For all those "lack of weapons" complaints...
I don't think people have realized how much that the much lauded and praised "plus system" mechanic has hamstrung development of different weapons in this game.
I'm just going to focus on one firearm in BF2042, but the same arguments can be made for most of the other weapons in BF2042 as well.
Let's take the M5A3 and break this down,
First the different barrels available basically equate to different, entirely unique weapons themselves, CQB, Carbine and Full-length variants, so that right there is THREE separate unique weapons that aren't in game because they would be redundant due to the "plus system" See what I'm saying?
So, now let's talk ammo types.
I'm going to make a couple of assumptions here in regard to ammo types and I'm going to ignore the armor piercing rounds since they aren't really relative to this breakdown.
I see them like this:
- "Standard" ammo (at last in the case of the M5A3) is probably 5.56x45 Nato cartridge, which would require the "Standard" barrel and all applicable lengths of said barrel.
- "Close Combat" ammo is probably based on the 9mm cartridge which would require a barrel change and then you would have all applicable barrel lengths.
- "High Power" ammo is probably based on the 7.62x51 Nato cartridge which again would require a barrel change and then you would have all applicable barrel lengths.
- "Sub-sonic" ammo (at least in the case of the M5A3) is probably based on the .300 Blackout cartridge and again then you would have all applicable barrel lengths.
So, there you go, twelve, count them TWELVE separate and unique weapons that aren't available in BF2042 due to the "plus-system" mechanic.
Now I think it's a neat mechanic, and I'm not saying it needs removed in BF2042, but I hope if they are going use it in future Battlefield titles, they consider limiting it to a couple of different scopes, grips and suppressors, and save barrel lengths and ammo types for making more unique weapon types.
Anyway, those are just my thoughts and opinions, feel free to share yours.
Great points, I actually hadn't thought of it from that perspective but you're right it does remove that layer of tactics with potentially every weapon platform being a "transformer" of sorts.
The main thrust of my post was how I felt the "plus-system" inhibited development of multiple variants of all the AOW weapons, but you're right the one-size-fits-all mechanic of the "plus-system" may just not be the best option going forward.
