Announcement

Collapse
No announcement yet.

Evolutionary Changes from BF2 and BC2 to BF3

Collapse
X
  • Filter
  • Time
  • Show
Clear All
new posts

  • Evolutionary Changes from BF2 and BC2 to BF3

    I have been thinking about how to apply objectivity to Battlefield improvements and I think I understand why some things are changing and why some things are not changing. Ask yourself, "Being as objective as possible, what changes are necessary?" Though I stray into subjectivity sometimes, I try to apply exactly what you see in stats and configurations to what needs to be fixed.

    Kits:
    • Unfortuately there seem to be no public stats on playtime by kit. If they saw one kit being played--in terms of total hours--above all else, that would indicate a balance problem. The opposite would be worrisome as well. If no one is using a kit (recall support in early BF), they would adjust...sometimes too much (like going from BF42 to BFV and the M60/LAW combo). No reason for 6,7, or 8 kits. Still like the modular + encumberance model in JOTR a bit better.
    • Despite the complaints, I understand keeping kits close to what is in BC2. Based on my experience, the kits are chosen fairly equally with slight advantages to asaault and engineer and a slight disadvantage to medic.
    • A fix to people using the engineer kit too much is to make suppressor an unlockable upgrade for all kits and give engineers an unsuppressed subgun. Perhaps even the wrench could be unlockable across all kits?
    • Looking at the global stats, the uprank-required Gustav has more kills than the RPG. Clearly a balance issue there.
    • Prone position will increase the play time of snipers so nerf that kit a bit more by slowing the snap-shot ability of the sniper rifles. No more 25m to 50m quick shots...have you tried that with a 10x scope within 50m? It's hard!
    • Prone position will increase the play time of medic/gunners but that kit seems to be slightly unfavored so as long as they prevent dolphin diving no other changes are needed
    • The only other improvements might be to reduce the number of hitpoints and ammo so squads are dependent on medics and assault kits (but that starts to elevate the player frustration level).
    • BF2 was unplayable if you were coming back from FFOW. FFOW shot dispersion was 90% recoil 10% randomization. BF2 was 70% recoil and 30% randomization. FFOW was better.


    Vehicles-Aircraft
    • In BF42/DC and BF2, there was teamkilling to get to aircraft. Long lines of plane campers established elaborate rituals and ettiquette to determine who gets the pilot the next plane that spawns. No one cared if enemy base-raped plane campers on your team. Served them right.
    • If 100% indicates balanced, I would place BF2 jets at 200% to 300% (obscenely overpowered). This is worrisome because Trauma Studios (DC Mod) nor DICE ever got jets right on the BF platform. Jets were so overpowered in BF2 that they were completely removed from BF2142 and BFBC2. I think there was even a quote from a DICE spokeperson expressing shock at how much the jets dominated BF2.
    • The BF2 rocket helo was about 150% to 200% (slightly to grossly overpowered). The BC2 rocket helo sometimes sits unused. That would indicate that the BC2 rocket helo is around 85% to 90% (slightly underpowered). I would say make the rocket helo more keyboard+mouse friendly and you would not need to upgrade its lethality. FFOW did this much better.
    • Clearly they nerfed the transport helos too much from BF2 to BC2 considering their idle time in BC2. A lot of this can be fixed by making it more keyboard+mouse friendly and making the maps multi-axis (instead of the insane funnel that is Heavy Metal. While I don't want to go back to Mashtur blackhawk caps, clearly some change is needed
    • There are distinct side differences in the global stats between the RU aircraft and the US aircraft. Dunno how to fix that but it needs to be fixed.


    Vehicles-Ground
    • Tanks generally don't sit idle. They are probably good to carry over from BC2 to BF3 virtually unchanged.
    • Looking at the global stats for armor, you cannot help but notice the RU armor not being used as much as the US armor. Probably someting to fix there.
    • Looking at global stats, one cannot help but acknowledge the uselessness of all of the thin-skinned vehciles except the quad bike. Why even carry the boats and PWC forward into BF3? Dune buggy is missing from the stats.
    • Looking at global stats, one cannot help but acknowledge the uselessness of all stationary weapons except the anti-air (the US AA seems to be missing)
    • Console players love the UAV. Probably because it sucks to play FPS on a console :-)
    • Buggies/Humvees seem to sit idle except at around start. BF has never gotten grenade launchers right so might as well put an M2 .50 up there so it can shoot at aircraft. That + non funneled maps would increase the use of buggies


    Maps
    • Lots of dedicated servers running Heavy Metal. There is a long legacy of a frickin huge armor map. El Alemein, DC Desertshield, DC 73 Easting, etc. Please ensure there is one in BF3. DC 73 Easting is the model (no aircraft)
    • Again, lots of dedicated servers running Heavy Metal. There is a long legacy of a frickin huge combined arms map. El Alemein, DC Desertshield. Zatar Wetlands didn't quite do it. Please ensure there is one in BF3
    • Lots of dedicated servers running Oasis. There is a long legacy of a tight urban map. DC Basra's Edge, DC Basra Nights, DC Lost Village, even BF2 Karkand (ugh...one way map). The DC Basra maps are the model here.
    • Wow that rush map that was intended to be Lost Village never quite hit the mark, did it? FFOW's attempt at a Lost Village failed but not quite as hard as the BC2 rush map.


    Server
    • You see lots of servers shortening the respawn time of players and vehicles. Probably not a good idea to go back to spawning only on a squad leader
    • You see lots of servers punishing base raping. DICE needs to figure out how to prevent this without resorting to auto-slay. No uncaps?
    • You see some servers limiting the number of snipers. Unfortunately they can only auto-slay you if you choose recon. Might be nice to have sniper rifles limited to kits that spawn next to flags so recon have to actually help cap a flag to get their precious ghillie and sniper rifle. Of course, that could cause a lot of nasty teamkilling for that scarce kit.

    http://battlelog.battlefield.com/bf4/user/58Congo/

  • #2
    Re: Evolutionary Changes from BF2 and BC2 to BF3

    Whew. First off, man, have you played on TG's server? A lot of the things you mention in your post seem... hard to believe. I never see some of this on TG. Even on public servers....

    Originally posted by Ski-Racer View Post
    Kits:[LIST][*] A fix to people using the engineer kit too much is to make suppressor an unlockable upgrade for all kits and give engineers an unsuppressed subgun. Perhaps even the wrench could be unlockable across all kits?
    WHAT IS THIS I DON'T EVEN. Why would anyone ever play Engi again if we could all repair. Look, there are a few tracks here:

    1. Lots of kits like in BF2
    2. Overlapping of responsibilities in 2142, which unfortunately lead to everyone using similar equipment all the time.
    3. Overlapping but strictly different in BC2.

    I think BC2 did it best.

    [*] Looking at the global stats, the uprank-required Gustav has more kills than the RPG. Clearly a balance issue there.
    I think this is still skewed because of how long the gustav was abused and how long it was not properly balanced and patched. Gustav is nowhere near the king it used to be. Thank goodness.

    [*] Prone position will increase the play time of snipers so nerf that kit a bit more by slowing the snap-shot ability of the sniper rifles. No more 25m to 50m quick shots...have you tried that with a 10x scope within 50m? It's hard!
    So, you'd like to see longer scope in times? Understandable. But I do not want to see sniper rifles nerfed to the point where they can consistently be caught with their pants down in medium range engagements just because the other player has an assault rifle. Keep in mind "sniper rifle" is kind of a blanket term in video games for anything with powered optics. The VSS in BC2? Considered a sniper, but used by man as an assault weapon.

    What I fear is the developer trying to narrow the gap between skilled and unskilled players. Players with twitch should be rewarded. Anything other than that is "casual" to me. Gasp. I know, bad word. But that's really what comes to my mind.

    How can prone be a bad thing?

    [*] The only other improvements might be to reduce the number of hitpoints and ammo so squads are dependent on medics and assault kits (but that starts to elevate the player frustration level).
    Already without the extra ammo perk you are only given 3 magazines. With a weapon like the G3 that's just 60 rounds. BC2 already has a good balance with ammo. Anything less than 3 mags would just infuriate players like myself.

    VSS? Forget about it. I never use that gun without extra ammo simply because it's high rate of fire makes it burn through ammo like it's nobody's business. But I do NOT want to be attached at the hip to a teammate simply because it's "better" teamplay. How about we let the players decide their level of interaction with their teammate, instead of the developer force it down our throats? I'm not encouraging lone-wolfing, but players should not have to be within box-throwing distance of their squadmate at all times.

    Vehicles-Aircraft
    • In BF42/DC and BF2, there was teamkilling to get to aircraft. Long lines of plane campers established elaborate rituals and ettiquette to determine who gets the pilot the next plane that spawns. No one cared if enemy base-raped plane campers on your team. Served them right.
    • Not an issue on most community run servers. Not an issue on TG, that's for sure.

    • If 100% indicates balanced, I would place BF2 jets at 200% to 300% (obscenely overpowered). This is worrisome because Trauma Studios (DC Mod) nor DICE ever got jets right on the BF platform. Jets were so overpowered in BF2 that they were completely removed from BF2142 and BFBC2. I think there was even a quote from a DICE spokeperson expressing shock at how much the jets dominated BF2.
    • The BF2 rocket helo was about 150% to 200% (slightly to grossly overpowered). The BC2 rocket helo sometimes sits unused. That would indicate that the BC2 rocket helo is around 85% to 90% (slightly underpowered). I would say make the rocket helo more keyboard+mouse friendly and you would not need to upgrade its lethality. FFOW did this much better.
    • Clearly they nerfed the transport helos too much from BF2 to BC2 considering their idle time in BC2. A lot of this can be fixed by making it more keyboard+mouse friendly and making the maps multi-axis (instead of the insane funnel that is Heavy Metal. While I don't want to go back to Mashtur blackhawk caps, clearly some change is needed
    • There are distinct side differences in the global stats between the RU aircraft and the US aircraft. Dunno how to fix that but it needs to be fixed.
2142 didn't have jets probably because it was on the same engine as BF2 - which proved to be hard for DICE to effectively create aircraft flight mechanics with. Also, to me, the setting of 2142 just didn't seem like it was a jet environment. Everything was repulsorlift, hover, etc. Why would you want such an inefficient craft such as a jet fighter in a war of resources?

I don't know what servers in BC2 you've played on, but I rarely see a chopper unused. There already is a problem where ANYONE can pick up and fly helo's in BC2. It's too easy already. It should be easy to learn, hard to master. As for ineffective - WHAT? A good attack chopper crew in BC2 can really make life difficult for a team. Even without any perks the attack choppers are deadly. The thing in BC2 you have to realize is this: Vehicles are not death machines like they were in other titles. But, with a little bit of teamwork and some skill, you can turn the tides of battle. But that's the thing - teamwork AND skill.

Still don't understand why you think the choppers are not keyboard and mouse friendly. Outside of BF games, what experience do you have? I think the controls in BF titles with m+kb are fantastic compared to other games. ARMA. GTA IV.

The stat difference is probably due to the fact that there seem to be more rush stages with the US attacking and getting attack choppers. Just my .02

Vehicles-Ground[LIST][*] Looking at the global stats for armor, you cannot help but notice the RU armor not being used as much as the US armor. Probably someting to fix there.[*] Looking at global stats, one cannot help but acknowledge the uselessness of all of the thin-skinned vehciles except the quad bike. Why even carry the boats and PWC forward into BF3? Dune buggy is missing from the stats.[*] Looking at global stats, one cannot help but acknowledge the uselessness of all stationary weapons except the anti-air (the US AA seems to be missing)
See above response about rush maps and US attacking.

Useless? Where are you playing? In the right hands, those "useless" vehicles can help a team. They aren't meant to be death-dealers. They're meant to be transports. The last thing I want is a realistically portrayed MK 19 or M2 on HMMWVs. Boats are fun, and make it possible for water assault maps and scenarios. Quads are cool, and I like them, but they only promote lone-wolfing.

Again, I shake my head and ask where you play BC2 where you see these vehicles as useless. Especially HMG's and TOW's. These are placed for BALANCE purposes by the game developer, and to give some variety. On some rush maps on TG, the stationary HMG's are part of the defense. I sometimes see assaults stalled by them, and then UAV's used to specifically take out ONE HMG. Useless still?

[*] Console players love the UAV. Probably because it sucks to play FPS on a console :-)
I don't even know what you mean by this. I like the UAV, and I play FPS' on console and on PC. The UAV is useful. It has a variety of cool features in BC2.



Server
  • You see lots of servers shortening the respawn time of players and vehicles. Probably not a good idea to go back to spawning only on a squad leader
  • You see lots of servers punishing base raping. DICE needs to figure out how to prevent this without resorting to auto-slay. No uncaps?
  • You see some servers limiting the number of snipers. Unfortunately they can only auto-slay you if you choose recon. Might be nice to have sniper rifles limited to kits that spawn next to flags so recon have to actually help cap a flag to get their precious ghillie and sniper rifle. Of course, that could cause a lot of nasty teamkilling for that scarce kit.
The reason you see a lot of servers doing this is because their playerbase is impatient and childish. Players seriously cannot wait 10 seconds to respawn? Seriously. 10 Seconds.

SL spawn was strategic. BC2's spawn system, while useful in BC2, should stay in BC2. It's frustrating to fight against and only creates problems in competitive play.

The point of an Uncap is to provide a safe area for the team to regroup, respawn, and move out when they get their butts whoopped. DICE does not determine the quality of play on servers. Why should they try to combat this? This should be left up to decide by the people paying for servers - ala the community.

AFAIK, there are a few scripts out there that limit "snipers." I'm fairly certain I've played on two variants.

1. Limits recons per team
2. Does not limit recons per team, only specific weapons, ala Counterstrike.

This violates some policy/EULA/whatever set by DICE/EA. Why? Because it's not DICE's job to decide how players are "allowed" to have fun. Sure it's annoying when a whole team is sniping, but even here at TG - I can't ban a player from playing how he wants. That's just stupid. People play games for fun. If they want to snipe - meh. Let them. It is not my job to determine how they're allowed to have fun, neither is it DICE's. AFAIK, DICE does not allow these scripts because it was abused in the past in BF2 - remember PK servers? Some went so far as slaying whenever you used a different weapon other than P/K. This only enabled the cancer that IS stat-padding.

The last thing I want is for a player to feel like he's frowned upon simply because he has a certain kit. A sniper can contribute to a team just as much as a medic. Just in a different way.

I'll wrap this up restating something: Where the heck are you playing BC2?
Skud


Comment


  • #3
    Re: Evolutionary Changes from BF2 and BC2 to BF3

    I am one of those players that is not the best sniper but would enjoy playing the kit more as a sniper and not a spec ops player with close combat weapons. However the stigma about snipers and the attitude people have really turns me off from giving them much play time because so many other players are doing that same thing and I feel I can better help my team but physically trying to get on flags instead of covering for those people trying to take the flags. With BF3 and 64 players I might not feel as bad going sniper every now and then if half the team is not sitting back sniping.
    Battlefield Samurai 'Banzaaaiii!!!

    Comment


    • #4
      Re: Evolutionary Changes from BF2 and BC2 to BF3

      Originally posted by TheSkudDestroyer View Post
      The reason you see a lot of servers doing this is because their playerbase is impatient and childish. Players seriously cannot wait 10 seconds to respawn? Seriously. 10 Seconds.
      Hell, even half of our OWN community whined and cried about a 5 second increase in spawn time, going from specious reasoning like "Revives will time out faster than the dead time" (not true) and "That puts defenders at a disadvantage" (Defenders spawn at/near the defense mark. Attackers have to run all the way up. Hell, this is standard in even Team Fortress 2, where the game was designed so that the more points the attacking team capped, the longer the defending team's spawn was, to prevent stalemates. Ever play on a equal-time or instant-respawn TF2 server? It's complete crap.)

      This violates some policy/EULA/whatever set by DICE/EA. Why? Because it's not DICE's job to decide how players are "allowed" to have fun. Sure it's annoying when a whole team is sniping, but even here at TG - I can't ban a player from playing how he wants.
      Not necessarily. It violates the ranked server rules, and can cause your server to be unranked. You can go on and unrank the server any time you want and play with those rules, but considering how everyone wants to get their Rank Ups and unlocks and stats-whoring, all of which turn off when the server goes unranked, people will whine and complain.

      In my opinion, I don't really care if the server I'm playing on is ranked or not. Hell, nonranked seems to enjoy a more mature clientele if only because there's no stats tracking or point whoring. Then again, it also doesn't attract the majority of pubs, the same as hardcore.
      If it's anything like BF2, you could set a server up as unranked and unlock all weapons for that server. Unranking the server was also a requirement if you were going to run any mods or TCs (like POE/PR/etc).

      <04:11:24> *** You are now talking in channel: "TFP - Task Force Proteus"
      <04:16:25> "|TG-XV| Tralic": this channel is so gay
      DICE needs to make a comical boxing glove attached to a spring punch the player in the face 40% of the time they get into a helicopter or jet.

      Comment


      • #5
        Re: Evolutionary Changes from BF2 and BC2 to BF3

        Originally posted by Bisclaveret View Post
        Hell, even half of our OWN community whined and cried about a 5 second increase in spawn time, going from specious reasoning like "Revives will time out faster than the dead time" (not true) ...
        IIRC, the primary reason why TG members weren't a fan of the increased spawn timer was it because it affected server population. Many non-TG members who joined the server were quick to notice the increased spawn timer, and didn't return to our server. Over time, TG members noticed how dead the server was becoming. I understood why we increased the timer and supported the idea of placing a higher value on staying alive, but in the end, it felt like a huge tradeoff in playing in a half-populated server.

        As for the revives timing out faster... it wasn't faster, per se. It remained at the default 10 or so seconds. It was just pointed out that increasing the spawn timer did not also increase the time allowed to revive a fallen teammate. I don't think that was a big deal, though... at least it wasn't for me.


        Comment


        • #6
          Re: Evolutionary Changes from BF2 and BC2 to BF3

          Skud broke the forums with that WOT.

          Comment


          • #7
            Re: Evolutionary Changes from BF2 and BC2 to BF3

            Originally posted by Ferris Bueller View Post
            Skud broke the forums with that WOT.
            I thought I was the only one who noticed :p

            Comment


            • #8
              Re: Evolutionary Changes from BF2 and BC2 to BF3

              Originally posted by Pvt Brokeback View Post
              IIRC, the primary reason why TG members weren't a fan of the increased spawn timer was it because it affected server population. Many non-TG members who joined the server were quick to notice the increased spawn timer, and didn't return to our server. Over time, TG members noticed how dead the server was becoming. I understood why we increased the timer and supported the idea of placing a higher value on staying alive, but in the end, it felt like a huge tradeoff in playing in a half-populated server.
              Which gradually expanded to the point where those same members of the community were willing/wanting to make major concessions to the TG server to be more "vanilla" and "pubbie-friendly" such as removing friendly fire and turning on killcam to attract more non-TG members, possibly removing SM kick, etc, which eventually culminated in this wherein Oneil reiterates that we will not sacrifice the meaning of Tactical Gamer and bring it down to the level of a 24/7 Karkand just to cater to non-members and have a full server. TG servers are for TG first and foremost, while everyone is welcome, our rules are to support OUR style of gameplay, not the gaming community at large.

              I would rather play on TG servers with 6/8 players on each side where I know people will follow a plan, communicate, play the objectives, and work together cohesively than a full server with people spamming grenades and rockets willy-nilly, teamkilling for choppers, and running some UT-text mod telling me who is "pwning" who every 3 kills. The latter is any random server I click on in the browser. The former is TG.

              <04:11:24> *** You are now talking in channel: "TFP - Task Force Proteus"
              <04:16:25> "|TG-XV| Tralic": this channel is so gay
              DICE needs to make a comical boxing glove attached to a spring punch the player in the face 40% of the time they get into a helicopter or jet.

              Comment


              • #9
                Re: Evolutionary Changes from BF2 and BC2 to BF3

                Originally posted by Bisclaveret View Post
                Which gradually expanded to the point where those same members of the community were willing/wanting to make major concessions to the TG server to be more "vanilla" and "pubbie-friendly" such as removing friendly fire and turning on killcam to attract more non-TG members, possibly removing SM kick, etc, which eventually culminated in this wherein Oneil reiterates that we will not sacrifice the meaning of Tactical Gamer and bring it down to the level of a 24/7 Karkand just to cater to non-members and have a full server. TG servers are for TG first and foremost, while everyone is welcome, our rules are to support OUR style of gameplay, not the gaming community at large.

                I would rather play on TG servers with 6/8 players on each side where I know people will follow a plan, communicate, play the objectives, and work together cohesively than a full server with people spamming grenades and rockets willy-nilly, teamkilling for choppers, and running some UT-text mod telling me who is "pwning" who every 3 kills. The latter is any random server I click on in the browser. The former is TG.
                Yes, a few people suggested we modify server settings to be even more pub friendly, but if you paid close attention you would've seen that this idea was quickly shot down by numerous people before Oniell came in and re-iterated what most of us thought. Also, it's great that you would be fine with playing on a server with only 6/8 per side, but during the time when our server was routinely empty it fell on the daily BC2 players to spend an hour or more to seed the server every day. This change, which you consider minor, was exactly that. It did not make any appreciable benefit to TG gameplay and it cost us a significant decline in daily server population. That is why most of us wanted the return of the default spawn timer.
                "Looking for brahs to come fight crime with me" - Unload



                Comment


                • #10
                  Re: Evolutionary Changes from BF2 and BC2 to BF3

                  Perhaps I'm recalling this incorrectly, but I believe there were some players going for pure vanilla, while most TG members were pushing for minor changes. You're remembering the vocal minority. In fact, I think only 1 or 2 people mentioned removing the SM kick... most were opposed to that; almost all members favored the removal of 3D spotting. The members play at TG for a reason, and many were not willing to sacrifice the primer just to fill up the server.

                  At the same token, you're making drastic conclusions based on changing server settings. You're somehow assuming that changing the server to vanilla will either 1) have non-TG players fill the server who are unaware or don't care for TG-style play, and/or 2) TG members will all of a sudden stop playing within TG rules and disregard teamwork, communication, and teamkilling.

                  In the end, we just reduced the initial start timer for 60 seconds to 30 seconds, and the spawn timer from 15 seconds to the default (or something like that). No other changes. Our server population filled back up, and the complaints completely stopped; no mentions of killcams or making it vanilla whatsoever. Any theories that TG members were trying to make major concessions or changes based on these results appear to be false.

                  I think we're starting to tangent a bit, but to get back to the original point, I just wanted to argue that you're taking a very condescending view of some of our members here at TG. Yes, some of us pushed for server changes, but most members had the intention of making minor tweaks to find a sweet spot between maintaining server population and more importantly, TG-style gameplay. Many of us continue to keep the primer in mind... we're here at TG for a reason.


                  Comment


                  • #11
                    Re: Evolutionary Changes from BF2 and BC2 to BF3

                    As I recall we didnīt have 6/8 players on each side when the changes to a more TG like server were implemented. We had 0/0 and that changed when the settings were tweaked back a little.

                    Regarding the evolutionary changes I donīt think they should change too much from BC2. Besides the actual gameplay which needs to be bigger in scale. The compromise here could be vast maps with smaller built up areas for urban combat. Much like BC2 is now but even larger.
                    sigpic


                    Comment


                    • #12
                      Re: Evolutionary Changes from BF2 and BC2 to BF3

                      I limit myself to west coast servers. I was shocked at my pings when I came back. In BF2 and JOTR I had 20-30 sec pings on West Coast, 50-60 pings in Chicago, and 70-100 pings on the east coast. Now, even in west coast game servers my ping is 150. Sensory time is 15ms and reaction time is 30ms. So people are like 5 cycles ahead with a ping of 150. Don't understand what happened! I just got Comcast installed but I need to string coax through the house to get it from the family room to my office.

                      This was an effort to be semi-objective and react to what I actually see on the servers I join. When it's 16 on 16, if you have 4 people sniping then 25% of your side is doing something that is largely unhelpful to winning. So I understand the desire to limit that kit.

                      I too would be unhappy with less ammo. I still think JOTR did it best where you could choose your player skin separately from your kit. And you could choose your primary separately from your gadget. There was an encumberance factor that limited how fast you could move based on how much you carried. The thresholds were <30lbs, 31-65lbs, and 66-105lbs, IIRC. I always saved weight by not equipping a pistol and (again IIRC), I would choose 1 gadget that I could deploy (mines/satchel charge) and RPGs. So started out close to 100lbs but dropped into medium movement once I deployed the gadget. Just a small squad of us could lock down a flag that way.

                      http://battlelog.battlefield.com/bf4/user/58Congo/

                      Comment

                      • Connect

                        Collapse

                        TeamSpeak 3 Server

                        Collapse

                        Advertisement

                        Collapse

                        Twitter Feed

                        Collapse

                        Working...
                        X