BF4 ideas?

mozattack

Not going to make this an easy and mention how much assault needs to be changed but what about 6 classes once again, as follows:-

- assault

same guns, no reviving and instread the medi pack is a lockin with the other slot being saved for M320/Buck M26 etc

- support

same guns, retain supply abilities with other slot being mortars (like BC2) or ability to call in artillery strikes and claymores (on a minor scale)

- engineer

no change

- sniper* (new)

same as recon but no semi-auto rifles, retain spawn beacon and have a trip wire as defence or MAV (no TUGS)

- recon

no blot actions, retain spawn beacon and TUGS plus C4

- medic* (new)

new guns, carbine level with revive ability and repair torch to repair vehicles


I know there could be issues above but it is a start..

danniemcq

overwatch/command mode

this is where one person on either team becomes a general of sorts. This would be an opt in option in your player settings.

you get overwatch. full map is on your screen giving you a RTS feel. you can see where your team is and enemies that have been spotted.

you can issue commands to players and possibly co-ordinate attacks much much better.

if you could issue commands to anyone with a mortor saying drop at map reference x.y ya know wee bits like that

Nuri Sahin

Just to bring in one idea from COD, now that they got rid of it But I'd love to see a Sabotage type game mode introduced. Each team has a bomb site they must defend in and around their spawn/respective area and, the bomb is in the middle of the map similar to a flag in CTF would be. Obviously the objective would be to plant the bomb in the opposing team's MCom and destroy it. If no one gets the bomb planted in the allocated time, let's say 10 mins, it goes into sudden death. Sudden death consists of 2-5 minutes where the bomb has to be planted and everyone has one life only. Unlike in COD though, if the bomb isn't planted. The team with the lowest amount of players will then win to help force the issue and encourage players to attack. Sudden death bomb plant XP should be far more, likewise a defuse.

mozattack

Two things that HAVE to be changed:-

- reviving (either remove it, reduce it to once per spawn or once per minute, have it more like repairs so 10 points in life is 10 points etc)

- spawn trapping (sick of playing CQ games 200% + where we are just trapped or being the trapper. It is boring as hell. In that case the trapped team should be able to quit or better yet they should automatically regain two bases at a cost of say 50 tickets (something like that). There are loads of options here; maybe they acquire more vehicles, etc etc

ktulu123

Reviving/Repairing wont be removed. It is part of Battlefield. Has been since the start

MajesticDonkey

- reviving (either remove it, reduce it to once per spawn or once per minute, have it more like repairs so 10 points in life is 10 points etc)

What exactly is wrong with reviving at the moment?

- spawn trapping (sick of playing CQ games 200% + where we are just trapped or being the trapper. It is boring as hell. In that case the trapped team should be able to quit or better yet they should automatically regain two bases at a cost of say 50 tickets (something like that). There are loads of options here; maybe they acquire more vehicles, etc etc

Many people believe it's the team's own fault for getting spawntrapped in the first place. I'm not one of them, but that is a view of it.

ktulu123

If a team gets spawn trapped, it is their own fault. But more importantly it is bad map design on DICE's part that allows that to happen

BlitzKrieg

I said something along these lines in an earlier BF4 thread but I'd like to see them experiment more with spawning options & vehicle integration.

particularly I'd like to see in conquest the removal of spawning on capped points, meaning there is a much stronger emphasize on holding points rather then the hail mary spawn on the losing point to stop the cap tactics.

To counter the obvious drop in spawn choices, I'd take what had already been implented with the amtrac/huey being a spawn option and extend it to all IFV vehicles.


edit:

post I did elsewhere on any serious change up:

Break up the 2 team set up into 3 team v 3 team set up and recognise that armour and jets are completely separate to infantry, thus every 64 player server would now divide 32 per side 24 of each side would be infantry 4 would be armour and 4 would be air support.

The most basic fundamental changes should be to the spawning mechanics, remove all ability to spawn on captured points, now players can either spawn on their squad leader, a squad radio beacon or in vehicles which have open slots, so apc/blackhawk vehicles become a core backbone of any match as they will keep players in the fight, no apc like vehicle and players are forced to respawn back at the homebase forcing them to make their way back to the points. Vehicles can spawn at specific capture points but not all of them, much like the ac130 cap point.

I also think some shake up on the capture system would be interesting, so for example there is always one cap point that is the airspace over a certain distance in the centre of the map at a specific height that is called the air control point, which goes to the team that had their aircraft in that space last, so when playing air that would be a key objective, but playing infantry/armour it would only be an icon telling you if your side controls the air or not, it should affect the tickets like the other points, but also works in easily communicating to the rest of the team how the opposing teams airforce is made up off. Also if there is going to be a AC-130 like artillery unit it would be tied to that point as in needing to hold it with your air force for a specific length of time to spawn one.

Treat most vehicles like you treat classes/weapons with a large variety that get unlocked as you progress with a class in each area. Humvees etc would remain as they currently are.

So in armour it would be MBT, IFV, Support.

and in air it would be Air Superiority, CAS, Support.

It would require huge tweaks both to how vehicles work firstly.

MBT's (which will include tank destroyers) would get a major nerf against infantry and would be encouraged more to engage at long ranges and in high speed, their role would be to knock out other vehicles.

IFV would be the best vehicle to counter enemy infantry and support your own infantry, because they will be able to carry AOE abilities like the medics heal or supports ammo, they also can act as spawn locations, which is important in the changing of things.

Support would be artillery and AA.

For Air

Air Superiority would be aircraft designed to take down other aircraft, I think in this version, these will have the speed boosted and their ability to d*ck on land targets toned down greatly

Close Air Support would be aircraft designed to hit vehicles and would include a number of helicopters in here

Support would be the scout helicopters and transport helicopters, maybe even UAV and the AC130 (acting as a heavy fortified moving spawn point rather then the air atillery it is atm)

The basic premise is that you will always have 8 vehicles, 4 land and 4 air in the game and they can be changed up as needed in the battle, have a strong jet player on the opposing side, have 2 players go AA and lock him out of key areas. You can also go MBT heavy which would give you a lot of punch, but every player who dies is forced to respawn back at their homebase (cant spawn in MBTS) so it means you hit hard but you wont be able to keep up the pressure. Of course some balancing would need to be teethed out, most obviously the gunships, but I think if you give the option for the other team to play stronger more dangerous jets it might keep gunships in check.

You could even tone it down to a competitive level with 8v8 games and having 2 players on each team being able to choose their vehicle of choice, again the choice of one going a spawn vehicle to help the team and the other a heavy hitter would be the balanced choice.

Of course there'll be issues, people skulking around in battlelog looking for a server with a free jet or tank slot. Infantry would need to be rebalanced to deal with larger armour presence (I think every class should have at least 1 AT solution of sorts, which they do at the moment except for assault, so I'd be tempted to move AT mines to Assault and see how that works) Maps would need to be scaled larger to consider the longer range for MBTs and the heavier vehicle presence, I dont think we need more cap points, in facting having less but spreading them out gives greater focus on keeping spawn routes open for other teams. I also think the 3 roles should be almost treated like completely different games, with their own scoreboards, objective icons and colour scheme (Red for armour, green for infantry, blue for air?)

mozattack

Re Spawn Trapping; yes it is the suffering teams fault for being crap but standing at the bridge in Seine Crossing for 10 mins trying to kills snipers behind cars is as boring as hell (even when winning).

Maybe once you have all bases a last base opens and once that is taken = game over.

It just puts me off long conquest games.

---

Re reviving and what is wrong with it? What is right with it?

How can you get more points from reviving that killing someone? It just breads the assault whore who continually play the same maps and do the same thing to get a high SPM... pathetic.

I've played so many games on Epicentre where the opposing team were 11/12 assault... came pointless in the end killing them cos they would just be revived = quit rage.

Limited reviving in a million ways, e.g.=

- points reduced to 50
- ribbon for 10 revives
- revive capped at 1 per minute or 1 per spawn
- revive taken a few seconds and not immediate
- cannot revive certain deaths, e.g. rpg or sniper fire to the head
- being revived remains same but comes at a cost of 100 points for beneficiary

MajesticDonkey

mozattack wrote: »

How can you get more points from reviving that killing someone? It just breads the assault whore who continually play the same maps and do the same thing to get a high SPM... pathetic.]

Because Battlefield is a TEAM-BASED game. Reviving people helps your team.

I've played so many games on Epicentre where the opposing team were 11/12 assault... came pointless in the end killing them cos they would just be revived = quit rage.

This is exactly how to win a game. Revive-train. Why do you think all the pro teams use the assault class? So they can revive each other and hence reduce their ticket loss. Your example of this is a bad example anyway, there are so many possible situations. Why not rush them while they are reviving and kill the players doing the reviving? As far as I know you can't shoot and revive at the same time.

Judging from your post it appears you are also one of these people that give out about people using the M16/AEK etc...would I be right in that?

TerrorFirmer

I really wish they'd go Battlefield 1944. I loved BF2 and I do like BF3, but I'm constantly daydreaming of what a return to the roots would be like - even though I know the market lies elsewhere. I know there's a fair amount of decent ww2 FPS titles out there like RO2, Iron Front, etc, but nothing quite like a Battlefield title.

dreamers75

ktulu123 wrote: »

If a team gets spawn trapped, it is their own fault. But more importantly it is bad map design on DICE's part that allows that to happen

its your own fault, its happens in all BF games. its just mean you suck and god is punishing you.

Bf3 actually alleviates it more than previous games.

mozattack

MajesticDonkey wrote: »

Because Battlefield is a TEAM-BASED game. Reviving people helps your team.


This is exactly how to win a game. Revive-train. Why do you think all the pro teams use the assault class? So they can revive each other and hence reduce their ticket loss. Your example of this is a bad example anyway, there are so many possible situations. Why not rush them while they are reviving and kill the players doing the reviving? As far as I know you can't shoot and revive at the same time.

Judging from your post it appears you are also one of these people that give out about people using the M16/AEK etc...would I be right in that?

"Judging from your post it appears you are also one of these people that give out about people using the M16/AEK etc...would I be right in that"]

YES; anyone using the same gun and the same class 24/7 should be locked away and thought what the word 'variation' means.

Look, fine, if you think having once class so superior to others improves a game, fine, but for me it is ruins a game.

I know the pro-gamers use assault and the noob guns all the time and that adds to my point in that no class should be overly dominant and force 24 out of 24 players to have the same class and adopt a childish system of revive trains.

It is pathetic.

MajesticDonkey

mozattack wrote: »

I know the pro-gamers use assault and the noob guns all the time and that adds to my point in that no class should be overly dominant and force 24 out of 24 players to have the same class and adopt a childish system of revive trains.

I'm trying to figure out why you think it's childish. Like I already mentioned, reviving teammates is how you win a game, especially in Rush maps. It's the same for both teams. It's not the players' fault that a certain gun outperforms every other gun.

I use the M16 or AEK most of the time I play. Why? Because so many people use those weapons and there are no other guns that outperform them. I could either use the M16/AEK to have a chance of killing him or I could use some other "uncommon" weapon and never kill him. I also use them because I play on maps (Seine, Bazaar, other city maps) where they are the best situational gun available. If you're using a weapon with 550-600 RPM on a city map you might as well sit in your deployment.

I do agree however that no one class should be dominant and the assault class is dominant, but I wouldn't agree with changing the reviving mechanics at all. Buff the other classes, give more points for throwing ammo boxes etc. Engineers are perfect the way they are IMO. There isn't much place for engineers on city maps, and I always play either engineer or support on larger maps because that's where the class is suited best.

PhlegmyMoses

dreamers75 wrote: »

its your own fault, its happens in all BF games. its just mean you suck and god is punishing you.

Bf3 actually alleviates it more than previous games.

The biggest problem with spawn trapping are the people who give up once all bases are captured. The "Guess it's time to snipe now" attitude when there is still hundreds of tickets on the board. The only time I have ever been effectively spawn trapped is when I join a server late and we don't have enough tickets to make a break.

It may take you 100 tickets to break it but break it you shall, and this has lead to some of the best comebacks I've been involved with. In reality this can't be fixed because people have become too concerned about K\D and seem to worry too much about the life of the digital representation of them on the screen.

Spear

I'd be very skeptical that they'd use a modern scenario once again. They've never repeated timeframes in the past. I'd personally prefer to see a 1944 edition. Is there anyone who wouldn't want to see another Normandy, or King Tigers roaming around in the FrostBite engine? A 2142 sequel wouldn't be bad either. I know it seemed to polarise some people against it, but it was one of the more creative editions in terms of game mechanics, with personal cloaks, the deployment pods and titan mode.

dreamers75

2142 is the adopted child of the family.

WW2, Vietnam modern day are fine.....but not 2143 its the divil!!!

ktulu123

2142 was amazing! Would love to see a sequal to it. A world war 2 one would be epic but I think i think I remember reading that it was going to be set in modern times also. Cant remember where I saw it. I'm hoping for bad company 3, that story line was great!

dreamers75

ktulu123 wrote: »

2142 was amazing! Would love to see a sequal to it. A world war 2 one would be epic but I think i think I remember reading that it was going to be set in modern times also. Cant remember where I saw it. I'm hoping for bad company 3, that story line was great!

no no no no

2142 is the only blip on another wise solid game line.

no no no no no :pac:

mozattack

MajesticDonkey wrote: »

I'm trying to figure out why you think it's childish. Like I already mentioned, reviving teammates is how you win a game, especially in Rush maps. It's the same for both teams. It's not the players' fault that a certain gun outperforms every other gun.

I use the M16 or AEK most of the time I play. Why? Because so many people use those weapons and there are no other guns that outperform them. I could either use the M16/AEK to have a chance of killing him or I could use some other "uncommon" weapon and never kill him. I also use them because I play on maps (Seine, Bazaar, other city maps) where they are the best situational gun available. If you're using a weapon with 550-600 RPM on a city map you might as well sit in your deployment.

I do agree however that no one class should be dominant and the assault class is dominant, but I wouldn't agree with changing the reviving mechanics at all. Buff the other classes, give more points for throwing ammo boxes etc. Engineers are perfect the way they are IMO. There isn't much place for engineers on city maps, and I always play either engineer or support on larger maps because that's where the class is suited best.

Sorry to say this but this type of player is EXACTLY who I want removed from BF4... the M16/AEK noob who cant use any other weapon.

GottaGetGatt

mozattack wrote: »

Sorry to say this but this type of player is EXACTLY who I want removed from BF4... the M16/AEK noob who cant use any other weapon.

lol, you've never being in a 12v12 lvl 100 server on metro, i take it.Every one uses those weapons because there the best for aggressive play.Especially at the very first encounter on the B flag.Why would you use a lesser powered weapon against a team who are all using those 2 weapons.Your just gonna lose every battle.

Same situation if you got into a fight with a guy in the street.He pulls out a machette, and gives you the choice to pick a machette or knife.What do you pick?Same analogy applies to Battlefield.

I used to always use those two weapons in competitive matches, but i've since switched to the AN-94.

mozattack

GottaGetGatt wrote: »

lol, you've never being in a 12v12 lvl 100 server on metro, i take it.Every one uses those weapons because there the best for aggressive play.Especially at the very first encounter on the B flag.Why would you use a lesser powered weapon against a team who are all using those 2 weapons.Your just gonna lose every battle.

Same situation if you got into a fight with a guy in the street.He pulls out a machette, and gives you the choice to pick a machette or knife.What do you pick?Same analogy applies to Battlefield.

I used to always use those two weapons in competitive matches, but i've since switched to the AN-94.

Comparing overusing the same weapon on BF3 to a fight IRL is a little insane no?

I hardly need to mention that one is real life and the other is a game?

I think you essentially admitted to the problem at hand in that you have to roll with OP guns to compete with others who similarly use OP guns - thats my point.

For me I aim to master all guns (e.g. I have 30,000 kills but no more than 550 with any gun) and not be reliant on using the same gun, same class and same maps like a good percentage of BF3 players who are basically limited in intelligence and the type who probably order "well done steak" in a restaurant.

My analogy for you is that the AEK/M16 brigade are who make the likes of FIFA etc unplayable online as 99 times out of a 100 you will end up playing Barcelona... some people have no imagination or desire to actually diversify

GottaGetGatt

mozattack wrote: »

Comparing overusing the same weapon on BF3 to a fight IRL is a little insane no?

I hardly need to mention that one is real life and the other is a game?

I think you essentially admitted to the problem at hand in that you have to roll with OP guns to compete with others who similarly use OP guns - thats my point.

For me I aim to master all guns (e.g. I have 30,000 kills but no more than 550 with any gun) and not be reliant on using the same gun, same class and same maps like a good percentage of BF3 players who are basically limited in intelligence and the type who probably order "well done steak" in a restaurant.

My analogy for you is that the AEK/M16 brigade are who make the likes of FIFA etc unplayable online as 99 times out of a 100 you will end up playing Barcelona... some people have no imagination or desire to actually diversify

The guns aren't OP, there just the most commonly used and easiest for new players to use.There's plenty of weapons that outshine them in different circumstances.

As players progress through the ranks and get more accustomed to the game, they will eventually start moving onto different weapons.

Havermeyer

mozattack wrote: »

Comparing overusing the same weapon on BF3 to a fight IRL is a little insane no?

I hardly need to mention that one is real life and the other is a game?

I think you essentially admitted to the problem at hand in that you have to roll with OP guns to compete with others who similarly use OP guns - thats my point.

For me I aim to master all guns (e.g. I have 30,000 kills but no more than 550 with any gun) and not be reliant on using the same gun, same class and same maps like a good percentage of BF3 players who are basically limited in intelligence and the type who probably order "well done steak" in a restaurant.

My analogy for you is that the AEK/M16 brigade are who make the likes of FIFA etc unplayable online as 99 times out of a 100 you will end up playing Barcelona... some people have no imagination or desire to actually diversify

What in the name of jases are you on about are you on about?

ahnowbrowncow

mozattack wrote: »

Comparing overusing the same weapon on BF3 to a fight IRL is a little insane no?

I hardly need to mention that one is real life and the other is a game?

I think you essentially admitted to the problem at hand in that you have to roll with OP guns to compete with others who similarly use OP guns - thats my point.

For me I aim to master all guns (e.g. I have 30,000 kills but no more than 550 with any gun) and not be reliant on using the same gun, same class and same maps like a good percentage of BF3 players who are basically limited in intelligence and the type who probably order "well done steak" in a restaurant.

My analogy for you is that the AEK/M16 brigade are who make the likes of FIFA etc unplayable online as 99 times out of a 100 you will end up playing Barcelona... some people have no imagination or desire to actually diversify

Well I went and checked your stats seeing as you have been insulting other players' intelligence just because they don't play how you want them to play.

12.5% accuracy after nearly 600 hours played, maybe you should copy the players you are moaning about and stick to one gun so you can learn to aim properly.

BlitzKrieg

when did this go from the bf4 ideas to the bitching and moaning thread?

ktulu123

Exactly, Lads can you take it to the bitching & moaning thread or better yet just agree to disagree. We all have our hated weapons but we have to accept that guys will play the game how they see fit. Please keep this thread to Battlefield 4 ideas & what you would like to see.

mozattack

"Well I went and checked your stats seeing as you have been insulting other players' intelligence just because they don't play how you want them to play.

12.5% accuracy after nearly 600 hours played, maybe you should copy the players you are moaning about and stick to one gun so you can learn to aim properly."

Should be entitled to a response to this though?

WHO CARES ABOUT ACCURACY?

Do bullets cost money?

Last time I checked, they didn't, not in this game.

Also thought using a LMG and suppressing was the point, not sniping with a LMG, for example.

Also, whats wrong with going nuts and shooting everything?

<< Saddo >>

mozattack

Back to ideas:

- back to assault class, what about keeping it the same but giving the OP weapons to another new class and maybe restricting assault to PDWs or something?

- rush... what about 3 mcomms instead of two if game size is more than 24? Would that work>

- what about a new class, maybe enhanced engineer type who can build artillery where you can deploy them on the map subject to maybe it taking 5 minutes or something... I dunno

danniemcq

Ok so I was thinking about this last night, I doubt that BF4 will go back to a WW2 setting or a WW1 even due to a number of reasons.
For example people on this thread have mentioned how everyone uses one type of gun all the time. Can you imagine how infuriated people would end up being when there is nothing but m1 garand are used? I know there is a large selection of guns back then but compared to bf3 not so much.

Most players would end up with the m1, sten, Thompson, Enfield, Mosin-Nagant, mp35 etc. (btw I know 1942 had a total of 30+ guns but that was split through classes and some crossed over) and I know that they could include some lesser known ones but there is usually a reason they are not included in previous games or heard of much, the Romanian Orita for example)

There would also be the issue with customization and upgrades that a lot of people love (myself included) where you can change the scope on your gun from HOLO to Red Dot, as a classic example. If you set it back in WW2 you have a very limited range of options.

I know there would be a huge fanbase for a WW2 era game but I can’t see them changing drastically right now. Personally I’m torn, I’d love a WW2 game again especially if they up the frostbite engine a bit but if it’s a next gen release I would love to see another currentish release!

Spear

I wouldn't mind seeing the Korean war. That's something that's constantly overlooked, and is understandably referred to as the forgotten war. There'd still be good variety in weapons due to the numerous nations involved, good variety in maps and vehicles.