Open/Closed Weapons: A Hybrid Solution
Premise: To resolve the Open/Closed weapon debate in a way that does not split the player base into two separate playlists, I am proposing a hybrid solution be adopted that incorporates both the ope...
Forum Discussion
There are already other threads about this. A hybrid solution could work, but I don't think this suggestion would solve the problem for me. I would still feel forced to choose a class based on my preferred weapon(s). An open class system is simply far better for most players, as it allows you to choose a class based on situation and promotes more tactical team play instead.
As an example I really liked playing the support class in the beta. I felt like I could contribute a lot to my squad in many situations. However if I am forced to play with an LMG as a support I would never play that class. This is not how the class system should feel like. I should pick my class based on the needs of the squad and the needs of the situation I am in. This is why a class system is a positive thing. If I only pick class based on the weapon, the system becomes redundant.
I understand your concern about splitting the player base, but It's better to just keep the weapons open as default.
If you are going to make a "hybrid system" I think more of the weapons needs to be available to different classes. Each weapon should be usable for more than one class, also sniper. Like, why did you exclude sniper from the Assault class.
This is exactly how a class system should feel. YOU MAKE CHOICES. TOUGH CHOICES.
This is NOT call of duty. Your playstyle itself changes in a class. THIS is what battlefield should be. We dont need ballerina cod crap. We need BATTLEFIELD.
Open weapons are like impossible to balance.
Since you have SO many good opinions (you dont) why dont you tell me how to balance carbines vs assault rifles? What would make you choose a carbine?
What you are really saying is you are a cod player. Those are no good.
Ok cod player, you dont seem to get it
This is NOT call of duty. Your playstyle itself changes in a class. THIS is what battlefield should be. We dont need ballerina cod crap. We need BATTLEFIELD.
I love it when people has literally no other argument than calling me a CoD player. Great job. I am well aware this is not Call of Duty, and I don't want it to be. Yes, your playstyle does change with different classes, even in a open weapon system.
Just keep weapons open as default. It is not that hard to balance, and the weapons should be fairly balanced regardless if they are closed or not. It does not have to be perfect for a public casual match anyway. The game should be fun, not feel like it restrict you in a stupid way.. and yes, closed weapons is in my opinion a stupid restriction. We can have different rules if they ever implement a ranked mode.
I really don't understand why it is that important for you to ruin the game for other players by locking weapons. Just play with the class and signature weapon if you want, but don't force other players to play with different classes OR weapons. It is not that hard, and it is not that big of a deal. I never liked the class system with closed weapons in BF3 either, luckily BF6 beta had a more fun open system, where I as a player actually appreciate and engage in the class system.you have SO many good opinions
Thank you, I know.
Let me ask you, y does the game has to have open weapons to be fun. BF has a rock, paper, scissor style of play which gets thrown off when you have open weapons. Its fine for battle royale but not for the base game. What makes it even more ridiculous is how they are closing throwables instead. The term COD player is used to over simplify a list of core mechanics that are oversimplified for shooter, which is not a bad thing but it has a place (not BF)
You are correct in saying Balancing weapons its easy, but that only counts when you are only Balancing said weapons. BF has a class system which focuses on what each class does instead of a K/D ratio which is what makes it difficult to balance. It doesn't have to be perfect, you are correct on that point but it also makes it pointless to have classes and a variety of weapons when most will run with the same gun loadout no matter which class they play. One player shouldn't be a one man army, 1 gun shouldn't be good at everything. Each class and weapon has to have shortcomings and every player have to rely on others to overcome them (weight the consequences of your choices and actions). Worst case scenario fall back and reposition to a situation that is advantageous "this is what COD players seems to not understand" (you are not a super soldier).
You can play alone but you will need to have more situational awareness or risk getting blown/shot to hell. Also it will emphasize the need for taking cover and fire, which has been nerfed as respawn time and health regen are too fast but i can overlook it if they did a better job at balancing the classes. I don't have a problem with games that have open weapons but it doesn't work for BF base game balancing, don't have an issue with it being added to battle royale and lobbies as those stray away from classic BF and should have more freedom. With all said and done it would be up to EA to make that final decision
