Forum Discussion

RogueLdr's avatar
RogueLdr
Rising Novice
2 months ago

Please don't make Generic Shooter #1472

This game does not feel like Battlefield. It feels like a well made, but generic FPS. 

Low TTK,

Small meat grinder maps,

small squads,

paper vehicles.

 

Let's define what makes Battlefield, Battlefield, and see how 6 stands up.

 

1: Objective based game play.

Didn't get to play all the modes, but as long as you keep the focus on Conquest, Rush etc and not waste time with crap like team death match or some battle royal BS, you seem to be on track.

 

2: Squad based tactical game play.

Squads need to be bigger. At least by one man. Such small squads reduces the impact that strategic play offers. Sneaking behind enemy lines and placing a beacon, or letting people spawn on you is much less effective the smaller the squad.

Class restricted weapons. This is a big one. If you're gaining the ability to carry game changing gadgets, there has to be a trade off. Explain to me why the hell i would ever use assault when i can use the same weapon AND carry AV stuff. Let's not even mention snipers that can heal and resupply themselves.

While it's no where near as bad as the "one man army" nonsense we had in 2042, not restricting weapons weakens the class roles and the interdependence of balanced squads.

 

3: Combined arms

This, IMO, is really the one that sets BF apart. There are many games that offer various quality levels of infantry combat. But only BF offers true combined arms gameplay.

While i'm aware that for some inexplicable reason, they chose to not add the larger vehicle oriented maps, or even all of the vehicles in the beta,  I will base this portion on what i did see, as well as what was done in 2042 as this was their latest design philosophy. 

In 2042 vehicles were too weak. Well, TBH, the issue wasn't that vehicles were weak. it was they there are too many counters to them. On top of having to deal with jets, helos, other armor, almost every single infantry carried something that could kill you. You rolled into an area, and instantly 8 rockets would come flying at you from every direction. Not to mention the 4 guys charging you on foot with C4 trying to beat the rockets to the kill. In a tank you were the hunted, not the hunter.

In 6, you either got blown up instantly, (a la 2042) or you were unkillable because you had 4 engis fixing you. Now, because they chose to almost completely ignore vehicles in beta, i can't comment on wide spread power, but i will say this about repairing.

There needs to be diminishing returns. 

I.E.   1 engi repairing gets full repair. The 2nd engi repairing the same vehicle does so at 50%. The 3rd does so at 25%. 4 plus, repairs at 5%. I love the teamwork involved with repairing vehicles, but unlimited stacking can be broken if abused.

In short, vehicles need to feel important. They are force multipliers. Normal infantry should flee before them, or hide in terror. 

Don't misunderstand. I don't want them to be all powerful. But a tank showing up at your flag, should be an "OH $hit!" moment. Unless your squad are all AV, (which you shouldn't be, because class locked weapons and you don't like the engi guns), you should not be happy about armor rolling up on your position. It should take a coordinated effort by several people to take out armor.

if that sounds unbalanced, remember this. Vehicles have a long respawn timer. You are contested to even get into it. Then you have to drive across the map to get to the fight. Where as infantry respawn very quickly and you can always spawn as whatever class you want. Usually right at the fight.

If vehicles die to easily they become utterly pointless.

In fact they become a detriment. Because in the amount of time it took me to wait for the vehicle, drive to a battle only to die almost instantly, i could probably have gotten several kills and helps hold a flag on foot. Armor should help your team win, not hurt the chances.

 

BF 6 feels like it was made by someone who was told about all the good things about Battlefield, but never actually played it, so the best they could do was a poor imitation. 

As it stands now, i'm not sure i'd pay $30 for this generic shooter. $70 is almost laughable.

 

Please turn this into a real Battlefield game.

If you build it, they will come!

 

4 Replies

  • You need to read the Devs update from last week. Most of your concerns have been addressed already.

  • RogueLdr's avatar
    RogueLdr
    Rising Novice
    2 months ago

    They said they are "investigating" ttk.

    While better than nothing, it's hardly reassuring that it will be changed and sounds more like placating. but we'll see.

    Nothing in point 2 was addressed.

    And at best it looks like we'll have 2 large scale vehicle maps at launch. with none of my vehicle balance concerns being mentioned.

    I'd hardly call what i talked about "being addressed."

  • Did you know that the TTK being low and one frame deaths are recurring issues? It has plagued Battlefield since at least Battlefield 3. Despite that, the Battlefield weapon roster over the years have often included 900+ RPM weapons, meaning that you had sub-300 millisecond non-headshot deaths.

    Did you know Battlefield 1942 had a Team Deathmatch or that every Battlefield since Battlefield 3 has had Team Deathmatch? If you count Squad Deathmatch to the equation, the majority of the Battlefield games have had a game mode that featured no capturable objectives.

    Did you know that Battlefield 1942 didn't even have a squad system, but a buddy system? Interestingly,  Battlefield 4, Hardline and 1 had 5 player squads, which meant that on a 64 or 32 player server you always had incomplete squads, because 64 and 32 aren't divisible by 5 to a whole integer? Battlefield 2/2142 was no exception, it had 6 player squads, but 64 or 32 player servers aren't divisible by 6 either.

    People's perceptions of the identity of Battlefield is always interesting to read. They always have a very specific idea in mind, but the reality is that Battlefield games have tried all sorts of things over the years.

     

  • SpiritofGames's avatar
    SpiritofGames
    Rising Adventurer
    2 months ago

    The EA_Rtas "Open Beta Debrief" was quite good, and "talking about" or "investigating" issues is usually the best you can get before they make definitive statements and changes. We should not want these changes to be made too rapidly but to be well contemplated and implemented. 

    I am sorry that you feel that this game is just a generic FPS, but I must say that I feel that after experiencing two Open Beta Weekends that this Battlefield 6 is "classic" Battlefield. 

    I am an old veteran Engineer tank driver and tank gunner in Battlefield (and Recon) from way back when, and I do feel that the RPG and C4 damage was a bit overtuned.  However, I did notice the strong sense of camaraderie among the Engineer class. A bevy of Engineers would ride on top of the tank repairing it or walk behind it repairing it which, because of the heavy incoming damage, was absolutely necessary. It was a great feeling to be a tank driver and have a tank gunner and four Engineers surrounding your tank helping you out. That is classic Battlefield -- that is team-play.

    I spent $99 on the Special Edition Battlefield 6 package and after playing both Open Beta Weekends I'm really happy I did. The YouTube Battlefield Open Beta videos that I have been watching seem to be anticipating a really great game. Please be aware that it takes also the first six months to a year after release to make sure the game is fine-tuned properly.

    ;-D

About Battlefield 6 General Discussion

Join the Battlefield 6 community to get game information and updates, talk tactics and share Battlefield moments.3,823 PostsLatest Activity: 7 days ago