyptic in the future so maybe a reboot of BF2142

    Link to BF6 Main Theme Concept:

  • armorcrazy
    30 postsMember, Battlefield 3, Battlefield 4, Battlefield Hardline, Battlefield, Battlefield 1, Battlefield V Member
    OPSEC wrote: »
    Being Swedish and having studied the Swedish Armed Forces doctrine, organization, and equipment from world war one to modern day for 5 years, I would love for DICE to release a Battlefield title (or DLC) that portrays a fictional Swedish-Russian war set in the near-future. In this fictional conflict, NATO would intervene due to the strategic location of Sweden in Scandinavia and the Baltic Sea. Naturally I am not suggesting to make Sweden overpowered or to portray it as being able to single-handedly fight off a Russian invasion, as doing so is not part of the Swedish military doctrine.

    I find it unfortunate that DICE, as a Swedish company, has not (to my knowledge) explored making a game or DLC including the Swedish Armed Forces. It is also my opinion that it is not unreasonable that the Swedish Armed Forces would agree to a cooperation between it and DICE. The Swedish Armed Forces is notoriously understaffed and a Battlefield game exploring the Swedish Armed Forces and relatively realistically depicting it could help develop a public interest for the Armed Forces here in Sweden.

    On top of that, we have a lot of (in my opinion) interesting equipment in our armed forces, most of which is used internationally as well as nationally, exempli gratia; the M3 MAAWS and M136. The only really exclusive weapon we have is the Ak 5C and Ak 5D rifles, the former already having been portrayed in Battlefield 4 so that model could easily be reused and modified to become the Ak 5D.

    Sweden was already portrayed in Medal of Honor: Warfighter so I would presume those models could very easily be ported over to the next Battlefield game, as they did so with several weapons in Battlefield 4, despite the different game engines (MoH is Frostbite 2, BF4 is Frostbite 3).

    While I do hope that the Swedish military is somehow represented in the next Battlefield game, I am not expecting it to be for the simple reason that our armed forces rarely are in the spotlight on the international scene.

    In addition, Sweden has a very diverse terrain and climate, ranging from large, open fields in the south to mountains and taiga in the north.

    TL;DR:
    I want to see the Swedish Armed Forces in the next Battlefield game.

    On the first paragraph I think a fictional war is very likely as well. DICE did it with BF4 having the campagin set in a time of war between China and America
Sign In or Register to comment.