community-update-classes

[undone ermine]

New Space for Class-related Discussion.

Our https://discord.com/channels/140933721929940992/1374763710169616525 has reached its limit for the amount of discussion and members possible, as such we are closing the thread.

Your thoughts and feedback on this subject do matter, as such we want to keep the conversation going.

Feel free to use this new temporary space to discuss the recent Community Update on Classes - Part One 🙂

You can read the Community Update by viewing the first post of this thread: #1374763710169616525 message

Please note, all commentary matters, be constructive and respectful to one another. We do continuously check in and record the discussions so that we can improve further.

[gleaming harness]

Positive vibes to the team; stick with it, one day at a time! Just keep listening and learning

[dusk ether]

There’s a max limit to thread chats? Interesting. Thanks though

Couldn’t send a message in that other thread for some reason, that must be why

[muted sandal]

So we're sticking to unrestricted weapons for now? Nice.

[wind oyster]

From what i understood its just for this test period then they lock classes and test that as a part 2

[dusk ether]

I’m on the fence about class weapon restrictions to be honest.

Loved choosing the right class for the situation and playing around their weaknesses, but the main benefit was being able to estimate where people are in the team.

Knowing assaults are up front, medics behind, supports behind them and scouts further back still made it easy to know where the support you need will be. Which from experience has been less consistent in 2042 when the potential range can vary from shotgun to sniper

But being able to play something like close quarters recon has been a blast, and I’ve got the gamesense to move to a position that fills in those weak spots without the enforced weapons

[keen scroll]

I personally still disagree with the unrestricted weapons. Class limits should be about trade off to reel in the power of each class across the board.
An engineer with an assault rifle can now go toe to toe with infantry and vehicles.
A support with a sniper rifle never has to get off the hill because ammo wont be a concern.
The assault and the recon are now redundant
Classes need strengths and weaknesses
Where is the weakness of a recon if he has a shotgun?
Where is the weakness of an engineer if he has a sniper rifle?

[sweet frost]

Threads aren't meant to be channel replacements, so yeah

Making it a channel too now hopefully helps with visibility and people not treating #general as somewhere to discuss labs

[undone ermine]

They are meant for holding bespoke and focused feedback, and that's what we use them for as they feed into a lot of systems for us 🙂

But yeah, perhaps not one as interesting as Classes 😛 😛

[muted sandal]

Not that I've played in any of the tests so far (hint hint, nudge nudge) but I still think class oriented weapon attachments are worth exploring with the new 100pt system. You could further incentivise bolties for Recon by making high-zoom scopes more expensive for others, extended mags for all but Assault, etc.

[wind oyster]

1- The weapons people play do not matter because it wont change wether they play their set role or not, people in bf4,1,5 99% of the times never use their kits smartly even if they have weapons that are better fit for the situations they are in
2- theres few pros to have with an open class system, it means that people wont be keen on picking a particular class (a class that they likely wont play anyway) for specific group of weapons but seeing as classes vary a lot in 1,4,5 i dont think itll be an issue or something that will change much of anything
3- Open class system clearly won’t make people play their kits better regardless, majority of players from older titles and current title dont actually play their kits effectively so at the end of the day it wont really matter what weapon they will pick

Im more concerned over gadgets than the weapons

[muted sandal]

Also from what I've seen from the singature weapon bonuses I still think Recon is weak when it comes to non-sniping roles like SpecFor. Even just buffing their sidearms, which frankly go hand-in-hand with a boltie would feel more impactful than an automated Hold Breath bonus.

[dusk ether]

I’d argue there are still benefits to each beyond just the weapon. Assaults can take damage after a fight, stim and then fight immediately after. They have far more aggression because of that kit. Recons, engineers don’t get that. Supports might, which would be my main concern. As falck AR in 2042 just feels like bf4 assault. Assaults should be strong for their space clearing tools - grenade launchers, explosives, smokes etc. The other two classes will struggle to be as effective but yeah I’d agree that for supports specifically that is a troublesome point

For instance, playing asssault with a carbine in 4 will feel different to an engineer or recon with a carbine. But give assault a pdw and engineer an ar and force them into it, then it becomes a different dynamic

[pure zinc]

Honestly facts with the first one

Ngl not class locked makes it easier for people to use any class they want

So more people play something other then assualt

As ARs are the best for kills

So

[wind oyster]

It entirely depends on the maps and whatnot aswell

[pure zinc]

Yeah

[dusk ether]

If the main concern is the positioning of teammates and having predictable access to the class you need, open weapons has a better best case but a worse worse case

[pure zinc]

But mostly none class locked makes it easier for people to choose anything other then Assault (which is the class with the best gun class ARs for kills)

[wind oyster]

For example if you have a map where ranged weapons are more strong but your team is overwhelmed because your revives and heals go down a lot by everyone picking a class with ranged weps with no real support effectivness

So if you could play a scout rifle with a supportive kit in that situation it would be much more ideal

[dusk ether]

Inverse too. I have plenty of experience with next to no supports in bf1 because the map was a smaller one and people couldn’t comfortably use the lmgs that had wind up accuracy

[wind oyster]

Not that it matters though

[vocal herald]

Hi When the code come?

[wind oyster]

Yeah

But again people just really do not play their roles anyway

So its not like we will see people use kits effectively regardless

[pure zinc]

Feel like I'm the only one who actually revives and stuff

[wind oyster]

Doesnt matter if locked or unlocked there will still be variety proven by older tiltes and 2042

[vocal herald]

???

[pure zinc]

I love giving ammo and heals to

[wind oyster]

With no one actually really playing the game

[dusk ether]

After spending some time thinking it over in depth I feel my main quarrel with the lack of it comes down to A) a class that is balanced around strong gadgets won’t have weak weapons to compensate. B) finding teammates (eg a support) when their weapon range can vary so drastically has been a pain in 2042, and would be again

[wind oyster]

Battlefield is usually 4-8 players actually playing the game and rest are ingame spectators watching others play the game

[pure zinc]

Lol

[wind oyster]

Thats why im more concerned over gadgets than weapons, at the end of the day weapons wont be a determing factor that wins the gunfight but generally your timing and positioning

[nova gull]

🤣 sounds like a typical Bf Server

[wind oyster]

But

[pure zinc]

Honestly taking in account that no class locked is makes it more appealing to use any class you want now since there isnt restrictions

A lot of times people use class for guns

Like Assault majority

So its good actually

[muted sandal]

Truth

[wind oyster]

You can compeltely get dogged on by some dude accidentally spamming extremely spammable gadgets

Spf launchers, scatter grenades, xm370 or whatever it was frag launcher

[dusk ether]

That’s where my point about the edge cases comes in. Cause say theoretically everyone in a match chooses the same AR cause they like it, it means supports, assaults, engies etc will all be at the same range. Which on paper sounds golden

[wind oyster]

I die more to random explosives than actual players that shoot guns at me

[pure zinc]

Yeah

[dusk ether]

The ‘sniper support’ thing isn’t bad because they have infinite ammo, it’s bad because it means a support coiuld either be right next to you in the fight if they have equipped a shotgun or so far back they could be in another map entirely with a sniper

[wind oyster]

Its hard to balance it because we are playing a timeline where modern weapons are highly versetaile tbh

[dusk ether]

But with locked weapons you’ll know that if a support is locked to lmgs, there will usually be a natural line of them behind the frontline to go find ammo when you need

[wind oyster]

Yeah but it doesnt matter because people wont raise in iq if you put them inside the team or far away

Its very uncommon for people to actually properly play their kits

[dusk ether]

It’s not a matter of them playing better because of it, or trying to push teamplay

If i need ammo, i can instinctively tell where the supports will be. If they have ammo placed by them I can more easily run to them and know where they can be intuitively

[wind oyster]

Youll be someone medic players doormat for 10 seconds just them laying ontop of you without reviving you or them never healing

[wind oyster]

Even if you can tell 70% of the time you will never get ammo from where you should get it from anyway

(Lol)

[dusk ether]

Weapon restrictions don’t push teamplay, it’s a mindset gained through an understanding of gamesense. But these restrictions can simply add less variance to teammate positions for when you yourself need to seek them out

[wind oyster]

You can stand infront of a support player and theyll stare through you like glass

[dusk ether]

If only there was a handy way to pick ammo off of people who refuse to drop theirs.

God I really hope that comes back in bf6.

[pure zinc]

Pretty sure it is

[wind oyster]

People pick classes based on primary weapons more often than picking them for the role

[finite osprey]

love to weapon free classes ppl can use there favorite class and weapon

[wind oyster]

But imo at the end of the day it just wont really mean much, bad players will still under value their role or class within the game, good players will play good with any weapon and kit anyway

[pure zinc]

@wind oyster you changed my mindset on no class locked

It makes it where you can use any class you want without worrying about what gun is on it

So other classes besides assualt will be used more

[finite osprey]

that was the problem wit bf3 and 4 ppl pick assault and never revive or heal

[wind oyster]

Its an issue in every bf game

[dusk ether]

Since I never took that approach I didn’t really consider it. I’m going mostly off my own experience

[wind oyster]

People dont even think once about paying attention to teammates usually

You can go in spec mode in bf1 and 5

They just stare at their teammates play

[dusk ether]

I’ll choose a class based off its overall strengths and weaknesses and enjoy working around its weapon type to perform its role

[wind oyster]

So stupid actually

Even with very clear displays of health amount and signs on top of teammates they just do not play their kits

[main python]

I'm gonna be the stubborn ass and say that if you get rid of class-locking weapons, completely disregarding whether people CHOOSE to play their role or not, BF's identity goes out the window. Simple as.

Atleast with weapon-locking, you have a higher chance of encouraging to play certain roles and certain playstyles. If that means some people play some classes more than others, then it just changes the gameplay dynamic to puts higher value on those classes, and being the person that decides to play it FOR the role is getting a significantly richer gameplay experience.

[wind oyster]

Thats what any normal person should do, but thats why open clsss doesnnt really matter

[pure zinc]

Yeah

[wind oyster]

A good player will function decently with any weapon in the game

[finite osprey]

class lock or not wont change if someone play there role or not

[pure zinc]

Problem is people care about kills more then their team

[wind oyster]

Whilist actually playing the class aswell

[main python]

But restricting someone to a series of weapons is likely to force them into the designed playstyle more often than not. That's inarguable. Having no restriction means the ceiling is infinite.

[finite osprey]

we had class lock in bf3 4 5 1 and ppl didnt play roles still the problem isnt the class locking

[wind oyster]

Classes vary a lot in older battlefield titles i dont think its an issue we should be concerned about tbh

Some maps are more prone to specific classes but you still see quite a few medics and scout players

Bf1 is a prime example but bf1 also did a perfect job with balancing the class weapons

[muted sandal]

BTW have you seen the new Signature Weapon bonuses? They're closing the gap, I'd say.

[dusk ether]

Haven’t seen any leaked stuff but I’m assuming they are the same as 2042’s

[wind oyster]

You had autoloading extended which contested good in cqc, gen liu if you wanted to contest people in further ranges and then you had good amount of mid range weps that were good til 40m (howell, farquhar) etc

[celest gorge]

BF1 did terrible with balancing the classes. I never played medic because I HATED the guns...I always play medic.

[dusk ether]

Really? Medic guns felt amazing

[finite osprey]

medic guns were mid

[dusk ether]

The iron sight cqc ones are more fun to use than automatics for me

[wind oyster]

In support class you had burton that contested good against smg type weapons in cqc, bar, madsen for mid ranges etc etc

Assault had quite a few good midrange weapons

Ribey for example contested really good til 25m

You had a semi auto rifle in scout class (m1903 exp)

So you had a varied mix of weapons still

[main python]

People absolutely played their role in a lot of circumstances, especially around chokepoints. If the game is up in the air, and atleast during the initial rush, yeah there isn't a need for strict gameplay, but when you start getting pigeon-holed, that's when the class identity comes out. Between medics rezzing, supportrs resupply, assaults smoking, and recon taking potshots through the smokes - that dynamic 100% works.

[wind oyster]

Thats like 8 players that are actively playing and are also top scoring

[celest gorge]

What's wrong with a sniper that has an AR? If you play the class for TUGS and a respawn beacon, but want to be that role for the team, why not?

[wind oyster]

View the the majority that are bottoming

They do nothing

[mystic escarp]

EXACTLY DUDE

[muted sandal]

Excuse me, we're called Recon not Sniper.

[finite osprey]

good fantasy

[pure zinc]

💀

[celest gorge]

@muted sandal you know what I mean.
What we DON'T want (imo) are the special operator abilities.

[main python]

And, those aren't the players you cater to anyway. They're probably enjoying themselves regardless. The class fantasy is basically all the BF identity centers around. Aside from audio-design and destruction, large player battles aren't particularly unique anymore.

If you have an opportunity to make certain player classes shine and offer those to players that wish to take that, it's rewarding for those that do. It's not like WITH class restrictions, people aren't playing or aren't enjoying the game. BUT, if you give everyone everything off the rip, they have no incentive one way or the other.

[pure zinc]

@wind oyster whats your opinion about no class locked guns

[wind oyster]

You must be very wishful if you think that the same person doesnt supply teammates and sits on the hill with a scout rifle will automatically start doing it with an AR

[mystic escarp]

im pretty sure he wants it open :/

[muted sandal]

100% correct

[pure zinc]

For me there are positives and negatives

I really dont care much

[wind oyster]

Its fine either way imo i do not care if its locked or open

[mystic escarp]

i honestly think it sucks, its one of the main reasons why i hate 2042

i dont want a repeat of that mess

[wind oyster]

Im not going to see better teamplay

[muted sandal]

What class do you mostly play?

[wind oyster]

Im not going to lose or win more gunfights

It doesnt matter

[mystic escarp]

im an assault main everywhere else but i main support in 2042 for the ammo

[wind oyster]

Jesus vhrist

[mystic escarp]

i dont only keep ammo to myself tho

if teammate needs i give

[muted sandal]

What about gun then?

[mystic escarp]

i think i use ARs in 2042

[wind oyster]

You can literally bring what 3-4 different ammo types with 30 different magazines why do you need an ammo crate

[celest gorge]

I wouldn't be surprised if the whole community just adopts the AEK like in BF3. It's the only gun you see in that game, minus the PDW snipers in TDM

[pure zinc]

So true

[muted sandal]

Sounds to me like you're against sharing your toys with others tsk tsk

[wind oyster]

And the rest of your team dies within a minute anyway its not like theyll ever run out of ammo

[mystic escarp]

yeah

if there ever a time though i do give tho

i like bf1 classes personally, i kinda feel that 5 classes is a good thing for bf because then medic doesnt need to be lumped into another class

weapon locking in that game is the strictest though

[wind oyster]

Idk it doesnt matter at end of the day

People are kinda overthinking it

[mystic escarp]

honestly open weapons is something i wouldnt care about just my 2042 experiences make me think its almost impossible to do correctly.

if i actually see open weapons that are fun i would be fine

i just think it would be like really hard to do right

[wind oyster]

A lot of players say this because of 2042 ptsd imo

[mystic escarp]

and i like class dynamics from older bf games anyway

especially bf1

[wind oyster]

We still have the same form of classes its just the primary weapons we have an open selection to

[main python]

It doesn't ignore the fact that it's the first line in the series to seriously deviate from the formula. And whether you wanna quote initial launch performance as it's metric for failure, it evenmtually got to a stable state, and not nearly as many people returned it post-fix.

[mystic escarp]

one thing i heard is that only restrict snipers for class weapons

and honestly that seems way eaiser to balance

[wind oyster]

People can still play medic but with more suited weapons for the maps which gives more options and gameplay choices in that sense

[celest gorge]

That's one thing that made BF1 the most annoying though. I hated the guns for the classes I normally played. The M1 Gerand had less power than pistols, medic was ruined.

[wind oyster]

But

People are bad sadly

They dont play kits

[pure zinc]

True

[mystic escarp]

do you mean 5, the m1 garand wasnt a thing in ww1. the US army had 1903 springfields

[pure zinc]

And no class locked makes it easier to play class

[mystic escarp]

i played assault for the smgs and tank destroying in bf1

[muted sandal]

You should try an experiment where you record your gameplay sessions and go over the times when snipers actually made any sort of substantial impact on the game.

[pure zinc]

LMAO

SO TRUE

[main python]

This literally makes no sense. If all barriers of the class are removed, you're able to go far and beyond the original identity of the class. The classic BF formula classes don't exist at that point.

[wind oyster]

This is exactly what i mentioned earlier “people pick specific classes for particular weapons”

[pure zinc]

IT DOESNT DO SHIT

[celest gorge]

I hardly played the game BECAUSE of the classes. That's the problem.

[mystic escarp]

i also pick for gadgets, i said i liked tank destroyings which are the gadgets

[pure zinc]

Are the classes the guns or the gadgets?

[mystic escarp]

i just take in both factors

[main python]

Easily a combination of both. Without question.

[mystic escarp]

that is what i think

[wind oyster]

So in some more assault dominated maps (because of primary) will decrease amount of other classes (that are much more needed within current situation) purely because their guns dont pair up with assault weapons

[muted sandal]

Did you ever play BF2?

[pure zinc]

But by locking guns on each class it makes it more incentivesed to use the glass for the gun rather then the gadgets itself

[main python]

But for the people who DECIDE to play those lesser played classes on those maps, it makes them significantly more valuable and adds a whole lot of opportunity for them to live that class fantasy.

Absence of balance of all classes on an individual map doesn't mean classes are bad.

[sharp depot]

I think bf4 did it best each class had it's own unique category of weapons as well as carbine category and dmr category

[mystic escarp]

i feel like open classes could work if lmgs and snipers were limited to thier respective classes and engie and assault be balanced to where theyre both good

[keen scroll]

They will if they want to heal or resupply themselves. That's why the supply crates are AOE. It doesnt matter if someone's being specifically resupplied or not because it applies to everyone in a vicinity

[wind oyster]

A very small portion of players actually play for kits

[mystic escarp]

i play for both weapons and kits

[wind oyster]

Ye anyone should

But they dont

[mystic escarp]

i feel like classes being only kit oreiented would be real odd

[pure zinc]

I try to play for the kit but just the problem is the guns on the kit I might not like

Like Engineer doesnt have ARs which are carbines but better

Less range, less accuracy, less stability

[celest gorge]

When the guns don't have the gumption to stand up to anyone, yet the gadgets are good, it's not worth playing...It's worth finding a different class

[wind oyster]

It would work better ideally

But no one cares for kits so its not impactful

[main python]

Yes, but they're more powerful in close quarters. That's the point of a carbine in the BF universe. They're naturally more compact. It's meant to fgill the tank crew fantasy.

[mystic escarp]

i just feel like at least snipers should be locked

support or whatever shouldnt have them

[pure zinc]

They are the same as Carbines but better

Ars are just as good but better stats

[languid pine]

Best argument for not class locking weapons I've heard: Why class lock LMG's to Engineer if Assault can just equip a drum mag to their AR

[wind oyster]

No one has fun playing a weapon in a map thats just extremely unsuited thouhh

[muted sandal]

I always felt like a chump wanting to play an SMG on an infantry map in BF4. I was literally robbing myself and the team from any useful utility by doing so.

[mystic escarp]

because extended mag uses up attachment points, while lmgs come with big mag

[main python]

But if you're in an engineers territory, IE the 10 meters around their tanks or vehicles they're commanding, trying to repair, or taking cover behind, you lose to a carbine.

[keen scroll]

I've seen a lot of people say the attachments will make class specific weapons redundant if you can convert a weapon into another class via attachments.
To which I argue, then you balance the attachments the make a weapon the best in its class for your comfort, and turning it into anything else makes it pretty weak.
If you want to turn an AR into an LMG all you get is a very weak LMG, if you wanna turn an SMG into a Carbine all you get is a really weak carbine, etc etc. Attachments for weapons should be about making the best gun for your class and how you play it and accepting the trade offs.

[pure zinc]

I'd just stop repairing and gun them down then repair again

[mystic escarp]

yes

[wind oyster]

Mgs and ars will probably have ttk, rpm and damage range differences still i imagine

[mystic escarp]

i hope bf6 has like g36 and m4 rifles

[main python]

Not if you're class locked, as you should be, then the domain around vehicles belongs to the engineers as it should be.

That's how you create unique scenarios around classes.

[pure zinc]

But Ars are the same as carbines but ARs have better stats across the board

Irl they aren't

[muted sandal]

BTW Support will have the sprint-to-fire penalty removed in BF6 due to their class bonus. That's huge.

[main python]

Carbines often have higher fire rate. They're the inbetween of ARs and SMG/PDWs in the BF games.

[wind oyster]

Would be a bit too senseless to add insane drum mags and have no real disadvantages over lmgs

[mystic escarp]

i feel like carbines should be like a mix between ar and smg stat wise in bf6

[pure zinc]

But in battlefield (as game) they are essentially the same but better stats

[mystic escarp]

like almost like a high cal smg but not quite

[celest gorge]

The best balanced game was BF P4F. None of the guns were "bad" and none of the gadgets were "bad". The guns were fair across the board stat wise. That game was great.

[muted sandal]

AEK is still better than Carbines in BF4

[keen scroll]

Battlefield 4 balanced carbines by making them the middle ground between assaults and engineers. The perfect medium range weapon that often became very niche depending on the map

[pure zinc]

Well they might be better for closer engagements but objectively (as conquest is concerned) ARs are generally the best for most maps

[wind oyster]

I think bf should either

[main python]

Okay, but you're intentionally choosing to ignmore the gamneplay dynamics then. If you're purely l;ooking at weapon stats, then be my guest. Assults usually engage at longer ranges from behind cover with slower fire rate, more accurate, and more powerful rounds.

An Engineer in their domain, CQB, with a carbine will often out-maneuver a Assault, especially when vehicles have more than one person.

[mystic escarp]

if bf really wants most guns open, it is neccessary that snipers and maybe Lmgs should be locked

[wind oyster]

Heavily restrict weapons and add like a pinch of vairerty for different cqc, range type situations (that bf1 did really good) give specific weapons to x classes but with universal weapons like bf4 did or open class

[mystic escarp]

i made type i meant lmg not smg, i just fixed it

[muted sandal]

Are you talking about BF4 because that's frankly fanfic at this point

[keen scroll]

I still think classes should only have one sub weapon type to compliment their main weapons.
Assaults get Ar's and battle rifles
Engineers get SMG's and shotguns
Supports get LMG's and carbines
And recons get DMR's and Bolt actions

[modest flint]

Out of curiosity I haven’t played any of the tests yet but are we going back to bf3-4 class style where there’s dedicated roles or more towards bf2042 with the do whatever you want but thiers buffs to using specific stuff?

[keen scroll]

The latter

[main python]

Welcome to the conversation.

[languid pine]

I think recons should get machine pistols too

[wind oyster]

This tbh

[muted sandal]

Recon is most useful with capable CQC weapons so no thank you! I'll settle for Carbines but nothing less...

[mystic escarp]

recon maybe should have like a mac-10 or like that three burst beretta

[keen scroll]

Perhaps. But nothing like rhe glock from 2042 for the love of god

[mystic escarp]

but only if their the only sniper class

[languid pine]

Good thing 2042 isn't a real Battlefield game

[keen scroll]

That's what the DMR's are for

[muted sandal]

Okay, we get BF4 Glock

[wind oyster]

The weapon really doesnt matter as much of the gadgets im so stressed about gadget balance being horrible again

[muted sandal]

No deal!

[main python]

I think pistols are one of those things that should be universal of all classes. Pistols are like a signature, everyone has their preference no matter how impractical.

[modest flint]

Dang maybe im stuck in the past but i REALLY like the older system it made every class feel essential and everyone had thier role to stick to

[mystic escarp]

that also works, and id prefer that probably

[mystic escarp]

agreed

[main python]

I used my Rex on every class

[muted sandal]

That hasn't been a thing since BF2

[finite osprey]

thats is what u call nostalgia

[keen scroll]

If you stick a red dot on an AR-15 and give it a fast firing trigger, you've fulfilled the cqb niche for the recon

[wind oyster]

They still get their roles

They just get to pick a larger selection of weapons and be more versetaile

[languid pine]

How about instead of Recon holding breath longer there's like a 1 second period when you first scope where there's no glint

[muted sandal]

I need my full-autos for clearing sites if you want those T-UGS to cover the whole objective

[wind oyster]

Hell nah

[mystic escarp]

i feel like if they REALLY want snipers open to all, make other classes unable to breath or like so short that it is almost pointless. in the military, you have special training if you get a sniper. I really feel like snipers should be restricted, even if everytthing else isnt

[muted sandal]

That's actually kinda based

[keen scroll]

Solution: give T-UGS greater range. They were originally designed to be a heads up for recons getting snuck up on anyways

[modest flint]

Recon should honestly get a sway buff or something so if your prone you have little to no sway because you know… you are a professional marksman or they can mount without a bipod idk im just excited to play ts

[muted sandal]

That's for campers 🤮 I'm a PTFO player...

[wind oyster]

Bipods exist stoll

[keen scroll]

And a greater range allows you to cover more of the objective

[wind oyster]

Oh nvm

You edited

[modest flint]

Yea thats mb i shouldve made it clear about the being able to prop up almost universally

[wind oyster]

Hell no

[mystic escarp]

snipers should be restricted and maybe lmgs too if clases are mostly open

[wind oyster]

Dont buff free wallhacks

They shouldnt be a thing in the first place

[main python]

This is about as far as I'd go and be okay with. Of all weapons, LMGs and Sniper arguably have the most identity.

[mystic escarp]

why didnt many people complain about spotting in bc2?

[mystic escarp]

same here

[muted sandal]

We could do that with actual dedicated servers like in BF4 with limited sniper slots

[keen scroll]

They could change how the tugs work. Instead of marking the enemy player specifically it just informs there's enemies on the objective and then you go look for them

[modest flint]

Simpler times back then🙏 people just wanted to shoot each other and capture points

[pure zinc]

But the line issue is for people that choose a class for the weapon and wanna play let's just say engineer but they dont play becusse it doesnt have ARs.

[wind oyster]

Objective marker does it anyway

[muted sandal]

I'd say shotguns and snipers, the rest is mostly just automatics

[pure zinc]

It stops people from playing the class they want

[languid pine]

Recon:

• Faster bolt racking
• Less sway
• No glint for .5 seconds when aiming down sight

Get out of here with this longer breath holding stuff.

[wind oyster]

No glint is too broken

[languid pine]

It's .5 seconds

[muted sandal]

Based 💯 %

[wind oyster]

It takes .200 to make a shot

[mystic escarp]

snipers really should be the only limited weapon type (maybe lmgs too tho)

[keen scroll]

Given the ranges recons operate at, they have to stay scoped in all the time to see the people they want to shoot so you've changed nothing with a half second no glint

[wind oyster]

Im not aiming at people for half a second lol

[mystic escarp]

quick scoping exists i think, i dont usually recon tho

its still a buff anyway

[keen scroll]

Quick scoping ranges make the glint completely redundant

[languid pine]

It doesn't change nothing. It's a slight advantage.

[wind oyster]

Glints allow for better reaction

[mystic escarp]

fair

i really feel though that snipers and possibly lmgs should be restricted if they want everythign else to be open

[muted sandal]

LMGs aren't problematic enough for that tbh

[mystic escarp]

thats why i say possibly, i just feel like there is class identity with lmgs that id like to preserve

[muted sandal]

Also in case you didn't know, Support completely removes the sprint-to-fire delay from them, making them actually usable

[languid pine]

Engineer:

• Better recoil control on LMG's
• See vehicle health from far away
• +1 rocket ammo

[mystic escarp]

i feel like lmg buffs should only go to support. besides that oopsie, that sounds decent

[muted sandal]

Unbased 🤮

[main python]

They could be. Bring back suppression from BF3 and apply it to only LMGs. I know everyone was a baby about it back then, but it made LMGs super oppresive which they should be. If you're throwing down 100 rounds down range 5 times faster than an assault, your damage shouldn't be high, but your impact should be.

I don't like high damage LMGs. I like suppression which is their purpose.

[fresh cliff]

The fact that they had to turn this into a seperate channel should show how much the community hates this lol

[mystic escarp]

suppression should be a thing for LMGs, as they are suppresive fire guns IRL

[muted sandal]

Only Engineers can equip RPGs in BF6, and LMG is Support's weapon

[mystic escarp]

just dont make it over the top tho

[languid pine]

Medic:

• Head twice as big
• Bight flashing camo
• 50% health

[mystic escarp]

💀

[languid pine]

/j

[eager briar]

Command not found

j is not a valid command.

Use the help command to see the list of all commands.

[main python]

Yeah, suppression could do without the blur. Just do what they did in Red Orchestra. Higher aim punch.

[languid pine]

Oh my b

[muted sandal]

Please do not mention suppression around me and my children ever again, creep! I'm a certified hater since 2012 https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=K2QjpLmOKz8

[waxen cypress]

"Better recoil control on LMG's" better than this? there's no recoil management at all they are all laser guns

[main python]

shrug It's what it should be. Even for support mains like myself, there's been a long going conversation about how we're just the "worse" assault class. Frankly, I don't think I should be doing as much damage as an assault. I should be good at keeping heads down.

Make me accurate. Make me oppressive. Leave the damage to the other classes.

[muted sandal]

FWIW I was also a support main in BF3, but mainly for the C4's anti-vehicle capabilities using the M27 IAR as an AR... It's also why I'm completely fine with unrestricted weapons.

[celest gorge]

I support both restricted and unrestricted IF the gun balance can be just that, balanced.

I'd rather have a toss of a coin vs always losing to one type of gun.

[fresh cliff]

One of my biggest fears with this is that Assault will be basically useless. Why pick assault with it's grenade launchers when you can pick engineer and have a rocket launcher? or pick support and have infinite ammo? or pick recon and have automatic marking?

[muted sandal]

This is why: https://x.com/temporyal/status/1926034548845916406

[waxen cypress]

it's utopia. Impossible to have a perfect balance. Unrestricted means chasing the meta like in COD.

[celest gorge]

BF4 had automatic spotting, nobody really used that attatchment

P4F had very good balance and it had restricted classes

[muted sandal]

I mean, every BF has had OP guns and balancing patches. It won't be any different in BF6. Unrestricted or not.

If anything we should be asking for faster patches.

[celest gorge]

Yeah, great point there

[fresh cliff]

Oh

So they're throwing in the towel on having to make choices when you are making a loadout? This sounds like a worse version of the plus system. The only difference is that the plus system didn't allow you to literally swap between shotguns and snipers; just figuratively

[waxen cypress]

I'm disappointed there's no official space to leave feedback at.

[muted sandal]

Yell into the void, it usually helps.

[main python]

That's a horrible assault weapon trait. Give them taped mags or something. Faster reloads. Good lord.

[celest gorge]

they'd be swamped with people who hate one or the other, while people like us are willing to consider both sides

[waxen cypress]

Or don't give "traits" at all.

[celest gorge]

Engie traits are A**

[muted sandal]

It's not bad once you realize that Assault relies on their stim to stay alive. Faster weapon swap is great for both that, grenade throwing and sidearm switching. An absolute banger for fast-paced gamers.

[celest gorge]

this isn't COD, we reload not switch to our sidearm

[finite osprey]

what

[muted sandal]

Remember...

[finite osprey]

switching weapons is now cod LMAOA

[waxen cypress]

well speak for yourself

[main python]

This guy is lost. Lol

[celest gorge]

"reloading is faster than switching to your sidearm" - COD hint in loading screens

wait

i got that backwards

[fresh cliff]

That isn't even a Cod thing. It's a thing in literally every game where swapping guns is faster than reloading. This includes games like insurgency

[muted sandal]

hahah

[finite osprey]

bf players blame everything on cod man tears

[waxen cypress]

it's a thing irl too lol

[celest gorge]

Well, everyone took my joke literally...

[fresh cliff]

basing an argument off of irl stuff is dumb imo, but yeah

[muted sandal]

IRL I lay down and bleed to death, pulling out a picture of my dog as the light fades away

[celest gorge]

IRL they used to take LSD to be semi-bullet-resistant (World War 2)

LSD in Battlefield when?

[muted sandal]

Bro if soldiers took LSD they'd be seeing shimmers and movement everywhere...

[celest gorge]

I need sleep

[balmy zodiac]

bro

where is my code

i choose today

[celest gorge]

2042 would've been a good game if the character abilities weren't in it, that's my only stance on it, be it unrestricted or restricted

[pure zinc]

Even with them it wouldn't of been a good game

The problem was its glitches and bugs and also the maps

[fresh cliff]

This honestly may be one of the worst decisions I've seen regarding this new game. Even worse than no class-locked weapons

Allowing people to have 3 different range types (if you include pistols) just completely ruins all pre-planning. With a second primary, you can carry a sniper, AR, and shotgun(if they have a pistol shotgun like 4) all at the same time

And even if they don't include pistol shotguns, there's still the high power pistols like revolvers.

[pure zinc]

They all sucked

Too big

[waxen cypress]

what about the bodies having the weight of a doll being thrown around like in skyrim?

[muted sandal]

If they ever make a BFV sequel I bet Assault will get Pervitin instead of stims

[frosty gorge]

I really hope DICE reverses the decision to NOT lock weapons. Without locking or experimenting, the system will become dull, repetitive, and lacking the soul that BF always had. Class-restricted weapons represent 70% of the identity of the classes. The new system ignores the human factor. No matter how many bonuses you put in, there will be 15 medics camping as snipers. In my opinion, the best system was BF1, but if we wanted to add BF4, it would be a middle ground.

[celest gorge]

Here me out, it's not a "realistic battlefield" like Squad...that's one of the things we all love. We like the arcade shoot-em-up, run-and-gun of Battlefield.

BF3, BF4 were a far cry from BF2. BF2 was the "Squad like" era. The majority of us LOVE BF3, BF4.

Remember when you couldn't run 8 miles continuously?

[fresh cliff]

Imo Battlefield is an "authentic" shooter. It feels realistic and immersive, but doesn't actually have that much realism

[celest gorge]

Do classes really matter if we're immersed, as long as the gunplay is fair?

[main python]

BF2 was 'Squad' like because of large maps and wide-open spaces. You get the same effect on smaller maps if you reduce player speed. Reducing player speed means relying on class identity more. BF2042 was too damned fast.

[waxen cypress]

Yes.

In battlefield, yes.

[celest gorge]

Okay, quick question for you all...do we like the "sectors" (A1, A2) or "flags" (A, B, C) better?

My opinion, flags.

This is more important than classes in my opinion.

[waxen cypress]

flags, but it's not more important. even sectors had "flags" in it.

[main python]

I super don't think this is important. You wanna talk about players just playing the game, players will just lemming with the group to the next point. Whether it's 3 mini points or one large point, the majority of the player base is going to one or two points at a time.

[copper bobcat]

Battlefield needs to evolve and stay relevant. Having a closed class system doesnt add anything to the game other than being forced to play a specific class to use a particular gun.
The ability to use all weapons allows you to evolve with the flow of the game and adapt accordingly.
All forcing class specific weapons will do is create the same old boring meta playstyles from previous games.

[celest gorge]

Most of the time the sectors were neutral, one team had a flag each, ruining the ticket drain of capping

[fresh cliff]

Honestly, I feel like removing class-locked weapons is going to be like Hardline removing the military theme. It could be good if they do it right. It just won't feel like a true Battlefield to the majority of the community.

The game could be the best game possible, but removing one of the core aspects of BF will make the game be hated on by the community until people actually remember if it was any fun

[celest gorge]

Hardline was not bad though. The PR for the game and public opinion were tainted from the start

[untold tide]

i actually agree with this sentiment. It seems like people are against any and all change half the time

[copper bobcat]

I think the 2042 class system is GENUINELY amazing, the game isnt made "unreadable" because of it, its enhanced because it adds creativity and chaos to the mix, and should be retained. Similar to the Plus System.

[main python]

Wrong. Change =/= relevance. Memorable experiences and consistency = relevance.

All forcing class specific weapons will do is create the same old boring meta playstyles from previous games.

Literally every game is devoid of the experience that Battlefield games give. That's what makes Battlefield popular. It's the happy medium between games like Red Orchestra and Call of Duty.

[waxen cypress]

Evolving doesn't mean letting go the core of what made you known to the public. I can evolve as a person but be myself at the same time. About the "meta playstyle" - sure there always was a class "better" than the other but right now we're talking about chasing the best GUN while obviously playing (99% of cases) as a medic because heal.

[fresh cliff]

That's kinda what I'm saying. The game could be good. The public opinion from removing a core aspect will be terrible though and taint the PR from the start

[copper bobcat]

The core aspects of BATTLEFIELD were never the CLASS systems. It was strapping C4 to a buggy and jumping off a bridge into a tank, or jumping out of your jet and shooting your pursuer with an RPG

The BATTLEFIELD EXPERIENCE is the chaotic sandbox

[fresh cliff]

In fact, HL is my favorite Battlefield. I'm just saying that this is a terrible PR decision

[main python]

But for players who wantred to keep their boots on the ground and stuck in a more realistic experience, no other game provided that experience without needing to look at commands for 10 hours or require hoofing for 5 minutes to get to the action.

[rotund agate]

that's like 10% of the total game, what about the other 90% of the time you're playing?

[waxen cypress]

I agree. Battlefield was a middle ground between realism and arcade.

[rotund agate]

we just say "fuck it" and chase trailer moments until people get bored and leave?

[main python]

I think the CBT was some peak Battlefield juice. I didn't care for full launch tho. Not sure why full launch felt so different from hardline's CBT.

[copper bobcat]

Battlefield is not and has NEVER been a MilSim - Its an ARCADE shooter. It has realistic bullet physics and drop, and simulated bullets with travel time and things like that, but its never been a rigid milsim.

[fresh cliff]

Battlefield is quite literally a military combined arms shooter with classes being a main feature in Every Single Battlefield Ever Made

Even 2042 cause they realized that it's one of the most important aspects of a BF

[main python]

No one is arguing it's a milsim. Class specialization =/= milsim. Lol.

[rotund agate]

2042 was specifically because of community whining and they super half assed it lol

[copper bobcat]

Only reason they added classes to BF2042, is because the "community" complained so much for it D:

The loudest voices arent always the most correct.

[waxen cypress]

It has? Yes, in bf 1. Right now it's all laser guns.

[main python]

And how many of them stuck around after 2042 got fixed? Almost none. So, no, those aren't the main players that are speaking for the community. They're a vocal minority.

[fresh cliff]

The "community" was 90% of everyone who plays BF

[main python]

Scratch that. I misread. I thought you meant the initial launch classes.

[copper bobcat]

If you dont evolve you get left behind. I want to play this franchise well into my 40s not have it die off because of old mechanics that genuinely arent relevant to whether or not its "like it used to be"

[main python]

Disregard

[main python]

Battlefield doesn't need to evolve when there is no other game on the market that does what Battlefield does. Not a single one to the extent BF has.

[fresh cliff]

Evolving doesn't mean disregarding the core parts of your franchise. That's like saying that ARMA should add skins and become faster because it's the industry trend

[muted sandal]

Rightfully so in that case. I only returned to 2042 for the class rework.

[waxen cypress]

if you copy others to follow the trend and not be "left behind" you'll just be a poor imitation.

[fresh cliff]

If everyone "evolved" with the trends, there would be no point in having different franchises cause it'd all be the same game

[waxen cypress]

Please tell me how popular the Battle Royale mode was in BF V?

[copper bobcat]

If you dont play 2042 because it used to be bad and now its gotten 1000% better, and your only reason is you dont like it because reasons then you're not a true fan of the franchise and you cannot see how much effort DICE has put into fixing it. Nostalgia is a wonderful thing, it makes people forget how almost every mainline battlefield has released broken and buggy, BF4 is legendary now, when it was released it was a hot mess, for about 3 years, until the CTE saved it.
BF1 was hands down amazing, but not without its issues, and the community constantly complaining about BFV stopped the devs from actually making it as amazing as it could have been.

[muted sandal]

(That's what Battlefield has been doing since BC2/BF3)

[copper bobcat]

The idea that battlefield is "battlefield" unless it forces players into classes is ridiculous

[main python]

Cringe No-True-Scotsman fallacy. Stopped reading at 'true fan'.

[copper bobcat]

Ok?

[rotund agate]

they didn't fix it though, "classes" are half assed and the maps are still bad and the guns are still laser beams and the input still doesnt work

[copper bobcat]

Dont read it if you dont like it?

I'm voicing my opinions 🤷‍♂️

[fresh cliff]

Tbf, this was mainly because it was locked behind the main game's paywall

[waxen cypress]

True but I remember stats showing like 5% of those who bought the game played it.

[warm moss]

Guys I want to ask , where should I ask questions about labs?

[copper bobcat]

@rotund agate I play on console and 2042 has peak gunplay and movement, I genuinely love it. Not sure what platform you play on

Dont ask about Labs

[rotund agate]

oh that explains a lot

[rotund agate]

one of the emails you got supposedly has an email address you can contact

[warm moss]

I got the test qualification of lab and filled in the test time, and then I received three emails telling me to participate in the test.

But there is no cdk that can be exchanged for games in any email.

[copper bobcat]

Look, all of you who are against me for liking the open class system, write a long well written explanation of what YOU FEEL is a BATTLEFIELD game. Explain, you reasoning, and why - What makes it FEEL like a battlefield game.

[fresh cliff]

"The idea that battlefield is 'battlefield' unless it forces players to deal with vehicles is ridiculous"

This is how you sound. You are actively denying a core aspect of the franchise. What you are saying is the same as if someone said that CoD could be CoD without loadouts

[main python]

As long as you chose a date and it shows scheduled for you, you should be in. I think you'll receive a follow-up email during the time you signed up for once you're let in.

[copper bobcat]

Thats not what I said at all.. 💀

[warm moss]

You mean I should send an email to ea's mailbox to ask my question?

[fresh cliff]

It's basically the same thing. Vehicles are on equal grounds with classes when it comes to how important they are to BF

[main python]

It's rich to ask for this kind of engagement when you open your argument by saying that anyone who didn't like the latest game, a commercial flop, isn't a true fan. You're not open to hearing the criticism.

[copper bobcat]

All of the alleged information if you were accepted will be on this discord somewhere.

[copper bobcat]

Again, thats not what I said at all, but you continue to fight me on issues instead of actually doing what I asked.

Theres a lot of division here, and there is a common ground. We all love Battlefield games.

Its not a simple YES or NO to open or closed classes.

Its highly devisive

[main python]

If you dont play 2042 because it used to be bad and now its gotten 1000% better, and your only reason is you dont like it because reasons then you're not a true fan

Pure bad faith here. There's been plenty of discussion here so far, and you've categorized it as 'just cuz'. So, no, not worth engaging with, and it is what you said.

[warm moss]

Yes, the first email asked me to choose the test time.The second email told me that the test had started.The third email still tells me that the test has started, but it is different from the second email.None of these emails told me how to get labs. There is no labs in Ea App, and I have not been given cdk to exchange it.

[copper bobcat]

so maybe lets work together to HELP DICE instead of arguing with our nostalgia glasses on

[waxen cypress]

Imagine me playing since 2005, honestly trashing latest game after one week because awful, being called not a true fan of the franchise.

[copper bobcat]

If you dont play a game because "hurr bad" then you're low IQ, especially if the game was fixed. Battlefield 4 is a prime example of this, the game was broken as fudge and fixed over time and is now considered one of the BEST games in the franchise

I'm only saying what I genuinely beleive to be true, I'm sorry if I offended you

[waxen cypress]

Hurr bad ? BF 42? I could list 50 things that are wrong in it.

[copper bobcat]

Imagine me, being 38 and played every battlefield game on PC and Console not knowing what a "true battlefield experience" is

[copper bobcat]

Like fr anyone?

[fresh cliff]

I agree that both have nuanced benefits, but removing something that has been a part of the franchise for so long and is such a core aspect of class choice is just stupid

People act like choosing a class for the weapon is bad. That's the whole point of assault though. Pure Assault has bad gadgets, but good guns. With this new system, Assault is basically useless (ignoring the blatantly terrible decision they made to give Assault Two Primaries)

[waxen cypress]

Can't wait to use shotguns in close quarters and snipers for long ones.

[copper bobcat]

But what if its a good thing? - You are comparing apples with pears, this game needs to save the franchise, if you want to play a BF with locked clases, play BF3,4,HL,1,5? They already exist and if they're as amazing as you're purporting then why do you care about BF6?

[muted sandal]

2042 sucked in a lot of ways but not because it had unrestricted primary weapons.

[fresh cliff]

If 2042 is as good as you're saying, why do you care about BF6?

Go play 2042 if you want unlocked weapons

[copper bobcat]

Because I want the next BATTLEFIELD to not make the same mistakes as its forebears

[fresh cliff]

That's my exact point. I don't want the next Battlefield to make the same mistakes as 2042

[copper bobcat]

I do, I am a Sweatlord with a 4.70 KDR and a 76.5% WLR with over 2000hrs XD

I love 2042 its genuinely peak

[pure zinc]

Problem is so many people dont even play their classes, they choose for the guns really. Open gun system is good as anyone can choose any gun regardless of class so it makes it easier to play a class you want to play as you can use any gun.

[waxen cypress]

i give up good night

[copper bobcat]

2042 was bad because of specialists not the open weapon system

[copper bobcat]

gn

We might not agree but I dont dislike you, I hope you have a good night 🙂

[waxen cypress]

ngl I dislike you a little bit

[copper bobcat]

Thats your choice 🤷‍♂️

[fresh cliff]

Specialists was only one of the bad choices. Even Dice admitted that they only kept weapons unlocked because the community had gotten so used to not having them locked in 2042. It was supposed to go back to normal in the next game

[copper bobcat]

but I wont dislike somebody for being passionate about a game I love

Even if I disagree

[copper bobcat]

source

Also I just want to point something out - I was just going through the blog post and in it, it mentions the class system but it actually states that you can change from your signature weapon to either a DMR, Shotgun, or Carbine - I have a feeling, genuinely, the class system will be similar to BF4

[fresh cliff]

https://www.ea.com/games/battlefield/battlefield-2042/news/dev-notes-classes-in-battlefield-2042
I'll admit. I was a bit off. It wasn't about the community being used to it. It was more about the whole progression system being built around unlocked weapons

[fresh cliff]

It wont. It's fully unlocked weapons or they would've said otherwise. Especially with how much outrage is happening

[copper bobcat]

I appreciate your dilligence in sourcing that.

[main python]

Doesn't nullify your point though. Still valid. And its for that same reason that people aren't returning to the game in droves.

Lets say, for shits and giggles, that the game released flawless in terms of performance; the base gamneplay systems aren't fun and detract too far from what Battlefield is canonically known for and what people enjoy. That's why its not fun.

I returned to BF2042 after the class system change, and while it was marginally better and felt more honed in, all the other reasons the game was admonished still existed, and why I eventually put it back down.

[copper bobcat]

DICE arent incompetent, but they do lack hindsight in certain areas, what if this is all a misunderstanding from our part?

[prisma birch]

how so?

[main python]

Brother. The game is fun, or it isn't. You said it yourself. We have years of knowing what true battlefield games feel like. Tell me why a majority of the community disagrees with you that 2042 is peak, and that older Battlefield games are better.

[fresh cliff]

Honestly, seeing the weapon proficiencies from 2042, I can see why they aren't even noticeable

They are so bad compared to what's been leaked

[fresh cliff]

... fair. Dice isn't exactly known for being good at PR

[copper bobcat]

They added maps from BFBC2 to Portal, but some of the bushes on that map are bulletproof one way, they obviously didnt scan all the meshes to see which should allow pass through

[prisma birch]

its one thing to like 2042, its another to be in denail about the community liking it...which it did not

[copper bobcat]

Its why I believe they lack hindsight, they want to make great things, but get ahead of themselves, its actually genuinely endeering to me.

Like somebody making a clay mug, but forgetting to put the handle on properly, they painted it, its amazing to look at but isnt as fuctional as it could be.

[cyan dome]

stop the ammo and medic merge

[muted sandal]

2042 isn't a fan favourite but it's still a fun game. It's unironically the closest we've been to a BC3 that we'll probably ever get. It's the less serious cousin of mainline titles.

[prisma birch]

its not at all close to bc3...

[muted sandal]

It's closer to BC2 than a "real" BF

[prisma birch]

its being "fun" doesn't mean anything since who determines that its fun?

[muted sandal]

No but the overall vibe, if you get me.

[copper bobcat]

I think the movement and gunplay of 2042 is hands down amazing, it feels like BF3 to me, the recoil and the pushing and flanking, I recognise the game released poorly, but its not even the same game anymore.

[fresh cliff]

I agree that 2042 isn't a bad game, but it's nowhere close to being bc3. It has it's charms, but the whole design of it doesn't really fit in

[pure zinc]

Battlefield 2042 is the least Battlefieldly Battlefield

[muted sandal]

Exactly

Just like BC2 was

(If you're a PC player, at least)

[copper bobcat]

It offers up those amazing only in battlefield moments

[main python]

Holistically, Hardline was as close as we'll get to BC3 before it comes out. Destruction, dialogue campiness, more narrow-focused.

[prisma birch]

BC2 is more BF than 2042 by a long shot, this comparison is crazy

[fresh cliff]

I wish HL's studio didn't shut down. We could've gotten HL 2 (It never would've happened anyways)

[main python]

I don't think Hl was a good game, but I think it was closer to BC3 than 2042 was. Lol

[muted sandal]

I'd say it's still far from BF3 in any regard but it's not as bad as the non-players deem it

[prisma birch]

good point

[muted sandal]

You need to re-read my posts...

[copper bobcat]

HL is like Battlefields Cousin, she has a great lineage, and quite a nice smile, but her laugh is annoying and she has bad B/O

[pure zinc]

HL is underrated

[main python]

@muted sandal Battlefield 2042 isn't a BAD video game. It's a bad BATTLEFIELD game.

[fresh cliff]

HL is just 4 with a different theme, no armored vehicles, and better gunplay

[muted sandal]

Okay that might be true, I completely skipped BFHL

[pure zinc]

It was a battlefield game just cops and robbers

[copper bobcat]

Swap bunnyhopping with slide cancelling and its basically the same game imo

[pure zinc]

Had the battlefield core

[copper bobcat]

2042 is underrated*

[pure zinc]

Ehhh

[main python]

Lol. This dude

[fresh cliff]

2042 is overhated as a game. HL is underrated as a BF

[pure zinc]

Objectively yeah ofc its not a good battlefield game really

Its just decent

[prisma birch]

no, its not at all underrated, its rated fine

[main python]

True and based

[muted sandal]

Sounds about right

[copper bobcat]

I always thought HL was a massive depature from the franchise' core identity, which is ironic given this discord channel and the discussions taking place here

[waxen cypress]

Playing 42 is like hitting your nuts with a hammer

[fresh cliff]

2042 is just Deltaforce if they didn't add SBMM and actually released content

[prisma birch]

exactly, there are some dudes that are into that, but that doesn't mean its good lol

[copper bobcat]

what? O_O

[pure zinc]

It was a battlefield game but cops and robbers, it was much different

[main python]

And ya know whats funny about that, DeltaForce is actually an okay game. Battlefield just isn't about that. DeltaForce just doesn't have a history like BF does. BF players know what they want, and it wasn't 2042.

[copper bobcat]

Yeh, a departure from soldiers and boots on the ground, very gimmicky and lacking any real substantial improvements to the core experience.

BF1 was amazing, everyone lost their collective minds over the sniper sweet spot

[pure zinc]

I dont agree with that

[copper bobcat]

Said it was a departure from the core experience of battlefield

D:

Attrition from BFV was also considered by the community a departure from the core mechanisms of the franchsie

franchise*

[fresh cliff]

Oh, it def was. It was a very weird choice to change the entire theme when the series is a military shooter.

And going off of the fact that HL was the studio's last ever game, I don't think it worked out as well as they thought. It really does show that, no matter how good a game is, if you abandon the expectations of your core audience you will fail

[pure zinc]

It was a way of nerfing vehicles

[copper bobcat]

It was also the fastes TTK of any battlefield

[muted sandal]

Attrition 🤮

[pure zinc]

V?

[copper bobcat]

People didnt like suppression, it was phased out.

[muted sandal]

Suppression 🤮

[copper bobcat]

I didnt care either way, I understood what it was supposed to simulate and how it was supposed to work.

But it was implemented poorly

[muted sandal]

It was fine in late BF4 TBH

[copper bobcat]

There have been so many things that changed the "core" battlefield experience.

[fresh cliff]

I never understood the reason for suppression. If you're close enough to gunfire to be suppressed, you already have someone shooting at you

[main python]

Even though HL commercially flopped, I still appreciated it though. EA never tried to sell it as an evolution of the franchise or a continuation. It wasn't marketred that way. That's why even though it failed, it wasn't horrible.

EA tried to shove 2042 down everyone's throat and gaslight them in saying it's what the players wanted when there's no tangible way they could have come to that conclusion.

[muted sandal]

Hell, just merging Anti-Tank and Engineer into a single class is a departure from actual classic era Battlefields

Same with Medic and Assault from BF2

[copper bobcat]

I genuinely think we should all stfu and let DICE cook if people dont like the end result they wont buy it - Or play older titles.

BFBC was the larget departure from the core battlefield experience. it was comedic and silly, but it is a beloved franchise with many people begging, probably praying to Cthulhu for a BFBC3

[fresh cliff]

Yeah. It also probably helped that it wasn't Dice that developed HL. It was a completely seperate studio that made it while Dice was making 1

So it didn't really hurt anything since 1 came out on the usual BF schedule

Meanwhile, 2042 took up a main game slot

[mild rock]

Its funny how integrated destruction is. Its easy to forget it wasn't there at the very start.

[main python]

For sure. 100% agree. With that said though, the DICE we know has been gone for a while. Just listen to the folks over at Embark; almost all original talent from the BF3/4 days are gone, including the rollover talent from BF1 that moved over to Embark

[mild rock]

Refractor era games genuinely feel like a different time.

[muted sandal]

They're milsim by today's standards...

[toxic lantern]

which is kinda sad if you think about it

[pure zinc]

Dice have cooked with the new battlefield

[copper bobcat]

DICE will never please everyone - Sadly, its impossible to do just that with anything, but if the soldiers look and feel authentic, the weapons handle as good as BFV/2042/3 and the maps are designed around flow rather than chaos, I'll enjoy streaming this game 🙂

[pure zinc]

Complete 180

[pure zinc]

A game for everyone is a game for no one

[copper bobcat]

I think DICE should stick to their vision for once.

[fresh cliff]

Yeah. Honestly though, I'm kinda sadder because of what Embark is working on. They had the perfect opportunity to make a BF competitor while Dice was on it's last leg and made The Finals

[main python]

They did, and 2042 was the result 🤣
And it's on record as the worst received BF to date.

[copper bobcat]

They should make a game the way they want it to be, and actually stick to their guns, dont flip flop with weapon balances constantly (BF4) or change the TTK drastically towards the end of the games life cycle (BF1) or change the TTK multiple times (BFV).

[fresh cliff]

I understand it, but I also wish they would've made their dream BF with the new studio

[main python]

Honestly, with how flexible Embark is considering how different their new mainline IPs are, I wouldn't be surprised if something like that came from them at some point. Arc Raiders fuckin SLAPS though, so I'm fine waiting. PLUS... there may be legal issues with them trying to make a Battlefield competitor, atleast for the next several years.

[copper bobcat]

BF4 released with awful netcode, terrible optimisation and literally bricked peoples PCs and Consoles. but it was constantly fixed until it is considered the best game in the franchise to date.

[muted sandal]

What about every other game? I don't think it's fair to say that 2042 was the only BF where they stuck to their vision.

[fresh cliff]

Eh, I wouldn't be surprised if a lot of the 2042 stuff was because of EA meddling

[copper bobcat]

The idea that the game is bad because you dont like it, even if its been fixed and works well, and feels amazing, is entirely your loss D:

[main python]

Yup, because the core fundamentals of the game were lockstep with what the game is known for and developed very heavily. I don't give shit to 2042 for bad performance. I ALWAYS dismiss bad performance. The baseline game is horrible.

Sorry. Let me reword that more accurately. The baseline Battlefield experience of 2042 is horrible. 2042 as a video game is fine

[copper bobcat]

Thats entirely your opinion which you're entitled to. 2042 is one of the best BF games I have played, the updated movement, vaulting, slide cancelling, gunplay is top notch in my book, feels like I'm playing BF3 all over again.

I also like the fact that as a person slowly encroaching on their 40s I can play 2042 and keep up with everyone. - BO6 for instance basically made me feel like an OAP...

[main python]

Hey man. I'm glad you enjoyed it, you just can't deny what the industry and the consumers said, and that's been what you've been riding on. I'll never shit on someone for what they enjoy, but you cant sit here saying 'It's just my opinion' and insist it's the best game they've made on a factual basis when the market whole-heartedly disagreed.

[main python]

Well this is kinda what CPL and I were just talking about. Old DICE has been gone for a few years. 2042 is made primarily by new DICE which, good on em for trying, but it flopped.

Old DICE ate with BF3, BF4, BF1, and BFV once it was given the room to breathe.

[muted sandal]

DICE has always been chasing trends. They're part of the gaming industry as any other, they're not immune to it. At that time that is what was trendy in the shooter-sphere so they (wrongfully IMO) went chasing others so the game strayed TOO FAR from the fundamentals. It was also a COVID project so it also suffered from that... Remember no scoreboard? Yeah, that's called prioritizing in software development. The game was a mess but after all the patches, developments and refocusing on BF's roots it has reached a point where it's actually a good game.

[copper bobcat]

Thats valid, like I said, your opinion, my opinion. I think everyone should try 2042 now, and see what its like, and give it a fair shake, dont just play one game and have a jet crash land on your face and uninstall. Learn the movement, the angles and gunplay and actually experience it, because you're (not you personally, the royal you're) sleeping on something that is a peak battlefield experience imho

[copper bobcat]

I genuinely believe the reason 2042 released poorly was because of crunch, deadlines and the fact it was rumoured to have been converted from a BR to a proper BF style game only a few months prior to launch.

[fresh cliff]

There were so many poor situations surrounding 2042's development. The terrible initial plan to be an extraction shooter, Covid, EA's meddling, Developing in-betwen generations, community unrest because of deadline pushbacks, etc

[muted sandal]

Yeah the whole BR/Extraction stuff is also why so many of the old pre-64p maps suck. It's like every other map started as a flat world with randomized elevation, buildings and some towers for all the Sundance mains to capture Ebin BF MoMeNt shorts with...

128p was another huge mistake that I glossed over with how the game improved after they began refocusing on BF's roots. At least they've reworked most of the maps to be more playable but damn, never again pls...

[fresh cliff]

128p would've been fine if the maps were good. And most of the maps would be good if they just increased the amount of map objects they were allowed to use

All the maps feel empty because they are empty

Iirc they used the same object count as old 64p maps

[muted sandal]

Yeah but 128p also comes with other compromises. So many players eats up CPU cycles that could instead be used on better destruction or whatever. Also I've played enough Planetside 2 to rid myself of BIGGER NUMBER BETTER thinking when it comes to FPS games... That game became a complete clusterfxxk really fast...

[main python]

Yeah, 128 is a pipedream and I'm super okay with letting it go. I'mve fine with DICE maybe experimenting with 40v40, or 45v45, but not 64v64 again - at least not for a while

[copper bobcat]

So many games had unrestricted class weapons, the only game that didnt almost entirely was BF1 D:

[mild rock]

The biggest thing that really messed up 2042 was 128 itself.

[copper bobcat]

People have selective memories D:

[mild rock]

They had to make a branch of the engine to deal with 128 but because it was unfinished it's why everything runs like shit.

The lower your frame rate the worst the game feels, Input is all fucked, Optimisation is the worst.

[flat socket]

HELLO

lock weapons to classes that is all

[next sky]

Nice try

[main python]

based

[mild rock]

Fundementally to make a 128p supported map you need to expend a LOT of resources, Developer side, Server side, Hardware side - And it isn't worth it.

[main python]

100% agree.

[mild rock]

I think open weapon classes with a greater emphasis on class elements will be fun.

Not 2042 styled

[muted sandal]

Same

[mild rock]

If they set it from the get go that these classes are meant to run this and that it'll help perception on classes.

I'm more concerned over balancing and things becoming stale but I think that ends up happening anyways.

People will play the game same no matter what you do.

[muted sandal]

I still think that intertwining classes to weapon attachments would be interesting. Like making higher zoom scopes cost less for Recons, Extendos for Assault, Suppressors for whoever, etc.

It's just added depth

[waxen cypress]

I doubt this. Many people won't return if the game gives another 42 vibe.

[muted sandal]

Skipping BF6 over unrestricted weapons is like amputating your entire leg because your toenail is chipped.

Drama queens will be drama queens

[waxen cypress]

I wasn't specifically talking about that but, still, if you give it little importance its up to you.

[muted sandal]

But that's the closest BF6 gets to 2042

[rugged heart]

Out of curiosity, IF one would get access to the Pre-Alpha stress test, would it be a key sent to your email or something else?

[mighty zealot]

Too bad, I really like 128p modes

[rugged heart]

Ah I see it would come under an email

[mighty zealot]

I enjoyed the chaos of it all

[main python]

So, I understand the point you're making, but he's not wrong. Doesn't matter if you wanna consider them drama queens are not. People are going to play what they wanna play. A majority of the BF playerbase knows what they want from a BF game, and if the new one doesn't have it, especially if it's something considered core to the game that they enjoy (just consider the fact that this single topic has consituted it's own discord sub), they're just not gonna play and the game might swamp.

Battlefield needs a win right now, so it's in DICE's best interest to give those 'drama queens' what they want, especially when it's not a hard ask considering it's been in the DNA of the franchise since it's golden era.

[mighty zealot]

Okay but classes/weapons hasn’t been consistent across the series, new classes have come and go, weapons have changed classes

This is nothing new

[main python]

BUT, class restriction has been consistent. Even if the classes were shuffled around and weapons re-defined, class restriction has still been a staple.

EDIT: Restriction, not identity.

[mighty zealot]

Kinda but not really, bf4 had universal guns, and yet the games considered a gold standard in the series

This just expands on that

[mystic escarp]

Exactly

[main python]

We're not talking about universal guns. We're talking about canonical class restricted weapons.

You're not gonna hear me make a guff about PDWs and shotguns.

[mystic escarp]

I still feel like the most open BF6 should go is the only restricted guns are snipers and machine guns

[main python]

I'm okay with this.

[mystic escarp]

:D

[mighty zealot]

Why only those two?

[main python]

I'd still prefer canonical restriction, but I'm okay with LMGs and Sniper definition.

[mystic escarp]

Those are outliers and have a lot of class identity impact compared to ARs, carbines, etc

[main python]

These weapons have arguably the most identity of any weapon across all games besides universals.

[muted sandal]

I agree with everything you said. The problem is that BF fans are reactionary cretins against any change. I know this because I used to be one on them on the EAUK forums and this entire kerfuffle is almost making me nostalgic.

They've CLEARLY put it a lot of work into not repeating another 2042 but most reactionaries haven't spent any time reflecting on the whys and hows of the new designs or decisions beyond the CHANGE BAD mindset.

Just going from Battlefield 2 to Battlefield 3, the Special Forces and Sniper classes got merged into Recon; Assault and Medic into Assault; Anti-Tank and Engineer into Engineer... Now we're at primary weapons not being the defining trait of what CLASSES are; the gadgets are what really define their role.

I call them drama queens just as I'll call a spade a spade. Trust me, I GET where they're coming from but it's not the right decision going forward. Class unlocked weapons have far more pros than cons in the end.

[mystic escarp]

I hope support gets the MG3 and RPK in bf6, I really like those weapons and how they look irl

[mighty zealot]

Well it’ll be open weapons so it will

[mystic escarp]

I hope dice will restrict snipers and MGs in bf6

Also those are specific weapons

I don’t know if they’re in the game

I just hope they are because I like those guns

The MG3 is literally a modern MG42 and the RPK is just heavy AK

That’s why I like those

[mighty zealot]

So you only want them locked for class identity?

[mystic escarp]

It is harder to balance, creates unfair situations sometimes, and is class identity

I think it would just be nicer

[mighty zealot]

What unfair situations?

[mystic escarp]

Support using sniper as one example

Snipers are just too different in my opinion

[mighty zealot]

Expand on that

[mystic escarp]

Sniper can camp and just won’t need to get ammo because they can just spawn in more ammo for them selves

TLDR: snipers get practically infinite ammo

[muted sandal]

Yeah bolties and shotguns are more or less the only weapons that stray from the rest (automatics).

[mystic escarp]

MGs being restricted are arguable in my opinion

[mighty zealot]

I mean snipers ALREADY do that. Access to ammo doesn’t change that.

[muted sandal]

It's also why I've been shilling my idea of making high zoom scopes, say anything above 4/6x, costly for any non-Recon class in the new weapon customization system

[mystic escarp]

Shotguns I feel don’t need restriction as much because they’re cqb and have similar role to SMGs almost

[mystic escarp]

But they need ammo, the only game where they do that is 2042

[mighty zealot]

If anything a sniper will just use the spawn beacon to revive themselves with fresh ammo

[mystic escarp]

I’ve also seen crazy wing suit grapple hook sniper clips that seem too crazy

[mystic escarp]

That is slightly more balanced than literally inf ammo practacly

And also that’s not using the role properly kinda

[muted sandal]

Spawn beacon also reinforces a sniper's presence on the map since it allows them to return to their sniping spot unlike any other class

[fresh cliff]

Imo the thing that we should be really worried about isn’t class restrictions

It’s them giving assault two primaries

[muted sandal]

Any other (solo) sniper just gets wiped out

[mighty zealot]

Not really, also I’ve done what you’ve described and it’s not as cut and dry as you make it out to be, I didn’t do better or worse with access to ammo/ health packs

[mystic escarp]

I’ve heard a rumor that they nerfed that specialist BS

I just feel like if open weapons have to be a thing, restrict snipers and maybe MGs

[mighty zealot]

Yeah, playing as not a recon made me switched up locations far more while using a sniper rifle

[mystic escarp]

Class identity is a big part to that as well

[fresh cliff]

If open weapons have to be a thing, don’t give any class the ability to be amazing in literally every range (like being able to choose a sniper, shotgun, and full auto pistol in one loadout)

[mighty zealot]

I think only assault can have two primaries but you lose a gadget

I didn’t get the invite so Idk how well it works

[mystic escarp]

They probably have gotten rid of 2 primaries

[fresh cliff]

Losing a gadget is a weak loss considering it makes you immune to having bad matchups

[mystic escarp]

Or at least I hope so

[fresh cliff]

We can only hope

[mighty zealot]

I mean maybe? Idk, I’m not in the play test so I can’t comment, I’m sure if it’s OP then they’ll change it

[fresh cliff]

Fair

[mystic escarp]

That may work, I think using irons/simple red dots for snipers is maybe an okay idea?

[fresh cliff]

I somewhat trust the testers

[muted sandal]

Nah, that's too much IMO. At least 4x

[mighty zealot]

That’s fine, I prefer the lower scopes to be a bit better, no glint and all

I do have to squint tho

[mystic escarp]

I remember playing some game and just running around with a sniper but like with an eotech on it and it was fun and balanced

[muted sandal]

Dual primaries is silly tho. We back to COD4 lmao

[mystic escarp]

BF shouldn’t have too many cod features

[muted sandal]

That's tactical

[mighty zealot]

Tactical squint?

[muted sandal]

Well isn't Vince Zampella in charge now? AFAIK he was in charge of older CODs or smth

[fresh cliff]

It could actually be cool if attachment costs were affected by what class you’re playing. Like, high cap mags are cheaper on support, high zoom scopes are cheaper on recon, etc

Idk what assault and engineer would get tho

[mighty zealot]

They were popular games so I mean…

[mystic escarp]

That guy who I talked to who played from 1942 to Bf3 said he didn’t like some of the features he though felt too much like cod

[muted sandal]

I mean in relation to dual primaries, which was a perk in COD4 AFAIK

[mighty zealot]

Ah

Idk, i never liked cod

Cept for warzone

[mystic escarp]

Cod is okay until like a couple years ago, battlefield is just better though

[fresh cliff]

The last cod I liked was ww2

After that, it just felt off for me

[muted sandal]

I only 🏴‍☠️ COD4 and tried some MW19 during free trials but same. It's not really my jam but I can still appreciate some of their designs

They're very high quality games

[mystic escarp]

I thought the OG MW2 campaign was pretty fun when I played tbh

[muted sandal]

I don't like BF1 either but I still respect it as a high quality game, a passion project if you will

[mystic escarp]

Bf1 is my favorite so makes sense why we have different opinions lol

[fresh cliff]

All the og mw campaigns are good. The new ones can’t compare

[mystic escarp]

Yeah, they completely changed no Russian, Activision had no balls

And also campaign is half baked

[fresh cliff]

I’m pretty sure I’m one of like 10 people in here that unironically have HL as their favorite bf

[muted sandal]

My biggest gripe with BF1 is that it felt like a downgrade from BF4. It had too much SWBF DNA and the gunplay felt off

[mystic escarp]

Isn’t hardline cops and robber?

[fresh cliff]

Yep

[mystic escarp]

I didn’t feel like that it was a downgrade, i still love it

It’s fine though, people have different opinions

[muted sandal]

I only really liked BF1 for its high-velocity bolt actions that I found a straight upgrade from previous titles (except BC2) but the rest just didn't vibe with me

[fresh cliff]

Though, honestly, it’s just 4 with a different theme, no armored vehicles, and better gunplay

[mystic escarp]

There is some tanks in 1

[fresh cliff]

I’m talking about HL

[mystic escarp]

Oh

I never really tried HL

[muted sandal]

Just like 99% of the fanbase

[fresh cliff]

It was surprisingly fun for a off-theme mixup game that wasn’t even made by dice

[mystic escarp]

Neat

[waxen cypress]

You don't like bf 1 but you like 42 ?

[muted sandal]

Yes

[mystic escarp]

2042 is probably my least favorite tbh

[fresh cliff]

It’s sadly 6ft under now, but it was fun when it still had servers

[mystic escarp]

RIP

I wonder if there will ever be a remake, like how someone is remaking BF heroes

[mighty zealot]

I never liked it sorry, idk I just never liked old war settings

[muted sandal]

BF1 was just too casualized from BF4

[mystic escarp]

I like stuff not being too competive

[waxen cypress]

Bf 1 required actual skills

[main python]

BF1 was peak audio design and my favorite since BF3

[mystic escarp]

I really like history so I did like the setting

BF1 has the best atmosphere and graphics i feel

[mighty zealot]

I do too but not when it comes to fps’s

[fresh cliff]

There’s no need for a remake. It just doesn’t have enough players. There’s still 1 server running tdm on pc

[mystic escarp]

That fine, everyone has different opinions

[mighty zealot]

Like assasin creed is my favorite series

[muted sandal]

I mean you can say that but I never bothered to git gud at it because I didn't find it intriguing enough from the get-go. Coming from BF4, and one of the first balance patches increasing spread on my fav guns just left a sour taste in my mouth iykwim

[mystic escarp]

Heroes has servers, huh or are you talking about HL

[waxen cypress]

You dont need any skill right now to handle a gun they're all laser guns, in bf 1 it was different. I feel no recoil at all, not even on what I'm playing right now wink wink

[muted sandal]

I'm not against laser guns. If anything laser guns are great for 1v1 since the better aimer wins. Also I'm happy for you, I wish I could join you

[fresh cliff]

HL. I’m pretty sure heroes is fully shut down

[mystic escarp]

Ok

[unkempt yacht]

BF1 and Bad Company 2 had insane audio. Distant and indoor gunfights in BC2 sounded so good

[rotund agate]

all the audio engineers were raptured around 2016 for whatever reason

[main python]

100% agree. BC2 has my favorite audio overall despite the esign being more linear. It was a bit more arcadey and rougher. Guns were LOUD in that game, absurdly loud. Not a single BF game except BF1 has come close to it since. Unfortunately, I don't think we'll ever go back to weapon audio that violent because in today's market, it's probably considered low-tech, but man I can sure hope.

To this day, the M1 Garand in BC2 is the nastiest weapon sound of all time for me. I love it.

[mild rock]

Bf5's bar was one of my favourite sounding guns

[unkempt yacht]

Nailed it, the guns.. the audio in a headset with the volume cranked up.. man I wish BC2 still had a population

Destruction in BC2 was also near peak

Leveling small buildings, lots of small and medium destruction in nearly all buildings

[main python]

Yeah, their design with guns in Bad Company was to include the distant weapon crack in the audio as well with a separate microphone. That's why it was so violent. Also, I'm not sure if it was intentional back then, but they left in the highs on the audio peaks that got muddy which just made it sound super violent.

I've watched this video more than I'd like to admit:
https://youtu.be/cakRb44wilI?t=399

(M1 Garand Timestamp)

M24 isn't bad either. Puts a thump in your chest.

[unkempt yacht]

Mmmmf that distant audio gets me going

[mild rock]

I had a weird dream where this garand had a chance at sticking a grenade onto someone

Thanks for the reminder

[red bay]

My main concern right now is the AMOUNT of choice. With the gadgets becoming more prominent I think we are looking at these issues:

1. With more gadgets, in order to use them effectively you need to play each class a certain way.
   • A medic needs to sit behind the front line of assault and engineers to revive and heal, while the recon sits even further behind or is part of the front line (I know wishful thinking).
   • If all guns are available, one might pick a support role with a sniper rifle not supplying the front line with ammo, or a medic may use a sniper rifle with heals to ensure they can survive counter snipers
2. With more gun choice for each class you may end up playing your class much less efficiently and as a result have much lower impact as the class you choose/like playing
   • A medic may want something like an SMG/Shotty vs. an AR or a DMR but because they have the choice they may pick a weapon that is less effective for their role, which is primarly a support (primarily close quarter combat)
   • A Recon player may find that a DMR is more useful for the smaller maps and thus push further up than necessary and as a result not spot as well for the team which may cause others to die to flanks/unseen enemies.

From what I have seen thus far, if we want to keep the level of gadgets the same, we will need to restrict SOME weapons for each class to prevent them from using sub-par options. This will have the dual benefit of people playing their classes closer to how they will most effective as well as creating a more delineated Battlefield where one after some play would be able to know/expect to find certain classes.

TLDR - I think we need to lock some weapons from each class to avoid choice creep, resulting in sub optimal team/class play

[mystic escarp]

that is how i feel mostly.

[cyan dome]

And bring back the medic class instead of rolling it in with support

[mystic escarp]

yeah, i liked how bf1 has seperate medic

but having it with support i think worked in bc2 or whatever game had it

id prefer medic seperate however

[cyan dome]

As a medic main, if I'm locked to LMG's I'm going to be pissed

[outer osprey]

whoever said medic benefits from SMG/Shotty probably needs some reconsidering. They are people who are gonna stay behind Assaults who had ARs. That means they should have weapons at least Carbine-grade if not better.

I think in many prev battlefields, shotguns/SMG are prominent for the engineer class because they are supposed to be the demo guy with every explosive bigger than a 40mm grenade

[cyan dome]

Everyone was able to use shotguns and smg in old bf

[outer osprey]

I mean in 1/5 for the scenario

Shotgun and SMG are class locked

[cyan dome]

They were not in bf3.

[outer osprey]

I know

In BF4 too

(For Carbines and Shotguns)

[mild rock]

I don't exactly see people talking about all kit weapons.

It's nice that someone other than me brings them up.

Locked weapons or Open weapons aren't exactly bad or good to me it's just something DICE wants to change up by going for the former, Giving more focus to the class itself and making the weapon itself not matter as much.

[outer osprey]

I just think battlefield had taken many approaches to weapons and I don't think it would be a bad idea to, you know, further complicate the system a bit

System in BF1/V is simplified because they are, well, about warfare 80-100 years ago

[mild rock]

They did a pretty good job there but I would much prefer to be able to use a carbine on recon say.

Do recon things.

[outer osprey]

But back then BF4 did introduced things like reclassifying SMGs as PDWs, and adding a category called DMR which is all class

[mild rock]

I don't like how they handled 2042's specialists, They're cheap. But the one thing I do REALLY enjoy is the fact that you can designate a certain specialist to a particular sub class role.

Hey paik is close range recon so shotgun or SMG, Casper is long range so rifle. Rao and Blasco do their own things and are quite flexible.

[outer osprey]

I'd love to see some class locked options, like Assault being able to take on the fanciest and latest rifles. Maybe we can seperate AR with those firing 5.56 and those firing larger caliber bullets, like 7.62 ARs or M7 Spear etc

[outer osprey]

After all, it's just about creating a category

[mild rock]

I think if they were to do locked weapons they should just give classes certain selections of weapons like delta force does. I'm more enamoured by the idea of classes working as they are and their weapon in the end not mattering.

If I want to be a support with a battle rifle BFH style then let me.

I don't think the fundemental balance of the game would be broken as long as I can still fullfill my role.

[outer osprey]

I still think the major issue is about DMR/Sniper/10x Scope accessibility for classes outside of recon

[mild rock]

Infact it would drive me to play medic more cause it means I can stay at a range and care for my teammates.

If that's the case then just lock snipers out of all the classes. But with the slope you'd want to ban more and more things and it becomes a mess.

[outer osprey]

You're right, let the experts in Dice decide that

[mild rock]

Actually after a quick thought locking scopes to recon is actually a better idea.

I like that idea more.

[outer osprey]

Had that idea too

[mild rock]

There's a lot of complications to it all.

[outer osprey]

Esp for WW1/2 Battlefields before

[mild rock]

I understand where you're coming from and I would stay I still have my concerns about balance letting every class using weapons.

In older battlefields guns had a much more defined role.

In modern combat the majority of arms are ranged automatics.

[outer osprey]

So yeah I am fairly against locking most ARs out for classes

[mild rock]

Go iron sight aggro recon in bf5 and you won't find much success versus bf1 where the only ranged automatics were LMG's.

[outer osprey]

Especially those firing 5.56 or equilvalent

[mild rock]

I think the cons of everyone running a sniper isn't as bad as everyone thinks.

Cause most of the time people won't.

[outer osprey]

hm, sure

[mild rock]

Asides from that one weird player running it for experimentation.

[outer osprey]

I just think everyone is just going to run, well, kit weapons

Or ARs

[mild rock]

(Anecdotally) playing 2042 I don't see the worst case scenario as much.

[outer osprey]

because meta

idk it's just a guess

[mild rock]

Yeah I agree though what should happen is that hte map should push for shotguns and smgs on some and assault rifles and lmgs on some.

Oh yeah I understand what you mean

I run AR's because they're the safest option, Well technically a battle rifle cause SCAR H love but get me.

2042's maps were large and they necessitated the need for AR's hard.

Based off what I've seen, SMG's look super viable but AR's are still super relevant.

I don't like medic because I think it's braindead but point is trhat if I can keep playing as medic with an SMG, An "AR" and an LMG, Contributing to my teams health line I'll gladly take the idiot sitting in spawn as a medic infinitely healing themselves because to me they're just another useless fool who should have picked recon.

(And even a proper gun)

[lilac flicker]

Good Morning @all 😀

Don't change an existing system. What made Battlefield special? One of them was the tried-and-tested weapon class system. People don't want to reinvent the wheel. Nobody is against innovations, like the really good movement in Battlefield 5. But tried-and-tested systems must stay.

I also believe that weapons should be unlocked based on class. For example, if I've selected the Engineer, I don't want to be able to unlock the Sniper's weapons at the same time. That's nonsense. You're supposed to master the respective class. Take a look at the classes yourself and learn how to use them. That's part of the Battlefield universe.

For me, it's nothing more than another generic shooter if the legacy features are no longer included.

[dawn relic]

@administrators -- I am having trouble with the BF Lab process. I have been asked to finish completing the survey multiple times. I have completed it now 3 times and unfortunately have yet to receive any new emails or anything at all regarding the playtests. I very much wish to participate in these tests as I have been a long-time community member and advocate for increased player interaction in the development processes. Please send me a DM. I'm at a loss here... 😞

[wind oyster]

It doesnt mean that you can or will participate if you complete the surveys

[lilac flicker]

Look at the pinned message in the top right corner & please delete your post

[cunning plover]

[lilac flicker]

What does that mean? Or rather, what does it imply? I don't really know ^^

Edit: ahh ok ^^

[mild rock]

So Tempo did some digging up for the class perks and shit.

By the wording only recon can hold breath and a quicker rechamber.

[dawn relic]

No thanks, an Admin can delete if it they so wish.

[lilac flicker]

You have to know, but it explains exactly what happens

[mild rock]

People don't want you losing your access to the labs & well, literally in the NDA.

[dawn relic]

I know, but I was invited early and believe I am encountering an error with the survey as it seems to be looping me to the same point without the ability to proceed fully.

This has been going on now for 2 months

[errant spear]

Can I still get a plan on how to take part in the Pre Alpha?

[dawn relic]

Sorry to drop it in here but I figured an active admin might be able to get back to me

[cunning plover]

If you got the invite you don't need to complete the survey.

You either got the RSVP email or you didn't. The survey is irrelevant.

[wind oyster]

You cant anymore

[stone tundra]

mfw weapon discussion is still going

[lilac flicker]

Look at the pinned message in the top right corner - There you will get all the answers you need

[wind oyster]

Completing the survey doesnt mean you get invited lol

[pure zinc]

Guys this isn't Labs help

[stone tundra]

what are the rest

[wind oyster]

Im confused

What for are you doing surveys again

Why are we talking about it anyway lol

[errant spear]

im not doing surveys again, i just try to figure out what i have to do now xd

[wind oyster]

Wait til it starts

Idk

Dont talk about the contents of the email if you want to play though

Youll just get your playtest revoked or account banned lol

[mild rock]

Dms.

[unborn pollen]

I suggest something, destroy all the buildings on your servers to see if they hold up 😁

[mild rock]

I don't know anything, But it would be cool if players were given instructions how to push the servers.

[unborn pollen]

I agree, maps are rather small, we are here to test them it seems to me, not just to play

[mild rock]

People are gonna default to playing the game and that's fine. Maybe that's all they want.

[summer summit]

I mean, they do say they're not looking for feedback in the #1375428094361468991 channel

[undone ivy]

Do some guys can't play on ps5 ? I'm stuck in the lobby just after accept all task

[unborn pollen]

I don't know how it works on console but on PC you have to download "DLC" in the options

[summer summit]

feedback on this https://discord.com/channels/140933721929940992/1374763710169616525. Anything from in-game, even saying you have access, is breaking NDA

[mild rock]

The reason why they got the lot of players for this test is to stress test the srervers not to give feedback, they have plenty of people for that.

[undone ivy]

I downloaded all the DLC, and the launcher starts on PS5, after accepting all the tasks, at the level of choosing the color blindness parameters (which by the way we do not see the writing of the parameters, they are empty) we can no longer do anything and it is blocked at this level

[unborn pollen]

#community-update-classes message

[somber pilot]

who comes to me still has to receive the email?

[shrewd loom]

Im also can’t play on my ps5 pro

[undone ivy]

I will try, thanks

[empty condor]

where do i do that?

[undone ivy]

In paramètre system

Of your ps5

[empty condor]

oh found it thanks!

reinstalling rn hope it will work uff

[somber pilot]

who comes to me still has to receive the email code?

[pale vault]

wth is this for

[tall dove]

When they put new optics and attachments to WW1 and WW2 weapons they lost me i member the days when BF were proud of the fact they used and recored real weapon sounds in the game .yes BF1 was well put together but was not my cup of tea

[pale vault]

it would be so hard to make a fun game set in the ww1 era without fudging the the realism a little

[summer summit]

Well done, that's the channel we're in, however if you had used your eyes, the thread I linked to and even the message you linked to, which goes against your own original message, says to use this channel to continue discussing stuff, from that thread, not in-game stuff, in-game stuff, once again, breaks NDA

[dusk ether]

Grab a paint brush and a you can easily change the colour of your ps5

Do that then you can play

[wraith totem]

Shut up 😂

[mild rock]

I heard if you paint it red it works faster

[wraith totem]

But I would prefer black

[mild rock]

Seriously though if you're speaking about colour blind settings I think that should be coming later.

(Custom colours and shit is usually under that moniker)

[dusk ether]

If you get all achievements for every game ever made I’ve heard you get a tier 1 skin for your ps5

[mild rock]

I hope we get the damascus skin from bf5 again.

[dusk ether]

On what game?

[mild rock]

We can't help you and I'm really sorry for that, There's a lack of resources for play testers to get help.
While you're not meant to tell us that you're having issues (cause it makes us aware taht you're in the test) I hope you can get this worked out.

[dusk ether]

Oh if it’s labs then yeah, we can’t help

[mild rock]

Oh that's to launch it

Yeah I hope something gets sorted out.

Ya. I gotta buy Dinner. best of luck my dude.

[dusk ether]

Oh yeah, upside down and all

I just woke up lol

[wraith totem]

Thanks bro have a great day 👆🏻

[mild rock]

yeah it's cause you're british

my drink bottle fell on my keyboard and it opened co pilot

[summer summit]

I'm UK and woke up like 10 hours ago

[empty condor]

thank you!

[dusk ether]

Dunno why you’re talking about it here. Not only is this not the labs channel but you also cannot discuss labs

[atomic spoke]

BF 2 Classes or Better Delete This New BF 6

[drowsy hedge]

OK thank you bro

[dusk ether]

That’s because you don’t. They aren’t expecting server stress testers to give any

[mossy flare]

Since when this chanel exist

I swear it wasnt here yesterday

[dusk ether]

It wasn’t. The classes blog post thread got too large so it was moved here

But of course people don’t read the title and just use it to ask questions about labs that can’t be answered

[molten meadow]

When they announced this, the Discord server erupted with people saying they wanted class restricted weapons, literally 85% of comments sharing that sentiment.

It's classic DICE. Ask for feedback and opinions, ignore the feedback, then wonder why people complain about their choices. Hopefully they read the outcry and change it. But we all know they won't.

[mighty zealot]

I mean none of us have even played it yet and we’re complaining about a feature we haven’t even tried

[autumn shoal]

People complained about specialists too

Stick to what works and what people want

[cedar lake]

impossible we need to reinvent the wheel

xd

[heavy bobcat]

Please add more classes and bigger squads! Server browser and preistent servers are also must!

[finite osprey]

those ppl dont even know what they want

they'll just find something new to complain about

[flint cradle]

i have the same error on Pc
Hi, I got an error code, " unable to conect to the EA servers..

[autumn shoal]

A sentiment to dodge the obvious. A traditional class system is something every battlefield fan loved

Looks like this is the wrong channel to talk about labs

[mossy pendant]

O shoot, apologize

[woeful coral]

which one

[autumn shoal]

#battlefield-labs-discussion

[woeful coral]

ty

[mossy pendant]

It brings me here, the channel is maxed out.

[weak nymph]

ok thx

[mossy pendant]

Nvm I got in

Thanks

[modern wolf]

Of course , it’s clear people want classes weapon’s segregation. It’s unbelievable we are here talking about this… came on EA/Dice, no jokes!

[fossil root]

There are those who enjoyed 2042 and they’re vocal in support of it.

[autumn shoal]

There's also a reason why it had record low player numbers

[vernal pecan]

Leaving my two cents here, I've been playing BF since 2002, it's literally my favorite game (series). What DICE could do, and potentially make everyone happy is:

-Lock classes/weapons (but.....)

-Incentivize squad communication by allowing temporary weapon changes by coordinating locally with your squad leader.

Example: You are a sniper class, but your entire squad needs your support to break through an area. This could be limited to just a few moments while the breakthrough is happening.

The sniper class makes the temporary request, it is approved and the weapon can be changed until the point has been captured or their order has been followed. The specific loadout can be saved ahead of time by the requestor to avoid delay during selection.

For balance, the amount of times this can be done per round can be limited.

I believe this could be an excellent way of showing new players how working closely with your squad can quickly change the tide of a match.

This is like having the older style of commander assists in the field.

Hoping the developers see this. Thanks for taking the time to read if you did.

[fossil root]

Agreed

[strange pebble]

Good take on things. Would be a happy middle ground

[solid sigil]

unfortunately the majority of bf players overwhelmingly want class locked weapons across literally any poll

[serene igloo]

Is this where we discuss the class system ?

[wild valve]

If you ask me, keeping the classes locked to the BF4 system is the smartest move. One major part of BF is the feeling that you are random soldier working together with your team to achieve something larger than yourself. The feeling i got from 2042 was that i was some kind of super soldier that could do it all, which is fine, but it really didn't feel like BF.

[waxen cypress]

99% of people feels like that.

[tribal plinth]

I am sure those who has played games on the old Refractor Engine (1942, 2, 2142) and early Frostbite engine iterations would overwhelmingly vote for having weapons assigned to respective classes at least for Conquest game mode. Battle Royale is Battleroyale and governed by totally different set of rules of engagements.

[valid mesa]

I disagree, I don't want PDWs to be solely locked in Engineer class, it's such a stupid choice. 1. When are you most likely going to use PDWs? At close quarter engagements on close quarter maps. 2. What you don't have on close quarter maps? Vehicles, making engineer on those maps useless.

[tribal plinth]

@valid mesa Engineers role is to repair vehicles, plant mines, shoot at incoming vehicles, cover area in near proximity. Engineers role does not belong into all range engagement META. Once that is scrapped... entire Conquest concept is a random shootout.

[solid sigil]

ive always seen it as engineers having a bare minimum self defense weapon explaining why

[tribal plinth]

@solid sigil because Engineers did not have access to ARs and LMGs in previous iterations?

[solid sigil]

idk i just thought of that as the reasoning behind engis in 4 having PDWs

personal defense weapons yk

[fossil root]

Yep, I’m one of them. It makes it more fun with friends or a random squad you link up with.

[solid sigil]

same

[vernal pecan]

The first rifle as a medic in BF2, from what I recall, was seriosuly limited compared to an assault class. This taught me to focus on reviving. We need more of this, but I also think squad interaction could be taught in this situation. See my comment above about when sniper class could be temporary support during a breakout.

[solid sigil]

it feels like im being gaslit in this server and the reddit that people actually want unlocked weapons

like the majority

[tribal plinth]

@solid sigil In BF4 there are powerful Carbines available, Shotguns and DMRs...

for Engineer.

[solid sigil]

ye i member

[fossil root]

It’s a noisy minority I think. It’s odd but people often want to be contrarians

[abstract quest]

heloo i want to ask somethink how i can get BF Labs ?

[vernal pecan]

There's a sign up page, https://www.ea.com/games/battlefield/battlefield-labs

[abstract quest]

ty man

[valid mesa]

Here's my proposal how weapons could be allocated between classes:

ASSAULT

• Assault rifles
• Carbines
• PDWs
• Shotguns
  Reasons: Mostly aggressive weapons mid-close range engagements

ENGINEER

• Carbines
• LMGs
• Shotguns
• DMRs
  Reason: More of vehicle support role, so engagements mostly medium with shotgun as a close range option

SUPPORT

• Assault rifles
• LMGs
• Carbines
• PDWs
  Reason: Support orientated but can also engage close range engagements with assault class

RECON

• Sniper rifles
• DMRs
• PDWs
• Carbines
  Reason: Long range to fill sniper role, close range weapons to fill special ops role

[abstract quest]

but i think i do it before

and im not get a game

[vernal pecan]

You must learn patience, young one. 🙂

[abstract quest]

oh nooo

and ya i do it before

[tribal plinth]

In BF2 Assault Class also have M16A2 and AK101. I felt like with basic weapons Assault is weak compared to Medic. But Assault could unlock G3 and F2000 with flashbangs. If utilized properly with teamwork, Assault class could be extremly lethal.

[vernal pecan]

This channel is for class discussions, though.

[abstract quest]

ok

i hate to be patience

😂

i like be fast

and action

so ya

[graceful orbit]

Make classes like in BF3, tyvm

[tribal plinth]

I am against all guns available knowing how long does it take to patch a broken weapon 😂 . This can be done within the span of 48h not 2 weeks as with 2042 and PP29.

[waxen cypress]

Pdws to recon? Hello no. This is terrible.

[tribal plinth]

PDWs and Recon is a travesty especially with on demand scanning abilities.

[valid mesa]

Why not? It's a reconnaissance class, a stealth class. Why shouldn't it have PDWs?

[graceful orbit]

iirc Recon in BF3 had UMP-45, correct ?

[solid sigil]

if they genuinely wanted to evolve the class system i feel like they ought to go the opposite route, add in another class, or add in sub-classes with gadget differentiation

[waxen cypress]

If you want to play close range you should pick another class

[solid sigil]

does anyone waenna seqe my stupid ass cat

[waxen cypress]

No

[solid sigil]

:(

[graceful orbit]

hell no, get out with sub classes nonsens

[valid mesa]

You're still not providing a reason.

[solid sigil]

just shooting ideas

[waxen cypress]

You're giving almost everything to every class the difference with how it is now is minimal

[tribal plinth]

I feel like 5 classes Assault/Medic/Support/Engineer/Recon...

[graceful orbit]

What would be the difference btwen support and the others

[valid mesa]

Bruh, are you for real? Each class has 4 of the available 7 weapon types.

[tribal plinth]

@valid mesa LMGs suck because of availability. Do not have any power compared to BF4 or V...

PP29 obliterates compared with even LMGs bipod stance lol

[waxen cypress]

Yeah that's too much. Why not making it like bf 1? Their last great success dunno

[valid mesa]

Which is why I'd give it to Engineer. All weapons would have at least 2 or 3 available class options with sniper rifles being exclusive to recon.

[mystic sapphire]

Nah its fine

[wind oyster]

because we arent having another ww1 game