Health and Body armour
I've seen comment on the next BF as modern setting, and customization of body armour different level and impact on players. This is more a reharshing an order topic of past BF. What if we had 2 ...
Forum Discussion
@DingoKillr I'm not a fan as it changes the established formula and adds another layer for DICE to balance and let's face it, their track record on balancing things doesn't inspire confidence since things go from OP to useless in one patch. It also
Fully agreed @ragnarok013 ,
Can we please keep it as simple as possible!
I recall the endless quarreling aka when BF4 came out with all the disgruntled players who kept complaining about why their "Skill Score" was listed as it was and not much higher, to match their (self proclaimed) SuperHero status. As many were so busy comparing themselves versus others.
Same as well with all the complainers about nerfing that thing and that weapon and what have you.
As aka they had dressed out with the defensive perks and they still found it totally unfair as they were sure some enemies could still one-shot them...
So, the simpler the better please ! :o)
@ragnarok013Personally I think an armor-system would probably change the TTK of the game way too much.
If the TTK becomes higher than BF1, then the game will become an even more jumping-strafing-superhero gaming than BFV (and more like Apex legends), we don't really need that in BF...
I think the TTK should be like BF4/BFV. And regenerative health should be back (like BF4/BF1).The gameplay of BFV was partly slowed down because people needed health all the time (attrition), putting another 'resource' in the game will distract players even more from PTFOing. And having armor that increases health 'by a lot', will just slow the game-play down even further, people without armor will "camp" more.
- @cso7777 Everyone would start with Armour it is not a option you can only lose in combat. Medic crates/station are available to be deployed.
There is no reason a player should need to camp long term.
As I indicated TTK would have little impact on most weapons but could create more specialized weapons.
- @ragnarok013 you seem to oppose any new idea calling them unbalanced.
If games don't evolve they die.
@DingoKillr I see how it would appear that way given my recent comments however most of the balance problems prevalent in BF1/5 seem to stem from moving away from the old Battlefield paper/rock/scissors balancing.
@DingoKillr wrote:
@ragnarok013 you seem to oppose any new idea calling them unbalanced.
If games don't evolve they die.
I think for the next entry they need to stop, center themselves, go back to what made Battlefield fun and successful and then once they’ve recaptured the magic and rebuilt trust with the playerbase then look into further innovation. One can’t accurately troubleshoot and triage a problem on the move when you’re constantly changing everything.In essence I like innovation that improves a process or corrects a deficiency but “innovation for innovation’s” sake is usually a bad thing changing things that don’t need to be changed which usually has unintended follow on effects.
- @DingoKillr Prolonging the average "lifetime" of players can be done by other means (reduce sniping, better balancing of vehicles/infantry, better visibility, fixing the broken sound etc etc.).
You are meant to die often in BF-games, this is a part of the 'flow' in the gameplay.
If gunfights gets longer (due to armor raising TTK), the PTFOing will be much harder and it will probably make the gameplay much slower overall. Personally I think this would be bad for the game.- @cso7777 I will try to explain better if a gun that does 34 damage per bullet would need 3 bullets to kill now. With the suggested armour it would be 3 bullets to kill but instead of 34 for both armour and health it is still 34. Thus the same TTK. It is your ability to heal to 100% is the difference.
Without quick access to armour repairs TTK would be less.
Even if you changed the 3 BTK to 2x25 for armour and 1x50 health still the same TTK.
TTK is more impacted by bullet speed, spread, recoil and RPM.
@DingoKillr wrote:
@ragnarok013you seem to oppose any new idea calling them unbalanced.
If games don't evolve they die.I would honestly not call deviating from a successful formula a case of evolution.
The most long standing of the successful franchises were at their finest when they were deviating as little as possible from what defined them and made them successful.
Age of Empires 3 deviated from the 3 predecessor games by having the home city mechanic which added another major layer of complexity and more grind. It tanked the franchise and the dev got shut down. Only in the last few years have the loving fans managed to get Microsoft to give the series another go.
Rather than add a layer that is questionable, why not just adjust the TTK of certain weapons/gadgets accordingly?
