Weekly BF

Assault class is too powerful.

2

Comments

  • munkt0r
    3037 postsMember, Battlefield 3, Battlefield 4, Battlefield Hardline, Battlefield, Battlefield 1, Battlefield V Member
    fakemon64 wrote: »
    munkt0r wrote: »
    fakemon64 wrote: »
    gibonez wrote: »
    Piat should go to Support, Recon should get sticky dynamite.

    Assault would be fixed after that.

    That would be terrible, way too much anti tank spread across multiple classes.

    PIAT is anti-tank? Could've fooled me.

    Well I've fooled many tanks with it as well. I try to keep my weapons faction specific so i only use piat for allies and panzerfaust for axis. Sure the piat is harder to land ranged shots with due to the lob but it kills tanks just as well as the panzerfaust or at pistol imo.

    "just as well" implies equal efficiency. You and I know that's a damn lie. A DAMN LIE SIR!
  • Phugazi
    115 postsMember, Battlefield 3, Battlefield 4, Battlefield Hardline, Battlefield, Battlefield 1, BF1IncursionsAlpha, Battlefield V Member
    I completely agree with you and I didn't want it to come off that way, I don't belive tanks should work independently or without infantry aid, in reality tanks work with infantry, this is how it should be in-game. But unfortunately in the current condition, infantry or no infantry moving into an objective to support infantry is certain death.

    Very true but I almost don't mind if helps take the point. I've "taken one for the team", in a tank or two, just to help my guys push further up and finish capping the last point in a section. But if I know I'm going down in the tank I'll try and position it somewhere strategic so my guys can use it as cover to stay on the point and continue capping after it's destroyed.
  • fakemon64
    898 postsMember, Battlefield 3, Battlefield 4, Battlefield Hardline, Battlefield, Battlefield 1, CTE, Battlefield V Member
    munkt0r wrote: »
    fakemon64 wrote: »
    munkt0r wrote: »
    fakemon64 wrote: »
    gibonez wrote: »
    Piat should go to Support, Recon should get sticky dynamite.

    Assault would be fixed after that.

    That would be terrible, way too much anti tank spread across multiple classes.

    PIAT is anti-tank? Could've fooled me.

    Well I've fooled many tanks with it as well. I try to keep my weapons faction specific so i only use piat for allies and panzerfaust for axis. Sure the piat is harder to land ranged shots with due to the lob but it kills tanks just as well as the panzerfaust or at pistol imo.

    "just as well" implies equal efficiency. You and I know that's a damn lie. A DAMN LIE SIR!

    I think it just takes more skill and thought to use than the panzerfaust. But about the piat not being an anti tank weapon or whatever. PIAT = projector, infantry, anti tank)
  • DemonsofRazgriz
    136 postsMember, Battlefield 3, Battlefield 4, Battlefield, Battlefield 1, Battlefield V Member
    fakemon64 wrote: »
    Hawxxeye wrote: »
    What if they moved the dynamite to the recon?

    That should go to support instead of the at pistol they get. There's enough assaults with rockets already. I don't think support needs one. But with dynamite and mines, support can be a secondary or hybrid anti tank class.

    Giving dynamite to support would be a bad move, imo. The ammo box would make support more powerful then they already are
  • eMartinez
    173 postsMember, Battlefield 3, Battlefield 4, Battlefield Member
    edited December 2018
    Wrong Wrong Wrong.Tanks should never be the tip of the spear. They are called up to support infantry. Any tank leading the attack, should deservingly be destroyed.

    The hell does this have to do with Assault being OP? And people are agreeing with him. Your vehicle "hate" is obscuring the very point of the post. Typical.
  • munkt0r
    3037 postsMember, Battlefield 3, Battlefield 4, Battlefield Hardline, Battlefield, Battlefield 1, Battlefield V Member
    fakemon64 wrote: »
    munkt0r wrote: »
    fakemon64 wrote: »
    munkt0r wrote: »
    fakemon64 wrote: »
    gibonez wrote: »
    Piat should go to Support, Recon should get sticky dynamite.

    Assault would be fixed after that.

    That would be terrible, way too much anti tank spread across multiple classes.

    PIAT is anti-tank? Could've fooled me.

    Well I've fooled many tanks with it as well. I try to keep my weapons faction specific so i only use piat for allies and panzerfaust for axis. Sure the piat is harder to land ranged shots with due to the lob but it kills tanks just as well as the panzerfaust or at pistol imo.

    "just as well" implies equal efficiency. You and I know that's a damn lie. A DAMN LIE SIR!

    I think it just takes more skill and thought to use than the panzerfaust. But about the piat not being an anti tank weapon or whatever. PIAT = projector, infantry, anti tank)

    Fair, I can't argue that.

    But it's a damn lie to say it works just as well as the PF =)
  • Foot_Guard_Tomei
    438 postsMember, Battlefield 4, Battlefield Hardline, Battlefield, Battlefield 1, CTE, Battlefield V Member
    Small adjustments wouldn't fix AT launcher & AR rifle combo which is the beef here. Shouldn't go on same kit, combat role. AT/Engineer role was usually balanced by SMGs and SGs as its primaries, rightfully.
  • fakemon64
    898 postsMember, Battlefield 3, Battlefield 4, Battlefield Hardline, Battlefield, Battlefield 1, CTE, Battlefield V Member
    Wrong Wrong Wrong.Tanks should never be the tip of the spear. They are called up to support infantry. Any tank leading the attack, should deservingly be destroyed.

    That's what the French thought before the blitzkrieg. A dire miscalculation of the uses of armored warfare. If tanks only move with infantry, they sacrifice their speed and mobility.
  • fakemon64
    898 postsMember, Battlefield 3, Battlefield 4, Battlefield Hardline, Battlefield, Battlefield 1, CTE, Battlefield V Member
    edited December 2018
    fakemon64 wrote: »
    Hawxxeye wrote: »
    What if they moved the dynamite to the recon?

    That should go to support instead of the at pistol they get. There's enough assaults with rockets already. I don't think support needs one. But with dynamite and mines, support can be a secondary or hybrid anti tank class.

    Giving dynamite to support would be a bad move, imo. The ammo box would make support more powerful then they already are

    They already have the at pistol though, i think this should be removed or nerfed in some way. I think i get far too many tank kills with it. With my ammo box i can spam it behind cover. At least with dynamite id have to risk cqb with the tank. This is why i think support should lose at pistol and gain dynamite.
  • DemonsofRazgriz
    136 postsMember, Battlefield 3, Battlefield 4, Battlefield, Battlefield 1, Battlefield V Member
    fakemon64 wrote: »
    fakemon64 wrote: »
    Hawxxeye wrote: »
    What if they moved the dynamite to the recon?

    That should go to support instead of the at pistol they get. There's enough assaults with rockets already. I don't think support needs one. But with dynamite and mines, support can be a secondary or hybrid anti tank class.

    Giving dynamite to support would be a bad move, imo. The ammo box would make support more powerful then they already are

    They already have the at pistol though, i think this should be removed or nerfed in some way. I think i get far too many tank kills with it. With my ammo box i can spam it behind cover. At least with dynamite id have to risk cqb with the tank. This is why i think support should lose at pistol and gain dynamite.

    The AP pistol is... not very good. Even 3 rounds (max carry) will not destroy a transport vehicle. Plus Dyno is alsovery useful in other ways such as chucking it into contested lanes and just blowing up everyone instantly.
  • gibonez
    296 postsMember, Battlefield 3, Battlefield 4, Battlefield, Battlefield 1, Battlefield V Member
    fakemon64 wrote: »
    Hawxxeye wrote: »
    What if they moved the dynamite to the recon?

    That should go to support instead of the at pistol they get. There's enough assaults with rockets already. I don't think support needs one. But with dynamite and mines, support can be a secondary or hybrid anti tank class.

    Giving dynamite to support would be a bad move, imo. The ammo box would make support more powerful then they already are

    It's not like its really powerful now.

    Dynamite should go to Recon though as a Sabotage combat role armed with suppressor submachineguns and sticky dynamite.
  • Supawaffleman
    30 postsMember, Battlefield 3, Battlefield 4, Battlefield, Battlefield 1, Battlefield V Member
    edited December 2018
    They could reduce Panzerfaust ammo to one shot and give Assault a dedicated AT main weapon (in place of the AR) like a Bazooka or a Panzershreck with maybe 3-4 shots. This way if someone wants to run around terrorizing tanks then they have to give up their AR. Assaults with ARs can still kill tanks but it would require a lot more coordination with teamates to accomplish with just single shot panzerfausts
    Post edited by Supawaffleman on
  • Psycomad
    70 postsMember, Battlefield 3, Battlefield 4, Battlefield, Battlefield 1, Battlefield V Member
    Phugazi wrote: »
    Wrong Wrong Wrong.Tanks should never be the tip of the spear. They are called up to support infantry. Any tank leading the attack, should deservingly be destroyed.

    This guy gets it! How come sooo people do not understand this concept? But there is a line between supporting infantry on a point push and flat out "tank camping". Know the difference people!

    We should be scared of tanks, not run out and meet them.
    No one is afraid of tanks, just like bf4, they made them too weak and now no respects them.
  • Hawxxeye
    6275 postsMember, Battlefield 3, Battlefield 4, Battlefield Hardline, Battlefield, Battlefield 1, CTE, BF1IncursionsAlpha, Battlefield V Member
    gibonez wrote: »
    fakemon64 wrote: »
    Hawxxeye wrote: »
    What if they moved the dynamite to the recon?

    That should go to support instead of the at pistol they get. There's enough assaults with rockets already. I don't think support needs one. But with dynamite and mines, support can be a secondary or hybrid anti tank class.

    Giving dynamite to support would be a bad move, imo. The ammo box would make support more powerful then they already are

    It's not like its really powerful now.

    Dynamite should go to Recon though as a Sabotage combat role armed with suppressor submachineguns and sticky dynamite.

    Anything that can take assault the ability to 1vs1 so easily those sluggish vehicles.
  • GeneralXIV
    270 postsMember, Battlefield, Battlefield 1, Battlefield V Member
    I have issues with the assault and the support class, both the same reasons.

    I don't mind the assault's anti-vehicle things, and I don't mind the supports anti-vehicle things. My issue is that they can counter infantry, vehicles and snipers all within one class. I think if they reduced the range of the assault's semi-automatic rifles and made the support weapons better at aiming generally, but remove the bipods, it might fix most of my complaints about the classes and make them overall more balanced. I was very relieved when I reached level 20 with the recon - the semi-automatic rifles and the machine guns were better snipers than the guns I had :D
  • Pmuecke
    31 postsMember, Battlefield 3, Battlefield 4, Battlefield, Battlefield 1, Battlefield V Member
    tbh , i don't mind the assault players , most of em are so mindless they just run into my MMG's line of sight thinking they are rambo , shame they can't face a 981 RoF monster
  • gibonez
    296 postsMember, Battlefield 3, Battlefield 4, Battlefield, Battlefield 1, Battlefield V Member
    Outside of giving the Piat to the support and giving sticky dynamite to recon

    How about actually adjusting the Panzeraust itself.

    Keep the weapons power but make it have a much more drastic drop and thus harder to use and absolutely vital to use within 50m with enough practice can be used within 100m.
  • Blakkwolfe
    376 postsMember, Battlefield 3, Battlefield 4, Battlefield, Battlefield 1, Battlefield V Member
    gibonez wrote: »
    Outside of giving the Piat to the support and giving sticky dynamite to recon

    How about actually adjusting the Panzeraust itself.

    Keep the weapons power but make it have a much more drastic drop and thus harder to use and absolutely vital to use within 50m with enough practice can be used within 100m.

    I don't mind if you nerf the panzerfaust into the ground as long as I get to keep my Piat. Never liked the panzerfaust anyway.
  • Getier
    228 postsMember, Battlefield 3, Battlefield, Battlefield 1, CTE, Battlefield V Member
    GeneralXIV wrote: »
    I have issues with the assault and the support class, both the same reasons.

    I don't mind the assault's anti-vehicle things, and I don't mind the supports anti-vehicle things. My issue is that they can counter infantry, vehicles and snipers all within one class. I think if they reduced the range of the assault's semi-automatic rifles and made the support weapons better at aiming generally, but remove the bipods, it might fix most of my complaints about the classes and make them overall more balanced. I was very relieved when I reached level 20 with the recon - the semi-automatic rifles and the machine guns were better snipers than the guns I had :D

    This. Class balance is a joke atm. semi auto rifles are the most op guns and cam compete on all ranges. I've now 70 hours in the game and whenever I want to play serious I just pick assault.
  • izayoi80
    25 postsMember, Battlefield 3, Battlefield 4, Battlefield, Battlefield 1, BF1IncursionsAlpha, Battlefield V Member
    Wrong Wrong Wrong.Tanks should never be the tip of the spear. They are called up to support infantry. Any tank leading the attack, should deservingly be destroyed.

    I guess you've never heard the term "Blitzkrieg" before. :)
    Yes, yes, I know... this is a game.
Sign In or Register to comment.