Remove the drone like you did with the shield
Just remove the from the game like you did the shield until you fix the ability to put C5 on it. It's not a "fun battlefield mechanic" it's an exploit and a bug and will only get worse as it gets m...
Forum Discussion
Just putting the word exploit in all caps doesn’t mean anything, you know. A video game exploit is defined as the use of bugs, glitches, or systems to gain an unfair advantage in a manner not intended by the development team.
I, alongside many others I’m sure, have never once had an issue taking out a drone. Furthermore now that the latest update has increased their visibility and hitbox size you should be having even less trouble. So there goes the ‘unfair’ part of the argument.
Furthermore did you ever play battlefield 4 and get mauled by a SUAV? Or blown up by a C4 jeep? Or a MAV targeting some C4 that a friendly had placed in on your vehicle because they were pally with someone on the enemy team? All of these things are not intended use but they all happened and they were all mainstays for better or worse. Most of them were even arguably harder to deal with than Casper’s drone. To state that, after all the shenanigans that used to occur in previous titles, using a recon drone to ferry C4 was ‘unintended by the developers’ is insane.
Battlefield lives and dies on its playerbase’s out-of-the-box thinking, if people didn’t experiment with the sandbox we wouldn’t have C4 launches or rende-zooks. If you want to play a Battlefield where player expression is considered exploitative and should be reigned-in, then you do you, but that is never what Battlefield has been about, it has always been about creativity.
It’s what makes the game so great.
@WrongJeremy
I might understand the use of a single gamebreaking OP-V-C5 in-game, but not 8 and more at once. It is absolutely gamebreaking, an exploit.
Even killing a Tank by a single hit, on normal server - not hardcore...
You are one of these exploiters, right? That is why you defend this easy kill, easy XP and gamebreaking issue to the cost of others.
You keep using the words ‘game breaking’ and ‘exploit’ but I don’t think you know what they mean.
I empathise with your point of view, I do. I know it seems like I don’t, but I do. Dying a lot is frustrating in any game, no less one where death might mean you have to trek across a desert for 5 minutes before seeing another enemy.
The issue is you’re playing a dangerous game by constantly calling what is ultimately player expression an exploit. It plainly isn’t, it doesn’t break the game, it might make it tough, but it’s playable by definition alone, and I’ve already gone over why it’s not an exploit.
We can’t fall into this trap where every little bit of creativity is sucked out of a game because the player base just wants a normal, point-and-shoot experience, where exploration of the tools at hand is actively punished. And I’m not saying that’s what’s definitely going to happen here, but surely you can see you’re starting down that road, and surely you don’t want that?
@WrongJeremy
At first: BF2042 has already enough "variety"... except maps and gamemodes. But those will be added later, I guess, and hopefully without "paid DLCs" or we gonna see a next crappy BF4..
Second: I exactly know what gamebreaking and exploit mean.
3rd: I don't care if I die in BF, but due to cheater and exploiter!! They are both the same "pest".. just like in any other games!!And at last but not least:
I play BF since its early beginning with BF1942 almost 2 decades ago, I own every BF game. I have disliked your beloved BF4 and later BF1. So I have truly sticked to BFBC2 - hardcore only, the best part and past of all. BF3 was okay, even as a Closed Alpha tester.
In BF3 Closed Alpha, Closed Beta and even in Open Beta, we had really amazing OP weapons which had become nerfed later. These were better and way more precisely than the just-fixed PP-29. And I hope to see this OP-V-C5 nerf coming for BF2042 as well... for good.
so we both have roughly the same experience with Battlefield games, only I played 1942 much later, so you must understand that it’s an unhealthy mindset to go calling something like this an exploit?
When people say exploit what usually comes to mind is out of map glitches, spawn timer resets, that kind of thing.
Using two tools in an unorthodox but valid way doesn’t scream exploit to me and, judging by this thread, many others. I just think you’re going about getting your point across the wrong way, that’s all.
Out of interest, have you played since the new update? I didn’t get the chance to play today as I’ve been quite busy but I’d love to know how the hit boxes on the drones have actually changed.
@WrongJeremy
When people say Sushi, they generally mean raw fish... But it isn't raw fish. Sushi is "prepared vinegared rice". Raw Fish is called "Sashimi".
An exploit is an exploit!
A map glitch is a map glitch, not an exploit, but it can be "exploited"... Same goes for badly scripted gamerules, errors, issues like spawn timer resets. A badly scripted spawn timer is a badly coded spawn timer, but it can be "exploited"...And as mentioned already, this OP-V-C5 gamebreaking issue in its current state is currently a heavy exploit. It is even more gamebreaking, it is totally off without a doubt, if there are waiting half a dozen and more of such OP-V-C5's "at once".
yeah I’m fond of sashimi but not sushi, always found that odd.
How about we just agree to disagree on the whole exploit thing? It seems we could both go all day because we seem to disagree on something as fundamental as what is fun about Battlefield, and that’s totally fine because fun is subjective.
As I’ve said already I empathise with your position, and while I don’t agree, it’s important to take all aspects in.
Regardless of what comes of this I think we CAN agree that it’s good that DICE have seemingly already taken steps to course-correct a little bit.
@WrongJeremy
This needs a massive balance, or this "ability" to be removed completely.It is already tough enough to kill an enemy tank with the Recoilless in normal mode, but to instantly kill a Tank with such an *cough* exploit *cough*, ..nope..
I have set my point of view about this issue and I hope there will be a "balanced" fix in near future. However, I am back in-game. Cya guys around later.No. Please do not take them out.
This is the only thing that i enjoy. If Tank X killed me 4-5 times and i finally get revenge with one drone, thats not really very unbalanced. Its sorta cool you can do that and a lot of things have to go right to do it properly anyways. Just have your squad look out for drones. They are super easy to shoot down. Its not my fault when you can't see me coming at ya 😉
- @WrongJeremy They have. I shot a ton of them down. They are super easy to destroy.
- @WrongJeremy I am overall against the idea, mainly due to the roof vehicle drops and other silliness still in the game.
Otherwise, it does seem silly to load up so much C5 on a tiny, hand-held recon drone… and I think that is the best compromise solution:
Limiit the “weight” the drone can carry, which is likely just one C5 pack. Well, I feel that might be better than nothing, but it still does not address my concern. And I am trying to be fair - both for Infantry & Vehicle players in Breakthrough.
Why I feel this C5 + Drone thingy must be removed is:
1. No-Risk Involvement for Casper
As Casper, you can get multi-kills, vehicle destroyed stats and XP with absolute no risk. If your drone gets shot down, then re-supply and repeat. This is not the same as other Battlefield titles where you actually had to use a quad bike or jeep , which involved risk. If your quad bike gets shot, you die and have to re-spawn. But in this Casper's case, you just have to re-supply and repeat.
I love this game, this issue is not gonna stop me from playing BF 2042, I enjoy both vehicle & infantry play ( I absolutely love the latest update, assault rifles are finally usable). All I want is to contribute and hope there is a fair balance between Infantry & Vehicle gameplay.
(Removed text, dont share exploits on the forums) -Atic
