The some of the community really doesn’t understand how battlefield V fails in parts.

«1
Minigun991
75 postsMember, Battlefield 4, Battlefield, Battlefield 1, CTE, Battlefield V Member
edited June 12
Recently I made a post about how tank combat sucks. Not in all aspects. Tank on tank can be fun.

But then there is the assault player with the tank hunter build. They have the following.

PIAT or Panzerfaust.

Dynamite.

Anti tank grenade. What does equal? One man being able to destroy any tank.

Now, most of the community agrees tank combat sucks, and assault is the everything class. But there are some people who don’t understand one concept.

NOT EVERYONE PLAYS AS A SQUAD.

Maybe my friends are at work, and I’m off, and i wanna play solo on battlefield V. Then I guess I’ll just choose a tank to get killed, cause the blue dots are useless.

Then there is the other suggestion of using blue dots as meat shields.

Great idea, except you’re in a tank. Everyone is going to be gunning for you, so it will be easier to take on the infantry. You will get hit with rocket after rocket till you are dead.

And even if you do survive and kill the infantry wile pushing an objective, well that sucks for you cause the spawn time is damn near two seconds. So you will have assaults spawning back In fully loaded, with an itch to take you out for killing them.


Honestly, the people who defend these design choices are amazing. This isn’t battlefield 1942, where there was a class designed solely on taking out tanks.

No, they gave all of that to the most played class there is.

Comments

  • Capuonce
    15 postsMember, Battlefield 4, Battlefield, Battlefield 1, CTE, Battlefield V Member
    I play assault 90% of the time and there is nothing more satisfying then to destroy a Tank bcs mostly they camp and even worse redzone camp but how ever it can be better for Tanks to have more speed and faster repair time.
  • Minigun991
    75 postsMember, Battlefield 4, Battlefield, Battlefield 1, CTE, Battlefield V Member
    I er..  I don't see the issue?

    You're not supposed to go and lead your team to a flag,  You are supposed to hang back and give your team supportive fire.

    It sounds to me like you're pushing up ahead of your team and getting wrecked by assault players.


    Do yourself a favour and stay behind your team,  providing supportive fire for them and catching stragglers that may be attempting to flank.


    Any semi-competent tanker will know not to push first and to put enough distance between them and the "meat" so that you can deal with threats from a decent range.

    I don’t think you understand military doctrines. Tanks do work along side infantry, yes. But this is WW2

    You have your infantry support tanks, medium tanks, then you have your breakthrough tanks like the tiger.

    Their purpose is to spearhead the charge. But they can’t in this game cause one assault can take down a fully loaded tiger.

    If you are talking about fire support and hanging back, then ask for self propelled artillery on the battlefield twitter.
  • Minigun991
    75 postsMember, Battlefield 4, Battlefield, Battlefield 1, CTE, Battlefield V Member
    Capuonce wrote: »
    I play assault 90% of the time and there is nothing more satisfying then to destroy a Tank bcs mostly they camp and even worse redzone camp but how ever it can be better for Tanks to have more speed and faster repair time.


    Pretty sure most play assault in this game. It’s like the easy mode in multiplayer.
  • Capuonce
    15 postsMember, Battlefield 4, Battlefield, Battlefield 1, CTE, Battlefield V Member
    Minigun991 wrote: »
    Capuonce wrote: »
    I play assault 90% of the time and there is nothing more satisfying then to destroy a Tank bcs mostly they camp and even worse redzone camp but how ever it can be better for Tanks to have more speed and faster repair time.


    Pretty sure most play assault in this game. It’s like the easy mode in multiplayer.

    It does not have to do anything with what u said Assault 4 me has the most optimised guns for all ranges and its the most balanced class in my opinion. Is it overpowered against Tanks maybe and it should be just bcs of redzone campers (ex. The field between B and A on Arras) and for those who fight along side Infantry hat down for those players Tanks need to be buffed.
  • sabootheshaman
    549 postsMember, Battlefield 3, Battlefield 4, Battlefield Hardline, Battlefield, Battlefield 1, Battlefield V Member
    This reads like a play style issue.

    It also reminds me of all the threads about snipers being OP etc.

    In my opinion they are very subjective and tend to be from people unwilling to learn new countermeasures.

    Also saying that it’s “some of the communities” lack of understanding is pretty solid baiting.

    Tevs, bunj.
  • olavafar
    1920 postsMember, Battlefield 3, Battlefield 4, Battlefield, Battlefield 1, CTE, BF1IncursionsAlpha, Battlefield V Member
    If  I got that right the main point of OP is that everyone does not play as a squad. Secondly, when not playing as a squad one seems to be supposed to choose a tank. Third, assault is the most played class. Then it becomes a bit fuzzy to me because either there are too many assaults around -> tank goes down, or one single assault is enough to take out a tank (which is true if you can get close enough) -> tank goes down.

    So what exactly is the point OP is trying to make? "Everyone not playing as a squad", suggests one assault SHOULD be enough to take out a tank, maybe even at range? Or is a a problem that a tank cannot freely mow down any number of infantry so that solo players can have a safe way to get by? Is there some kind of suggestion buried in here, I do not see it anyway?
  • VincentNZ
    2154 postsMember, Battlefield 3, Battlefield 4, Battlefield, Battlefield 1, BF1IncursionsAlpha, Battlefield V Member
    Yeah I also do not fully understand the point. Does he want assault nerfed or not, on the premise of many players playing alone? Or is it about being able to man a tank alone?
  • Hawxxeye
    4761 postsMember, Battlefield 3, Battlefield 4, Battlefield Hardline, Battlefield, Battlefield 1, CTE, BF1IncursionsAlpha, Battlefield V Member
    edited June 12
    Capuonce said:
    Minigun991 wrote: »
    Capuonce wrote: »
    I play assault 90% of the time and there is nothing more satisfying then to destroy a Tank bcs mostly they camp and even worse redzone camp but how ever it can be better for Tanks to have more speed and faster repair time.


    Pretty sure most play assault in this game. It’s like the easy mode in multiplayer.

    It does not have to do anything with what u said Assault 4 me has the most optimised guns for all ranges and its the most balanced class in my opinion. Is it overpowered against Tanks maybe and it should be just bcs of redzone campers (ex. The field between B and A on Arras) and for those who fight along side Infantry hat down for those players Tanks need to be buffed.


    red zone camping tanks are the symptom and not the disease

  • MatthewSkeet
    255 postsMember, Battlefield 4, Battlefield, Battlefield 1, Battlefield V Member
    edited June 12
    Hawxxeye said:
    Capuonce said:
    Minigun991 wrote: »
    Capuonce wrote: »
    I play assault 90% of the time and there is nothing more satisfying then to destroy a Tank bcs mostly they camp and even worse redzone camp but how ever it can be better for Tanks to have more speed and faster repair time.


    Pretty sure most play assault in this game. It’s like the easy mode in multiplayer.

    It does not have to do anything with what u said Assault 4 me has the most optimised guns for all ranges and its the most balanced class in my opinion. Is it overpowered against Tanks maybe and it should be just bcs of redzone campers (ex. The field between B and A on Arras) and for those who fight along side Infantry hat down for those players Tanks need to be buffed.


    red zone camping tanks are the symptom and not the disease

    I disagree, if you look at previous games, it was relatively easy to kill tanks. hell in bad company 2 I was running as a sniper with c4 and I enjoyed wrecking tanks.

    and to say you want a tanks to be buffed is insanse. it will just make those hill campers invincible. no amount of armour will protect you from being killed in a tank. If 1 assault cant kill you another one will join and so on.
    the biggest problem is attrition but I dont have a good suggestion. perhaps on spawn only shells available and if you want a machine gun you need to get resupplies from inside of the play area or something
  • Hawxxeye
    4761 postsMember, Battlefield 3, Battlefield 4, Battlefield Hardline, Battlefield, Battlefield 1, CTE, BF1IncursionsAlpha, Battlefield V Member
    Hawxxeye said:
    Capuonce said:
    Minigun991 wrote: »
    Capuonce wrote: »
    I play assault 90% of the time and there is nothing more satisfying then to destroy a Tank bcs mostly they camp and even worse redzone camp but how ever it can be better for Tanks to have more speed and faster repair time.


    Pretty sure most play assault in this game. It’s like the easy mode in multiplayer.

    It does not have to do anything with what u said Assault 4 me has the most optimised guns for all ranges and its the most balanced class in my opinion. Is it overpowered against Tanks maybe and it should be just bcs of redzone campers (ex. The field between B and A on Arras) and for those who fight along side Infantry hat down for those players Tanks need to be buffed.


    red zone camping tanks are the symptom and not the disease

    I disagree, if you look at previous games, it was relatively easy to kill tanks. hell in bad company 2 I was running as a sniper with c4 and I enjoyed wrecking tanks.

    and to say you want a tanks to be buffed is insanse. it will just make those hill campers invincible. no amount of armour will protect you from being killed in a tank. If 1 assault cant kill you another one will join and so on.
    the biggest problem is attrition but I dont have a good suggestion. perhaps on spawn only shells available and if you want a machine gun you need to get resupplies from inside of the play area or something
    I joined in BF3 and I do not remember BF3/4 having compulsive hill camping tanks. 
    The AT class was not also the meta anti infantry class which made them less numerous. The ranged AT options were easier to counter due to countermeasures unless you went for smaw/rpg which were harder to hit things with.
    There were no or less mobility issues allowing more chances for a tank to not get stuck until repaired due to systematic damage.
    The AT weapons that could quickly kill a tank were mines and C4 which were harder to use because it was a lot more dangerous to come close to a tank due to the protected top MGs and the fact that the tankers spent more time in 3rd person.
    .
    The tanks started going downhill in BF1 where the mobility mechanics became more prominent and the assault got all the good AT goodies and better ranged AT tools like AT grenades.
    In BFV the tanks became slower and much easier to get close and put mines and dynamite on, the dynamite has an even bigger range to throw, the AT launchers are very accurate and one of them has a pretty good RoF too.
    Every encounter with another tank or assaults  means an obligatory trip back to ressuply for the emergency fast repair etc.
    .
    It is no wonder that tankers, especially those who unlike me value a lot their K/D found that  keeping the safest distance possible to be their meta.
    Thus the tank slots get hoarded by drivers who contribute little to nothing and cannot die easily so cannot be replaced.
    .
    I am not sure what must be done but it has to be something that makes tankers to not feel that their perfect place is in the red zone. Personally I would not even mind the red zone to be gone
  • bigiain
    153 postsMember, Battlefield 3, Battlefield 4, Battlefield Hardline, Battlefield, Battlefield 1, Battlefield V Member
    That's the problem, they're trying to balance tanks and assaults so that the tanker on the flag is viable, but not have the tanker on the edge of the map be invincible. They need to look at their map design and stop having so much elevated map edges looking straight down on flags for a start. It's too late to fix that now.
  • Hawxxeye
    4761 postsMember, Battlefield 3, Battlefield 4, Battlefield Hardline, Battlefield, Battlefield 1, CTE, BF1IncursionsAlpha, Battlefield V Member
    bigiain said:
    That's the problem, they're trying to balance tanks and assaults so that the tanker on the flag is viable, but not have the tanker on the edge of the map be invincible. They need to look at their map design and stop having so much elevated map edges looking straight down on flags for a start. It's too late to fix that now.
    How about increasing the damage of tank attacks that have traveled less distance to reach their target and vice versa? To reward taking risks?
  • VincentNZ
    2154 postsMember, Battlefield 3, Battlefield 4, Battlefield, Battlefield 1, BF1IncursionsAlpha, Battlefield V Member
    Hawxxeye said:
    Hawxxeye said:
    Capuonce said:
    Minigun991 wrote: »
    Capuonce wrote: »
    I play assault 90% of the time and there is nothing more satisfying then to destroy a Tank bcs mostly they camp and even worse redzone camp but how ever it can be better for Tanks to have more speed and faster repair time.


    Pretty sure most play assault in this game. It’s like the easy mode in multiplayer.

    It does not have to do anything with what u said Assault 4 me has the most optimised guns for all ranges and its the most balanced class in my opinion. Is it overpowered against Tanks maybe and it should be just bcs of redzone campers (ex. The field between B and A on Arras) and for those who fight along side Infantry hat down for those players Tanks need to be buffed.


    red zone camping tanks are the symptom and not the disease

    I disagree, if you look at previous games, it was relatively easy to kill tanks. hell in bad company 2 I was running as a sniper with c4 and I enjoyed wrecking tanks.

    and to say you want a tanks to be buffed is insanse. it will just make those hill campers invincible. no amount of armour will protect you from being killed in a tank. If 1 assault cant kill you another one will join and so on.
    the biggest problem is attrition but I dont have a good suggestion. perhaps on spawn only shells available and if you want a machine gun you need to get resupplies from inside of the play area or something
    I joined in BF3 and I do not remember BF3/4 having compulsive hill camping tanks. 
    The AT class was not also the meta anti infantry class which made them less numerous. The ranged AT options were easier to counter due to countermeasures unless you went for smaw/rpg which were harder to hit things with.
    There were no or less mobility issues allowing more chances for a tank to not get stuck until repaired due to systematic damage.
    The AT weapons that could quickly kill a tank were mines and C4 which were harder to use because it was a lot more dangerous to come close to a tank due to the protected top MGs and the fact that the tankers spent more time in 3rd person.
    .
    The tanks started going downhill in BF1 where the mobility mechanics became more prominent and the assault got all the good AT goodies and better ranged AT tools like AT grenades.
    In BFV the tanks became slower and much easier to get close and put mines and dynamite on, the dynamite has an even bigger range to throw, the AT launchers are very accurate and one of them has a pretty good RoF too.
    Every encounter with another tank or assaults  means an obligatory trip back to ressuply for the emergency fast repair etc.
    .
    It is no wonder that tankers, especially those who unlike me value a lot their K/D found that  keeping the safest distance possible to be their meta.
    Thus the tank slots get hoarded by drivers who contribute little to nothing and cannot die easily so cannot be replaced.
    .
    I am not sure what must be done but it has to be something that makes tankers to not feel that their perfect place is in the red zone. Personally I would not even mind the red zone to be gone

    I have to strongly disagree here, too. In BF3/4, three classes had the potential to take out one or multiple tanks with the standard loadout and with consistent results. It took three C4 to take out any vehicles on the ground, and depending on the launcher 2-5 hits with a launcher, of which you had seven, that also worked at realistic ranges of up to 100m with very decent reload times. In BF3 tanks also got critical when below 50 health. C4 was also easier and faster to use.
    So it was no issue taking out a tank in these two games at all, yet they are perceived more powerful back then. I put this down to the heartrate sensor, gunners being more prevalent and repair monkeys being more frequent. Also a significant portion of the game was played with 32 players, with a similar vehicle count. Mobility plays only a small role, as you were done goofed in any case if people got close.
    BF1 and BFV suffer from too many players with insufficient resources while vehicles offer no bonus for teamplay. Yet for personal gain, they are absolutely functional.

  • Hawxxeye
    4761 postsMember, Battlefield 3, Battlefield 4, Battlefield Hardline, Battlefield, Battlefield 1, CTE, BF1IncursionsAlpha, Battlefield V Member
    VincentNZ said:
    BF1 and BFV suffer from too many players with insufficient resources while vehicles offer no bonus for teamplay. Yet for personal gain, they are absolutely functional.

    Infantry can be a lot more efficient for personal gain as seen in the scoreboards as far as core and total kills are concerned.
    Personally I only run two medium tanks these days: the Archer and the Panzer IV. Both offer a spotting upgrade that can go a long way in providing more spotting than the entirety of the recons of the average team.
    .
    The only map where there is a critical case of personal gain tanks is Aerodrome and that is a map issue... maybe the first sector in panzerstorm breakthrough too
  • ninjapenquinuk
    1653 postsMember, Battlefield 4, Battlefield, Battlefield 1, CTE, Battlefield V Member
    I think the viability of  the MG gunner position has a huge bearing on balance.  In BFV they are only good for getting you to the deploy screen, whereas in BF4 you could have a good driver/MG gunner team run rampage through a map.  What's changed?  
  • bigiain
    153 postsMember, Battlefield 3, Battlefield 4, Battlefield Hardline, Battlefield, Battlefield 1, Battlefield V Member
    Hawxxeye said:
    bigiain said:
    That's the problem, they're trying to balance tanks and assaults so that the tanker on the flag is viable, but not have the tanker on the edge of the map be invincible. They need to look at their map design and stop having so much elevated map edges looking straight down on flags for a start. It's too late to fix that now.
    How about increasing the damage of tank attacks that have traveled less distance to reach their target and vice versa? To reward taking risks?
    Have the tank shell do more damage at close range? That makes sense and might encourage more movement. On the other hand, it's more complication. It seems to me that the number of variables already in play is why they've had so much difficulty balancing the vehicles and have ended up giving up in a way and disconnecting them from the game.
  • Hawxxeye
    4761 postsMember, Battlefield 3, Battlefield 4, Battlefield Hardline, Battlefield, Battlefield 1, CTE, BF1IncursionsAlpha, Battlefield V Member
    I think the viability of  the MG gunner position has a huge bearing on balance.  In BFV they are only good for getting you to the deploy screen, whereas in BF4 you could have a good driver/MG gunner team run rampage through a map.  What's changed?  
    the devs did not wanted a magical top mg before the advent of tank gunnner screens I guess... then they made the Stug which does have a magical top MG...
  • ninjapenquinuk
    1653 postsMember, Battlefield 4, Battlefield, Battlefield 1, CTE, Battlefield V Member
    Hawxxeye said:
    I think the viability of  the MG gunner position has a huge bearing on balance.  In BFV they are only good for getting you to the deploy screen, whereas in BF4 you could have a good driver/MG gunner team run rampage through a map.  What's changed?  
    the devs did not wanted a magical top mg before the advent of tank gunnner screens I guess... then they made the Stug which does have a magical top MG...
    I know im nearing 40 and my memory may be slipping - or is alcohol and kids to blame. I digress, but the top gunner was still exposed in BF4 tanks werent they, or am i going senile?
  • ElliotLH
    6797 postsMember, Battlefield 3, Battlefield 4, Battlefield Hardline, Battlefield, Battlefield 1, CTE, Battlefield V Member
    Hawxxeye said:

    ninjapenquinuk said:
    I think the viability of  the MG gunner position has a huge bearing on balance.  In BFV they are only good for getting you to the deploy screen, whereas in BF4 you could have a good driver/MG gunner team run rampage through a map.  What's changed?  

    the devs did not wanted a magical top mg before the advent of tank gunnner screens I guess... then they made the Stug which does have a magical top MG...

    I know im nearing 40 and my memory may be slipping - or is alcohol and kids to blame. I digress, but the top gunner was still exposed in BF4 tanks werent they, or am i going senile?

    Been a while since I've played BF4 but to my memory they had a camera like the Stug. Or maybe I'm going senile since it runs in my family.
Sign In or Register to comment.

Howdy, Stranger!

It looks like you're new here. If you want to get involved, click one of these buttons!