Weekly BF

DICE should make (bring back) a new class

«1
avengerpat
38 postsMember, Battlefield 4, Battlefield Hardline, Battlefield, Battlefield 1, CTE, Battlefield V Member
Everyone here is complaining (and rightfully so) about the assault having too much power in both the anti-infantry and anti-tank facets of gameplay. The simple way to fix this is to bring back the anti tank class. This would make it so that their is another dedicated role to play as (increasing gameplay options) and it will also shift the power of class balance away from the assaults. Anti-tank class would have semi autos/ SMGs to offer options for mid-long range and short-mid range gameplay, while the assault keeps its powerful weapons such as the Stg44 and Stg 1-5. The Assault should keep dynamite for breaching and leveling houses and fortifications, but dynamite should do less damage to tanks in turn. A new gadget option could be the smoke grenade rifle, and AP mine, showing that the assaults primary goal is to be the backbone of the team in attacking/defending and taking out enemy infantry. This will also make tanks stronger, as most people play assault for its powerful weapons and benefit from the anti tank capabilities. What do you guys think??

Comments

  • Diabolus_Musica
    788 postsMember, Battlefield 3, Battlefield 4, Battlefield, Battlefield 1, CTE, BF1IncursionsAlpha, Battlefield V Member
    Not everyone is complaining about assault. For example, I'm not. So "everyone" can't be. That said, horrible idea, having just an anti-tank class. Classes are fine now as is, with the exception of medic needing a buff and decent weapons.
  • Caramac_D
    174 postsMember, Battlefield 4, Battlefield Hardline, Battlefield, Battlefield 1, CTE, Battlefield V Member
    I wouldn't argue although it would make medics a bit redundant.
  • XxCHAOS315xX
    128 postsMember, Battlefield 3, Battlefield 4, Battlefield Hardline, Battlefield, Battlefield 1, CTE, Battlefield V Member
    At least this is a new take on the nerf assault post that we've all seen 10 million times now.
  • avengerpat
    38 postsMember, Battlefield 4, Battlefield Hardline, Battlefield, Battlefield 1, CTE, Battlefield V Member
    At least this is a new take on the nerf assault post that we've all seen 10 million times now.

    this isnt to nerf assault, but make tanks stronger. Assault will always be seen as the strongest class because A. most people play assault, therfore you are most likely to be killed by an assault and 2. it makes tanks stronger from having less people that can destroy tanks.
  • avengerpat
    38 postsMember, Battlefield 4, Battlefield Hardline, Battlefield, Battlefield 1, CTE, Battlefield V Member
    Not everyone is complaining about assault. For example, I'm not. So "everyone" can't be. That said, horrible idea, having just an anti-tank class. Classes are fine now as is, with the exception of medic needing a buff and decent weapons.

    How is it a horrible idea? I gave you reasons why i think its a good idea but just saying its a "bad idea' proves nothing.
  • PrairieGeek
    363 postsMember, Battlefield 4, Battlefield Hardline, Battlefield, Battlefield 1, Battlefield V Member
    avengerpat wrote: »
    At least this is a new take on the nerf assault post that we've all seen 10 million times now.

    this isnt to nerf assault, but make tanks stronger. Assault will always be seen as the strongest class because A. most people play assault, therfore you are most likely to be killed by an assault and 2. it makes tanks stronger from having less people that can destroy tanks.

    Actually I've been killed more by medic and recon than any other class. And mostly medic
  • BL4CK_W4LL_
    704 postsMember, Battlefield 4, Battlefield, Battlefield 1, Battlefield V Member
    I don't think there are enough weapons to make another class and make them feel unique.

    Im just curious why after all this time they changed the class that was supposed to be short-medium range and anti-tank into a class that was medium-long and anti-tank.
  • Foot_Guard_Tomei
    438 postsMember, Battlefield 4, Battlefield Hardline, Battlefield, Battlefield 1, CTE, Battlefield V Member
    Mid-range weapons shouldn't ever be paired with AT launchers. That's overkill on power against both infantry and armor. AT class should carry SMG & SG weapons for close range combat as "self-defense" weapon.
  • M_Rat13
    1282 postsMember, Battlefield 4, Battlefield Hardline, Battlefield, Battlefield 1, Battlefield V Member
    A split could work, but you have to take into account role. Assualt should keep the Assault rifles, becuase, you know, their job is to lead the charge. Also, give them access to either 2 'standard' or 3-4 smoke, as well different grenade lauchers, like smoke, incendiary, or the AT grenade launcher. This makes they great for clearing out objectives. Then, put the mines in the rocket category, both AT and AP, to round out the class.

    Now, with an actual Assault class laid out, what about anti tanks. Well, obviously they get the rockets, sticky dynamite, sticky and AT grenades (Assualt will no longer need them), and AT mines as a bonus. They will also now use the DMRs, as Jack of all trades master of none guns.

    Thoughts?
  • CreedManiac
    29 postsMember, Battlefield 3, Battlefield 4, Battlefield Hardline, Battlefield, Battlefield 1, CTE, Battlefield V Member
    M_Rat13 wrote: »
    A split could work, but you have to take into account role. Assualt should keep the Assault rifles, becuase, you know, their job is to lead the charge. Also, give them access to either 2 'standard' or 3-4 smoke, as well different grenade lauchers, like smoke, incendiary, or the AT grenade launcher. This makes they great for clearing out objectives. Then, put the mines in the rocket category, both AT and AP, to round out the class.

    Now, with an actual Assault class laid out, what about anti tanks. Well, obviously they get the rockets, sticky dynamite, sticky and AT grenades (Assualt will no longer need them), and AT mines as a bonus. They will also now use the DMRs, as Jack of all trades master of none guns.

    Thoughts?

    So you want the new class to be the current assault minus ARs? Nah, DMRs are still lasers and it wouldn't probably change a thing.
  • Noodlesocks
    3027 postsMember, Battlefield 3, Battlefield 4, Battlefield Hardline, Battlefield, Battlefield 1, Battlefield V Member
    I do feel as though they got the class balance woefully wrong with BF5. They made one class the best against infantry and vehicles while negating the other classes to little more than auxiliary roles. At this point it feels as though recon is only in the game because they can't have a game without sniper rifles.
     
    I doubt they will add a new class into the game at this point but I do feel as though they need a complete overhaul and rebranding because class balance is a bit of a mess right now.
  • DocCuda418
    155 postsMember, Battlefield 3, Battlefield 4, Battlefield Hardline, Battlefield, Battlefield 1, Battlefield V Member
    Should have been five classes with engineer/anti-tank being added. Give em shotties and be done with it.
  • l4chy
    57 postsMember, Battlefield 3, Battlefield 4, Battlefield Hardline, Battlefield, Battlefield 1, Battlefield V Member
    Yes bring back the Engineer class.
  • Foot_Guard_Tomei
    438 postsMember, Battlefield 4, Battlefield Hardline, Battlefield, Battlefield 1, CTE, Battlefield V Member
    Assault, anti-tank, support and recon? Med pouches added as common limited inventory item which are resupplyable from supply stations & drops and squad members can only be revived. Turn medic class into anti-tank class with SMGs and SGs and keep infantry assault simple grenadier killer class with best AP power. Maybe throwing dynamite sticks on recon's secondary gadget pool so they can do "Spec-ops duties" behind frontlines?
  • fakemon64
    898 postsMember, Battlefield 3, Battlefield 4, Battlefield Hardline, Battlefield, Battlefield 1, CTE, Battlefield V Member
    They need to make a legit anti tank class and let assault be an objective rushing class
  • Popa2caps
    577 postsMember, Battlefield 3, Battlefield 4, Battlefield Hardline, Battlefield, Battlefield 1 Member
    avengerpat wrote: »
    Everyone here is complaining (and rightfully so) about the assault having too much power in both the anti-infantry and anti-tank facets of gameplay. The simple way to fix this is to bring back the anti tank class. This would make it so that their is another dedicated role to play as (increasing gameplay options) and it will also shift the power of class balance away from the assaults. Anti-tank class would have semi autos/ SMGs to offer options for mid-long range and short-mid range gameplay, while the assault keeps its powerful weapons such as the Stg44 and Stg 1-5. The Assault should keep dynamite for breaching and leveling houses and fortifications, but dynamite should do less damage to tanks in turn. A new gadget option could be the smoke grenade rifle, and AP mine, showing that the assaults primary goal is to be the backbone of the team in attacking/defending and taking out enemy infantry. This will also make tanks stronger, as most people play assault for its powerful weapons and benefit from the anti tank capabilities. What do you guys think??

    We could stop right now all these bad ideas, and get an open class for once. Has no one noticed that most of the other shooters let the user pick what he or she plays with, like come on, Battlefield is stick behind a design model from 2002.

    Dice should open the class system to let the user pick the items they want, the items that never get used would get buffed and round and round it goes. Dota 2 and LOL have been doing this for years, They're not even the same mod game when they started from because they change with time.

    Battlefield is like this everlasting template Dice keeps using because of old memories, it needs to be redone the way modern games are today. I'm not saying they need BR, they just need to be more open for the user and less helpful assist for devs.
  • JediMastaWyn
    528 postsMember, Battlefield 3, Battlefield 4, Battlefield Hardline, Battlefield, Battlefield 1, CTE, Battlefield V Member
    Anti-tank?? We need some Spec-op type classes or derivatives. Apart from assault, who can go and stealthy plant explosives??
  • Foot_Guard_Tomei
    438 postsMember, Battlefield 4, Battlefield Hardline, Battlefield, Battlefield 1, CTE, Battlefield V Member
    Anti-tank?? We need some Spec-op type classes or derivatives. Apart from assault, who can go and stealthy plant explosives??
    l4chy wrote: »
    Yes bring back the Engineer class.

    Assault, anti-tank/engineer, medic, support, recon and spec-ops? Why this look familiar :D
  • DocCuda418
    155 postsMember, Battlefield 3, Battlefield 4, Battlefield Hardline, Battlefield, Battlefield 1, Battlefield V Member
    Assault, Anti-Tank, Engineer, Medic, Support, Spec Ops, Sniper. Six man squads, you betcha.
  • Foot_Guard_Tomei
    438 postsMember, Battlefield 4, Battlefield Hardline, Battlefield, Battlefield 1, CTE, Battlefield V Member
    DocCuda418 wrote: »
    Assault, Anti-Tank, Engineer, Medic, Support, Spec Ops, Sniper. Six man squads, you betcha.

    + Squad leader
    C.A.S marker/ Binoculars and Spawn beacon as gadgets, squad can be leaderless but loses squad spawn mechanic onto leader or his beacon
    , Pilot, Tank crew and Commander special classes. Take notes for BF6!
Sign In or Register to comment.