What if Tanks, Helicopters, and Jets also had limited ammo just like infantry does. From there you either need a certain vehicle that resupplies them (yes you can steal an enemy's resupply vehicle and supply your tank/Heli) or you need to go to your base or maybe certain objectives have ammo for tanks. This would balance Tanks/Helis/Jets by preventing them from Being OP and would make it more realistic. I'm Not saying to only let them have 10 shots, but make it more realistic and don't allow them to have unlimited ammo. The unlimited ammo allows for someone to tear through the map, by reducing their ammo it at least means they cant camp a certain area and means everyone has to play as a team. That's why I love Battlefield. It rewards team work and has everyone doing their roles.

@vash98mmwe had limited ammo in Battlefield V and it was more of an annoyance then anything and didn't do much for balancing tbh

@vash98mmHow about people stop trying to take away what makes BATTLEFIELD unique compared to other shooters because you can't handle it.The reason battlefield v is hated is because it's limited ammo system for vehicles is the WORST CHANGE EVER compared to previous games. It's the reason a ton more people are playing Battlefield 4 right now.If you don't like them than that is what Stingers and other Rocket Launchers and Explosives are for. If you want to stop them than you need to learn how to outsmart them.BATTLEFIELD is all about huge battles with Tons Of Vehicles. If you can't handle that than learn to counter them. That's what the new Solo and Coop matches are for 🙂

@vash98mm Nah, ground/air vehicles should have unlimited ammo again.Ground/air vehicles need quick enter/exit animations; none of this instant transmition in/out of vehicles rubbish anymore, especially when you're about to kill someone in a vehicle.When it comes to helicopters acting as mosquitos against troopers, troopers should be able to shoot and damage pilots through windscreens. That's another risk pilots should have to take if they decide to try and get too close and sweaty at troopers.Unguided rockets need to instant kill all aerial vehicles. Guided rockets need to take away 50% hp. They can activate counter measures and fly away so this is reasonable and balanced.Ground vehicles should have a bit more resistance to rockets than air vehicles, but not so much that they're OP to something that should be able to destroy them as intended.Everyone being able to carry rpgs/stingers, etc is going to be one of the best features the devs could've added - anything to improve the chance of eliminating scrubby vehicle spam (especially aerial) quicker the better.Really hope the devs do reasonable enough balancing when it comes to all of this.

@GRiPSViGiL wrote:@NoodlesocksThe BFV system is a good system to balance. I didn't mind the out of the way resupply stations...that was balance. With the way the new territory control system can be capped these stations will probably be more vital to controlling areas.The problem was that it made it most beneficial for tanks not to get involved with the objectives. There was no reason for them to; it was better to sit far away from the action, out of bounds or literally parked right next to a supply station taking shots of opportunity. When they ran out they can just drive off to relative safety where no enemy is going to bother going to cause it's not an objective.Compare this to 1942 that had a similar system, the resupply stations were always on objectives. It was always in the best interest for vehicles to help take and defend the objectives. To put themselves at risk in areas that the enemy may be lurking because if they didn't take the point and they didn't defend the objectives, they would be running out of ammo and having to return to base or to another flag to rearm.They also screwed up air resupplying by allowing you to resupply over enemy spawns so there was no more risk flying over enemy territory than it was staying in your own. Something they fixed for the pacific maps but never bothered updating the older maps with.It's a good system. Much better than infinite ammo six pump chump system they appear to be going with in 2042 but like many things in BF5, it wasn't very well implemented.

@RNM4010028 wrote:simple really..... get rid of jets....For some reason, and it may be just a way off wrong sensation I have picked up from your many many posts mentioning jets...But OK, now I will ask you very direct. So, sorry for being blunt, but:Do you have something against jets in the BF games? :o)

How to Balance Tanks/Helis/Planes

26 Replies

Noodlesocks
5 years ago
@GRiPSViGiL wrote:
@NoodlesocksThe BFV system is a good system to balance. I didn't mind the out of the way resupply stations...that was balance. With the way the new territory control system can be capped these stations will probably be more vital to controlling areas.
The problem was that it made it most beneficial for tanks not to get involved with the objectives. There was no reason for them to; it was better to sit far away from the action, out of bounds or literally parked right next to a supply station taking shots of opportunity. When they ran out they can just drive off to relative safety where no enemy is going to bother going to cause it's not an objective.
Compare this to 1942 that had a similar system, the resupply stations were always on objectives. It was always in the best interest for vehicles to help take and defend the objectives. To put themselves at risk in areas that the enemy may be lurking because if they didn't take the point and they didn't defend the objectives, they would be running out of ammo and having to return to base or to another flag to rearm.
They also screwed up air resupplying by allowing you to resupply over enemy spawns so there was no more risk flying over enemy territory than it was staying in your own. Something they fixed for the pacific maps but never bothered updating the older maps with.
It's a good system. Much better than infinite ammo six pump chump system they appear to be going with in 2042 but like many things in BF5, it wasn't very well implemented.
DingoKillr
5 years ago
@TTZ_Dipsythis was talked about before BFV release, that was going to happen but no community insist it would not happen. A solution would have been allow 100% repair from inside, large ammo pool, supply crate drops and no stations.

No, we need teamwork to repair tank or station to complete.
That type of thinking is happening again.
Trokey66
Seasoned Ace
5 years ago
@TTZ_Dipsy wrote:
Limited ammo in BFV was the WORST because they allowed the initial spawn point to harbour a repair station *rolls eyes* - Enemy vehicles just hugged out of bounds and retreated at the first 2 points of damage and I really hope this won't be tolerated in 2042.

Most if not all vehicles should be automatically balanced with the amount of laser-guided anti-vehicle weapons we should theoretically have

It is dangerous to balance around the 'theoretical' and not the actual.
This is why I firmly believe that unless obviously broken, changes should not be kneejerk and time should be given for things to settle down.
Too many times something is introduced and 'the community' whinge like hell only for a 'thing' to be change too soon often rendering it useless.
Gummgs
5 years ago
Lmao, sounds more like “make it Battlefield 4” than anything. Limited ammo isn’t a new thing and could make the game more strategic, as Battlefield has always been. It’s chaotic, yes, but not a Call of Duty endless shooting ripoff.
rainkloud
Seasoned Ace
5 years ago
@Noodlesocks It depended on the tank. Heavy tanks were not supposed to plop themselves on flags where they would become easy targets for dynamite and mine sandwiches. Light and medium tanks could afford to get closer to the action but even then we have to keep in mind that tanks are supporting units and not for CQC - certainly not WW2 where tanks had slower traverse and speeds and gunners who could be shot dead resulting in dramatically less anti personnel capability.

What I see here is a lot of people I suspect taking a quick mental snapshot of their teammates and then using that to describe the totality of the tanker's behavior. They look over and see a tank resupplying at the depot and they think that tank is camping when in reality they were just resupplying/repairing before moving on to the next objective.

This notion that tankers were just sitting at spawn taking potshots is not in keeping with reality, at least not as I experienced it. What I did see it tankers positioning themselves about 50-100m off the center of the objective and providing support for their teammates. Which is exactly how they're supposed to fight so as not to become RPG magnets.

BF2042 will be a little different since tanks (presumably) will have a lot more tools at their disposal like protected gunner, new rear gunner seat and spotter positions, faster speeds, optics like FLIR/IRNV - so they'll be better equipped to engage at close ranges.

I do totally agree though about aerial resupply over enemy territory, that was unforgivably daft.
CyberDyme
5 years ago
@Gummgs wrote:
Lmao, sounds more like “make it Battlefield 4” than anything. Limited ammo isn’t a new thing and could make the game more strategic, as Battlefield has always been. It’s chaotic, yes, but not a Call of Duty endless shooting ripoff.
A fully remastered BF4 would actually get my vote!
BF3/BF4 on steroids is what they promised me.
And it is what I want !

Forum Discussion

How to Balance Tanks/Helis/Planes

26 Replies

About Battlefield 2042 General Discussion

Recent Discussions

PS5 Edge controller

Snipers, head shots, one shot kills

WTB EU Gamers (And NA I guess too, if you must...)

Are we going to pretend that low tick-rate servers were never a thing?

Auto Aim a big problem, please fix this Electronic Arts