Active BF5 Milsims

Kendelie
postsMember, Battlefield 4, Battlefield, Battlefield 1, Battlefield V Member
are there any active BF5 Milsims i used to be apart of them in BF4 but thats long but died out

Comments

  • Terminator000001
    982 postsMember, Battlefield 3, Battlefield 4, Battlefield Hardline, Battlefield, Battlefield 1, Battlefield V Member
    This casual game is anything but a milsim. 🦆
  • Hawxxeye
    7504 postsMember, Battlefield 3, Battlefield 4, Battlefield Hardline, Battlefield, Battlefield 1, CTE, BF1IncursionsAlpha, Battlefield V Member
    This casual game is anything but a milsim. 🦆
    Worse It tries to both be a casual arcade game (Infantry be flippin out all over the plance, mon!) and a partial simulator (lol modular damage and turret limitations) at the same time
  • rainkloud
    553 postsMember, Battlefield 3, Battlefield 4, Battlefield, Battlefield 1, CTE, Battlefield V Member
    BF does best when it accepts its rightful place between COD arcade style and ARMA/Squad style levels of realism. It's been trending (slowly) towards what I call representative realism whereby real life battlefield mechanics like logistics and medics are represented (but not replicated in full) by in game systems that allow for some extra layers of depth such that players and teams that utilize and excel at these mechanics will generally prevail over those that don't. 

    BF still has a way to go though. They've tried to keep one foot it the door and hold on to some of the goofier stuff so as not to alienate the funtime/coolbreeze/yolourrolos crowd. What I don't think they have come to terms yet are A) these two styles are largely mutually exclusive and not going all in on a package of smart, complementary and cohesive mechanics has a massive detrimental effect on the eventual quality of the product and B) The funtime/coolbreeze/yolourrolos crowd has largely migrated to Fortnite, Apex Legends, Valorant etc.

    An example of the evolution that needs to happen is the regulation of weapon types. BF has long resisted this because they wanted everyone to have freedom to choose their class. But that level of freedom isn't compatible with an objective based game. You can't have a team of 32 snipers and expect to win. And it is incredibly difficult to balance weapons if you don't know how many will be on the map. Instead of giving the player complete control over their class they should be able to choose from purpose based squads. Most squads would have say 3 riflemen, a medic, and a LMG. But then you'd also have specialist squads like AT teams consisting of a couple of AT equipped players supported by a couple of riflemen and a medic. You'd also have a mortar squad, a sniper squad, and an HMG squad with similar consisting of similar class makeups. These would be clearly labeled (no surprises) so when you join a squad you can pick from any of the available classes for that squad type that are open. Each map would have a template such that vehicle heavy maps might have 1 or 2 more AT squads than say a close quarters infantry heavy map. Finally, you'd have a commander on each team and they would have a wild card squad the get to choose so they can dictate what kind of squad specialty that wildcard squad will be.

    The end result is that each map will have squads that naturally compliment one another (emphasizing the squad/teamwork aspect) along with class distribution that both makes more sense in terms of the objective and has a more contracted range of possibilities making it easier to balance weapons/upgrades/gadgets. People contend that class limitations are not a BF thing but they very much have been, always in fact. We need to look no further than vehicles to see that we've always restricted those and vehicles are effectively a class. We know that having 2 or 4 jets on a map is sensible but having 32 v 32 (unless that is what the map is specifically designed for) is nonsensical. But even if vehicles weren't historically restricted or BF never had them in the first place (hypothetically) saying infantry classes can't be restricted just because there is no precedent for it in the game is not itself grounds to prevent such a change in the future. If the argument to implement them is stronger than to not implement them then is should happen and I think the argument for them is overwhelming.

    Once you've accounted for roughly how many of each class can be on the battlefield and what kind of composition squad will consist of then you can start to do some really cool things with balance. For example a rifleman in a infantry squad can have one fixed gadget specific to that role along with one "free choice" slot while a rifleman in say a Mortar squad might have a different fixed gadget that compliments that squad type (perhaps ammo for the mortar). 

    Anyway, the TLDR is that BF needs to double down as a semi serious (but not hyper serious) military shooter and employ systems that reinforce that. That lucid dream anything goes ww2 theme and battle royal were soundly rejected because they attempted to please everyone and in doing so they ended up with this Frankenstein product that was shameless in its transparency to try to separate you from your money while delivering the least possible value for it.


  • Hawxxeye
    7504 postsMember, Battlefield 3, Battlefield 4, Battlefield Hardline, Battlefield, Battlefield 1, CTE, BF1IncursionsAlpha, Battlefield V Member
    edited June 30
    Class limitations contradict the sandbox nature of battlefield though.
    Even now the game is more of a sandbox territory than a team vs team game with predetermined roles like you see in football.
    .
    That said, I would not mind the high power scope BA rifles to become powerful pickup weapons only
  • DerDoktorMabuse
    255 postsMember, Battlefield, Battlefield 1, Battlefield V Member
    Maybe "Hell let loose" maybe something for you if youre looking for a WW2 MilSim, There is also a game called "Post Scriptum"... "Post Scriptum" feels lees refined but more milsimy than "Hell let loose". I decided myself for "Hell let loose" as it felt like a highly milsimy BF5 more or less... but both games have a lot of similarities...
  • rainkloud
    553 postsMember, Battlefield 3, Battlefield 4, Battlefield, Battlefield 1, CTE, Battlefield V Member
    Hawxxeye said:
    Class limitations contradict the sandbox nature of battlefield though.
    Even now the game is more of a sandbox territory than a team vs team game with predetermined roles like you see in football.
    .
    That said, I would not mind the high power scope BA rifles to become powerful pickup weapons only
    No doubt it reduces player agency in terms of class choice somewhat but you (assuming it is executed properly - never a given) gain a more rewarding team based experience by introducing more order and structure. But there's no reason we can't have our cake and eat it too. I'd be perfectly happy with a certain amount of servers set aside that don't have class limitations. That can even be an option for community games too.

    But to get back on topic, here are a couple of links that may help you OP (FYI - I am not a milsim or even a player of the game at this point)

    https://www.facebook.com/groups/battlefieldplatoons/

    https://twitter.com/MilsimNews?ref_src=twsrc%5Egoogle%7Ctwcamp%5Eserp%7Ctwgr%5Eauthor
Sign In or Register to comment.