We need to have clans added like we have in every battlefield and every game that is out there. The bottom part of ID cards works great for the location. The non-patriarchy ID but if in a clan says (tags) (clan name) with symbol. Clans are one of the biggest factors to community and making the game live. Just look at battlefield 4 and 3, the clans and milsims that bring players in and keep active counts going. As someone that runs a milsim, this is something we are hopeful for

@VOLBANKER_PC Sounds like a good plan to remove any kind of team play, along with the voip. Then we can complain how team mates don't heal/revive/repair/give ammo. Any way to make a lone wolf's experience more pleasant

@VOLBANKER_PC you know with or without tags they will still play together...2042 only made it impossible to play with more then 3 people at a time

@VOLBANKER_PC are we talking about 10+ ppl stacking or a simple party of 4/5 because if 5 players can dominate an entire team i'd blame your teamates to be just a bit on the usless side of things

@VOLBANKER_PC I think BF is (or was) all about cohesive squad play. Bigger squads brought more team play and better rewards. I think one of the best features of BF V was that “stick to your squad” strategy that paid off very well.Thought-out the history of BF the team element was always super important. Team work takes strategy. Strategy takes patience. And Patience takes maturity. Which is what draws me to the BF franchise. I feel BF has always taking a higher level of intelligence to play and I think the reason for that is it supports a high level of teamwork.But I think we should have all the player base information on the scoreboard, including tags, that way we can choose to stay or go to another game.

@VOLBANKER_PC Honestly, even in battlefield 4, having 4 people playing together out of 64 doesnt change much and you want more people playing together, working as one. It helps your team and makes the fighting more impactful. Plus clans and milsims spend more time in their own server with other people. Look at bf4, one of the biggest things keeping it going are clans, milsims and groups of players. Battlefield isnt the same playing it alone and clans or not. people load in with stacks of 4. even if they dont add clans, your "issue wont leave" but i suggest getting a group of friends for a fireteam

Clans/Platoon system needs to be added ASAP with team swapping

16 Replies

VOLBANKER_PC
Seasoned Ace
4 years ago
Ah yes, the joy of being put into a round with 4+ clan players on the same side….
Clans should play on their own servers instead of ruining the game for everyone else.
BR-DuaneDibbley
Seasoned Ace
4 years ago
@Airstriker97

Yes, but this would improve the game. So it's safe to say it will never be implemented.

@VOLBANKER_PC

I agree that we need a RSP, but again, making the experience is not in the interest of EA/Dice. Therefore expect this to NOT see the light of day.
X-Sunslayer-X
Seasoned Ace
4 years ago
@VOLBANKER_PC you know with or without tags they will still play together...
2042 only made it impossible to play with more then 3 people at a time
VOLBANKER_PC
Seasoned Ace
4 years ago
Clans ruin the team balance a lot of the time in BF1 for example. So no thanks to anything that helps clans play together.
fragnstein
4 years ago
@VOLBANKER_PC Sounds like a good plan to remove any kind of team play, along with the voip. Then we can complain how team mates don't heal/revive/repair/give ammo. Any way to make a lone wolf's experience more pleasant
X-Sunslayer-X
Seasoned Ace
4 years ago
@VOLBANKER_PC are we talking about 10+ ppl stacking or a simple party of 4/5 because if 5 players can dominate an entire team i'd blame your teamates to be just a bit on the usless side of things
BR-DuaneDibbley
Seasoned Ace
4 years ago
@fragnstein

I'd say for any clan, VOIP was not really 'removed' as we never used that before anyway (we use TeamSpeak, others use Discord).

The problem was that team play was removed along with any kind of meaningful squad management. It took us several minutes each match to finally join the server only to be thrown back out after the round ends. This was what made us go back to the older titles (or to WW3 and HLL as many of us now play those titles). Let's hope WW3 gets more content and they get the server problems sorted as this is also not a game that can be considered a good replacement for BF2042 at the moment. Maybe in the future. And definitely sooner than BF2042.
fragnstein
4 years ago
@DuaneDibbleyHaving voip was a way to help build a platoon of players who are willing to use discord or TeamSpeak. No sense in spending time giving someone discord/TeamSpeak info if they aren't willing to use voip first, especially if they aren't going to be in your squad when the round ends
cKrash32
4 years ago
@VOLBANKER_PC I think BF is (or was) all about cohesive squad play. Bigger squads brought more team play and better rewards. I think one of the best features of BF V was that “stick to your squad” strategy that paid off very well.
Thought-out the history of BF the team element was always super important. Team work takes strategy. Strategy takes patience. And Patience takes maturity. Which is what draws me to the BF franchise. I feel BF has always taking a higher level of intelligence to play and I think the reason for that is it supports a high level of teamwork.

But I think we should have all the player base information on the scoreboard, including tags, that way we can choose to stay or go to another game.
cKrash32
4 years ago
@fragnstein Totally!! That’s how BattleField Lovers are made!!! Open comms, another lover of the game. Sparks Fly!!!! 🙂
It’s how my old squad broken the 100 mark. It Would have been nice to play n chat with new and seasoned players when the game was just released.