Does anyone else hate specialists?
After puting many hours into the beta, I came to one conclusion. Specialists suck! They make the game unrealistic in every way, they don't make sense, and this game didn't feel like a battlefield gam...
Forum Discussion
@dirtytamatoSpecialists are more “realistic” than classes, truly.
They are merely a different form of the class system and I have yet to hear a valid, coherent argument against the concept of specialists.
Most people just don’t like them for emotional or nostalgic reasons, which is fine, but that does not really invalidate the reality that they are not all that different from classes…
I full heartedly disagree. I'm pretty sure our us military don't run around with an auto turret in their back pocket.
- @dirtytamato They do not, but Boris is not American and this is a “future” setting game… beside the point though.
The military does identify combat roles within a squad or team for each member to fill, but cross-training can make those combat roles interchangeable and I see specialists in much the same light. You could argue about the Medic / Corpsman, but even Combat Lifesaver Training is widely taught across the board. - @dirtytamato I’m pretty sure they don’t carry a bunch of parachutes either.
It’s a game, not a sim. There’s not much that’s realistic about BF if you actually break it down for a second. The focus for any game should be balancing which I would argue makes for the most fun. I’ve played classes for years now, kinda boring.It took me about 5 hours each to get bored of each specialists. I stopped playing the beta 2 days in because of how dreadfully boring the specialists made the game. I suppose they are better for playing solo and not worrying about sticking to a role but that's not what I play battlefield for and other games do it better so I don't really see what the point of this battlefield game is.
@dirtytamato If think in this way, jump from a jet and blow a enemy with a rpg is not much realistic, c'mmon bro, over realism is not a argument for this is not the propose from this game, never was and is not a sim
I get where you are coming from but have you seen the new specialists? This is litterally a cod game
- @carsono311 Exactly!
The Specialist system looks really interesting and we’ll see soon enough how well it works in practice. I’m really excited for Hazard Zone. Specialist definitely didn’t make the beta bad in anyway. The wall-hacking lady will probably need to balanced, but that’s any game. It’s not going to be perfect at launch. When anyone says something like 'I have yet to hear a valid, coherent argument' against something, what they mean to say is 'no matter what you say, I will claim it to be invalid and incoherent as my mind is already made up'.
Maybe that isn't the case here, but I struggle to believe that someone can come to these forums and make that claim.
Specialists could (heavy emphasis on could) be like a sub class within a class, however how anyone could claim the current specialist situation is like classes in any way is beyond me. What makes a class? Previously it was gun, gadgets and armour. Specialists can have any gun, any gadget and their armour tells you nothing about them.....
Now, most of the issues with specialists can be amended to make them less of an issue; things like having the same specialists on each team messing up enemy recognition, not knowing who is carrying ammo/medic kits, one specialist being better than the rest. All specialists looking the same as each other. With UI tweaks, faction specific colours, customisation and ongoing tweaks to specialists abilities this will evolve and could be fine, in time.
However, some things may be harder to solve, like how do you encourage the use of ammo/medikits over more fun/solo oriented gadgets I e. RPGs? Classes restricted your choice and even non-team oriented players would likely have to run a beneficial gadget that they may even use once or twice. The beta, not full game I know, had an overabundance of Mackay's and RPGs... Hopefully the full game doesn't settle on to such a meta. Multi-class guns, rather than specialists, would keep to those restrictions forcing players to pick useful teamplay gadgets, or even just restricting the gadgets each type of specialist can take - the latter seemingly a great half way house that could make both sides a bit more content.
I also liked classes as you knew what the enemy player could have, from gun type to gadgets, so knew whether to stay at range or rush in or if your tank was likely to be C4'd or RPG'd. This is gone with Specialists. This removes a tactical element that I liked that they can't get back.
The abilities are the biggest issue for me though, as it stands. Some seem very lacking and then you have wall hacks.... I can already see who most of the community will be playing as and with no restrictions on gun or gadget to help balance them, it is going to be a challenge for Dice. This will be a buff/nerf fest for the foreseeable future and including more specialists down the line will only add to this. Who wouldn't want to be the best specialist, with the best weapon and best gadget?
- @Tee_Doff2369 Nice post. I understand some of the arguments against specialists, like recognizing the enemies capabilities at a glance.. and balancing problems. One thing I don’t understand though is the argument that now no one will pick meds or ammo because they can have a rocket launcher. Isn’t this just the same as before? Some people selected support classes even when another class was ‘better’.. there are lotsa players out there that like to play the support role. I don’t see how the specialists suddenly will change that..
As for the OPs question: nope. Don’t hate them. Don’t care much for them either way.. not game breaking and it is still battlefield to me.- @mesterKG I don't think no one will pick ammo or meds, just going by what I saw in Beta it was very limited and the temptation to pick an RPG seemed too great. I expect it to start similar but work its way out as people get in to a teamplay mindset again, however I still think this may not quite be up to the level of past games.
The big question is around weapons. A lot of players will have chosen a class based on weapon and used the kit accordingly in past games. So in BF4 if you wanted an assault rifle you'd have to be a medic and use the tools that come with it - now would these players have used those tools if they didn't have too? I guess we are going to find out... I'm perhaps just a bit more pessimistic!
Conversely a lot of players may not have played as medic/support because they didn't like the weapons. So now they are free to do so...
Personally Angel seems to be who I'll play as, as a support/medic oriented specialist. I just hope the wall hack meta doesn't take hold!!!
@Tee_Doff2369I said exactly what I meant to say.
"...What makes a class? Previously it was gun, gadgets and armour. Specialists can have any gun, any gadget and their armour tells you nothing about them..... "
What makes a class is the combat role it performs, which was in the name. Those roles can and will still exist within the game, but there is simply more freedom and variety within and between them.
"...like how do you encourage the use of ammo/medikits over more fun/solo oriented gadgets I e. RPGs?..."
Ah yes, the age old question of Battlefield (and team-building in general): How do we make inherently selfish individuals behave and perform as a team? I do not believe Specialists are going to influence this problem one way or another. Those players that enjoy and participate in the team aspects of the game will continue to do so, while others will not.
"...This removes a tactical element that I liked that they can't get back."
Target prioritization is important, no doubt. However simply knowing how to deal with an enemy at a glance (no matter the range, many times) is unrealistic and in my opinion, stale over time. I would argue that this is one of, if not the most important, points of weapon optics... I will agree in general that this point is a valid concern overall though, since I have not seen consistent draw distances (and only on one map) that make this reliable enough.
Lastly, yes the meta game will be a bit crazier in Battlefield 2042, I agree. Constant tweaking has been part of most Battlefield games though and my only real hope is that EA DICE have not bitten off more than they can (or want) to chew... we will see.- @carsono311 Me too, with Specialists or Class System the selfish behavior will be there, always exists how many medics crossing arround you without revive? Support's dont using ammo box ... Engineers dont give atention to veichles, is a normal thing in all Battlefield, much more if you play solo is rarely encouter one guy, squad or the entire team playing for the objective and team play. This depends allways from the player, not the system
I've yet to see a coherent argument FOR specialists. I know that the only reason they are in the game is to sell the battlepass and dice was probably forced to put them in by ea but besides money I haven't heard a single good argument in their favour.
@carsono311 wrote:
@dirtytamatoSpecialists are more “realistic” than classes, truly.
They are merely a different form of the class system and I have yet to hear a valid, coherent argument against the concept of specialists.
Most people just don’t like them for emotional or nostalgic reasons, which is fine, but that does not really invalidate the reality that they are not all that different from classes…
@carsono311 I loath Specialists for actual game play reasons. You cannot identify friend from foe, it destroys the 2 decade long paper/rock/scissors balancing via COD's create-a-class concept, you have no idea which teammate is carrying ammo/health/reps, and this leads to everybody creating the most self centered lone wolf load outs which further contributes to lessening the teamwork.
I have a yet to see any reason beyond trend chasing and monetization that explains why Battlefield was suddenly turned into a Hero Shooter.
@ragnarok013
- IFF is simply a visibility issue, not really a conceptual problem.
- Okay, yes. The potential balancing issues could be a problem, but it is not for certain yet.
- If you mean the general, 64-player team, then I guess I will agree that being able to identify who can resupply , heal , etc. at a glance is a problem. However, in a pre-made group / squad, this is moot.
Now, as to why they moved away from the class system... I cannot offer anything other than what you say. The only possibility I could possibly give is perhaps that this was seen as a chance to innovate, but my gut tells me you are correct...
@carsono311 wrote:
@ragnarok013
- IFF is simply a visibility issue, not really a conceptual problem.
- Okay, yes. The potential balancing issues could be a problem, but it is not for certain yet.
- If you mean the general, 64-player team, then I guess I will agree that being able to identify who can resupply , heal , etc. at a glance is a problem. However, in a pre-made group / squad, this is moot.
Now, as to why they moved away from the class system... I cannot offer anything other than what you say. The only possibility I could possibly give is perhaps that this was seen as a chance to innovate, but my gut tells me you are correct...@carsono311 you cannot balance a game around pre-made squads when the average player is playing alone in a PUG squad. IFF has a solution by faction locking specialists or even better giving each specialist a faction look and faction voice lines but DICE didn't even mention considering such a COA so we have to assume the worst case scenario that they aren't looking at real solutions just their "IFF lighting" that will still get you killed in a split second gun fight since you team still looks exactly like the enemy team.
I agree with you. And dice needs to read these discussions cause there is a lot wrongs with specialists
- @carsono311 They’re not at all really. I mean everyone can play as them on both teams and they have the same uniforms. They’re “Russian” and “American” fighting against themselves. This to me makes no sense whatsoever. At least with factions in BFV you had classes and could change their appearance and STILL be able to identify who’s an enemy and not see Mackay everywhere on both teams. It’s just goofy. IMO they could’ve put specialists in just Hazard Zone where they actually make some sort of sense
@zanderson9688Again, I agree with the visibility (IFF, unique skins, all of it) of specialists being an issue, but not the concept.
Visibility can be, and will be I am sure, quickly and easily fixed.
@carsono311
If..... they want to fix it.
Haven't heard a single thing about faction specific skins. At all. I bet there aren't any. Just other skins that will be paid in game. I bet!
@carsono311 wrote:@dirtytamatoSpecialists are more “realistic” than classes, truly.
They are merely a different form of the class system and I have yet to hear a valid, coherent argument against the concept of specialists.
Most people just don’t like them for emotional or nostalgic reasons, which is fine, but that does not really invalidate the reality that they are not all that different from classes…
For starters:
- It limits your gadget loadouts. In previous games you could pick any two class gadgets, now one of those slots is locked. You can't pick a repair tool and rockets, for example.
- They are not classes at all. Classes have very defined roles in Battlefield. These specialists have very loosely defined roles, if any at all. When your "medic" can take an ammo crate and a sniper rifle to go camp and self heal that doesn't sound like a class.
- Right now you can have the same specialist on both teams, that's annoying for team recognition.
- There is no way to know if any of your teammates may or may not have certain support items.
- The specialist abilities are slowly looking more like CoD or R6 perks than Battlefield perks. Built in wall hacks? No thanks.
The reality is that specialists are here to make money and cater to the CoD crowd who wants to treat each match like a one man army.
1. Repair tools and rockets were avalaible at the same in bf3 and bf4 in the engineering classes
2. There still is classes, some specialist are geared towards assault, some recon, some support ect.
3. You played the beta, which was very incomplete. You dont think they are going to add faction distinction in the full build? I do.
4. Again beta with incomplete UI and info systems. (U also didn't know what a teammate had until bf1 in the series btw)
5. Kinda like in bfv when you can call in an air strike, or a v2 bomb or other "perks" or in bf4 and bf3 when you got "perks" like faster revive ability or flak protection or extra armor...why are you complaining about this just now?
@carsono311The main problem is that we are losing a system from past games where choosing a class defined your role. ENGI gets ridd of vehicls and can run carbines while repairing, ASSAULT heals and deals better damege with assult rifles etc .... when all those synchronicities are gone everyone will pick the specilst and gear that best suits them and not the team. We saw it in the Beta. Mobility of McKay and rocket launchers were everywhere without any revives or ammo being handed out.
The previous games made sure that no matter the class u played there was an element of that class that forced you to help your team in some way. With specialists that is all gone. Get ready for wall hacking, rocket launching solo players.
I think an easy fix is to make sure specialists have restrictions on gear, for instance in the engineer class, is the oly one that can run rocket launchers and anti vehicle gear and run carbines. Assault specialists have medic abilities and are the only class to run assault rifles. These restrictions help define roles... Without it u could end up with game breaking situations that make playing multiplayer painful between each game breaking patch for the next 2 years.I still believe that nobody would have said anything if those gadgets would have been added directly into the 4 classes that we are used too. People are just blind by hate and easily convince by other people.
- @sk8chalif I think you may be correct.
@J4K5I disagree.
1. The players that want to play as a team will do so and coordinate their decisions around that.
2. Not sure what Battlefield you played where players were “forced” to play as a team… because I have never played it.
There have always been the true lone-wolf players that will never play with teammates and there always will be.
Any gamebreaking issues / situations will be patched. So again, I think my original point stands.
@carsono311 wrote:@J4K5I disagree.
1. The players that want to play at a team will do so and coordinate their decisions around that.But this argument circles back to the main point against Specialists. If you are a random that joins a squad when firing up the game (which may be a large majority of players) and wants to play as a team how will they know how to coordinate? You don't know how the other Specialists will fill their roles in that squad. Unless of course you get on comms with each other and say "ok you play as this, I'll play as that, etc." Good luck with that...
Traditional classes gave you a greater ability to coordinate teamwork based on the classes that were filling out a squad.
