DICE TeamDrop your comments below.
Specialists were a step forward, classes were two steps back. Dice has less to listen to those they listen to.
An outdated class system from the past is one big folly.
The fact that this game face-planted and players abandoned it in droves almost immediately after launch would indicate that specialists are in fact NOT the way forward.
If EA/Dice learns any lessons from BF2042, I would hope that the next Battlefield stays closer to the roots of the franchise.
@Straatford87 wrote:
- What do you like?
- What do you dislike?
- Anything you'd like to see changed?
I like the update in general, although it has made the way I like to play somewhat more frustrating.
I like that one can still use a gun one likes - the class perks don't make any particular weapon impractical for any class - and that tactical weapons and DMRs aren't subject to the perk system. I do wonder why Mackay's perk applies to SMGs though; this seems a little out of keeping with the character of the update.
I still think DMRs could use a buff - something feels off about them, perhaps because they beg for the comparison with BFV's semi-autos. In that game, I was happy taking on players using assault rifles because the semi-autos were competitive with them outside of closer ranges. In 2042, I'd rather use a G57 out to about 40m because the DMRs just... feel wrong - like weak sniper rifles rather than a gun that, at its intended range, can compete with an assault rifle. The SFAR and the AK-24 are good examples of assault rifles that out-compete DMRs at their intended range.
This might be down to networking issues. The "netcode" still needs significant work - there's nothing more frustrating than being killed by superbullets, from round a corner, or by someone who seemingly isn't even pointing their gun at you.
The support specialists feel... anaemic. Sure, I get it: They are supposed to be the ones keeping others alive, but this seemingly ignores the reality of BF2042, which is that in the deliberately chaotic environment of CQ128, someone whose job it is to hang back a bit needs to be able to support their teammates more actively. I think it would be worthwhile considering allowing support specialists to equip the SOFLAM. I'd even suggest that C5 be made universally available - support are otherwise powerless against vehicles, while engineers can have that or some kind of rocket and assault can equip C5 too. I'd happily sacrifice the ammo or medical crate as Falck for the ability to annoy a chopper, now that all support can revive to 100% health.
I've started playing Boris recently, which must be because I like punching myself in the balls. Is his turret some kind of joke? Compare it with Lis' TGM - at least that's useful. At launch, it was at most an irritation; now, it is an active handicap on the idiot that chooses Boris. I appreciate that people don't like dying to some auto-aiming machine (no one likes aimbots!), but it's poor at spotting (Casper's drone is infinitely superior), doesn't have the health of the Ranger, and is about as effective as farting at an enemy when it comes to damage output. There seems to be no reason for it to exist. Please address this.
@NazT55 wrote:IMO BF went downhill after 2142. Nothing can compare to BF2 and 2142. The rush of going behind enemy lines to destroy the commander's assets was awesome. And then waiting for the enemy commander to drop a supply crate to repair their assets only for you to resupply yourself with C4 to destroy them again. Fun times. If only they would bring it to Portal.
I’ve heard that so many times that BF2 was quite the experience. I unfortunately missed out on that one. I also heard 2142 was epic. I’m so jealous. I didn’t start playing until Bad Company 2.
The game needs a Commander role or something. We need direction and goals to work towards. There’s no leadership in Battlefield currently.
Respectfully that's revisionist fantasy, while performance issues surely played a part (as well as lack of weapons, maps, so-called "legacy" features etc. etc.), the vast majority of displeasure voiced about BF2042 at launch revolved around the heroes and their abilities.
@Ironhead841LOL, well then, Respectfully those are facts that I stated. The game ran horrible for myself and for some of my friends. If you can’t play the game, then you’re not going to stick around. It’s one part of what hurt the game at launch. You can see the statistics of the most used hardware on Steam.
Do you have any sort of data or statistics to back up the claim that the majority of players had a problem with the lack of classes?
I would argue that between really bad performance and the lack of content played a bigger role then the absence of classes.
I'm not saying that all of that DIDN'T play a part but from a lot of what I saw on these forums, Redditt, Twitter as well as customers' reviews at launch, specialists weren't being warmly received by the Battlefield community at large.
Classes, love them or hate them, are a foundational core feature of a Battlefield title.
EA/Dice's experiment with specialists failed, that is why they are trying to shoehorn classes back into this game NOW.
I don't agree with that decision this late in this game's life cycle but that is WHY they are doing it.
I think Medkit and Ammo need to separate to 2 classes.🙂
