Campaign Unlock Discussion

[WoodenPlank]

I figure it's time we start at least bouncing some ideas around when it comes to how we want to handle unlocks for the campaign. Obviously there are a lot of unknowns (ie: unlock order changing for retail, final weapon balance, level of control over unlocks we will actually have for the unranked server, etc) for this, but it seems like a good time to at least get some basics hashed out.

Obviously, we have got to have unlocks available in GC, otherwise some kits are unable to do their job. Letting people use personal unlocks is an issue, though, since it can obviously cause imbalance issues. Looking over the current unlock trees in the beta, though, it seems like we can strike a balance pretty easily, assuming that server controls will allow us to do so.

So, with that, here are my preliminary thoughts. I am presenting this mainly to get opinions/ideas/suggestions/feedback from the GC community, since it is something that hasn't been heavily discussed yet. One way or the other, it needs to be addressed before we can really begin prep for C1, and since everyone has had access to the beta, it seemed a good time to start.


For individual kits, I'd suggest the first 4 tiers of unlocks would be available.

Assault: Defib, M416, M320 Grenade Launcher, AEK-971 - 2 rifles, 2 gadgets
Engineer: Igla/Stinger(for our purposes, a single unlock), AT Mines, SCAR-H, EOD Bot - 1 missile launcher, 2 gadgets, 1 rifle
Support: M249, C4, PKP Pecheneg, Mortar - 2 LMGs, 2 gadgets
Recon: SV98, T-UGS sensor, SKS, SOFLAM - 2 rifles, 2 gadgets

In my opinion, 4 tiers of unlocks per class gives everyone a broad range of abilities, as well as access to core abilities, without giving access to the top end unlocks. This simplifies loadouts, simplifies balance, and also prevents possibly overpowered, end-game unlocks from coming into play. It also allows every class access to at least one (usually 2) standard rifles/LMGs to negate any balance differences in the default army weapons. As it stands now, it would probably be simplest to allow all the accessory unlocks for all of the weapons available to GC players, assuming we even have control over that.

I think we should also consider the possibility of allowing a limited number of the general weapon unlocks, to give a little more variety, and a little more versatility. Since Recon now seems to be a little more important class to GC style play (spawn beacons, SOFLAM, sensor), it would also allow them to branch out from the typical sniper/designated marksman role that is often frowned upon. It would also help prevent the entire class from being nearly written off, as we only have 4 basic classes to pick from now.

General unlocks suggestion - First 8 unlocks. At is stands now, this would give the following:
Pistols - G17C w/laser, M9 w/light, MP443 w/light, and G17C Suppressed w/laser
Shotguns - 870MCS pump-action and M1014 Semi-auto
PDWs: PP2000 and UMP45 - two weapons DiCE has already said will be "rebalanced" for retail.

IMO, this gives a good balance overall of versatility for all classes.

Finally, specializations - I think this may be the one place where unlocking everything would work well. Squads can mix and match their squad specializations to meet their needs. Infantry could have cover, suppression, frag and ammo at their disposal, for example.

Vehicles:
Many of the typical BF vehicle abilities are now unlocks - including countermeasures for all vehicles, anti air and anti ground missiles on jets and helicopters, AA missiles for mobile AA, AT missiles on APCs, etc.

This gets a little trickier, since some of the abilities we are used to are far up the unlock tree - Air-to-ground missiles and TV guided missiles specifically, as well as the laser-guided missiles and guided shells for almost all vehicles. The latter are a good match to the SOFLAM unlock for recon kits, since the SOFLAM can "paint" an vehicle for these projectiles, even if the person firing cannot see the target.

If we cannot pick and choose exact unlocks, but only what "rank" is available, then this might present a problem, since the laser guided munitions are near the top of the unlock tree, and TV guided missiles are the last unlock for attack helos.

Otherwise, a "first 4" approach again seems fairly solid...

All air vehicles except transport helos- Stealth (decreased spotted time, harder lock on from AA), IR Flares, Heat-seeking A2A missiles, Belt speed (increased reload speed for guns/main weapon) - 2 survivability unlocks, 2 lethality unlocks
Main Battle Tanks - IR smoke Countermeasure, Coaxial LMG, Autoloader (main gun reload speed), Zoom optics - 1 survivability, 3 lethality
Infantry Fighting Vehicle - IR smoke, Anti-tank missile launcher, Belt speed (main gun reload speed), Coaxial LMG - 1 survivability, 3 lethality
Mobile Anti-Air - IR Smoke, Anti-Air missile, belt speed, zoom - 1 survivability, 3 lethality

Unfortunately, I have yet to earn any vehicle unlocks in the beta, so I have no idea how these unlocks fit into the 3 unlock slots shown on the customization screen. It may be that the first 4 fill those 3 slots out nicely, or will always leave a slot open.


Again, these are just my thoughts. I was rambling to Brummie on TS earlier about this, and he suggested I start a thread. Blame him.
Please, share your thoughts or suggestions, or just call me an idiot for even posting this. One way or the other, though, we have to start working on an unlock system for C1.

[Robawillis]

This might get me shot for saying or even suggesting this but Ive been looking at this from all sort of perpectives.

Realisticly I disagree with limiting unlock's full stop.

From a TA view point it would be hell to say "stop using that weapon" or "you can't use that" or "please kick him for using that weapon in that way." It would take allot of fun out of the game both for the players and TA's. Even limiting it on the server if you can I don't think it should happen.

From a player point of view we don't want to turn away players for unbalance but we don't want to turn away players for the number of rules we got in place. It becomes to much law and control and not having much fun when we start putting rules like this in place.

If we also try a say let the officer's and SL's handle the weapon limit issue it going to put a lot of strain on them and would probably prevent them from having much fun which is our main goal here I hope. Anyway I think once the retail is out we retake a look at this if we want to go further

[styphon]

A nice detailed thread but I feel it may be vain. We have no idea what level of control we will have over the server until full release. IMO no serious discussion can occur until the games released and we have our servers that we can play around with.

[.Sup]

For our first campaign I would enforce as least rules as possible. Lets see how the game plays. I would leave all unlocks available. Currently there are a couple of weapons too powerful, one being the UMP which I unlocked yesterday and I achieved my best score in the game since the release of the beta with it even on my poor performing PC. But DICE said it will reduce its damage like they have done in the past. So I understand some weapons seem too powerful at the moment. You can always counter too powerful weapons by selecting it as your weapon yourself.
As Rob pointed out it will be hard for the TAs to monitor what is being used as they will also have other stuff to enforce and look after.
Another issue with limiting unlocks is a lot of people joined and will join to play and experience the full fledged Battlefield 3 with all the unlocks and vehicles. Limiting that would mean we either loose players or have unhappy members.

So I suggest we leave everything available and see how it goes. We can still agree on a gentlemen rule not to use something if it too unbalanced later on in the campaign.

[Fanne]

For our first campaign I would enforce as least rules as possible. Lets see how the game plays. I would leave all unlocks available.
...snip...
You can always counter too powerful weapons by selecting it as your weapon yourself.
As Rob pointed out it will be hard for the TAs to monitor what is being used as they will also have other stuff to enforce and look after.
Another issue with limiting unlocks is a lot of people joined and will join to play and experience the full fledged Battlefield 3 with all the unlocks and vehicles. Limiting that would mean we either loose players or have unhappy members.

So I suggest we leave everything available and see how it goes. We can still agree on a gentlemen rule not to use something if it too unbalanced later on in the campaign.

2nd this
and you can tell new players " if ya don't like it- donate and become a votable!" ( or has this changed ? )

[WoodenPlank]

This might get me shot for saying or even suggesting this but Ive been looking at this from all sort of perpectives.

Realisticly I disagree with limiting unlock's full stop.

From a TA view point it would be hell to say "stop using that weapon" or "you can't use that" or "please kick him for using that weapon in that way." It would take allot of fun out of the game both for the players and TA's. Even limiting it on the server if you can I don't think it should happen.

My original post is working on the assumption that we can actually use server-side controls to tell the server what can and cannot be used. That would eliminate the needs for TAs or anyone else to monitor who is using what weapon, etc.

I would love to be able to just go full tilt, and let everyone have full access to the unlocks, but I worry that will cause some issues. Some of the balance in the unlock trees are dependent on the time it takes to earn them. In an environment where everyone has every unlock, that could cause some balance issues.

For the other replies: My goal here was to throw out an idea, and to get everyone talking and thinking about my idea, as well as any counter ideas. So, keep them coming!

I am hoping that we can have a couple of "scrimmage" battles before we really start the campaign (maybe even before we have a draft) so that we can hash out what some of the unlock issues might be.

[Total_focus_haz]

Think i have to agree with Rob that a few scrim battle with and without unlocks to see what advantages / disadvantages there are and decide from there, i can see a lot of GC'ers playing the game for the first few weeks it is out and racking up game time and with that unlocks and i can remember the issue with BF2 and medic unlocks causing big issues as they where so accurate.

Suck it and see i guess until the game is released

[Ash2Dust]

Weapon balance is different in Conquest from Rush. UMP is pretty deadly in Metro with its many face to face encounters. But out on Conquest, its alot less effective because range comes into play alot more.

Alot of the weapons are Overpowered when used right in the right playing style. Also unlocks need to be better than previous weapons or why even have them as unlocks?

[.Sup]

Weapon balance is different in Conquest from Rush. UMP is pretty deadly in Metro with its many face to face encounters. But out on Conquest, its alot less effective because range comes into play alot more.

Alot of the weapons are Overpowered when used right in the right playing style. Also unlocks need to be better than previous weapons or why even have them as unlocks?

Its not just about sheer power but also about handling mostly. Deviation, recoil, iron sights, size, magazine capacity, etc

[Ash2Dust]

Weapon balance is different in Conquest from Rush. UMP is pretty deadly in Metro with its many face to face encounters. But out on Conquest, its alot less effective because range comes into play alot more.

Alot of the weapons are Overpowered when used right in the right playing style. Also unlocks need to be better than previous weapons or why even have them as unlocks?

Its not just about sheer power but also about handling mostly. Deviation, recoil, iron sights, size, magazine capacity, etc

Yep, its a beautiful strafing weapon when running around like a mad man. Its my favorite so far for Metro. Been playing with the PDWR also, but that runs out of bullets too fast.

[WoodenPlank]

Weapon balance is different in Conquest from Rush. UMP is pretty deadly in Metro with its many face to face encounters. But out on Conquest, its alot less effective because range comes into play alot more.

Alot of the weapons are Overpowered when used right in the right playing style. Also unlocks need to be better than previous weapons or why even have them as unlocks?

Its not just about sheer power but also about handling mostly. Deviation, recoil, iron sights, size, magazine capacity, etc

Yep, its a beautiful strafing weapon when running around like a mad man. Its my favorite so far for Metro. Been playing with the PDWR also, but that runs out of bullets too fast.

The PDWR seems to work a little better at medium distances than the UMP does.

I'm curious to see what DiCE has done with the PDWs to "rebalance" them.

[dad0ughb0y]

The AEK is a nasty weapon. I've found it to be very powerful both in close combat on full auto and in longer range with 1 and 3 round burst modes.

[Ash2Dust]

Throw in the pistols too. Some are complete crap and others are almost as deadly as the UMP in close combat.

[WoodenPlank]

Throw in the pistols too. Some are complete crap and others are almost as deadly as the UMP in close combat.

Yeah, the only thing that has slowed me down using the G18 has been the 20 round magazine. The rate of fire on it makes it stupidly powerful up close.

[WoodenPlank]

Bringing this thread back up, since we are getting close to the start of C1.

The little bit I got to play earlier in the scrimmage made it clear (at least in my eyes) that leaving all unlocks available will be a mistake. Everyone I saw was using the same gun (on market) - the USAS 12. It looked like almost everyone was using extended mags, IRNV and FRAG ammo. It takes a lot away from the game for me when 90% or more of players are going to use the same weapon. While some unlocks are completely needed (a few general weapons to allow recon to play specops, shock paddles, grenade launcher, portable AA, etc), having every single unlock available (which, by the way, allows for items that are not available at all in ranked play, like shotgun suppressors) is a mistake in my eyes.

So, what are some updated thoughts now that we have all had time in the retail game? Weapon balance and unlock order has changed, so a lot of our beta thoughts are now null and void.