To play just like BF2.(minus the bugs)
- Index »
- Games »
- Battlefield Series »
- Battlefield 2 »
- One thing I think we can all agree on that we want from BF3.
pre-1.2 BF2
You mean when it was closer to the Demo? Hell yeah man! I've been playing BF2 demo the past few days and i've never realized how much sex was in the game before I started playing. Fuck yeah shooting while standing up, Assault's Grenade Launcher having a nice explosion radius, And my Favorite, Blackhawk miniguns! Those things are the shit, Take down and APC in 5 seconds, Transport Heli in 3, Attack Heli and Jet in 2! Fuck damn why did they ever take those things out! USMC already has it hard enough as it is with it's "situational" handheld weapons.TrashBlinD wrote:
pre-1.2 BF2
being able to prone is a nice thing ! lol
I played the demo for half a year. I miss those times but CB didn't had a demo ladderDavid.P wrote:
You mean when it was closer to the Demo? Hell yeah man! I've been playing BF2 demo the past few days and i've never realized how much sex was in the game before I started playing. Fuck yeah shooting while standing up, Assault's Grenade Launcher having a nice explosion radius, And my Favorite, Blackhawk miniguns! Those things are the shit, Take down and APC in 5 seconds, Transport Heli in 3, Attack Heli and Jet in 2! Fuck damn why did they ever take those things out! USMC already has it hard enough as it is with it's "situational" handheld weapons.TrashBlinD wrote:
pre-1.2 BF2
Same gameplay as BF2 minus the bugs and better graphics would be an awsm game.
No Wake and/or karkand.
Why no Karkand ?Snake wrote:
No Wake and/or karkand.
Karkand is actually a decent infantry map when played correctly.
Don't judge a map b the way the pubbers play it.
Wake would be fun if the two closests bases to US were neutral flags.Snake wrote:
No Wake and/or karkand.
Karkand is just awful, and 90% of players only play pubs, so if it sucks for 90% of the time then it sucks.TrashBlinD wrote:
Why no Karkand ?Snake wrote:
No Wake and/or karkand.
Karkand is actually a decent infantry map when played correctly.
Don't judge a map b the way the pubbers play it.
Blame the players, not the map.DoctaStrangelove wrote:
Karkand is just awful, and 90% of players only play pubs, so if it sucks for 90% of the time then it sucks.TrashBlinD wrote:
Why no Karkand ?Snake wrote:
No Wake and/or karkand.
Karkand is actually a decent infantry map when played correctly.
Don't judge a map b the way the pubbers play it.
head shots should result in a kill, no ability to revive.
If we couldn't revive, we'd have another gay counterstrike.KEN-JENNINGS wrote:
head shots should result in a kill, no ability to revive.
I think BF2 has done just about everything correctly. All I want is more. More weapons, More vehicles, More maps.
What's wrong with wake?Snake wrote:
No Wake and/or karkand.
agreedGuy.Buddy.Friend wrote:
If we couldn't revive, we'd have another gay counterstrike.
play Special ForcesKEN-JENNINGS wrote:
head shots should result in a kill, no ability to revive.
Lol, I knew my post above would get a good few people replying to it
Gulf of Oman on a full 64man between the flags on foot is better than karkand fighting. If I want to play a city map, Ill play it with vehicles and be on the ground on Sharqi or Mashy (on vanilla). They at least have vertical and height elevation (on more than 1 flag) to make it interesting. Which is why Great Wall on 16size is the best infy map around. But I prefer large, open maps, and Wake is the total fail of all those maps. Zatar beats Wake into the ground with a giants sledgehammer. 100times over.
Then again, Ive always hated the popular maps in every game I play. Dust on CS? Sucks. Havana is better than Dust.
And yes, I did say Zatar
Im not, I actually hate the map and the way it looks, the layout, the way it plays, and then add in the way everybody plays it...TrashBlinD wrote:
Why no Karkand ?Snake wrote:
No Wake and/or karkand.
Karkand is actually a decent infantry map when played correctly.
Don't judge a map b the way the pubbers play it.
Gulf of Oman on a full 64man between the flags on foot is better than karkand fighting. If I want to play a city map, Ill play it with vehicles and be on the ground on Sharqi or Mashy (on vanilla). They at least have vertical and height elevation (on more than 1 flag) to make it interesting. Which is why Great Wall on 16size is the best infy map around. But I prefer large, open maps, and Wake is the total fail of all those maps. Zatar beats Wake into the ground with a giants sledgehammer. 100times over.
Then again, Ive always hated the popular maps in every game I play. Dust on CS? Sucks. Havana is better than Dust.
And yes, I did say Zatar
Just keep vehicles, planes, helis, kits etc so its not another COD4=CS shit. Yea, maybe even remove IO option. Keep it as it is just with better graphics, engine bla bla bla...
And Wake is great map Snake
And Wake is great map Snake
Correct! Thats what sets BF2 apart from other team based FPS games.Guy.Buddy.Friend wrote:
If we couldn't revive, we'd have another gay counterstrike.KEN-JENNINGS wrote:
head shots should result in a kill, no ability to revive.
Bingo! Ak103 and an M14 EBR would be nice.killaer wrote:
I think BF2 has done just about everything correctly. All I want is more. More weapons, More vehicles, More maps.
Also right! Cod4 fails because it's a console port to PC. CS Just fails.legionair wrote:
Just keep vehicles, planes, helis, kits etc so its not another COD4=CS shit. Yea, maybe even remove IO option. Keep it as it is just with better graphics, engine bla bla bla...
And Wake is great map Snake
Wrong doc. Trash has got it right. Karkand is fucking awesome on IO when you have FF ON nades. It's even better with vehicles MINE/C4 FF=OFF.TrashBlinD wrote:
Blame the players, not the map.DoctaStrangelove wrote:
Karkand is just awful, and 90% of players only play pubs, so if it sucks for 90% of the time then it sucks.TrashBlinD wrote:
Why no Karkand ?
Karkand is actually a decent infantry map when played correctly.
Don't judge a map b the way the pubbers play it.
bf3 needs a proper an-94 with 2 round burst.
Yeah no shit! It's too bad though, that the BF2 engine only allows Semi, Burst, and Auto fire on weapons only. But you know there was a work around being worked on someone from the PR or FH2 team(Can't recalll which one at the moment) That allowed an AK to fire a 2 round burst, By forcing the engine to recognize it as a 3 round burst. But I heard it was abandoned because of the constant crashes it caused. Real shame though. I would've loved for the upcoming Russian Faction to have AN-94's.hiberNative wrote:
bf3 needs a proper an-94 with 2 round burst.
Abakan's are not and will not be used by regular army.David.P wrote:
I would've loved for the upcoming Russian Faction to have AN-94's.
*cough* Spec-ops */coughLongbow wrote:
Abakan's are not and will not be used by regular army.David.P wrote:
I would've loved for the upcoming Russian Faction to have AN-94's.
If Wake and Karkand didn't exist I wouldn't play BF2 tbh.
The Kark nubs makes the map...nothing is better than going around with the M16 owning entire squads armed with G36Es/RPKs. Whenever I want good infantry combat Kark is great.
And FF Off Wake is amazing for me, I love the F35 and even as infantry its fun.
The Kark nubs makes the map...nothing is better than going around with the M16 owning entire squads armed with G36Es/RPKs. Whenever I want good infantry combat Kark is great.
And FF Off Wake is amazing for me, I love the F35 and even as infantry its fun.
- Index »
- Games »
- Battlefield Series »
- Battlefield 2 »
- One thing I think we can all agree on that we want from BF3.