Forum Discussion

Anonymous

4 years ago

Honestly Though, Who Really Thought Battlefield Needs Natural Disasters?

Tornadoes, Tsunamis, Dust Storms, And whatever else it brings. Why? Like really, if the rumors are true, why push for this? Like who in the world thinks BATTLEFIELD at DICE and says "MORE WEATHER"......

discussion

CyberDyme

4 years ago

Agreed @x--Fusi--x ,

I think the 'natural disasters' should more work as game/map changing events. As it was in aka Paracel Storm, as when that kicked in, then helis and the attack boats suddenly lost much of their influence on the gameplay. And the strategy turned more into infantry-based guerilla warfare, fighting from one island to the next on foot !

So epic change to the game dynamics, weapon loadouts and team tactics to win the battle!

x--Fusi--x

Seasoned Ace

4 years ago

@CyberDyme I can already imagine that at the beginning of the round we would fight for a flag on land, then there could be a tidal wave and you need boats to get to the flag. But please no fatal natural events as a behemoth (train) BF1 replacement.

Trokey66
Seasoned Ace
4 years ago
Didn't BF3's Aftermath DLC have earthquakes?
Weather events etc add another layer to the game as long as they are server side though. Nowt worse being the only player on Sinai with the sandstorm......
- ragnarok013
  Hero+
  4 years ago
  @Trokey66 wrote:
  
  Didn't BF3's Aftermath DLC have earthquakes?
  
  Weather events etc add another layer to the game as long as they are server side though. Nowt worse being the only player on Sinai with the sandstorm......
  
  @Trokey66 Yep unfortunately it didn't do much but was cool.I think Aftermath with BF4's levolution would have been epic if it brought down random buildings to change the map. If there are natural disasters in BF6 hopefully it contributes more than levolution did.