BF2S Forums Battlefield 3 - Main Thread

I miss the scale of destruction in BC2.  While you could argue that the BC series was a console spin off, not a true BF game, bla bla bla, at least it truly innovated on a pretty unprecedented scale for an fps.  Yes, it was more infantry focused, and the vehicle combat was not as diversified as in BF3, but it retained the sandbox, play it your way atmosphere that defines the series. 

BF3 is essentially the worst of Battlefield all in one package.  It's vehicle combat is too understated, and the sandbox playstyle is pretty much gutted.  No real destruction, shoddy map design, unlock-based progression.  I miss the simplicity of having only 2-3 sights per weapon.  I hate the fact that every kit has access to two dozen smg's and shotguns.  Not to mention the equipment system sucks.  Want a grenade launcher?  Oh, you have to get rid of the medic pack.  Want to use a mortar strike?  Oh, you have to sit alone in the corner of the map like a noob. (instead of the more logical option of calling one in with binocs).  Want to shoot down some aircraft?  Oh, you have to sacrifice the ability to take out ground vehicles. 

I got carried away there.  I can't wait to see what this AK pack will turn out to be on console.  I'm curious to see if the 24 player limit will make these maps unplayable.

Last edited by Spearhead (2012-08-01 12:06:01)

Spearhead wrote:

No real destruction

Well, in BC2, after several minutes, most levels became reduced to a pile of dust and rubble.
That was fine with the infantry-based game play.

In BF3, with its many more vehicles and possibilities to equip them with unlocks, this would quickly turn out to a slaughtering on most maps.
Imagine a map like Firestorm, where all of the large warehouses and high buildings are destroyed.
It would end up with everyone sniping across the map with tanks, helis, AA and everything.
The entirety of he map basically becoming a glacis, whit no cover to hide.

However, they could have made some more of the smaller buildings destructible.
Also, it would be nice to have the new HD destruction from the CQ DLC added to the vanilla maps, especially for the interior of larger buildings.

Spearhead wrote:

unlock-based progression

Ehrm, that's how it has worked since BF2.

Personally, I liked the unlock system in BF2142 best.
Especially the feature of 2 separate unlock trees per class.
That way, you could quickly gain one of the better weapons for one class early on, while having the drawback of accessing the other tree much harder later in the progression.

Spearhead wrote:

I miss the simplicity of having only 2-3 sights per weapon.

It's ok that the added a bit more unlocks.
I just don't like the fact that you can equip all of the accessories on almost all of the guns.
Who the hell would use a 12x scope on a carbine? Or even an assault rifle?
Also, I would remove anything more than red dot/holo sights for shotguns.
And extended mags make no sense at all for shotguns with tube and drum magazines.

Also, the different pistol varieties should be consolidated into one unlock with multiple accessory unlocks, just like the guns.

Spearhead wrote:

I hate the fact that every kit has access to two dozen smg's and shotguns.

Spearhead wrote:

Not to mention the equipment system sucks.  Want a grenade launcher?  Oh, you have to get rid of the medic pack.  Want to use a mortar strike?  Oh, you have to sit alone in the corner of the map like a noob. (instead of the more logical option of calling one in with binocs).  Want to shoot down some aircraft?  Oh, you have to sacrifice the ability to take out ground vehicles.

That's ok in my opinion.
I don't want walking tanks with an arsenal of guns and endless ammo for each of them, like in Doom or Quake.

I would like to see some running speed/sprinting differences between the classes though, especially the support class, with its machine gun, hundreds of rounds and infinitely more ammo in the bags.

-Sh1fty- wrote:

Remove shit point bonuses like comeback, avenger, savior, etc. What the fuck are those? I don't need to be rewarded for not doing shit. It's like a participation award, those are shit and only losers get participation awards.

Actually, I'd like to see teamwork actions get more points.

In fact, points for kills could get reduced drastically to a fraction of what they are now, unless you kill someone during a squad/team effort.
E.g. if you stay close to your squad members (more points) or team members (less points).
This would reduce silly one-man-army Rambo gameplay as well as lone wolves.

Kill streaks and silly stuff like that should be scrapped altogether.

http://callofduty.wikia.com/wiki/War
Sounds like the control point mode in TF2 basically.

I'd like to see a comeback of the Assault Lines mode from BF2142, which is the perfect mix between conquest and linear control point shifting.

Isn't Assault Lines the precursor to Conquest Assault?

All valid concerns, 9 months ago

jord wrote:

All valid concerns, 9 months ago

Never surrender

globefish23 wrote:

Conquest Assault just means that one team has no un-cap base, but instead starts out with all flags captured.
The game ends immediately, if they don't have any flags left and no squad leader/member left to spawn on and recapture a flag.

That brings back memories of everyone spectating that last PLA player on Wake Island, yelling into the chat because he wouldn't capture a flag.

GeoEnvi wrote:

-Sh1fty- wrote:

Oh and to make this game perfect, add Call of Duty World at War's "War" mode. That was the best game type I've ever played. Never had more fun that that, ever.

Not familiar with the "War" mode.  Was it like "Supply Lines"?

5 flags
Have to take flags in a specific order one at a time
the team to get the first flag gets "momentum" which makes capping the next flag faster
If you cap the next flag, the team that had momentum loses it or gains more momentum.
When you cap the last flag the game is over

It provides intense team-based fighting for control of an area, then you need to quickly move together as a team to capture the next one before you lost your momentum. It was a great game mode and I'd love to see it in more games.

GeoEnvi wrote:

TopHat01 wrote:

globefish23 wrote:

Conquest Assault just means that one team has no un-cap base, but instead starts out with all flags captured.
The game ends immediately, if they don't have any flags left and no squad leader/member left to spawn on and recapture a flag.

That brings back memories of everyone spectating that last PLA player on Wake Island, yelling into the chat because he wouldn't capture a flag.

And that last player, flying around in the J10 InvinciJet, attacking USMC ground forces, and rearming with occasional supply drops via commander on the beach.

The only thing more frustrating that this was everyone shouting for that last PLA player to cap/suicide and realizing there WAS NO LAST PLA PLAYER!  The game was glitched into the painfully slow PLA Ticket Bleed!

Enterprising USMC players took the opportunity to explore Wake, pose for group pictures on the bridge, and park their jeeps in knee-deep water while wrenching away to work on their Repair Points.

Ahhhh.... the Halcyon Days of 2006.

<3, I always hated the j-10 but I loved being that last pilot

Roc18 wrote:

Is there any way to know as a helicopter gunner when the pilot released their flares? Other than being on voice chat with them? Cause I never hear the sound of the pilot releasing theirs. So I release mine while they release theirs thinking that the pilot didnt release any since I didn't hear anything and then the pilot gets mad that I didn't flare after them when I did, just at the same time.

Also I tried changing the camera view but the stupid helicopter doesn't allow 3rd person view as a gunner in the helicopter.

in bf2 you could hear when the pilot dropped flares altho you couldnt benefit from it, other than bailing.

what the fuck is this insane stop-start lag