Re: BF2042 Soldier Weapons Loadout - Do we get what we want?

---

@ragnarok013 wrote:

---

@TickTack121 wrote:

@CyberDyme I Would like to have it like in Previous titles, Scrap those lame specialists and give us simple classes. But i guess i have to play it first anyways.

---

@TickTack121 ^^^THIS is exactly what I want.  I'm extremely leery of the balance implications where everyone can run around with the best AR, an RPG, and have their own ammo box. Battlefield was always about paper/rock/scissors balance. Choosing which class you wanted to play as had tradeoffs, do I want to have the best AR, kill vehicles, or have my own ammo supply. That choice had balance consequences and now it looks like DICE is using the rock/rock/rock balancing since everyone will inevitably use the latest best primary weapon, best gadget etc. If you thought the M16A3 was overused in BF3 just wait until you have 128 players using the new 2042 version of the M16A3.  I don't see tankers being happy with even more people using AT assets either.

This game looked like an absolute return to the BF3/4 game play that I loved until I saw the horrible Apex Legends ramrodded into the the Battlefield formula. Many of us just wanted DICE  to make a return to the tried and true Battlefield formula before it was corrupted by Battlefront mechanics, not move further away from the Battlefield formula by adding heroes and chasing more trends. I don't see them removing specialists but they could return to the class structure and make specialists the new Elites.

---

Did you read my mind? :D

I think, we will even see the Meta in the Beta (it rhymes, get it for Marketing Dice!!!). Instead of improving Battlefield since BF4 they always scrapped good mechanics for some "new stuff" that they just stole from other developers. Dice should set the trends with Battlefield, not follow them.

@ragnarok013 

I get your point and understand it but on console players already played the game (on my experience) in most self-serving way by selecting engineer class with most satisfying primary weapon of choice (carbine at close range or DMR for long range) and rocket launcher. There are usually full squads of engineers on combined arms maps.

I feel there will be no actual difference between these two in how people in reality will play other than that specialist system allows more flexible combinations with primaries and secondary gadgets. I am pretty sure there will be balance that you can't resupply rocket ammo for yourself that those gadgets are on same slot. 

On bright side, now sniper rifle enthuasists aren't limited to recon role. They have freedom to build alternative builds and some may select better options for team play.

Classes are now more like balanced in rock-paper-scissors-water-fire-metal-wind-earth-wood-void— balancing. As "heroes" which are specialised sub-classes if you think about it. Just only with one gadget and trait but still :3

---

@Teal_Pipo_Fredo wrote:

@ragnarok013 

On bright side, now sniper rifle enthuasists aren't limited to recon role. They have freedom to build alternative builds and some may select better options for team play.

---

That is what is being missed by some. Squadd can now be better suited to working together with primary weapons range while doing a range of combat roles.

Here a question to all. What is Sundance's gadget?

Based on comments about standard gadgets will be available to all, we only knowing ammo, health and RPG being available atm.

It would be possible for a Medic squad to run

Maria DMR, ammo

Maria SMG, ammo

Maria AR, RPG

Maria LMG, RPG

This squad  can fight infantry at any range and can handle vehicles. 

We can create squad to the way we want no matter the map. 

BF1 and 5 sucked for recon no real short range weapons to late in game and then could not be good at CQB because that was another classes role. BF3/4 was not much better with 2nd rate AR and shotguns for the same reason.