BF1....what went wrong... or not?

124»

Comments

  • trip1ex
    2396 postsMember, Battlefield 3, Battlefield 4, Battlefield, Battlefield 1, CTE, BF1IncursionsAlpha Member
    here's another thing that went wrong. I was just watching the Bf1 reveal event.

    IN the 2nd half they talked about ww1 tanks and how they were built to break through the frontlines.

    Ultimately I don't really think that vision was met. I think the big tanks mostly get used to take potshots from a distance or they flank back flags.
  • dA_9_eL_81
    1165 postsMember, Battlefield 3, Battlefield 4, Battlefield Hardline, Battlefield, Battlefield 1, CTE Member
    trip1ex wrote: »
    here's another thing that went wrong. I was just watching the Bf1 reveal event.

    IN the 2nd half they talked about ww1 tanks and how they were built to break through the frontlines.

    Ultimately I don't really think that vision was met. I think the big tanks mostly get used to take potshots from a distance or they flank back flags.

    Eventually its all about balance... i think tank gameplay is on point regarding to armour, durability, ammo-count and so on... if you got a special-snowflake that never leaves spawn and gets 4-5 kills thats not DICE fault but the playerbase...
  • FlashFlareFTW
    4086 postsMember, Battlefield 3, Battlefield 4, Battlefield, Battlefield 1, CTE Member
    edited May 17
    trip1ex wrote: »
    here's another thing that went wrong. I was just watching the Bf1 reveal event.

    IN the 2nd half they talked about ww1 tanks and how they were built to break through the frontlines.

    Ultimately I don't really think that vision was met. I think the big tanks mostly get used to take potshots from a distance or they flank back flags.

    If anything should cause suppression it's the fear of god instilled in men whenever a tank is bearing down on them, if that was an area of effect weapon for the tank, giving the tanker actual points for being near the enemy and scaring them senseless then tanks at least would be encouraged to stay in the action.

    ... _ _ _ ...
  • trip1ex
    2396 postsMember, Battlefield 3, Battlefield 4, Battlefield, Battlefield 1, CTE, BF1IncursionsAlpha Member
    dA_9_eL_81 wrote: »
    trip1ex wrote: »
    here's another thing that went wrong. I was just watching the Bf1 reveal event.

    IN the 2nd half they talked about ww1 tanks and how they were built to break through the frontlines.

    Ultimately I don't really think that vision was met. I think the big tanks mostly get used to take potshots from a distance or they flank back flags.

    Eventually its all about balance... i think tank gameplay is on point regarding to armour, durability, ammo-count and so on... if you got a special-snowflake that never leaves spawn and gets 4-5 kills thats not DICE fault but the playerbase...

    i'm not talking about newbs getting 4-5 kills with it from their spawn.

    I'm talking about the guys that get 30+ kills with it and 1-3 deaths with it because they just camp with it. They never seem to roll the big tanks in to break down frontlines.

    DICE let 5 guys spawn into a big tank and gave the big tanks flame throwers and/or mgs in every direction. This was designed to allow them to fight off infantry in CQ. But players do not use them like that. They camp. I think they failed to achieve that goal of making them front line busters.


    I don't think tanks are durable enough to be frontline busters. They are easily overwhelmed in close quarters by 2 Assault guys with AT nades/etc.
  • trip1ex
    2396 postsMember, Battlefield 3, Battlefield 4, Battlefield, Battlefield 1, CTE, BF1IncursionsAlpha Member
    edited May 17
    trip1ex wrote: »
    here's another thing that went wrong. I was just watching the Bf1 reveal event.

    IN the 2nd half they talked about ww1 tanks and how they were built to break through the frontlines.

    Ultimately I don't really think that vision was met. I think the big tanks mostly get used to take potshots from a distance or they flank back flags.

    If anything should cause suppression it's the fear of god instilled in men whenever a tank is bearing down on them, if that was an area of effect weapon for the tank, giving the tanker actual points for being near the enemy and scaring them senseless then tanks at least would be encouraged to stay in the action.

    ... _ _ _ ...

    Exactly where is suppression when you need it. Good point/idea/thought.
  • RRedux
    407 postsMember, Battlefield 3, Battlefield 4, Battlefield, Battlefield 1 Member
    They will probably not fix anything with bf1 anymore with bf2018 right around the corner.

    I just hope that they've seen the mistakes they have done with matchmaking and balance in bf1, and get a better system for the next one.

    Or just let server renters implement their own solutions, like in bf3 and 4.
  • Alphazetamu
    189 postsMember, Battlefield 4, Battlefield Hardline, Battlefield, Battlefield 1, CTE Member
    trip1ex wrote: »
    dA_9_eL_81 wrote: »
    trip1ex wrote: »
    here's another thing that went wrong. I was just watching the Bf1 reveal event.

    IN the 2nd half they talked about ww1 tanks and how they were built to break through the frontlines.

    Ultimately I don't really think that vision was met. I think the big tanks mostly get used to take potshots from a distance or they flank back flags.

    Eventually its all about balance... i think tank gameplay is on point regarding to armour, durability, ammo-count and so on... if you got a special-snowflake that never leaves spawn and gets 4-5 kills thats not DICE fault but the playerbase...

    i'm not talking about newbs getting 4-5 kills with it from their spawn.

    I'm talking about the guys that get 30+ kills with it and 1-3 deaths with it because they just camp with it. They never seem to roll the big tanks in to break down frontlines.

    DICE let 5 guys spawn into a big tank and gave the big tanks flame throwers and/or mgs in every direction. This was designed to allow them to fight off infantry in CQ. But players do not use them like that. They camp. I think they failed to achieve that goal of making them front line busters.


    I don't think tanks are durable enough to be frontline busters. They are easily overwhelmed in close quarters by 2 Assault guys with AT nades/etc.

    Where I feel for DICE is that it's essentially impossible to balance vehicles for all scenarios, because teamplay only occurs in a random way, so not giving individual players enough anti-vehicle weaponry leads to infantry farming, whereas giving enough for one or two players to take out a vehicle with minimal coordination leads to vehicle players hiding from everything. I don't see an easy solution at all to this.
  • vcm0x
    136 postsMember, Battlefield 3, Battlefield 4, Battlefield, Battlefield 1 Member
    i hated the way unlocks are done. just use the tried and tested rpg system to unlock something. meaning you earn points for doing something and then you use those points to unlock something.

    i hated having to shoot down planes to unlock a gun or do multikills etc.
  • trip1ex
    2396 postsMember, Battlefield 3, Battlefield 4, Battlefield, Battlefield 1, CTE, BF1IncursionsAlpha Member
    trip1ex wrote: »
    dA_9_eL_81 wrote: »
    trip1ex wrote: »
    here's another thing that went wrong. I was just watching the Bf1 reveal event.

    IN the 2nd half they talked about ww1 tanks and how they were built to break through the frontlines.

    Ultimately I don't really think that vision was met. I think the big tanks mostly get used to take potshots from a distance or they flank back flags.

    Eventually its all about balance... i think tank gameplay is on point regarding to armour, durability, ammo-count and so on... if you got a special-snowflake that never leaves spawn and gets 4-5 kills thats not DICE fault but the playerbase...

    i'm not talking about newbs getting 4-5 kills with it from their spawn.

    I'm talking about the guys that get 30+ kills with it and 1-3 deaths with it because they just camp with it. They never seem to roll the big tanks in to break down frontlines.

    DICE let 5 guys spawn into a big tank and gave the big tanks flame throwers and/or mgs in every direction. This was designed to allow them to fight off infantry in CQ. But players do not use them like that. They camp. I think they failed to achieve that goal of making them front line busters.


    I don't think tanks are durable enough to be frontline busters. They are easily overwhelmed in close quarters by 2 Assault guys with AT nades/etc.

    Where I feel for DICE is that it's essentially impossible to balance vehicles for all scenarios, because teamplay only occurs in a random way, so not giving individual players enough anti-vehicle weaponry leads to infantry farming, whereas giving enough for one or two players to take out a vehicle with minimal coordination leads to vehicle players hiding from everything. I don't see an easy solution at all to this.

    well the solution definitely isn't easy per se. Because giving it more armor or infantry less AT weapons only makes the tank campers stronger as well.

    That's why I thought the idea another poster had for tanks to cause suppression in close quarters was an interesting one.

    Anyway I think they would have had to do something that made the tanks stronger in close quarters without making them stronger at a distance in order to make them true frontlines busters.
  • Alphazetamu
    189 postsMember, Battlefield 4, Battlefield Hardline, Battlefield, Battlefield 1, CTE Member
    edited May 17
    trip1ex wrote: »
    trip1ex wrote: »
    dA_9_eL_81 wrote: »
    trip1ex wrote: »
    here's another thing that went wrong. I was just watching the Bf1 reveal event.

    IN the 2nd half they talked about ww1 tanks and how they were built to break through the frontlines.

    Ultimately I don't really think that vision was met. I think the big tanks mostly get used to take potshots from a distance or they flank back flags.

    Eventually its all about balance... i think tank gameplay is on point regarding to armour, durability, ammo-count and so on... if you got a special-snowflake that never leaves spawn and gets 4-5 kills thats not DICE fault but the playerbase...

    i'm not talking about newbs getting 4-5 kills with it from their spawn.

    I'm talking about the guys that get 30+ kills with it and 1-3 deaths with it because they just camp with it. They never seem to roll the big tanks in to break down frontlines.

    DICE let 5 guys spawn into a big tank and gave the big tanks flame throwers and/or mgs in every direction. This was designed to allow them to fight off infantry in CQ. But players do not use them like that. They camp. I think they failed to achieve that goal of making them front line busters.


    I don't think tanks are durable enough to be frontline busters. They are easily overwhelmed in close quarters by 2 Assault guys with AT nades/etc.

    Where I feel for DICE is that it's essentially impossible to balance vehicles for all scenarios, because teamplay only occurs in a random way, so not giving individual players enough anti-vehicle weaponry leads to infantry farming, whereas giving enough for one or two players to take out a vehicle with minimal coordination leads to vehicle players hiding from everything. I don't see an easy solution at all to this.

    well the solution definitely isn't easy per se. Because giving it more armor or infantry less AT weapons only makes the tank campers stronger as well.

    That's why I thought the idea another poster had for tanks to cause suppression in close quarters was an interesting one.

    Anyway I think they would have had to do something that made the tanks stronger in close quarters without making them stronger at a distance in order to make them true frontlines busters.

    I feel like had the landship been given more armor (not the mortar variant though), and had there been no A7V and artillery truck, everyone would have learnt to play as gunners in the landship from the get-go. By the time that the Tsar maps like Volga came out, it was already too late.

    One problem is that aiming as a side gunner is extremely hard when the driver is making sudden and random jerky movements, which throw your aim. I can't count the number of times I was about to blast that assault that was coming round the corner with the sideguns when suddenly the driver changes direction and ruins my shot. I don't know what they could do to make gunners aim more consistent - maybe some kind of compensation for the vehicle movement?
  • WHISPonPCin480P
    129 postsMember, Battlefield 3, Battlefield 4, Battlefield, Battlefield 1 Member
    Anyone currently bashing DICE LA clearly didn't play BF4...
  • Loqtrall
    9759 postsMember, Battlefield 3, Battlefield 4, Battlefield Hardline, Battlefield, Battlefield 1, CTE Member
    trip1ex wrote: »
    dA_9_eL_81 wrote: »
    trip1ex wrote: »
    here's another thing that went wrong. I was just watching the Bf1 reveal event.

    IN the 2nd half they talked about ww1 tanks and how they were built to break through the frontlines.

    Ultimately I don't really think that vision was met. I think the big tanks mostly get used to take potshots from a distance or they flank back flags.

    Eventually its all about balance... i think tank gameplay is on point regarding to armour, durability, ammo-count and so on... if you got a special-snowflake that never leaves spawn and gets 4-5 kills thats not DICE fault but the playerbase...

    i'm not talking about newbs getting 4-5 kills with it from their spawn.

    I'm talking about the guys that get 30+ kills with it and 1-3 deaths with it because they just camp with it. They never seem to roll the big tanks in to break down frontlines.

    DICE let 5 guys spawn into a big tank and gave the big tanks flame throwers and/or mgs in every direction. This was designed to allow them to fight off infantry in CQ. But players do not use them like that. They camp. I think they failed to achieve that goal of making them front line busters.


    I don't think tanks are durable enough to be frontline busters. They are easily overwhelmed in close quarters by 2 Assault guys with AT nades/etc.

    Well I hardly think thats an issue with DICE or their design of this game, that's definitely an issue caused and continued via player actions and mindset. Tanks were OP as hell in BF4 and people still sat on the edge of maps and used it as a giant sniper rifle.

    And despite realism, if two people can't take down a tank while working together to do so, that's just crap balance. And, ultimately, balance is more of a focus than keeping the game realistic. If it required like 5 guys working together to take down a tank, that'd be ridiculous and every tanker in the game would decimate.

    Tanks in these games are force multipliers to assist the infantry that still makes up over 80% of the team. They're meant to gain your team the upper hand against uncoordinated or ill equipped enemies on contested objectives, whether that's from right on top of the obj or 50m away from it - they're not meant to be a blatant win condition when it comes to making a push. We already saw how broken OP ground armor played out in BF4, and it made infantry play on CQL and Rush complete monotonous BS. Or, if you're an older player, we saw blatantly OP vehicles in BF1942 and BF2.

    Powerful vehicles can definitely make for a more real and immersive experience - but it can also be frustrating for the hundreds of thousands of infantry players who are either not playing a class to take down a tank, or always try to take down said tank but are attempting it solo and never come out on top.
Sign In or Register to comment.