Global Conflict

Didn't really read into any of the campaign map stuff since I never really care about anything outside of the immediate gameplay. However all the proposed changes etc. I completely agree with and they are, at large, basically what I listed a while ago when there was a big discussion on banning stuff or changing it up.

The entire removal of lock-on weapons in favor of player skill was basically my biggest point, and what annoyed me the most. The game would be a lot better without all these things, and I'd be willing to give it another try with rulings like these. It's still gonna be buggy as frak, laggy etc. but these sorts of changes would go a long way to making it less painfully frustrating to pla outside of the aforementioned bullshit.

A Docile Sloth wrote:

o1oo1 wrote: *everybody has DLC

Do you mean we use all DLC or that to play you want everyone to have all the DLCs?

map list made with an assumption that everybody has the dlc.

Battlepickups banned because 1 hit kill at any range is lame and the rocket launches are all lock-on weapons, that would leave only 1 weapon , so easiest is to just ban them all.


ill need to think about PLD. it does eliminate a player who has to be actively locking, the problem like Necromancer said is the range. i would need some feedback from chopper pilots tbh.

Necromancer im still not very clear on your proposed map.

What about removing FF so we can go back to use mines and claymores as defensive measures?
Don't kill me pls, lol.

o1oo1 wrote:

A Docile Sloth wrote:

o1oo1 wrote: *everybody has DLC

Do you mean we use all DLC or that to play you want everyone to have all the DLCs?

map list made with an assumption that everybody has the dlc.

Battlepickups banned because 1 hit kill at any range is lame and the rocket launches are all lock-on weapons, that would leave only 1 weapon , so easiest is to just ban them all.


ill need to think about PLD. it does eliminate a player who has to be actively locking, the problem like Necromancer said is the range. i would need some feedback from chopper pilots tbh.

Necromancer im still not very clear on your proposed map.

DLC wise we should just stick to the way weve done it before.
People just play the maps they own and sit the ones they dont own out.

For myself I'd also be down to try a campaign like this.
For the campaign system even having something as simple as BF3C2 would work, honestly its more about finding a good way to play bf4 than it is getting it into a good overarching format.

I think the TA's + whoever helped did a great job with last campaigns system, it was an interesting change, itd just be easier to play a simple format so we can test bf4.

Hgx wrote:What about removing FF so we can go back to use mines and claymores as defensive measures?
Don't kill me pls, lol.

Fly, you fools!

I guess you just need to be EXTRA careful when deploying mines or dodging them.

Good ideas overall

Necromancer wrote:With two reps and no stingers the littile bird can become invincible.

I totally forgot about reps. I'm so used to flying solo.

I'm in favor of removing reps from Scouts.

Hgx wrote:What about removing FF so we can go back to use mines and claymores as defensive measures?
Don't kill me pls, lol.

we used it in BF2, just need to communicate that friendlies have mined an area.

o1oo1 wrote: Battlepickups banned because 1 hit kill at any range is lame and the rocket launches are all lock-on weapons, that would leave only 1 weapon , so easiest is to just ban them all.

ill need to think about PLD. it does eliminate a player who has to be actively locking, the problem like Necromancer said is the range. i would need some feedback from chopper pilots tbh.

to touch on battle pickups, first off the M136CS or AT4 or whatever it is is dumbfire. I have no issue with it, as it only has 1 shot. The rest of them I could do without though, so I'm all for this, especially getting rid of the 50 cal.

as to the PLD, I'm also torn about it. On some maps I see no issues with it (golmud, silk road, etc) where the elevation differences aren't ridiculous. But on other maps (shanghai, hainan, flood zone) the elevation changes really just make it so any laser lock weapon short of a tank laser has way too much of an advantage. It does add a bit more risk to the reward, but banning it on a per map basis is a lot of work for no real returns and another thing to have to micromanage each round for TAs.

as to other discussion:
-IMO heavy handed "balancing" on a per player basis in the draft has never worked, every time we've done any of it, it just turned out just as bad as having a regular draft. Group sign ups have always been and are also still an issue, and personally I think if you've played more than 1 campaign you should just join in the community in single draft and make new friends. We've done it twice in a row more or less and it didn't work in either of them.

-agree completely to using commander. If you wanted to specialize a vehicle, you've had plenty of time to do it. I'm at level 50 with limited pubbing and have all land vehicles and all air vehicles short of the stealth jet done, and most of that was in the 3 weeks before thanksgiving when the game wasn't a stuttery mess for me. if you just wanted to do ground vehicles it doesn't even take that long, etc. Weapon balance between infantry stuff seems better as well rather than the m16 basically being the be-all-end-all of infantry combat like we saw in BF3.

-It may be worth looking at some of the more ridiculous fire rate weapons and removing them as they are a major component to the "netcode" problem, which we are always going to have due to the international nature of the community and the horrible network code of the game.

-Personally I'd rather get rid of the infantry AA all together and keep vehicle AA (short of active radar, because active radar), but not sure how that would fly.

-M2 SLAMs need to go as long as they are not acting as physical objects on the map (the whole place 3 on top of each other thing). As far as I'm concerned they are bugged.

-defuse isn't going to work until they fix the mode. I'd rather play air domination, which is really saying something.

Humble opinion:
First of all i would say we should focus first on the game rather than on the Risk aspect. If we can´t find a way to enjoy the game it´s useless to work in any other think.

Regarding lock on n smart weapons:
-Absolutly no Staff shell - MBT LAW (even if they nerf it and fix the AP bug) - Active Radar.

-I dont see a reason why vehicles Guided Missile should be banned BUT it could be interesting just playing with NON lock on weapon (besides AA manpads) nor laser gadgets.

Battle Pickups:
-Besides the .50 and the Guided AT i see them more as little gimmicks. Even then i dont find them as annoying as you sound them to be (maybe the Guided AT yes). If its easier to just ban them all i dont see a problem.

Game modes:
-I dont see Obliteration working on Battledays. Too clusterfuck with so many people and easily base/parachute rapeable (is that a word?).
-I would rather see Squad deatmatch rather Defuse on low count days.
-Unless 16+ (±2) per team, both Rush n Conquest shouldnt be played with vehicles (unless transport). Air vehicles shouldnt be used (cause it would be give a huge edge anyone having a good pilot). If it´s easier just ban all vehicles except those for transport from BOs.

Playing with commander & Unlocks:
-Commander: yes PLS!
- "...if you just wanted to do ground vehicles it doesn't even take that long, etc. Weapon balance between infantry stuff seems better as well rather than the m16 basically being the be-all-end-all of infantry combat like we saw in BF3."
- Or you can just use a 25-200% boost an unlock all vehicle upgrades on little to no time.

Balancing:
Hmmm... It has always being hard and will always be.
The problem i see here is not knowing the future, who will or not show up for BDs. Low on air force, armor or good infantry guys is gonna hurt everytime.

M2Slams:
Since they got hit by the nerfbat i dont see a problem with them*

*Except for this. Someone tell how the hell do you spot or destroy a M2Slam which is on the water on Paracel Storm!

Bonus track: UCAV ?

considering obliteration

Without obliteration there would be too few maps to play, the risk map would have 28 areas instead of 42. Unless we play some maps twice.remember there is no 64i mode.
It might be a big clusterfuck but a team that prepares well can do well on it.

regarding the open bases: i think we will have to add some no going into enemy base rule on that mode


defuse

Yes i know it is bugged atm, however non objective based games do not work out. Domination is NOT objective based . It usually takes us a month from announcement to scrim , Im hoping they will release a patch in that time.
If they dont we will have rush and conquest 32i on black ops.

mines/slams
jan. 30th patch did not contain any weapon balance fixes. That is all "weapons were watching" that they are doing and hasnt been released yet.

FF will be on with mines and slams allowed. I dont think neither of them is bugged(if you think they are please provide me with evidence). You can stack mines just like slams.
with FF you will not have slam jeeps. It adds another level of communication and strategy to the game.
On paracel the Bridge chokes act the same for both teams. If you cant go through it , neither can they.
With active protection an armour driver can just plow through a mine field.
ucav
Is just fine as it is.

vehicle MAA

cant replace igla/stinger with MAA since 32 player maps dont have MAA

i might be wrong here, but active protection does NOT protect against mines or C4 as far as i know.
moreover, even with FF off, while standing on friendly mine, a splash damage from a projectile can trigger the mine and blow you up even when the active protection is on.

Just remove FF from modes and maps with vehicles, it's that simple.

o1oo1 wrote:considering obliteration

remember there is no 64i mode.

It would be pretty easy to play infantry-only. We could just play with all the settings the same and have a global announcement prior to playing an infantry only territory that non-transport vehicles are not allowed.

Glancing over this thread I don't see much to disagree with. I think we could make it work. Keep talking, guys - at this point, the key is coming up with a concept the community actually wants to play, since it seems like we didn't have that in BF4C1.

i made a poll about mines since the the community seems to be divided about it

POLL ABOUT MINES

NEW POLL ABOUT MINES

Added poll to this thread to gauge if people like the idea or not.