Class system sucks
This class system limits you. What if your on a squad and your team doesn’t run ammo boxes, now your stuck running around looking for ammo to replenish your rockets. Or what if your angel or Casper y...
Forum Discussion
@3DiE9djua2 Classes bring nothing to the game anymore, especially now that other games have shed ancient features for the sake of progress and gameplay.
I think where a lot of the trolls miss the plot is one man army is not bad. With teams as big as they are and having multiple objectives, no single player is going to dominate the game. It's physically impossible. Why do they assume a right to dictate how anyone else plays? There's totally a place for skilled solo players who can capture or defend a point without needing a huge group. The idea of teamwork is the team works loosely together to win, not force everyone be tied head to * so that every player 'gets a turn'. Pretend it's a lot of tiny squads.
I'm a rando joining randos. There's no way that'll turn into anything of value, I need to be self sufficient and adaptable. Nobody on my list plays the same games I do and I'll be damned if I let someone use voice chat to chew their mic while I'm trying to hear what's going on. 100% mute.
So this game launched in a vastly better state than it is now. Anyone who voted for classes is low-skill or a tank camper who wanted easy mode. It's just a fact. I dunno if they need separate modes, one for the original vision of 2042 and one for the whiners, but whatever this unfocused mess is, it's turning players away faster. The PSN freebie is the only thing hiding the real numbers. And once the great nerf turned support into nothing more than a vending machine, I hope nobody ever gets ammo or revives when they need it. Let them see how much damage it caused the game to pivot without good reason.
I think where a lot of the trolls miss the plot is one man army is not bad. With teams as big as they are and having multiple objectives, no single player is going to dominate the game. It's physically impossible. Why do they assume a right to dictate how anyone else plays? There's totally a place for skilled solo players who can capture or defend a point without needing a huge group. The idea of teamwork is the team works loosely together to win, not force everyone be tied head to * so that every player 'gets a turn'. Pretend it's a lot of tiny squads.
I'm a rando joining randos. There's no way that'll turn into anything of value, I need to be self sufficient and adaptable. Nobody on my list plays the same games I do and I'll be damned if I let someone use voice chat to chew their mic while I'm trying to hear what's going on. 100% mute.
So this game launched in a vastly better state than it is now. Anyone who voted for classes is low-skill or a tank camper who wanted easy mode. It's just a fact. I dunno if they need separate modes, one for the original vision of 2042 and one for the whiners, but whatever this unfocused mess is, it's turning players away faster. The PSN freebie is the only thing hiding the real numbers. And once the great nerf turned support into nothing more than a vending machine, I hope nobody ever gets ammo or revives when they need it. Let them see how much damage it caused the game to pivot without good reason.
@DPsx7 I guess we just have different opinions on what BF is.
I have played this franchise since BF1942 and I guess I'm just an ancient player who likes the way Battlefield used to be different from the generic run and gun shooters.
I used to play competitive in earlier renditions until EA decided to remove every tool the community had in order to try to control comp themselves. They failed miserably and the franchise was left as pub only playground. Classes was one of the things that made it really fun to play this franchise, especially in comp, as it really mattered to have strategies around picking the correct class to the correct situation.
Today all I'm seeing is people wanting to have all the toys given to them so they can just go mindlessly around killing inf ignoring objectives, ignoring team mates, ignoring teaming up to take out vehicles, never wait for obvious revive etc. You call it progression, I call it regression. I feel the whole franchise has taken 10 step backwards only to try to cater for all the run and gun one man army players that have no tactical or stratetical awerness. When was the last time you saw someone change class (or loadout pre-class) when a heli or tank on the other team was dominating? But again, this may just be me being ancient 🙂
I personally never voted for classes to come back though. But when I say I want it to stay is mostly semantic.The reason is simply because classes is what battlefield is and has always been. Removing classes is like Acitivsion suddenly decided to remove killstreaks in CoD. Its part of the identity of the franchise and shouldnt be touched in the first place.
But from a playing PoV I never said anything bad about classes being removed as I just adapted to the new situation.
In the end I think it didnt really change that much either as people just pick one class and stick to it regardless of whats going on just like the pre-class just picked on loadout and went with it.
For me the people whining about this is just those who cant adapt to the situation since the game didnt really change that much. Just like all those players stopped playing because they fel the game wasnt Battlefield anymore. I have a friendslist full of them who couldnt adapt. 🙂
Also I dont htink it will make the game better or more attractive by changing this again so changing would jsut be mooth. If anything this thread will be created again only named "no class system sucks".
As for your last comment regardings ammo and revives. Things werent better pre-classes. Nothing did change in that regard. The only saving grace pre-class was that you could go 24/7 launcher Angel.
In the end I do not disagree with people in here on many of the points made and I dont really care either. But the point I was trying to make is that classes is a part of this franchise identity and shoudlnt hva been removed in the first place.
@3DiE9djua2 wrote:@DPsx7 I guess we just have different opinions on what BF is.
I have played this franchise since BF1942 and I guess I'm just an ancient player who likes the way Battlefield used to be different from the generic run and gun shooters.
I used to play competitive in earlier renditions until EA decided to remove every tool the community had in order to try to control comp themselves. They failed miserably and the franchise was left as pub only playground. Classes was one of the things that made it really fun to play this franchise, especially in comp, as it really mattered to have strategies around picking the correct class to the correct situation.
Today all I'm seeing is people wanting to have all the toys given to them so they can just go mindlessly around killing inf ignoring objectives, ignoring team mates, ignoring teaming up to take out vehicles, never wait for obvious revive etc. You call it progression, I call it regression. I feel the whole franchise has taken 10 step backwards only to try to cater for all the run and gun one man army players that have no tactical or stratetical awerness. When was the last time you saw someone change class (or loadout pre-class) when a heli or tank on the other team was dominating? But again, this may just be me being ancient 🙂
I personally never voted for classes to come back though. But when I say I want it to stay is mostly semantic.The reason is simply because classes is what battlefield is and has always been. Removing classes is like Acitivsion suddenly decided to remove killstreaks in CoD. Its part of the identity of the franchise and shouldnt be touched in the first place.
But from a playing PoV I never said anything bad about classes being removed as I just adapted to the new situation.
In the end I think it didnt really change that much either as people just pick one class and stick to it regardless of whats going on just like the pre-class just picked on loadout and went with it.
For me the people whining about this is just those who cant adapt to the situation since the game didnt really change that much. Just like all those players stopped playing because they fel the game wasnt Battlefield anymore. I have a friendslist full of them who couldnt adapt. 🙂
Also I dont htink it will make the game better or more attractive by changing this again so changing would jsut be mooth. If anything this thread will be created again only named "no class system sucks".
As for your last comment regardings ammo and revives. Things werent better pre-classes. Nothing did change in that regard. The only saving grace pre-class was that you could go 24/7 launcher Angel.
In the end I do not disagree with people in here on many of the points made and I dont really care either. But the point I was trying to make is that classes is a part of this franchise identity and shoudlnt hva been removed in the first place.
we didn't get classes though. classes need locked weapons to give people incentive to play different classes. all they did was lock gadgets. now we have a situation with anti vehicle that is a crapshow. boris and crawford have junk specialist gadgets and lis can't use 60% of the class gadgets
- @Prof3ss0r_M1k3 Why do you need incentive? If you're fine with one then be free to play that way. No reason the support guy can't temporarily swat a copter or bop a sniper if they happen to catch the right angle. When the metric for winning is holding tickets you'd THINK not forcing people to bleed them to adapt would be smart.
That is the biggest part of it. Locking all the gadgets means the vehicles have no balance. I know the ones voting for classes were the whiners who want to hide in tanks longer. That's not fair to the infantry.Come on guys, being passionate about your games is one thing but then letting that passion get out of hand to the point where we begin to throw insults is quite another. Lets try to curb ourselves so we can continue to discuss, ya know?
When it comes to the anti tank issue (and I only speak of it in terms of Solo/Coop and general bot play experiences since I have not enough experience in PvP) I think what they can do is to reverse the dead body drop mechanic...so they drop their gadgets/gadget ammo instead of their weapons. Just make it so that the dropped gadget won't stay there too long. Perhaps 60 seconds after death this way there's a sense of skill/timing & chance if you need to earn a gadget in this way to help take out more vehicles.
- @3DiE9djua2 Everyone always leads off with "I've played since" yadda yadda. So what? I've said games grow and evolve. I used to play UT99 and Quake so the earliest BF's were too slow. I came in around BF3 after a beta and I've played since. Hardline was different, 1 and 5 were low points. Anyway it's not run and gun, it's a sandbox shooter. BF at its core is conquest and rush, infantry vs vehicles, creative use of gadgets. Classes aren't necessary. Tacking in features just because the old games had it is how series stagnate. CoD recycles infinitely, is that where you're taking BF now?
There's no shortage of other FPS. It's ok to borrow ideas. Was royale mode a good fit here? Nah, but it was worth a try. Where's gun master? Specialists were nice to replace the boring old system. If you want to introduce new players why add pointless restrictions? Make your loadout fit your playstyle and get out there. BF can be for friend groups AND solo players, doesn't have to be one or the other. If you want realism go try a tac-sim.
I don't think you're gonna change player habits no matter what. Either they don't know about objectives or don't care. Forcing squads/classes is only going to chase away those like myself who liked the game as it launched. I need to play my way when stuck with clueless randos. The scoreboard should have never returned since it encourages K/D. Team score was on the HUD, good enough.
I didn't switch classes, I chose another loadout to adapt. Now we can't. How is THAT progression? Really it's not even the classes that pissed me off, it's just the restrictions. Take that crap out and stop worrying about what everyone else chooses. Those who understand the game will know when to grab C5, AA, a sniper rifle. They'll cap that flag by themselves as the rest of the team fights elsewhere. When the point of the game is to win, why does anyone care how you get there?
There's your problem though. Angel would revive and reload everyone while also being able to defend a flag. Now the character is yard art. It was absolutely better pre-classes, maybe you didn't play enough.
Nah, by that logic the franchise should have remained locked to WW2 era. The identity was listed above.Listen I am not really disagreeing with everything you say so no need to be so passive agressive. All Im saying is that classes have been a part of the games identity along with CQ64 since the first game and messing with it was bound to ruffle a lot of peoples feather. Thats also why people were asking for it to be brought back. Many bf vets abandoned the game at launch as a result. There are no need to call those people trolls, low skilled etc either. They have their opinion of what makes BF a BF game.
As I said I was never a part of those who asked for it back but now that we have it here I'm not going to ask them to undo the change either. So here we just have to disagree.
I guess Im trying to say that I think they shouldnt have removed the class system when they made the game, but when they first did, they shouldnt have put it back in several months after launch either. Its this back and forth that are causing the playerbase to be split and for people to feel they have been toyed with. If the class system was in the game at launch people wouldnt have talked about removing it now. Changing this a third time just becomes comical. Instead they can tweak the system to work better and open up for more alternatives in each class. A best of both worlds if possible unless people just want to play one specialist.
CoD is still going strong because they recycle endlessly and not removing what maked CoD the franchise it is.
But I'm sure if Activision removed something like kill streaks in that franchise people whould let Activision know thats a bad idea.
However I'm done with this discussion though as I just wanted to share my opinion on this. I didnt want to have a long discussion about this.
You have your opinion and I have mine. So lets just let it be with that
- @3DiE9djua2 That's just how I write and I dunno who voted for what. Don't let it keep ya up.
I know, and if that was the focus then support should have C5 and LMG's. Instead they catered to tank campers and just chucked something together that isn't working. We had a taste of a game that allowed all players to be flexible, adapt to situations. Why are they dragging the game backwards? They definitely aren't BF vets. They're just easily offended and loud.
I think it should be undone for the health of the game. Many of the early reviews were from players who weren't going to touch the game anyway. Numbers certainly didn't rise after the great nerf.
Would I have complained less if they had classes at the start? Hard to say. We know BF doesn't exist in a bubble, I've played some Fortnite, Doom, Pubg. There may have been a feeling that things could be refreshed as the franchise moves along. At least I wouldn't have bought one game and got served something else after a year.
CoD is for clowns anyway. It's not in any of my collections. I'd be disgusted if BF got dragged down to that level. Honestly I'd be thrilled if they took that crap to XB and it wasn't available on PS or Nin.
