FSFGrimes
Member
+1|6780
Aside from the CONSTANT complaining of various issues people have with BF2, there is somethings that are seriously flawed which many people over look and tend to forget. Many look at a problem in a very black and white sense. AA can't hit anything. So its made almost 100% accurate. Grenade launchers from 3 feet away and people jumping to fire them, removed ability to jump and shoot. There is a reasonably solution to everything.

In my years of gaming I have come across several FPS that have to BF feel of things. First game like this I played was C&C Renegade. It was actually pre-BF1942 and the multiplayer mostly consisted of destroying the other teams base structures. You earned money with points and then bought character classes or tanks. Massing for an attack in that game was simple. There was no jet or artillary strike that can come out of nowhere and claim your life or damage your newly aquired tank. There were distinct front lines for the most part. Then came BF-1942 where artillary required use of a spotter and the B-17 was a team effort, the gunners were valuable to the pilot and the pilot to the team. Soon came Joint Operations into my life. This was a run and gun style game but it had front lines to an extent but you can still go deep behind enemy lines and still live for a long time. Massing for teamwork was always fun, but due to map design flaws it hardly helped. (Each CP was a bunker that could only be attacked if it was the forwardmost bunker for each team the CP had a radius of varrying widths in which players had to be in. Some maps it was small others it was huge.)

Then there's BF2. The game where organized crazyness prevails. From my experiances the game is based on the concept of random teamplay.


Like all games a player must spawn someplace. Some games give the player a form of protection either invincibility for x amount of time or you spawn someplace where the enemy can't easily get to. In BF2 the player spawns in mid-air at several convinent locations and whereever it may be you MUST be instatly aware of your surroundings. There in my opinion are a good percentage of kills/deaths that are directly related to bad timing and players spawning. Be it spawning and there just happends to be arty at the same location 2 seconds later, or you come up on an enemy who happens to be a squad leader, one second he's alone the next theres 4 others standing there or you spawn right behind and enemy with their back turned. Its all happened to us at least once in this game.

Then theres the jets. Unlike BF1942 where the maps seemed bigger and the aircraft were slower. The jets in this game are fast, nibble, and until recently damn near impossible for infantry to kill. I am a flyboy, I love flying, I thought flying in BF2 was extasy until I got a combat flight sim. Now BF2 is cartoony to me. The maps seem to small for flying. Why am I flying my jet through a pipe in a dam? it just doesn't make sense. I'd be plenty happy if I didn't have to fly so close to the ground and that I could drop laser guided bombs as designated by whomever. BF2 is a close army combat game that utilizes everything of the modern army. Aircraft are hardly close to the action. I would understand if I was in an A-10 or SU-15t doing CAS (Close Air Support). But tactical fighters like the JSF, F-15, MIG-29?!?! Those I see up in the sky, dogfighting not bombing targets or straffing runways with the machine gun. So is the only reason they are in the game is to keep it like Battlefield series, where the games span over 60+ years of warfare and the idea was to keep the SAME basic idea for how to use air units!?!


Honestly, would you the average or hardcore player mind if they removed jets entirely? Or at least gave each side a CAS aircraft for the much needed balance that would become a tank war? Or even a flying spawn point like there was in in Secret Weapons? and scratch the whole squad leader spawning thing.

BF2 feels like a very random game now. How often has something come totally out of nowhere killed you? Jets are so fast they arn't there one moment the next they are. Helicopters, like the black hawk can hover way above ground and rain bullets down and you can't do much about it. You turn the corner and boom theres a tank pointing his barrel at you. The whole ordeal of spawning, especially with Squad Leaders. They have so much that feels so real, yet theres so much that feels so fake.

Thus BF2, unlike other games is built off of the concept of random. and it amazingly works....to an extent.
So is the system broke?
killaer
Member
+41|6756
You think jet's should be faster/larger maps? I don't want to walk miles on foot.
FSFGrimes
Member
+1|6780
No, just saying Im not sure they are really even needed in the game. Besides if the aircraft were the A-10 and Su25t they they would be ALOT slower.
OpsChief
Member
+101|6714|Southern California
@FSFGrimes

yes agreed I think I know what you mean by random. It is a strange game.  Maybe because this game is a 3-genre hybrid FPS/RTS/RPG. Everyone can find a place here but turn-based wargamers, they will get eaten.

BF2 is a place of some awesome ideas but some only half completed and other ideas over done.  My experience in the different servers is random but when I play with my bro's in a squad it can sometimes be very clear deliberate predictable logical and fun. On the other extreme when I join a game where I don't know anybody and can't get a squad built the game seems so random, even anarchistic.  Stuff doesn't seem to fit well then. It takes team effort to make sense from the obfuscation. The beauty of having different schools of thought being able to succeed in the same game is awesome. On one team you may have the cast of West Side Story prancing in the streets and the other you might have a teamworking Band of Brothers or maybe Platoon's TKers.

I think alot of the schisms in this game are from the broad diversity of people involved in and behind the game.  Sometimes one faction wins out over another. Some people can win by shear video gamer mastery, others by planning, tactics and teamwork.

I have to be careful when commanding that I don't just get mesmerized by the strange goings on lol 

It ain't broke but it ain't totally fixed yet either.

I intend to keep playing lol
airborne916
Member
+24|6703

killaer wrote:

You think jet's should be faster/larger maps? I don't want to walk miles on foot.
lol
JON.ANTONSSON
Member
+51|6730|Sweden
I agree with the spawn-thing. I think you should be able to choose whare you want to spawn on a spawnpoint. EXample: The Hotel at Karkand has three places you can spawn at, you should choose wich one of these three you want to spawn at, Then its ALMOST your one fault if you got spawnkilled.
pogled
Member
+0|6816|Europe
Good post man. It puzzeled me from day one onwards why the have chosen fast fighter jets for the air arm - A-10 or Su-25 (or a Harrier for Euroforces) would have been a much better pick.

On the random issue: the respawn system of BF2 is realy the WORST i have seen ever. MOHAA, Call of Duty, ... all have abetter and saver respawn system. Spawnign on the squad leader is a good idea though. It helps teamwork by keeping the squad together. Problem with that is that the system random picks a point where you respawn. If the Squad leader crosses a bridge it happens rather often that you just respawn at the height of the bridge but somewhere left or right of it. Or even worse: You respawn on steep slope - you neither can stand still nor open the chute. Alive but dead jet dead again. BF2 would be much less frustrating if there was acctually a system behind respawning.

Last edited by pogled (2006-02-15 17:22:53)

Spearhead
Gulf coast redneck hippy
+731|6728|Tampa Bay Florida
One of my favorite quotes--

"War is organized chaos"
FSFGrimes
Member
+1|6780
When I was reading about BF2 before it came out, many articles spoke of how a squad commander could be in an APC and everyone could spawn on him. At the time I thought "cool that means that he can stay in there and act as a spawn point and not fight as an ifantry but his squadmates can spawn on him as a tradeoff" Little did I know that my assumption was dead wrong. I know EA/Dice would never remove insquad spawning, but, if an APC or a light transport could be a spawn point if a squad leaders in it. Sure you'd have to add an APC or two to the map but then that would help the overall balance and assure each team has a anti-tank and an engineer.

I wonder how many people would buy a game if they made a ton of gameplay changes and sell it as another game. . .

Depending on what all they fixed, I might.
OpsChief
Member
+101|6714|Southern California
Mr. Grimes

I misunderstood what you are saying I am sure... because the squad leader can, in fact, act as a spawn point inside an APC/truck/tank or helo or boat etc and remain there providing direct fire support while the squad members spawn, dismount and attack on foot.

What did I miss?  What trade-off do you refer to?
FSFGrimes
Member
+1|6780
Sorry for the confusion I didnt phrase that well.

Its a trade-off by the sheer fact of vulnerability. If he is inside the APC he can't really be harmed by anything but a tank/ AT/ SF/ Engy or aircraft really. While if he's on foot pretty much anything in the world can kill him. He also loses manuverability. Note to mention vehicles show up on the HUD for jets so they have a pretty good idea of where targets are at. APCs can't duck behind a sandbag for some cover and its just a big target. If you can move it out of the way an confuse an AT guy as to where you might be going, good for you, but its a challange.  Its just different to being in an APC vs infantry. This whole game is about tradeoffs. Every class has a trade-off, their weapons, what seat to get in when in a vehicle; all of it does matter.
P2BP_KILLZ
Member
+0|6714
I agree on how the jets are way too fast for the size of the maps. As soon as you take off with a jet you gota start goin in circle. lo   its just stupid
Talon
Stop reading this and look at my post
+341|6799
Once again, the only real solution to everything is to have a bonus for the winning side, to encourage teamwork. Unfortunately, this will make people teamswitch. So if you stop teamswitching, you get unbalanced teams. So, IMO:

-If your team is winning, all your points are doubled. So you get 4 for a kill, etc. (reviving has to be reduced to 1 point per revive)

-Switching teams manually gives you -10 points.

-Switching automatically is free.
OpsChief
Member
+101|6714|Southern California
@Grimes lol ok my bad I see what you mean - gotta love the trade-offs that make this game far better than past FPSs.

@K1LLZ  lol

@Talon  yours is a good topic for its own thread - rewarding teamwork.  I hate the way teamswtching can be exploited and/or punitive. The cost in computing time to track real teamwork measurements would fry the servers. lol eh maybe just lag a little... But if they could actually reward teamwork effort/effect with points, squad manuever, internal support, cooperation, agility, cohesive play it would be awesome. Everyone would be in a permanent squad or clan and it would be pure hell on lone wolves.
7h3647h32in6
Member
+0|6761

killaer wrote:

You think jet's should be faster/larger maps? I don't want to walk miles on foot.
I would have to agree. I suggest moving back the boundary lines, but pressing the objectives closer together, giving plenty of room to fly and still keeping the infantry movements realistic.
persnickadee
Member
+0|6699
good shit fellas thnks for the read
vonSteuben
Member
+3|6741|Essen - Germany
I agree on the spawn problems. There is nothing more annoying than spawning at a flag and while you still turn towards the right direction the earthen flowers of the artillery strike start to blossom all around you, giving you a free aerial sight seeing tour.

I liked the way that Joint Operations handled the flag capturing. Having some kind of frontline because you needed to capture the flags in a certain order. No more of this people sneaking into the back of the enemy and capturing a flag there and opening up a second front that rolls over the rear.
The battles in JO were more concentrated and more intense (or would be "fierce" the right word?) imho
The problem I had with JO was the long walks sometimes. But I looooved the motor bikes

Regarding planes I have to say that I would like to see the single seater planes being air-to-air only and the two seater being air-to-ground. The single player planes would take the role of giving the bombers cover against other planes and this would bring up dogfights between fighter planes that try to shoot down the bombers while fighting against the other jets. In my eyes this would help teamplay since the fighters protect their teammates in the bombers and the bomber crew would have to work in a team as well.
(It should be impossible to switch from pilot to gunner/bomber in a two seated plane as well, you should only be able to leave the pilot's seat via parachute or on the ground )

AT-weapons shouldn't have this smokey target indicator telling the tank crew "Shoot here!" while pointing at the poor AT guy that just fired the missile like a finger from the Allmighty himself

But even with all its flaws BF2 is so much fun to play and I really like it even though I am not that good.
Just set your mind to "play for fun and the thrill" instead of "points and badges"

See ya,
vonSteuben
Talon
Stop reading this and look at my post
+341|6799
Battlefield 1942 sounds really good from the first post. Do people still play it>
OrangeHound
Busy doing highfalutin adminy stuff ...
+1,335|6687|Washington DC

Talon wrote:

Once again, the only real solution to everything is to have a bonus for the winning side, to encourage teamwork. Unfortunately, this will make people teamswitch. So if you stop teamswitching, you get unbalanced teams. So, IMO:

-If your team is winning, all your points are doubled. So you get 4 for a kill, etc. (reviving has to be reduced to 1 point per revive)

-Switching teams manually gives you -10 points.

-Switching automatically is free.
I like your thought direction.  Too often, players don't really care whether or not they win.  But, if points were somehow tied to winning .... hmmm ... this might encourage more teamwork.  The most memorable games I've had in BF2 were when people who worked together.

One other direction could be that points are only awarded to those on the winning team  (stats and awards still count for the losing side, but points for rank do not).   If you switch teams voluntarily, your points become zero at that point and your point total begins accumulating only while you are on your new team.
B.Schuss
I'm back, baby... ( sort of )
+664|6879|Cologne, Germany

the core issue behind all this is obviously teamplay and how BF2 rewards or encourages it.

At the moment, there is some encouragement to form squads, namely

- ability to communicate with squadmembers via VoIP
- extra spawn point
- ability to request suplies, artillery, etc.

on the other hand, players really never get a reward for forming squads. encouragement is fine, but most of the guys playing online care about their personal stats first ( you know, Tk'ing for planes, choppers, AA, point whores, etc.. ).  Joining a squad really doesn't help much here.

Teamplay on public servers is always difficult to achieve, but it would help tremendously if the game itself rewarded teamplay in some form ( points, that is... ). Having a global stats system is actually the perfect environment for this.

some ideas:

1.) you don't get team points if you are not in a squad. none at all. not for resupplying, not for healing, not for repairing, not for revives or flag capping. maybe for kill assists.
2.) no capping of flags unless you are in a squad. lone wolfes cannot cap flags.
3.) members of a squad receive more teampoints for the same action as lone wolfes. that's an option to 1.), if you don't want to make it that drastic.

things others here have suggested which I would like to reiterate:

4.) give more points to the winning team ( dunno, 25-50% more ? )
5.) manual team switching is fine, but you loose a certain amount of points for doing it ( 1-100% ? dunno )
6.) autobalance is free
7.) no switching seats in bombers in-flight

The problem is, if EA had wanted to really make BF2 a teamplay oriented game, they could have implemented such rules. But they didn't. Now, why is that ? The answer is easy. Profit. teamplay isn't really common on public servers and I believe games that enforce teamplay in such a drastic way generally don't sell well.

opinions ?
FSFGrimes
Member
+1|6780
JO had a good system but my problem with it was the fact that the last base was usually impossible to take. And those no timelimit servers made it become headaches.

On topic now.

It is fully possible that you join a squad and you still don't play as a team. Heck I'm guilty of that from time to time but its usually becuase A. I'm in a jet. B. I see a target of opportunity that I just can't resist and go run off. So giving people would just form squads and still play like they do now but are in a squad. How often do you see squads of 1 person? I see em quite often. I do agree that you should be rewarded for teamwork rather than lone-wolf play. Which makes you wonder what would work.

After some thinking I rationalized that some team points should be given based off of proximity. Gone would be the days of droping a med pack or ammo and someone picks it up a few minutes later then getting the point for it. Say you'd have to be within 20 meters in order to get credit for someone picking up your ammo or meds. If your outside of it, sure they get the meds but you don't get the point for it.

I wonder if giving a player assist points for spotting an enemy and that enemy is killed within a few moments would encourage more teamwork. Honestly I love it when I am told theres a tank on the next street. Or someone spots a apc and Im flying around, I look on the hud for that target.


Another thought, give the players more information before joining a server on if there are alot of team players in it. Heck filtering the servers off of "average player team score" would be a welcome feature.


Lots of good ideas everyone.
kontrolcrimson
Get your body beat.
+183|6866|Australia
i would like to use the UT/Pariah(?) game type of onslaught  then pariah's assualt/onslaught mix. there was always a front line.
Also love UT's spawn, were it has more than three set points......
seraphimneeded
Member
+0|6691

FSFGrimes wrote:

Then theres the jets.

...

Honestly, would you the average or hardcore player mind if they removed jets entirely?
This is probably why Sharqi Peninsula and Strike at Karkand are almost, if not fully, the most popular maps to play. They both lack jets altogether. The map with jets I tend to see the most played is Kubra Dam, and I think that would be because the way the map is layed out nullifies plane whoring styles.
kontrolcrimson
Get your body beat.
+183|6866|Australia
check the server rules out, try pick the ones that dont allow camping uncaps in vehicles. i do, and i dont realy worry about spawning into a bomb while in the red circle of life.
The Soup Nazi
Member
+18|6826|North Lauderdale, FL
You know, I was thinking about how it would be nice if the maps would be bigger.  Like in the order of 100x larger than they currently are.  But you could still leave the airfields, flags, spawn points, etc. in the center of the map so that you wouldn't have to walk for ages.  But for those in jets, the added airspace would be great for dogfighting, flare reloading, etc.  I hate how I'm off the edge of the map so quickly and would greatly appreciate a little more "room to breathe."

Board footer

Privacy Policy - © 2024 Jeff Minard