What BFI has right and how to improve BFV

«134
y_j_es_i
1342 postsMember, Battlefield 4, Battlefield Hardline, Battlefield, Battlefield 1, Battlefield V Member
edited May 19
This topic addresses the negative impact of BFV’s health attrition on ptfo and class balance

So I’ve mostly been playing BFI these last few weeks and what I’ve come to appreciate are just how good the health system is and just how balanced the health:bolt action balance is at distances under 80m.

In BFI it’s always good to have a medic on hand. You can regain full health on your own sure, but medics are still very valuable. Attrition is still a factor in the game and teamwork is encouraged, so much so that I always have a look to see which squad(s) with a free spot have both a medic and a support when I join games. But, the attrition isn’t so heavy that players are too scared to push forward without a medic nearby when they need to. It’s damn near perfect.

Then there’s the damage system for bolt-actions at distances under 60/80m.
Look, when I get one shot by some [camper] I’m like ‘[removed]. That’s really frustrating but it hasn’t gotten any less frequent with the abolition of sweet spots for BFV. But, when someone can out-do me with a BA at close-medium range whilst ptfo, I say ‘ok fair’, because unless I have an SMG I should be killing him first more often than not. The distinct lack of bolt-action users at close-medium range is testament to the fact that having a sweet spot at close-medium range isn’t OP because otherwise there’d be loads of BA users operating at close-medium range.
So going forwards, I think that an ideal damage system for bolt-actions would be one that feels like Bfi’s at close-medium range (I.e. ptfo distance) so sweet spots at 10-35m or 10-60m depending on the rifle, and feels like BFV’s at long range but with bullet velocities buffed to real life values.
Such a system would allow better recons to ptfo with BAs like they did in WWII, without buffing sniping at long range too much.

If these two systems were implemented in BFV then camping would provide less of an advantage, thus encouraging ptfo, and the recon class will finally be well balanced with the other classes. The medic class would still need weapon buffs but that’s a discussion for another time

FYI even tho BFV doesn’t have any sweet spots, there are just as many recons in each round in BFV as there are in BFI. What this suggests is that the sheer number of recons is probably down to player mentality and gameplay preference as opposed to the strength or lack thereof, of the recon/scout class
Post edited by LOLGotYerTags on

Comments

  • MBT_Layzan
    1402 postsMember, Battlefield 3, Battlefield 4, Battlefield, Battlefield 1, Battlefield V Member
    edited May 17
    I never really liked either game. Though BF1 was better. I miss games like 1943, bf3, Vietnam. 2142. Bf1 to me was a sign of how it was all going, and here we are now with this mess. 
  • ArchAngeL_777
    44 postsMember, Battlefield 3, Battlefield 4, Battlefield Member
    I never really liked either game. Though BF1 was better. I miss games like 1943, bf3, Vietnam. 2142. Bf1 to me was a sign of how it was all going, and here we are now with this mess. 
    I definitely miss these games.   That's why I still go back to BF4 and play it.  It's funny how I complained about them to various degrees at the time.  No they weren't perfect, but sometimes you have to realize it can get worse.   Now here I miss those days badly, even the PS3 days.   Seems every long running series gets that way.   COD imo has been washed up since PS3/360 days.
  • MBT_Layzan
    1402 postsMember, Battlefield 3, Battlefield 4, Battlefield, Battlefield 1, Battlefield V Member
    I never really liked either game. Though BF1 was better. I miss games like 1943, bf3, Vietnam. 2142. Bf1 to me was a sign of how it was all going, and here we are now with this mess. 
    I definitely miss these games.   That's why I still go back to BF4 and play it.  It's funny how I complained about them to various degrees at the time.  No they weren't perfect, but sometimes you have to realize it can get worse.   Now here I miss those days badly, even the PS3 days.   Seems every long running series gets that way.   COD imo has been washed up since PS3/360 days.
    No harm in wanting a better game. And yes, it can get worse, this game could too. But for me, BFV is the worst by far, on all fronts. I'm really astounded by how bad it is. 
  • M_Rat13
    804 postsMember, Battlefield 4, Battlefield Hardline, Battlefield, Battlefield 1, Battlefield V Member
    I never really liked either game. Though BF1 was better. I miss games like 1943, bf3, Vietnam. 2142. Bf1 to me was a sign of how it was all going, and here we are now with this mess. 

    BF1 is the best battlefield of this decade. I'd forgotten what a real battlefield felt like until I played BF1. It was a return to form where weapon class each had a role, eventually (LMGs needed some tweaks), where soldiers/vehicles moved like they had weight, and weren't just UFOs, and where everything was just so immersive and atmospheric. And then Dice dropped the ball, hard.... BFV is like taking that perfectly made cheese and tomato pizza that has all the right textures and tastes from BF1, and then slapping on the pineapple from BF4 on top of it. If BC3 is just a BF4 clone, battlefield is dead to me, and that's a shame. Becuase for one glorious moment, we had BF1. We had, perfection.
  • YourLocalPlumber
    2717 postsMember, Battlefield 3, Battlefield, Battlefield 1, CTE, BF1IncursionsAlpha, Battlefield V Member
    All that Dice had to do going from BF1 to BF5 is rework gunplay to what we have now, remove gimmicks such as elites and behemoths, rework customization to what we have now, and keep everything else the same. Vehicle balance, class balance, DLCs, old Operations (God I miss old Operations). 

    But nope. they had to mess up the class balance completely but miss matching guns to classes that don't need them.  They also had to totally ruin vehicle gameplay for reasons unknown to me. Moved to "Live Service" model that provides no post launch maps AT ALL.  And ruined BF1's biggest success - Operations. 
  • MBT_Layzan
    1402 postsMember, Battlefield 3, Battlefield 4, Battlefield, Battlefield 1, Battlefield V Member
    I felt vehicle game play suffered in Bf1 and became an abomination in BFV. Awful spawn system, you could mine certain tank spawn areas before the vehicle spawned. I missed having a respectable secondary gunner position with it's perks. I really am not a fan of set entry and exit areas with animations. The tank v tank combat was bland, just simple exchanges of fire with no real value from manoeuvrability or variation in different fun tank specs/perks you could play with like in past games. In Bf1, I felt more like a school bus in the heavy tank. My gaming buddy bored starring out one of many almost pointless side windows, he gave up and once I started going 70-0 each match I did too. 

    I detested the gimmicks such as elites and behemoths so much, that said it was better than what we have now. 

    In Bfv, we got no engineer class, so no fun weapons and gadgets to play with, I'm stuck as some generic women I can't even change the look of with some mines and the same weapons, (FUN!) 

    The vehicle play is awful with glancing hits, hit registration and hit detection out the windows thanks to a awful netcode. You can't tell if a tank is being fixed, and the tool to do is so super OP to a point it's not worth bothering firing tank shells because it out heals the damage done. Disables all over the place so it's now a camp fest, and even that leaves questions unanswered, why do I have to randomly self repair twice for one track disable, bug, intentional?

    The splash is so poor and unpredictable from tank rounds in this game, you often can't deal damage to the support guys super healing the tank you just tried to take out, even though you got the total drop on it. Your blow apart infantry with certain cannon rounds and it feels right, but then if your hit hits a bit of metal say on a bridge or tree/bush right next to the target explodes, they don't even take any damage. You can blow planes apart with infantry on them and they don't take any damage? Shoot the ground right near their feet and they take no damage. It's so random tankers now have learn't to snipe having to actually hit the target dead on with the tank round. 

    Infantry can OHK a bomber with one AT round, but the 38t APCR rounds, your need over THREE hits. It's crap like that which shows really poor design and thought towards balance.  
  • lunajpsn
    37 postsMember, Battlefield, Battlefield 1, Battlefield V Member
    edited May 18
    The maps were certainly better in BF4 and BF1...firefights seemed more focused in specific areas. Lots of BFV maps feel like giant circles with not much cover between flags...
  • X_Sunslayer_X
    682 postsMember, Battlefield 3, Battlefield, Battlefield 1, BF1IncursionsAlpha Member
    well attrition is at a point where it might as well be removed entirely. i mean whats the point of it anymore besides making Firestorm work within the same launcher. everything attrition does is mimik BR-mechanics in the main game nothing more or less and atm its just screwing over the entire balance in the game.
    so what would i do.
    • remove attrition all together now it has not worked out as intended instead of making team-play the focus it encourages camping and using team-mates as bait
    • rework the entire class system. Split up the SMGs to more classes. i.E fast firing SMGs go to recon. STEN and MP40 become faction weapons. EMP/MP34/ZK-383/MP28 stay with medic. semi-autos like G1-5 and M1A1/AGm go to medic for mid-range focus. G43/Selbstlader 1916 stay with assault as do ARs. bolt-action carbines (commando/M28) go to recon. Shot-guns can be accessed by all classes. Bolt-actions and SLRs stay with recon but 3x scope glints get removed entirely. LMGs/MMGs  can stay as they are as well.
    • tanks i can not really speak off since i dont use them as i do with planes but planes need to be restricted on certain maps like Fjell so no more bombers there. as does the 3rd person aim assist. 3rd person view would also disable turret rotation in order to make it a bit more tactical since sneaking up on tanks is nearly impossible at times.
    • frag-launcher does not do 100 DMG anymore max. DMG needs to be at most 60 and it should be an all-kit gadget. in general i'd put a nerf to all explosives against infantry since its getting laughable how indiscriminately they are getting abused.
    feel free to add more to it but map-design needs a "bit" of tweaking as well but  that will never happen since it takes them long enough to release a new map i.E almost 8 months
  • ArchAngeL_777
    44 postsMember, Battlefield 3, Battlefield 4, Battlefield Member
    I never really liked either game. Though BF1 was better. I miss games like 1943, bf3, Vietnam. 2142. Bf1 to me was a sign of how it was all going, and here we are now with this mess. 
    I definitely miss these games.   That's why I still go back to BF4 and play it.  It's funny how I complained about them to various degrees at the time.  No they weren't perfect, but sometimes you have to realize it can get worse.   Now here I miss those days badly, even the PS3 days.   Seems every long running series gets that way.   COD imo has been washed up since PS3/360 days.
    No harm in wanting a better game. And yes, it can get worse, this game could too. But for me, BFV is the worst by far, on all fronts. I'm really astounded by how bad it is. 
    yeah considering the expectations and potential of a WWII theater.   That's why I didn't get it until last week, and am waiting to get full into it until the Greece map arrives this month.   I played the beta and watched streams of the other maps at launch.   The map pool is pretty mediocre at best.   Good map design is the biggest thing I care about in shooters anymore, and really BF4 is the last Battlefield game that had it.
  • y_j_es_i
    1342 postsMember, Battlefield 4, Battlefield Hardline, Battlefield, Battlefield 1, Battlefield V Member
    well attrition is at a point where it might as well be removed entirely. i mean whats the point of it anymore besides making Firestorm work within the same launcher. everything attrition does is mimik BR-mechanics in the main game nothing more or less and atm its just screwing over the entire balance in the game.so what would i do.remove attrition all together now it has not worked out as intended instead of making team-play the focus it encourages camping and using team-mates as baitrework the entire class system.

    I agree about health attrition and BFI’s system’s the way to go imo but I think ammo attrition’s fine as it is given how plentiful ammo stations are.

    Split up the SMGs to more classes. i.E fast firing SMGs go to recon. STEN and MP40 become faction weapons. EMP/MP34/ZK-383/MP28 stay with medic. semi-autos like G1-5 and M1A1/AGm go to medic for mid-range focus. G43/Selbstlader 1916 stay with assault as do ARs. bolt-action carbines (commando/M28) go to recon. Shot-guns can be accessed by all classes. Bolt-actions and SLRs stay with recon but 3x scope glints get removed entirely. LMGs/MMGs  can stay as they are as well.

    I can’t see any reason to deprive medics of the fast firing SMGs and doing so would just make the medic class significantly worse. Giving recons access to fast firing SMGs would lead to problems due to them also having spawn beacons and I think it’d be far better to give recons access to the slower firing SMGs with medium range capabilities.

    Due to how good people on PC are with M1A1s and AGs I’m against giving them to medics. It’d be a much better idea to give medics access to the shorter range ARs so they’ll have better mid range capabilities but can’t camp with them.

    Recons should have access to the BA carbines but I don’t see any need to deprive medics of them.


    tanks i can not really speak off since i dont use them as i do with planes but planes need to be restricted on certain maps like Fjell so no more bombers there. as does the 3rd person aim assist.

    As there’s no way of targetting your bombs in 1st person removing the 3rd person target would make bombers useless.

    3rd person view would also disable turret rotation in order to make it a bit more tactical since sneaking up on tanks is nearly impossible at times.

    That would make tank camping so much worse

    frag-launcher does not do 100 DMG anymore max. DMG needs to be at most 60 and it should be an all-kit gadget. in general i'd put a nerf to all explosives against infantry since its getting laughable how indiscriminately they are getting abused.

    Disagree, that’ll make the spam worse and reduce the number of medics and supports carrying bandages and ammo

  • M_Rat13
    804 postsMember, Battlefield 4, Battlefield Hardline, Battlefield, Battlefield 1, Battlefield V Member
    I never really liked either game. Though BF1 was better. I miss games like 1943, bf3, Vietnam. 2142. Bf1 to me was a sign of how it was all going, and here we are now with this mess. 
    I definitely miss these games.   That's why I still go back to BF4 and play it.  It's funny how I complained about them to various degrees at the time.  No they weren't perfect, but sometimes you have to realize it can get worse.   Now here I miss those days badly, even the PS3 days.   Seems every long running series gets that way.   COD imo has been washed up since PS3/360 days.
    No harm in wanting a better game. And yes, it can get worse, this game could too. But for me, BFV is the worst by far, on all fronts. I'm really astounded by how bad it is. 
    yeah considering the expectations and potential of a WWII theater.   That's why I didn't get it until last week, and am waiting to get full into it until the Greece map arrives this month.   I played the beta and watched streams of the other maps at launch.   The map pool is pretty mediocre at best.   Good map design is the biggest thing I care about in shooters anymore, and really BF4 is the last Battlefield game that had it.

    My favourite map of all time, Amiens, is a BF1 map, just saying. Ok, maybe not of all time, but it's up there. I really wish people respected BF1 more, but considering most joined during the modern AR hard on phase of battlefield (mainly BF3/4), and not the beginning of the franchise, sadly I don't think it'll happen.
  • superteds
    1160 postsMember, Battlefield 3, Battlefield, Battlefield 1, BF1IncursionsAlpha, Battlefield V Member
    hahahahah considering the abuse BF1 got on launch this thread is hilarious


  • y_j_es_i
    1342 postsMember, Battlefield 4, Battlefield Hardline, Battlefield, Battlefield 1, Battlefield V Member
    superteds wrote: »
    hahahahah considering the abuse BF1 got on launch this thread is hilarious

    The same could be said for BF4 lol

    You know what’d be even funnier? If in 5 years time people started saying that BFV’s the GOAT BF or even GOAT fps
  • M_Rat13
    804 postsMember, Battlefield 4, Battlefield Hardline, Battlefield, Battlefield 1, Battlefield V Member
    superteds said:
    hahahahah considering the abuse BF1 got on launch this thread is hilarious



    I never understood that personally. I loved that game since the beta. Also, it still gets abuse lol, just not as much since BFV took that crown. But I'm still gonna bash BF4 myself, becuase someone needs to lol.
  • ragnarok013
    2925 postsMember, Moderator, Battlefield 3, Battlefield 4, Battlefield Hardline, Battlefield, Battlefield 1, CTE, BF1IncursionsAlpha, Battlefield V Moderator
    M_Rat13 said:
    I never really liked either game. Though BF1 was better. I miss games like 1943, bf3, Vietnam. 2142. Bf1 to me was a sign of how it was all going, and here we are now with this mess. 

    BF1 is the best battlefield of this decade. I'd forgotten what a real battlefield felt like until I played BF1. It was a return to form where weapon class each had a role, eventually (LMGs needed some tweaks), where soldiers/vehicles moved like they had weight, and weren't just UFOs, and where everything was just so immersive and atmospheric. And then Dice dropped the ball, hard.... BFV is like taking that perfectly made cheese and tomato pizza that has all the right textures and tastes from BF1, and then slapping on the pineapple from BF4 on top of it. If BC3 is just a BF4 clone, battlefield is dead to me, and that's a shame. Becuase for one glorious moment, we had BF1. We had, perfection.

    I have to disagree here.  I really wanted to like BF1 but it was so freaking bland and boring and never felt like a real Battlefield title to me. To me BF5 is a step in the right direction and actually feels more like a Battlefield title than BF1 although for the next one I wish they'd ignore everything after BF4 (and SWBF) and take what made the series great from BF1942-BF4 and build upon it instead of repeatedly shaking up the etcha-sketch and starting over from scratch. My perfect Battlefield would be to use BF3 as the basis minus suppression, then add BF2's commander, BF4's assist counts as kill and counter knife, BF4's UI and weapon customization system and a robust RSP that replicates all of the abilities that we had with procon\r-con. We'd have a normal hard core and core setting as well.  I'd leave all of the animations and attrition on the cutting room floor as if my soldiers ever crossed LD with less than their full combat load I'd have had more than strong words with them. All of the animations severely limit all of the "only in Battlefield" moments that we used to have until BF1.
  • M_Rat13
    804 postsMember, Battlefield 4, Battlefield Hardline, Battlefield, Battlefield 1, Battlefield V Member
    M_Rat13 said:
    I never really liked either game. Though BF1 was better. I miss games like 1943, bf3, Vietnam. 2142. Bf1 to me was a sign of how it was all going, and here we are now with this mess. 

    BF1 is the best battlefield of this decade. I'd forgotten what a real battlefield felt like until I played BF1. It was a return to form where weapon class each had a role, eventually (LMGs needed some tweaks), where soldiers/vehicles moved like they had weight, and weren't just UFOs, and where everything was just so immersive and atmospheric. And then Dice dropped the ball, hard.... BFV is like taking that perfectly made cheese and tomato pizza that has all the right textures and tastes from BF1, and then slapping on the pineapple from BF4 on top of it. If BC3 is just a BF4 clone, battlefield is dead to me, and that's a shame. Becuase for one glorious moment, we had BF1. We had, perfection.

    I have to disagree here.  I really wanted to like BF1 but it was so freaking bland and boring and never felt like a real Battlefield title to me. To me BF5 is a step in the right direction and actually feels more like a Battlefield title than BF1 although for the next one I wish they'd ignore everything after BF4 (and SWBF) and take what made the series great from BF1942-BF4 and build upon it instead of repeatedly shaking up the etcha-sketch and starting over from scratch. My perfect Battlefield would be to use BF3 as the basis minus suppression, then add BF2's commander, BF4's assist counts as kill and counter knife, BF4's UI and weapon customization system and a robust RSP that replicates all of the abilities that we had with procon\r-con. We'd have a normal hard core and core setting as well.  I'd leave all of the animations and attrition on the cutting room floor as if my soldiers ever crossed LD with less than their full combat load I'd have had more than strong words with them. All of the animations severely limit all of the "only in Battlefield" moments that we used to have until BF1.

    Battlefields in modern settings are so focused on making you this run and gun machine, they forget that battlefield is, first and foremost, a strategic game. You shouldn't win a gunfight becuase you have the better twitch reflexes (mainly talking ADAD spam) or the better gun, it should be who gets the jump on their opponent first, and it's what BF1, and the original battlefields, did. Oh, and getting the jump doesn't mean camping, that's a different thing.
  • X_Sunslayer_X
    682 postsMember, Battlefield 3, Battlefield, Battlefield 1, BF1IncursionsAlpha Member
    y_j_es_i said:
    well attrition is at a point where it might as well be removed entirely. i mean whats the point of it anymore besides making Firestorm work within the same launcher. everything attrition does is mimik BR-mechanics in the main game nothing more or less and atm its just screwing over the entire balance in the game.so what would i do.remove attrition all together now it has not worked out as intended instead of making team-play the focus it encourages camping and using team-mates as baitrework the entire class system.

    I agree about health attrition and BFI’s system’s the way to go imo but I think ammo attrition’s fine as it is given how plentiful ammo stations are.

    Split up the SMGs to more classes. i.E fast firing SMGs go to recon. STEN and MP40 become faction weapons. EMP/MP34/ZK-383/MP28 stay with medic. semi-autos like G1-5 and M1A1/AGm go to medic for mid-range focus. G43/Selbstlader 1916 stay with assault as do ARs. bolt-action carbines (commando/M28) go to recon. Shot-guns can be accessed by all classes. Bolt-actions and SLRs stay with recon but 3x scope glints get removed entirely. LMGs/MMGs  can stay as they are as well.

    I can’t see any reason to deprive medics of the fast firing SMGs and doing so would just make the medic class significantly worse. Giving recons access to fast firing SMGs would lead to problems due to them also having spawn beacons and I think it’d be far better to give recons access to the slower firing SMGs with medium range capabilities.

    Due to how good people on PC are with M1A1s and AGs I’m against giving them to medics. It’d be a much better idea to give medics access to the shorter range ARs so they’ll have better mid range capabilities but can’t camp with them.

    Recons should have access to the BA carbines but I don’t see any need to deprive medics of them.


    tanks i can not really speak off since i dont use them as i do with planes but planes need to be restricted on certain maps like Fjell so no more bombers there. as does the 3rd person aim assist.

    As there’s no way of targetting your bombs in 1st person removing the 3rd person target would make bombers useless.

    3rd person view would also disable turret rotation in order to make it a bit more tactical since sneaking up on tanks is nearly impossible at times.

    That would make tank camping so much worse

    frag-launcher does not do 100 DMG anymore max. DMG needs to be at most 60 and it should be an all-kit gadget. in general i'd put a nerf to all explosives against infantry since its getting laughable how indiscriminately they are getting abused.

    Disagree, that’ll make the spam worse and reduce the number of medics and supports carrying bandages and ammo

    well i would say the M1A1 and G1-5 perform more CQC centered then all the other semi-autos. so why not put them to the class that is virtually forced to reside there no matter the cost.
    the M1A1 is in my opinion much better suited for medic heck if you think it will be too good why not put a bit of a cool-down on the self-heal maybe you can only use it once ever 5-10s or slow it down so you cant heal that fast. you could also put it at a max scope of 1.5 or 2x. but ARs would work just as well for medic but i think you will find assaults are already unwilling to except anything but the best for their class.
    why not split up the fast firing SMGs to other classes? but hey they could also use the slower firing ones but then again a decent recon would perform better with something like a RSC on mid-range anyways then with a MP34.
    well putting a targeting system like BF1 had for the planes in shouldn't be too hard for them. and i remember many doing blind drops anyways in BF1
    why would that make the camping worse? if a tank wont move up he wont no matter what you do a PTFO oriented tanker would still PTFO. it would just put a bit of an actual skill-requirement on it. or focus more on squad-play since the tank needs it more and if i remember correctly DICE wanted to encourage team-play more but as we see mayn times it has failed in almost every possible way so far.
    well whats the point of ammo-attrition if its almost non existent anyways. then DICE should make offensive gadgets that are meant to kill harder to resupply because otherwise ppl will camp the stations and spam them even more since they can resupply all the time. so something has to be done there.
  • spartanx169x
    695 postsMember, Battlefield 3, Battlefield 4, Battlefield Hardline, Battlefield, Battlefield 1, Battlefield V Member
    I pointed out since they announced the attrition system for BFV was a horrible idea. Combine that with the lightening fast TTK and it scares people to move around the map. Camping (while I consider it a legit tactic) is by far the worst I have experienced it in any game (I've played since BFBC2). Players bought the game got destroyed and never turned the game on again. DICE admitted that early on. 

    With that said,  they are not going to make changes to attrition. The game is too far along. What they could do would be to have a "Conquest Classic" with Health like prior games and spawning with full ammo. That would provide at least something to play for people that don't like the current attrition. But, even that is not going to happen. Go to DICE's website, they have several positions they are just trying to fill. They are literally in need of help, so a Conquest Classic is not coming. They still have bugs they can't fix.  At least one bug fix should be pushed out every two weeks. instead of huge updates, focus on a small thing fix it so it stays fixed, then move to the next one. But they are not going to do that either.  If they do this mess with BC3 in 2020, the series will be shelved for years.     
  • y_j_es_i
    1342 postsMember, Battlefield 4, Battlefield Hardline, Battlefield, Battlefield 1, Battlefield V Member
    y_j_es_i said:


    X_Sunslayer_X wrote: »
    well attrition is at a point where it might as well be removed entirely. i mean whats the point of it anymore besides making Firestorm work within the same launcher. everything attrition does is mimik BR-mechanics in the main game nothing more or less and atm its just screwing over the entire balance in the game.so what would i do.remove attrition all together now it has not worked out as intended instead of making team-play the focus it encourages camping and using team-mates as baitrework the entire class system.



    I agree about health attrition and BFI’s system’s the way to go imo but I think ammo attrition’s fine as it is given how plentiful ammo stations are.



    Split up the SMGs to more classes. i.E fast firing SMGs go to recon. STEN and MP40 become faction weapons. EMP/MP34/ZK-383/MP28 stay with medic. semi-autos like G1-5 and M1A1/AGm go to medic for mid-range focus. G43/Selbstlader 1916 stay with assault as do ARs. bolt-action carbines (commando/M28) go to recon. Shot-guns can be accessed by all classes. Bolt-actions and SLRs stay with recon but 3x scope glints get removed entirely. LMGs/MMGs  can stay as they are as well.



    I can’t see any reason to deprive medics of the fast firing SMGs and doing so would just make the medic class significantly worse. Giving recons access to fast firing SMGs would lead to problems due to them also having spawn beacons and I think it’d be far better to give recons access to the slower firing SMGs with medium range capabilities.



    Due to how good people on PC are with M1A1s and AGs I’m against giving them to medics. It’d be a much better idea to give medics access to the shorter range ARs so they’ll have better mid range capabilities but can’t camp with them.



    Recons should have access to the BA carbines but I don’t see any need to deprive medics of them.



    tanks i can not really speak off since i dont use them as i do with planes but planes need to be restricted on certain maps like Fjell so no more bombers there. as does the 3rd person aim assist.



    As there’s no way of targetting your bombs in 1st person removing the 3rd person target would make bombers useless.



    3rd person view would also disable turret rotation in order to make it a bit more tactical since sneaking up on tanks is nearly impossible at times.



    That would make tank camping so much worse



    frag-launcher does not do 100 DMG anymore max. DMG needs to be at most 60 and it should be an all-kit gadget. in general i'd put a nerf to all explosives against infantry since its getting laughable how indiscriminately they are getting abused.



    Disagree, that’ll make the spam worse and reduce the number of medics and supports carrying bandages and ammo

    well i would say the M1A1 and G1-5 perform more CQC centered then all the other semi-autos. so why not put them to the class that is virtually forced to reside there no matter the cost.the M1A1 is in my opinion much better suited for medic heck if you think it will be too good why not put a bit of a cool-down on the self-heal maybe you can only use it once ever 5-10s or slow it down so you cant heal that fast. you could also put it at a max scope of 1.5 or 2x. but ARs would work just as well for medic but i think you will find assaults are already unwilling to except anything but the best for their class.

    The G1-5 I agree is the SAR most suited to close-medium range combat but not the M1A1. The M1A1 has the slowest TTK of all the semi-autos except the Selb1916. That puts it at a big disadvantage at close range. It’s only deadly in the hands of someone who can use its minuscule recoil to land regular headshots, meaning its best at medium range

    The thing with limiting the self heal is that it’ll affect the entire class regardless of the weapon you’re using, and medics don’t need a nerf

    Assaults may complain but they complain whenever something good happens to the other classes. SMG buffs, assaults complain. Recon buff, assaults complain. Dice just have to ignore them at some point


    why not split up the fast firing SMGs to other classes? but hey they could also use the slower firing ones but then again a decent recon would perform better with something like a RSC on mid-range anyways then with a MP34.

    I think it’d be fair to give assaults access to the fast firing SMGs in exchange for giving medics access to the shorter range ARs and I don’t see any negative repercussions to doing so and it worked in BFI. If recons got them then people would start placing spawn beacons on the edges of towns and there’d be a flow of people with Tommy guns streaming out which would lock down the area

    Whilst recons could do better at mid range with RSCs, giving them MP40s would allow recons to compete at close-medium range, thus extending recons’ potential range for engagement distances. This would give the class more versatility like giving medics ARs would


    well putting a targeting system like BF1 had for the planes in shouldn't be too hard for them. and i remember many doing blind drops anyways in BF1

    How do you use the targeting system in BFI planes? 😅 I only started playing BFI 3 weeks ago and haven’t figured it out yet lol I’ve just been blind dropping

    Why would that make the camping worse? if a tank wont move up he wont no matter what you do a PTFO oriented tanker would still PTFO. it would just put a bit of an actual skill-requirement on it. or focus more on squad-play since the tank needs it more and if i remember correctly DICE wanted to encourage team-play more but as we see mayn times it has failed in almost every possible way so far.

    Yeh they did try but the new change to attrition says that they’ve toned down their expectations because two few players so much as try to work together.
    Atm infantry and tank pretty much always operate separately, something due in part to Dice’s refusal to introduce team and/or proximity chat and so players can’t talk to teammates

    I have a moral issue with tank camping so I always provide close support in tanks. Doing that to tanks’ 3rd person view would discourage me from providing close supports



    well whats the point of ammo-attrition if its almost non existent anyways. then DICE should make offensive gadgets that are meant to kill harder to resupply because otherwise ppl will camp the stations and spam them even more since they can resupply all the time. so something has to be done there.

    They can kinda spam them from the stations but if gadgets automatically replenished without the need for stations there’ll be people spamming them from all over the place
  • ArchAngeL_777
    44 postsMember, Battlefield 3, Battlefield 4, Battlefield Member
    M_Rat13 said:
    M_Rat13 said:
    I never really liked either game. Though BF1 was better. I miss games like 1943, bf3, Vietnam. 2142. Bf1 to me was a sign of how it was all going, and here we are now with this mess. 

    BF1 is the best battlefield of this decade. I'd forgotten what a real battlefield felt like until I played BF1. It was a return to form where weapon class each had a role, eventually (LMGs needed some tweaks), where soldiers/vehicles moved like they had weight, and weren't just UFOs, and where everything was just so immersive and atmospheric. And then Dice dropped the ball, hard.... BFV is like taking that perfectly made cheese and tomato pizza that has all the right textures and tastes from BF1, and then slapping on the pineapple from BF4 on top of it. If BC3 is just a BF4 clone, battlefield is dead to me, and that's a shame. Becuase for one glorious moment, we had BF1. We had, perfection.

    I have to disagree here.  I really wanted to like BF1 but it was so freaking bland and boring and never felt like a real Battlefield title to me. To me BF5 is a step in the right direction and actually feels more like a Battlefield title than BF1 although for the next one I wish they'd ignore everything after BF4 (and SWBF) and take what made the series great from BF1942-BF4 and build upon it instead of repeatedly shaking up the etcha-sketch and starting over from scratch. My perfect Battlefield would be to use BF3 as the basis minus suppression, then add BF2's commander, BF4's assist counts as kill and counter knife, BF4's UI and weapon customization system and a robust RSP that replicates all of the abilities that we had with procon\r-con. We'd have a normal hard core and core setting as well.  I'd leave all of the animations and attrition on the cutting room floor as if my soldiers ever crossed LD with less than their full combat load I'd have had more than strong words with them. All of the animations severely limit all of the "only in Battlefield" moments that we used to have until BF1.

    Battlefields in modern settings are so focused on making you this run and gun machine, they forget that battlefield is, first and foremost, a strategic game. You shouldn't win a gunfight becuase you have the better twitch reflexes (mainly talking ADAD spam) or the better gun, it should be who gets the jump on their opponent first, and it's what BF1, and the original battlefields, did. Oh, and getting the jump doesn't mean camping, that's a different thing.
    I started at Battlefield 2.  I can't remember a single Battlefield game where some sort of twitch reflex was not involved.   That's online shooters, and that's Conquest.   You will consistently be put in a situation where you will have to quickly react to outgun an opponent.  The gunplay really isn't the issue.   I basically only used one gun the entire time on BF4 (AK-5C).   I didn't care.  I just wanted something reliable.   Same with BF3 where I often used the DAO-12.   To me Battlefield V has solid gunplay.

    I have to agree with @ragnarok013, BF1 was missing a lot of what makes Battlefield unique.  The beta turned me off because it was that desert map with very little cover.  It was a total sniper fest.   There weren't many vehicles.   Then the game launched and a lot of the maps were not much different...bland blown out towns or mostly flat fields, etc.  So I went with Titanfall 2 instead.

    I also agree with his "ideal Battlefield".  In particular, leave the animations out.   My one criticism of BF4 is having to sit there for 10 seconds and watch the guy who killed me.   Get rid of that.   Get rid of the rolling around on the ground screaming.   Window dressing...all of it that no one asked for.

    I should point out too that this series was T rated before Bad Company 2.   That includes Battlefield 2 and Battlefield 2142.   Most consider those superior games.   They didn't need blood effects, executions, or cursing.  It was all about the straight up Conquest gameplay and over the top maps.   Maps like Kubra Dam, Strike at Karkand, Gulf of Oman, Warlord, Iron Gator, Ghost Town, Mass Destruction, FuShe Pass, Operation Clean Sweep, Surge, Leviathan, etc.   Maps in Battlefield 2 had great features, design, and varied terrain.   Battlefield 4 is the last Battlefield to truly encompass much of the map design and features of the older games.

Sign In or Register to comment.