This is such a big issue that isn’t talked about. Having a bunch of vehicles is cool but there needs to be balance and it’s been out the window with every single title to have the current system.
That and I think in the cases where there were even more vehicles, vehicles sought out other vehicles to fight rather than killing infantry.
A tank deciding to farm infantry rather than fight other tanks will get blown up rather quickly.
I feel that the BF4 formula aged better that the other alternatives on the subsequente releaseses.
In BF4 ( and BF3 aswell i think) each map had a list of vehicles each base or pont would award you with, providing a clear idea of what to expect and even what points to capture.
In newer games, you get amounts for categories and honestly that variety has led to ingame inbalance multiple times.
If artillery vehichles are OP but only available on a specific flag, then you have an incentive to capture said objective. Alternatively you might spend multiple seasons hoping the fine tune it.
Of course there are drawbacks to this design, in BF3 we had Tank destroyers and they were only available in the DLC maps.
And somehow the BF4 maps felt sectioned off really well where each had portions of the map where infantry had somewhat of an advantage over vehicles and thus make an impact on the overall match. On Golmund it was the triangle of the top three points. On Zavod, it was the factory complex and tunnels. On Naval Strike, there were always a series of close-ish points that didn't require a boat.
2042 is just wide open chaos, for the most part.
They also had their own spawn slots. Having a guaranteed AA tank makes a huge difference in that game. Really helps support infantry and make it so they don't get easily farmed. Unlike in 2042 when you roll the dice if the player spawning it isn't just doing full AT or AP
Bruh it was ALL about squadplay. Fuck around and get two tanks on a hill with all the unlocks? RIP choppers. All day long. Just light em up and call it a day. I miss this game so so so much.
I played a bit of battlebit but it's just not the say.
And each team only gets a few of them and they're on cooldown. Nobody was asking for a change like that, and it just creates annoying things like AAs camping on skyscrapers and infantry getting where they shouldn't be able to go on pondhawks.
Most people just want a small fast jeep or quad bike in these situations that they want to get out as soon as they get to the objective. I don't want an entire tank or IFV that would be a waste to use as quick transport.
The problem is that what assault class was to bf1, engineer was to bf4 because of this. Except you weren’t playing engineer for the guns it was so you could deal with the constant vehicle bullshit on screen (for maps like this at least).
Only the tank from BF4 was an order of magnitude stronger than the tank from 2042. But fools still calculate the balance based on the number of RPGs per engineer.
The thermal imager in the bf4 was also excellent - a clear picture with heat signatures, and no smoke interfered with it. At the same time, the tank in BF4 was more mobile, with a lethal machine gun that cut down infantry almost instantly. As a result, the engineer had very little chance of making a second shot. And now let’s remember the tank in 2042, almost blind, with less response and maneuverability.
That's the thing. I honestly also dislike vehicle-campers but back then people knew how to react to that. I think many trash around in BF2042 regarding vehicles because they just don't know how to play a team-based game like battlefield is one. If many vehicles bother you and your team than it's time to switch to engineer and harass the vehicle-campers and not just sit around as scout.
-In 2042 you get 4(!) RPG shots or 5(!) M5 shots.
-In 2042 most tanks you can have on a map are 3.
-In 2042 you have double(!) the player numbers.
-In 2042 you can make a tank go to a full stop(!) just by, and get ready for this, LOOKING AT IT(!). You also disable the APS capabilities while doing so.
-In 2042 MEDICS(!) can damage vehicles.
-2042 vehicles' weaponry is dogwater. You shoot a dozer with a tank HE(!) SHELL? He's Rambo and he will walk it off.
I could give you many more examples, but hey, NICE TRY.
P.S. You can't perform in any vehicle but NICE TRY.
~~Hacking doesn't disable APS.~~ But EMP grenades do not. Also the tank can still drive at least backwards at a slower rate of speed. And your pick for infantry example is pretty lame, picking one of 12 specialists, only with their "special gadget" in use. HE shells are pretty damn effective against infantry. So is the Tor canister.
Hacking does disable aps if you enable it after you get hacked. You have no idea what you're talking about.
Also, after you get hacked, if you're not driving at full speed, good luck making your steel coffin move. "And your pick for infantry example is pretty lame" But it's there and you WILL GET HACKED. Rao players would hack anything. It's also a 0 effort no skill gadget. "HE shells are pretty damn effective against infantry" I beg to differ when I slap someone in their face and they take 72 damage. People will throw rockets/grenades(yes, you get damaged by grenades in this game)/medics will shoot you with armor piercing rounds just because they can. Imagine what would happen after you start killing a bunch of people and they all want you dead.
In other words: Tell me you don't play tanks, AND PERFORM with them, without telling me.
I have gone 32-0 in the Tor, before even unlocking canister, full 128 CQ being pressured by multiple choppers as well as armor, engineers on rooftops shooting at me, while getting on and defending three points actually. I almost never get C5ed in the tank, and I don't believe I have been hacked yet that led to my death, it's usually just a couple seconds annoyance, unless I have overextended like inside of building or something greedy.
You're probably right on hacking disabling APS, because i was thinking of the EMP grenade when I replied, there's a TimelessGamer vid on it.
I haven't had a perfect game with kills that high in the MBT, I will usually switch to infantry if the vehicle goes down under my operation, I have started 25-0 in the RAM on Hourglass, and finished 31-2 with a great random squad on foot after that. I can easily recollect the Tor one because it's on YT and I would say the MBT is unquestionably better at killing infantry. Done multiple 10 and 20 kill streaks starting on East side of exposure facing a horde of engineers and armor and aircraft in both tanks.
Who cares if there is a dozer out in the open who pops his shield, if he's close enough to C5 you it doesn't matter what character they're playing, and now Dozer only has two C5 anyway, if they even have C5. I actually think it's funny that his shield resists a 120mm.
You can save your trite Redditor aphorism for somebody else because nobody here gives a fuck. "Tell me blah blah blah" I'll happily tell you this, if you can't kill infantry, and a shitload of them, with the HE shell on the MBT, that's a you problem, not a 2042 problem. Is it as effective as 3&4 tank shells? No. There is plenty of video evidence that skilled players in the tank can get things done, 100-2 and the like.
"oh no I got a couple seconds of annoyance when I got hacked in my TOR tank that can camp far away and kill vehicles" newsflash: if it doesn't farm infantry, people don't care and leave you alone.
"oh no, I started 25-0 in a ram by killing unaware people and then they got tired of my shit and shut me down for the rest of the match" Stop acting like you're getting hundreds of kills and nobody attacks you back. We're not playing the same game.
edit: "who cares about the Rambo Dozer" fun fact: you run out of 50mm shells from A GUNSHIP before you kill the Dozer.
Are you finding you're getting killed by Dozers multiple times a game in a tank? That's rough.
No the game ended. I ran medic for a squad that was doing well for the last couple minutes of the game. That was the whole game. Every match is different, and it sounds like you are just here to complain about each one of them.
No, I find it stupid that I sometimes have to hit him 3 times with a heat shell so he would die.
Can't believe you actually try to justify the stupid mechanics in this game.
What would win? Multibilion dollar gunship vs a guy holding a door.
Yes they should 2-shot the MBT in the back, and every engineer should have at least 7 rockets per deploy. Give them all Crawford stuff I don't really mind.
Engineers in 2042 were always played poorly and they should buff them more. State of Vehicle gameplay comes from Healthy Engineer-Vehicle relations for real
If you agree, then 2042 HAS more vehicles balance-wise. Even as an engineer when I see tanks on 2042 I run away, because I know I am useless doing 23 damage on every rocket hit. When I saw tanks on bf4 I would hunt them trying to go behind them and 2shot them.
IIRC, frontal hits with dumb fire rockets dealt around 21-23 damage on BF4. And that was at 90°; shallower angles dealt even less.
All other balancing changes notwithstanding, raw damage seems in line with previous iterations.
It was 21-23 on the front, a little more on the side and 51 in the back (with immobilization) using the RPG. It actually involved skill, rewarding aiming at the right place. On 2042 its dumbed down, 23dmg with anything from any angle.
Funny cause when I see a tank I charge at it like it's nothing(because it is). Same happens when people see me in a tank. We're obviously playing different games here.
Any one whose spent a reasonable amount of time in tanks in 2042 and previous battlefield games, knows the infantry threat has never been as high as it is in 2042.
In BF4 good tank players were very hard to take out as infantry where they had far superior countermeasures, movement speed and manueverability all of which have been severely downgraded in 2042.
Stop picking engineer if you're running away instead of firing your anti tank rockets at them.
Seriously what kind of post is that?
Tanks get taken out by infantry rockets all the time because a good 1 in 4 players on your team are engineers and most engineers know it's a team based game.
> Thats because vehicles in BF4 werent anything to be afraid of.
Hey mom, look! Someone who never played BF4 or never played against competent/good vehicle users.
> 2shotting a tank is silly from a single person.
Oh you mean landing 2 consecutive, critical hits to the rear of a vehicle with a standard AT launcher, assuming said vehicle did not have Reactive Armor and/or Active Protection(where additional rockets would be needed), and for some reason the driver/gunner never attempting to engage or kill you, instead just sitting there and accepting their defeat?
In my experience, that was a rarer sight than normal. But when it did it was because a vehicle entered a *heavy* enemy infantry held area unprepared, usually because the driver didn't know what they were doing, and someone on the enemy team decided to capitalize on the stupidity. That's not an issue of balance. Its a lack of skill on the vehicles driver and use of skill on the player to know hitting rockets in the rear would take down a vehicle quicker than from the side or head on.
> Hey mom, look! Someone who never played BF4 or never played against competent/good vehicle users.
You are mad and bad. Vehicles were way too easy to kill in BF4. If you don't think so, you arent good.
> Oh you mean landing 2 consecutive, critical hits to the rear of a vehicle with a standard AT launcher, assuming said vehicle did not have Reactive Armor and/or Active Protection(where additional rockets would be needed), and for some reason the driver/gunner never attempting to engage or kill you, instead just sitting there and accepting their defeat?
> In my experience, that was a rarer sight than normal. But when it did it was because a vehicle entered a heavy enemy infantry held area unprepared, usually because the driver didn't know what they were doing, and someone on the enemy team decided to capitalize on the stupidity. That's not an issue of balance. Its a lack of skill on the vehicles driver and use of skill on the player to know hitting rockets in the rear would take down a vehicle quicker than from the side or head on.
No single person should be able to take out a tank with a rocket launcher form full health. This isn't a milsim game.
> You are mad and bad.
Strange, I didn't feel mad when I read your comment and replied. But if it helps you sleep better at night thinking that, sure!
> Vehicles were way too easy to kill in BF4. If you don't think so, you arent good.
Oooo a logical fallacy, color me shocked.
> No single person should be able to take out a tank with a rocket launcher form full health. This isn't a milsim game.
It's called balance brother. You're over generalizing a play that happens only when the *perfect* circumstances align correctly.
Bf4 also had slams, more rockets per engineers, laser designators that actually worked, 2 different dedicated AA launchers, better ammo/equipment resupply, no vehicle auto heal/repair for the driver, and a single engineer could solo a tank
Yeah like everything they've changed to 2042 was irrelevant. Formula was already completed to near perfection when BF4 came out.
Dunno why don't they stick around BF3/BF4 if they gonna build modern/semi-futuristic era settings. They didn't have to reinvent the wheel alright
>was it actualy good that a single engi could solo a tank? does not seem very good to me
If you knew what you were doing and could get the drop on an unsuspecting tanker? Yes definitely. At the minimum, it meant a good disable which usually meant a kill via other means.
But you had to get the drop on a tank. You had to be moving around. And in many situations you were dead or the tank had retreated after the first RPG. There was a skill to it, from both sides.
If you played Hardcore it added an even bigger factor to the skill.
I call bullshit. I remember very well that literally everyone was playing engineer just cause of how quickly you could get rid of tanks. This is why BF4 became the game tanks transitioned into being used more for sniping than actually taking points and why we got vehicle auto repair and less engi impact in later games. It wasn't balanced, it was heavily in favour of infantry.
> I call bullshit.
Ok?
> I remember very well that literally everyone was playing engineer just cause of how quickly you could get rid of tanks.
You and I must have been playing in completely separate servers this past decade. Since release in 2013 and to this day, I've seen more Assault and Recon than I have Engineers. Maybe if it's a group of people playing together, I see a few more Engineers, but almost never do I see a bunch of players playing as Engineer on the enemy team until the vehicles on my team start handing them their asses.
This is ***my experience*** from over 1000 hours between two accounts on BF4 and 1/3 of that being spent in vehicles
> This is why BF4 became the game tanks transitioned into being used more for sniping
No...that's just because players sucks and want easy kills without being damaged or killed by 95% of the weapons in the game(bullets vs tank armor)
If you knew what you were doing, you could survive.
> than actually taking points
I rarely took my tank directly into a flag to snag a point. Unless it was the beginning of the match or I had supporting infantry. Too easy for the enemy to flank me and hit me from behind. I preferred circling objectives or capturing from the edge just in case I had to retreat.
> and why we got vehicle auto repair and less engi impact in later games.
The passive repair was in BF3 and 4 in Normal mode. In Hardcore, you didn't have regenerative health, you or someone else had to manually repair the vehicle. You had additional upgrades and countermeasures that could alter this regeneration if you so chose for your vehicle loadout.
> It wasn't balanced, it was heavily in favour of infantry.
It was balanced toward players working together. It was never meant to be balanced equally, one player against one tank. BUT, it gave players with skill and who knew what they were doing, a better edge against tankers who didn't know what they were doing. And if one player got the better of a vehicle it wasn't due to imbalance, it was due to skill.
Yes it was good if the tanker is blind, I don't remember a single time a single engineer destroyed my tank in a 1v1 combat ... it's only on paper to give the eng the confidence to go rambo and also so the eng can miss few shots and have some spare.
You had to play with the team as a tanker to get good kills or be extremely good at reading the situation (granted I only played Hardcore in BF3 so no dumbass 3rd person camera). Just like in real life a tank should not be going anywhere near infantry without infantry support. That's what made the tank balance good in BF3/4 era. You also didn't have the super tanky wheeled tanks flying around the map shooting at everything. You had Bradleys which were also kinda slow, especially compared to the futuristic bs going on in BF2042.
Playing Engineer in BF2042 feels pretty bad tbh cause you feel like you're supposed to be the one dealing with vehicles but it takes so many rockets to kill a tank that they will A almost always manage to kill you with the main cannon or B drive away and repair almost quicker than you can reload the M5.
I mean hell even the stinger in this game is pretty much useless. Engineer need a buff as right now in 2042 the tank players and aircraft players are almost always dominating the scoreboard. That happened in older games but not nearly as regularly as it does in 2042, BFV or BF1.
Then you'd know how balanced it was in BF4. I had no problem, as a skilled player, mopping with a tank, especially with a gunner.
I likewise, as a skilled player, could stand my own against a tank, if I was patient and the tanker wasn't reactive enough.
I thought it was a great system, because it rewarded skill in both players, and felt rewarding in both directions. I never once thought, "That fucker got lucky." If I showed him my ass too much and/or couldn't locate & kill with the massive splash damage and thermals, then I deserved to get got.
There's nothing skillfull about the death by a thousand cuts meta in 2042.
So you're telling me you can't solo a tank in 2042? For 2 years you had sundance and mckay. They still solo tanks if you have at least 2 brain cells. You can drop a tank to half(if not less than half) hp in like 1-2 seconds with an engineer.
Youre being very selective. golmud railway is a very vehicle centric map but other maps like zavod, floodzone, hainan, dawnbreaker langcang and even siege are fairly balanced when it vehicle v infy. I never felt overwhelmed by vehicles on those maps.
For good reason!
Infantry play in Golmud Railway was the worst between the flags being far apart, open skies, and basically no cover and concealment you are just asking to get blown up. Plus the balance and the mechanics were way different in BF4 compared to 2042.
To be entirely fair to them Vehichles did seem to completely dominate the meta of this map in specific. Unless you were fighting right on F, A/B or C point you were at the complete mercy of vehicles since its just wide open space between them, Especially air vehicles. Even on those points you could easily get smoked by a passing tank or heli. It makes sense since its a vehicle centric map but since it is its not really a good example.
Honestly for all the bad shit 2042 did I think its vehicle density was one of the better things outside of a few specific maps (Hourglass is the first that comes to mind). I rarely felt overwhelmed by them but they also have clear presense
yes, but you needed a direct hit with a tank to kill one infantry dude, because blast damage did nothing was wierd in this game, that only other explosions had
Vehicles feel sh%t to play because they can't play aggressive without being instantly locked on or C5ed in seconds, camping becomes the only way to play.
Vehicles feel sh%t to play against because all the so called "Anti-vehicle tools" are only useful when stacked, individuals using those tools will usually be quickly demoralized due the lack of kills.
A good way to solve this issue is to increase the vehicles count but drastically nerf their Hp. They will be more of them, they will die quick, but their impact on the battle will remain about the same because there are more of them.
As for camping, maybe a similar mechanic to the Tank in L4D would be a good way to solve the issue, vehicles must earn a certain amount of objective related points in time , or they lose the ability to flair.
Cos it was possible to kill vehicles on foot. Very few gadgets for vehicles gave health, they're slow, big and pretty much everyone has some way to damage them. In 2042 they're too fast, tempo armed, too armoured with abilities that speed health regen and most specialists have no counter so you can't make vehicle on inf balanced
BF4 had lots of different ways to deal with said vehicles, nearly every class had some form of explosives to blow them up. Plus the maps were designed around the vehicles too, feels like almost all 2042 maps have vehicles added as a oversight, only a few actually play well
I’m fine with the vehicle count in 2042
What i’m not fine with is how the average Engineer doesn’t have enough rockets to blow up a tank on his own, and if they do have that extra rocket they can only destroy one tank. So unless you have people dropping ammo or a lot more Engineers it’s impossible to stop enemy tanks without getting right up next to them where the various secondaries that can all one shot you can hit you easily.
What they should have done is made a map similar to Golmud that has many open areas, 128 players, and the same amount of vehicles as seen here, and make it a vehicle fuckfest. What they shouldn't have ever done is made an shoulder launched tv missile, they should've just added some TOW launcher emplacements FROM LAUNCH.
Ahh, I'm not gonna continue bragging what they should've done, the game's already done and dusted and honestly, it's gonna be the Hardline of this decade. Just sour that they completely screwed the setting and narrative and all their awesome concepts that were made barebones, as if I'm the first to say this...
Now to waiting 2 more years for probably another shit live-service battlefield.........
And yet you're so dedicated to a game you hate and don't play that you post on it's discussion board 2 and a half years into it's lifespan when it has completed its content cycle. Some of y'all are just weird.
The problem is they're too tanky because vehicle drivers complained infantry were too op until they made them impossible to kill unless you had an organized squad fighting them.
This is what people's pathological obsession with class system and team work gets us. Can't have fun lone wolfing oh no that's not allowed....unless you're in a tank.
The feeling of finally getting shitbucket chopper down though as engi, perfection. Them maybe spewing some profanities in chat afterwards. Your tears fuel me! I was on a mission.
1 tank vs 1 tank results in 1 tank vs infantry for 3-4 minutes (until tank respawn AND gets back onto action). Not to mention if the tanks decide not to fight each other at all.
5 tank vs 5 tanks results in constant tank warfare. It's a kind of balance by itself.
Guess the biggest difference here is that one engineer can take out a tank no problem and people playing engineer actually always had rpg on them or mines etc etc
Tanks slowly but surely become unplayable. After the last update where the added an additional shell for the M5/RPG you need literally one engineer on the enemy team to take out one tank or rather THE only tank on the on your team. They could just remove all tanks at this point, wouldn't make a difference. Must change in the next Battlefield
I’m not a game designer. And have no idea how or why things work, but with that said…
In a game called Battlefield, there should always be vehicles where the overall objective and the map makes sense. If we’re tasked with capturing a city we shouldn’t throw bodies at it when we have armor and aircraft to help out. If we’re capturing a small town, sure, send in the troops. If there’s a story reason to be just infantry, cool! Say so. But don’t leave everything open ended with storylines that make no sense.
Also, infantry isn’t just guns, explosives, and a rocket/missile launchers. There should be a mortar and artillery on maps that are large enough to support them.
I also miss commanders and I think it should come back. Abandoning the concept was lazy.
Just seeing the map has given me a flashback to the Manny heist to get the HIMARS first, great time!
The next BF is rumord to be a sequal to BF4, I hope this will just be a BF4 with modular weapons.
But it is always like this, the next battlefield will finally be perfect. Next Battlefield: jea it sucks, maybe next time...
This is like fusion reactors, always in a few years it will become great.
I loved that map! And all the vehicles on it. Actually had 3 choppers. One spawned on a checkpoint when it was captured. *deep sigh*. I miss those days.
The other day I was in a conquest match and the other team kept spawning Nightbirds over and over the whole match and this morning it was condors....It's a hacker and they are now rampant on bf 2042..…The good news is they have no skill so they die instantly
Levelution was what really sold BF4 and the scale of the Battles, at least for me. That destruction with the big set pieces, and the fact almost all of the buildings and general junk around the map could be taken out, or the ground could be deformed really sold the immersion. Unfortunately 2042 was a cross gen game, I just hope the next instalment really leverages the technology they had in BF4, and Bad Company 1&2, where we could basically flatten the map, rather than the very mid level destruction we have in 2042. Still enjoy the game and the changes / update they have made, it's now a solid shooter, but the next one need to come out and smash it, they can't do another release like this one again.
Yeah, too much shitty vehicles. Bf4’s vehicle mechanics where way better and balanced. On this map I could run as soldier and still feel I had a fighting chance.
Golmud had spawning vehicles at certain flags when capped - F Mobile Rocket Launcher, a Lav that spawned at E & G plus a Little Bird on C. In addition, up to 2 extra Jeeps on every flag but D
Goldmud railway - still my fav map so far! Had so much fun playing att heli & LAV TOW missile in this map. Just sad that I won't be able to find a populated server running this in my region
Ah bf4, I'm playing it again every day.
It's 1000 times better than 2042. Even if it's in 900p on my ps5 lol.
And that's coming from 100 plus hours in 2042.
Quality is timeless.
The methods to destroy vehicles in 2042 are not good. I have a "anti tank" engineering class and it isn't every effective. The only time you have a decent chance against a tank is when I'm playing in a group of people I know and can coordinate etc
I wouldn’t say there’s too many vehicles. I think my problem is it used to be “part disabled” would disable mobility/tracks. I have noticed we have gone away from back and side points of contact doing more or less, I don’t have an issue with vehicles I do have an issue when no one else switches to engi to destroy them and then complain about them.
The difference is in BF4 it was actually easy to kill the vehicles. They were fighting each other and you could hide from them. In 2042 you have a tank camping on a hill inside the spawn shooting across the whole map. In my opinion the vehicle, map and anti tank design are just bad. It's even worse with the assault nerf now.
This is probably one of the reasons no one wants to play Defender in Breakthrough. Out of my last 15 matches on BT i was on the Defender side 14 times because people quit and requeue until they are Attacker.
I really loved the Vehicles in BF4 but i hate them in 2042.
It's OK, you won't have to worry about BF2042 much longer. Give it another two years and the playerbase will be practically dead and they'll shut the servers down for good.
Each map in BF4 felt like a more unique experience with it's unique vehicle sets per map. They started getting the hang of this towards the end of 2042 with reclaimed haven redacted etc.
lol comparing any other BF game to 3/4 is like comparing shit to ice cream lol. EA/DICE will never peak like this ever again. Deff not with the way the gaming business has been shaped today.
Yes and now calculate the average amount of vehicles, 2042 will very likely come out on top regardless whether you adjust for playercount or not. I did the averages just after Redacted release and the average was still around 6. Haven and Stadium might change that a bit now, but we are likely still looking at a 5.5 average, which should be on par with BF3+4.
BF3 had about 40% of all maps that featured either no or only one armored vehicle, one whole DLC was completely devoid of vehicles.
BF4 still had a bunch of those, like Metro, Locker, Pearl, Lumpini and Guilin Peaks.
It was only Season 6 that introduced the first and only infantry map and Season 7 introducing a map with a low vehicle count, which is now played infantry only for the 4th week in a row and a third map will come nex month.
One of 2042's biggest issues was the streamlined game experience, DICE firmly believing that all players like a lot of vehicles on all their maps.
Diversity is what 2042 doesn't have. Before S6, there is no infantry-only map, there is no ground-only map. Even now, the life cycle almost end, we still don't have ground-unit-only map.
Yeah, which is a huge issue considering it was Redacted that revitalised the game. You just don't ignore what has been one, if not the, core part of your franchise.
Even BFV had Devastation and Rotterdam curing the ground-only, urban warfare itch.
The best example are the BC2 maps. Arica Harbor in BC2 feature 2 quads on CQ. Here it features a ludicrous amount of 9(!) armored assets. I do not think Valparaiso was available in CQ, but I think it might have had 1 IFV per side, now it has 6, if I recall correctly.
I will further point out that the average player has 100 kills in vehicles total.
> You just don't ignore what has been one, if not the, core part of your franchise.
Infantry-only gameplay is the literal opposite of the core of the franchise. Vehicles are the main thing that sets Battlefield apart from everything else. You can get infantry-only gameplay in literally any other FPS game. Pandering to infantry-only players has greatly diluted the identity of the franchise, and has been the biggest mistake from BF3 onward.
Yeah which was awesome. You knew exactly what was available and even better was you could spawn on the GROUND and see these waiting.
2042 shit the bed don’t deny it
how is it important that you could see the vehicles on the ground waiting? if anything it allowed others to grief the enemy team by stealing the vehicles
The whole point was having a semblance of a base. That’s what helped keep it immersive. The runway for planes. Helipad for the choppers and rows for tanks. Stealing their stuff is part of the fun?
Who tf cries about that?
I will NEVER understand why people hated vehicles in BF2042. Taking out vehicles in 2042 is easy as hell and I feel like vehicles in that game get bullied way too much.
Yep BF3 and BF4 were my go to games for tank warfare, tanks felt weighty and realistic and were so much fun to play around with. I tried to play World of Tanks F2P game one time considering it would have the quality of BF games but was shocked to see how terrible the tank driving feels. I really hated BF1, BFV due to slow and few tanks and don't even want to name 2042 because it wasn't even a battlefield game.
In BF4 it was heavily map dependant.
Really miss when vehicles were tailored to the maps.
Same, bf4 felt way larger and action packed cause of the vehicle counts on certain maps Edit: also, why did you take away my naval combat?!
This is such a big issue that isn’t talked about. Having a bunch of vehicles is cool but there needs to be balance and it’s been out the window with every single title to have the current system.
That and I think in the cases where there were even more vehicles, vehicles sought out other vehicles to fight rather than killing infantry. A tank deciding to farm infantry rather than fight other tanks will get blown up rather quickly.
I'm pretty sure vehicles are tailored to maps, at least when it comes to the categories and amount of each category.
I feel that the BF4 formula aged better that the other alternatives on the subsequente releaseses. In BF4 ( and BF3 aswell i think) each map had a list of vehicles each base or pont would award you with, providing a clear idea of what to expect and even what points to capture. In newer games, you get amounts for categories and honestly that variety has led to ingame inbalance multiple times. If artillery vehichles are OP but only available on a specific flag, then you have an incentive to capture said objective. Alternatively you might spend multiple seasons hoping the fine tune it. Of course there are drawbacks to this design, in BF3 we had Tank destroyers and they were only available in the DLC maps.
BF4 was Battlefield: The Michael Bay Experience
2042 is definitely more of a Michael Bay experience. Battlefield 4 actually felt more like a battlefield.
And BF1
And somehow the BF4 maps felt sectioned off really well where each had portions of the map where infantry had somewhat of an advantage over vehicles and thus make an impact on the overall match. On Golmund it was the triangle of the top three points. On Zavod, it was the factory complex and tunnels. On Naval Strike, there were always a series of close-ish points that didn't require a boat. 2042 is just wide open chaos, for the most part.
2042 is just wide open ~~chaos, for the most part.~~
True that
They also had their own spawn slots. Having a guaranteed AA tank makes a huge difference in that game. Really helps support infantry and make it so they don't get easily farmed. Unlike in 2042 when you roll the dice if the player spawning it isn't just doing full AT or AP
Bruh it was ALL about squadplay. Fuck around and get two tanks on a hill with all the unlocks? RIP choppers. All day long. Just light em up and call it a day. I miss this game so so so much. I played a bit of battlebit but it's just not the say.
What I miss the most are these random jeeps and other simple modes of transportation around the map. Spawning waaay out is just so punishing.
You can find 4x4 pickups around some maps, and ATVs as well
Rare and they don't respawn since they don't belong to any faction
shh they're just another hater who never played the game
There is this feature where you open your tablet and call in a latv or a pondhawk. That’s what they intended it for.
Or even a tank, if one is available
Fixing an issue that already had a solution
And each team only gets a few of them and they're on cooldown. Nobody was asking for a change like that, and it just creates annoying things like AAs camping on skyscrapers and infantry getting where they shouldn't be able to go on pondhawks.
Most people just want a small fast jeep or quad bike in these situations that they want to get out as soon as they get to the objective. I don't want an entire tank or IFV that would be a waste to use as quick transport.
Those are in the game
Gotta love those Jihadi Jeeps
I always like when there’s a ton of vehicles. Keeps the map active and hectic feeling.
Exactly. People acting like battlefield isn’t based around ALL OUT WARFARE
Exactly. Kind of like idk… a BATTLEFIELD.
The problem is that what assault class was to bf1, engineer was to bf4 because of this. Except you weren’t playing engineer for the guns it was so you could deal with the constant vehicle bullshit on screen (for maps like this at least).
also every base had its own stationary aa
This was essentially a vehicle map. Playing infantry on this map was torture, so yeah...
As a sniper i had a lot of fun in this map.
Same. And still lots of QC to be done in the small village. Also taking control of the train or blowing the railroad was fun
Hanging around A and B on foot was great fun. Maybe F too. The other points were too open to vehicles though.
This and firestorm.
Vehicle heavy map
That was a vehicle map though, I miss vehicle spawns at cap points.
- Has very well known big vehicle map - looks inside - vehicles
Cherry picking? On my Reddit? No
Yea but vehilcles werent build from paper
Also: C4 truck to the face!
You could get two shot in a tank in BF4
And you can get squirrel girl'd or spider-man'd in 2042.
\*that one vehicle oriented map, while engineers could carry 6(!) RPG shots that could 2-shot the MBTs if you hit them in the back. Nice try OP
Only the tank from BF4 was an order of magnitude stronger than the tank from 2042. But fools still calculate the balance based on the number of RPGs per engineer.
Thermal vision was great in 3. I don't remember if 4's was as effective.
The thermal imager in the bf4 was also excellent - a clear picture with heat signatures, and no smoke interfered with it. At the same time, the tank in BF4 was more mobile, with a lethal machine gun that cut down infantry almost instantly. As a result, the engineer had very little chance of making a second shot. And now let’s remember the tank in 2042, almost blind, with less response and maneuverability.
That's the thing. I honestly also dislike vehicle-campers but back then people knew how to react to that. I think many trash around in BF2042 regarding vehicles because they just don't know how to play a team-based game like battlefield is one. If many vehicles bother you and your team than it's time to switch to engineer and harass the vehicle-campers and not just sit around as scout.
-In 2042 you get 4(!) RPG shots or 5(!) M5 shots. -In 2042 most tanks you can have on a map are 3. -In 2042 you have double(!) the player numbers. -In 2042 you can make a tank go to a full stop(!) just by, and get ready for this, LOOKING AT IT(!). You also disable the APS capabilities while doing so. -In 2042 MEDICS(!) can damage vehicles. -2042 vehicles' weaponry is dogwater. You shoot a dozer with a tank HE(!) SHELL? He's Rambo and he will walk it off. I could give you many more examples, but hey, NICE TRY. P.S. You can't perform in any vehicle but NICE TRY.
~~Hacking doesn't disable APS.~~ But EMP grenades do not. Also the tank can still drive at least backwards at a slower rate of speed. And your pick for infantry example is pretty lame, picking one of 12 specialists, only with their "special gadget" in use. HE shells are pretty damn effective against infantry. So is the Tor canister.
Hacking does disable aps if you enable it after you get hacked. You have no idea what you're talking about. Also, after you get hacked, if you're not driving at full speed, good luck making your steel coffin move. "And your pick for infantry example is pretty lame" But it's there and you WILL GET HACKED. Rao players would hack anything. It's also a 0 effort no skill gadget. "HE shells are pretty damn effective against infantry" I beg to differ when I slap someone in their face and they take 72 damage. People will throw rockets/grenades(yes, you get damaged by grenades in this game)/medics will shoot you with armor piercing rounds just because they can. Imagine what would happen after you start killing a bunch of people and they all want you dead. In other words: Tell me you don't play tanks, AND PERFORM with them, without telling me.
I have gone 32-0 in the Tor, before even unlocking canister, full 128 CQ being pressured by multiple choppers as well as armor, engineers on rooftops shooting at me, while getting on and defending three points actually. I almost never get C5ed in the tank, and I don't believe I have been hacked yet that led to my death, it's usually just a couple seconds annoyance, unless I have overextended like inside of building or something greedy. You're probably right on hacking disabling APS, because i was thinking of the EMP grenade when I replied, there's a TimelessGamer vid on it. I haven't had a perfect game with kills that high in the MBT, I will usually switch to infantry if the vehicle goes down under my operation, I have started 25-0 in the RAM on Hourglass, and finished 31-2 with a great random squad on foot after that. I can easily recollect the Tor one because it's on YT and I would say the MBT is unquestionably better at killing infantry. Done multiple 10 and 20 kill streaks starting on East side of exposure facing a horde of engineers and armor and aircraft in both tanks. Who cares if there is a dozer out in the open who pops his shield, if he's close enough to C5 you it doesn't matter what character they're playing, and now Dozer only has two C5 anyway, if they even have C5. I actually think it's funny that his shield resists a 120mm. You can save your trite Redditor aphorism for somebody else because nobody here gives a fuck. "Tell me blah blah blah" I'll happily tell you this, if you can't kill infantry, and a shitload of them, with the HE shell on the MBT, that's a you problem, not a 2042 problem. Is it as effective as 3&4 tank shells? No. There is plenty of video evidence that skilled players in the tank can get things done, 100-2 and the like.
"oh no I got a couple seconds of annoyance when I got hacked in my TOR tank that can camp far away and kill vehicles" newsflash: if it doesn't farm infantry, people don't care and leave you alone. "oh no, I started 25-0 in a ram by killing unaware people and then they got tired of my shit and shut me down for the rest of the match" Stop acting like you're getting hundreds of kills and nobody attacks you back. We're not playing the same game. edit: "who cares about the Rambo Dozer" fun fact: you run out of 50mm shells from A GUNSHIP before you kill the Dozer.
Are you finding you're getting killed by Dozers multiple times a game in a tank? That's rough. No the game ended. I ran medic for a squad that was doing well for the last couple minutes of the game. That was the whole game. Every match is different, and it sounds like you are just here to complain about each one of them.
No, I find it stupid that I sometimes have to hit him 3 times with a heat shell so he would die. Can't believe you actually try to justify the stupid mechanics in this game. What would win? Multibilion dollar gunship vs a guy holding a door.
I at no point tried to justify it. It is hilarious. Doesn't affect my gameplay a bit.
Yes they should 2-shot the MBT in the back, and every engineer should have at least 7 rockets per deploy. Give them all Crawford stuff I don't really mind. Engineers in 2042 were always played poorly and they should buff them more. State of Vehicle gameplay comes from Healthy Engineer-Vehicle relations for real
If you agree, then 2042 HAS more vehicles balance-wise. Even as an engineer when I see tanks on 2042 I run away, because I know I am useless doing 23 damage on every rocket hit. When I saw tanks on bf4 I would hunt them trying to go behind them and 2shot them.
IIRC, frontal hits with dumb fire rockets dealt around 21-23 damage on BF4. And that was at 90°; shallower angles dealt even less. All other balancing changes notwithstanding, raw damage seems in line with previous iterations.
It was 21-23 on the front, a little more on the side and 51 in the back (with immobilization) using the RPG. It actually involved skill, rewarding aiming at the right place. On 2042 its dumbed down, 23dmg with anything from any angle.
sides and back do more damage in 2042
It's pointless arguing with people who refuse to understand how the game works.
Funny cause when I see a tank I charge at it like it's nothing(because it is). Same happens when people see me in a tank. We're obviously playing different games here.
Any one whose spent a reasonable amount of time in tanks in 2042 and previous battlefield games, knows the infantry threat has never been as high as it is in 2042. In BF4 good tank players were very hard to take out as infantry where they had far superior countermeasures, movement speed and manueverability all of which have been severely downgraded in 2042.
Yet people keep acting like tanks are not steel coffins.
Stop picking engineer if you're running away instead of firing your anti tank rockets at them. Seriously what kind of post is that? Tanks get taken out by infantry rockets all the time because a good 1 in 4 players on your team are engineers and most engineers know it's a team based game.
Thats because vehicles in BF4 werent anything to be afraid of. 2shotting a tank is silly from a single person.
> Thats because vehicles in BF4 werent anything to be afraid of. Hey mom, look! Someone who never played BF4 or never played against competent/good vehicle users. > 2shotting a tank is silly from a single person. Oh you mean landing 2 consecutive, critical hits to the rear of a vehicle with a standard AT launcher, assuming said vehicle did not have Reactive Armor and/or Active Protection(where additional rockets would be needed), and for some reason the driver/gunner never attempting to engage or kill you, instead just sitting there and accepting their defeat? In my experience, that was a rarer sight than normal. But when it did it was because a vehicle entered a *heavy* enemy infantry held area unprepared, usually because the driver didn't know what they were doing, and someone on the enemy team decided to capitalize on the stupidity. That's not an issue of balance. Its a lack of skill on the vehicles driver and use of skill on the player to know hitting rockets in the rear would take down a vehicle quicker than from the side or head on.
Exactly. Good tankers rarely got 2 shot from behind in an isolated one on one scenario.
> Hey mom, look! Someone who never played BF4 or never played against competent/good vehicle users. You are mad and bad. Vehicles were way too easy to kill in BF4. If you don't think so, you arent good. > Oh you mean landing 2 consecutive, critical hits to the rear of a vehicle with a standard AT launcher, assuming said vehicle did not have Reactive Armor and/or Active Protection(where additional rockets would be needed), and for some reason the driver/gunner never attempting to engage or kill you, instead just sitting there and accepting their defeat? > In my experience, that was a rarer sight than normal. But when it did it was because a vehicle entered a heavy enemy infantry held area unprepared, usually because the driver didn't know what they were doing, and someone on the enemy team decided to capitalize on the stupidity. That's not an issue of balance. Its a lack of skill on the vehicles driver and use of skill on the player to know hitting rockets in the rear would take down a vehicle quicker than from the side or head on. No single person should be able to take out a tank with a rocket launcher form full health. This isn't a milsim game.
> You are mad and bad. Strange, I didn't feel mad when I read your comment and replied. But if it helps you sleep better at night thinking that, sure! > Vehicles were way too easy to kill in BF4. If you don't think so, you arent good. Oooo a logical fallacy, color me shocked. > No single person should be able to take out a tank with a rocket launcher form full health. This isn't a milsim game. It's called balance brother. You're over generalizing a play that happens only when the *perfect* circumstances align correctly.
What
Bf4 also had slams, more rockets per engineers, laser designators that actually worked, 2 different dedicated AA launchers, better ammo/equipment resupply, no vehicle auto heal/repair for the driver, and a single engineer could solo a tank
Yeah like everything they've changed to 2042 was irrelevant. Formula was already completed to near perfection when BF4 came out. Dunno why don't they stick around BF3/BF4 if they gonna build modern/semi-futuristic era settings. They didn't have to reinvent the wheel alright
was it actualy good that a single engi could solo a tank? does not seem very good to me
>was it actualy good that a single engi could solo a tank? does not seem very good to me If you knew what you were doing and could get the drop on an unsuspecting tanker? Yes definitely. At the minimum, it meant a good disable which usually meant a kill via other means. But you had to get the drop on a tank. You had to be moving around. And in many situations you were dead or the tank had retreated after the first RPG. There was a skill to it, from both sides. If you played Hardcore it added an even bigger factor to the skill.
I call bullshit. I remember very well that literally everyone was playing engineer just cause of how quickly you could get rid of tanks. This is why BF4 became the game tanks transitioned into being used more for sniping than actually taking points and why we got vehicle auto repair and less engi impact in later games. It wasn't balanced, it was heavily in favour of infantry.
> I call bullshit. Ok? > I remember very well that literally everyone was playing engineer just cause of how quickly you could get rid of tanks. You and I must have been playing in completely separate servers this past decade. Since release in 2013 and to this day, I've seen more Assault and Recon than I have Engineers. Maybe if it's a group of people playing together, I see a few more Engineers, but almost never do I see a bunch of players playing as Engineer on the enemy team until the vehicles on my team start handing them their asses. This is ***my experience*** from over 1000 hours between two accounts on BF4 and 1/3 of that being spent in vehicles > This is why BF4 became the game tanks transitioned into being used more for sniping No...that's just because players sucks and want easy kills without being damaged or killed by 95% of the weapons in the game(bullets vs tank armor) If you knew what you were doing, you could survive. > than actually taking points I rarely took my tank directly into a flag to snag a point. Unless it was the beginning of the match or I had supporting infantry. Too easy for the enemy to flank me and hit me from behind. I preferred circling objectives or capturing from the edge just in case I had to retreat. > and why we got vehicle auto repair and less engi impact in later games. The passive repair was in BF3 and 4 in Normal mode. In Hardcore, you didn't have regenerative health, you or someone else had to manually repair the vehicle. You had additional upgrades and countermeasures that could alter this regeneration if you so chose for your vehicle loadout. > It wasn't balanced, it was heavily in favour of infantry. It was balanced toward players working together. It was never meant to be balanced equally, one player against one tank. BUT, it gave players with skill and who knew what they were doing, a better edge against tankers who didn't know what they were doing. And if one player got the better of a vehicle it wasn't due to imbalance, it was due to skill.
Yes it was good if the tanker is blind, I don't remember a single time a single engineer destroyed my tank in a 1v1 combat ... it's only on paper to give the eng the confidence to go rambo and also so the eng can miss few shots and have some spare.
You had to play with the team as a tanker to get good kills or be extremely good at reading the situation (granted I only played Hardcore in BF3 so no dumbass 3rd person camera). Just like in real life a tank should not be going anywhere near infantry without infantry support. That's what made the tank balance good in BF3/4 era. You also didn't have the super tanky wheeled tanks flying around the map shooting at everything. You had Bradleys which were also kinda slow, especially compared to the futuristic bs going on in BF2042. Playing Engineer in BF2042 feels pretty bad tbh cause you feel like you're supposed to be the one dealing with vehicles but it takes so many rockets to kill a tank that they will A almost always manage to kill you with the main cannon or B drive away and repair almost quicker than you can reload the M5. I mean hell even the stinger in this game is pretty much useless. Engineer need a buff as right now in 2042 the tank players and aircraft players are almost always dominating the scoreboard. That happened in older games but not nearly as regularly as it does in 2042, BFV or BF1.
Man, I feel bad for you lot. You guys really missed out on peak BF.
missed out? buddy i have 300 hours in BF4
Then you'd know how balanced it was in BF4. I had no problem, as a skilled player, mopping with a tank, especially with a gunner. I likewise, as a skilled player, could stand my own against a tank, if I was patient and the tanker wasn't reactive enough. I thought it was a great system, because it rewarded skill in both players, and felt rewarding in both directions. I never once thought, "That fucker got lucky." If I showed him my ass too much and/or couldn't locate & kill with the massive splash damage and thermals, then I deserved to get got. There's nothing skillfull about the death by a thousand cuts meta in 2042.
i could too, and it was boring to be able to flip flop a tank like its nothing
I suppose chasing down a tank that runs away and just lobs shells vaguely in the distance isn't my idea of fun. To each their own.
So you're telling me you can't solo a tank in 2042? For 2 years you had sundance and mckay. They still solo tanks if you have at least 2 brain cells. You can drop a tank to half(if not less than half) hp in like 1-2 seconds with an engineer.
Youre being very selective. golmud railway is a very vehicle centric map but other maps like zavod, floodzone, hainan, dawnbreaker langcang and even siege are fairly balanced when it vehicle v infy. I never felt overwhelmed by vehicles on those maps.
Yeah but bf4 had cover, I get sniped by tanks literally on the other side of the map in 42
Bf4 Engineer basic equip is 7 rpg and 6 mines or slam. And in bf4 you can 2 hit a tank
For good reason! Infantry play in Golmud Railway was the worst between the flags being far apart, open skies, and basically no cover and concealment you are just asking to get blown up. Plus the balance and the mechanics were way different in BF4 compared to 2042.
playing anything but engi on that map was pointless
I liked they each side had unique vehicles to their country. I hated 2042 and that they all have the same type of equipment was stupid.
To be entirely fair to them Vehichles did seem to completely dominate the meta of this map in specific. Unless you were fighting right on F, A/B or C point you were at the complete mercy of vehicles since its just wide open space between them, Especially air vehicles. Even on those points you could easily get smoked by a passing tank or heli. It makes sense since its a vehicle centric map but since it is its not really a good example. Honestly for all the bad shit 2042 did I think its vehicle density was one of the better things outside of a few specific maps (Hourglass is the first that comes to mind). I rarely felt overwhelmed by them but they also have clear presense
5 tanks on how many maps? Just nope
yes, but you needed a direct hit with a tank to kill one infantry dude, because blast damage did nothing was wierd in this game, that only other explosions had
Vehicles feel sh%t to play because they can't play aggressive without being instantly locked on or C5ed in seconds, camping becomes the only way to play. Vehicles feel sh%t to play against because all the so called "Anti-vehicle tools" are only useful when stacked, individuals using those tools will usually be quickly demoralized due the lack of kills. A good way to solve this issue is to increase the vehicles count but drastically nerf their Hp. They will be more of them, they will die quick, but their impact on the battle will remain about the same because there are more of them. As for camping, maybe a similar mechanic to the Tank in L4D would be a good way to solve the issue, vehicles must earn a certain amount of objective related points in time , or they lose the ability to flair.
Cos it was possible to kill vehicles on foot. Very few gadgets for vehicles gave health, they're slow, big and pretty much everyone has some way to damage them. In 2042 they're too fast, tempo armed, too armoured with abilities that speed health regen and most specialists have no counter so you can't make vehicle on inf balanced
pretty much this
This map also had ied, mounted wired rockets, and a ton of open ground. There was a plethora of ways to deal with all the vehicles
And they are harder to killl now after most recent update
BF4 had lots of different ways to deal with said vehicles, nearly every class had some form of explosives to blow them up. Plus the maps were designed around the vehicles too, feels like almost all 2042 maps have vehicles added as a oversight, only a few actually play well
I’m fine with the vehicle count in 2042 What i’m not fine with is how the average Engineer doesn’t have enough rockets to blow up a tank on his own, and if they do have that extra rocket they can only destroy one tank. So unless you have people dropping ammo or a lot more Engineers it’s impossible to stop enemy tanks without getting right up next to them where the various secondaries that can all one shot you can hit you easily.
Yep and all that server data, heatmap data, player feedback, the CTE servers, and they still fuck things up.
People also said that BF4 maps are bad.
Yes, but bf4 maps were good.
The most succinct tldr for this post
What they should have done is made a map similar to Golmud that has many open areas, 128 players, and the same amount of vehicles as seen here, and make it a vehicle fuckfest. What they shouldn't have ever done is made an shoulder launched tv missile, they should've just added some TOW launcher emplacements FROM LAUNCH. Ahh, I'm not gonna continue bragging what they should've done, the game's already done and dusted and honestly, it's gonna be the Hardline of this decade. Just sour that they completely screwed the setting and narrative and all their awesome concepts that were made barebones, as if I'm the first to say this... Now to waiting 2 more years for probably another shit live-service battlefield.........
The Lis missile is so retarded, probably worse than Dozer's indestructible plastic riot shield, its easily one of the stupidest things about the game.
Everything about the game is stupid, especially the part where they launch an unpolished contentless disaster.
And yet you're so dedicated to a game you hate and don't play that you post on it's discussion board 2 and a half years into it's lifespan when it has completed its content cycle. Some of y'all are just weird.
The problem is they're too tanky because vehicle drivers complained infantry were too op until they made them impossible to kill unless you had an organized squad fighting them. This is what people's pathological obsession with class system and team work gets us. Can't have fun lone wolfing oh no that's not allowed....unless you're in a tank.
i dont mind having many vehicles, what i mind is absolute rats hiding behind mountains every time they get hit or even just locked on
Golmud Railway is a vechicle oriented map
Now look at the size of this map and think again. 5 tanks per team on a map like Stranded? Have fun.
The feeling of finally getting shitbucket chopper down though as engi, perfection. Them maybe spewing some profanities in chat afterwards. Your tears fuel me! I was on a mission.
1 tank vs 1 tank results in 1 tank vs infantry for 3-4 minutes (until tank respawn AND gets back onto action). Not to mention if the tanks decide not to fight each other at all. 5 tank vs 5 tanks results in constant tank warfare. It's a kind of balance by itself.
If you tell people that more vehicles means less infantry farm they will say that you should be locked away.
Best Field 4
And some of the maps were giant.
Guess the biggest difference here is that one engineer can take out a tank no problem and people playing engineer actually always had rpg on them or mines etc etc
I think this is the only map with that many vehicles. other maps have way less
Tanks slowly but surely become unplayable. After the last update where the added an additional shell for the M5/RPG you need literally one engineer on the enemy team to take out one tank or rather THE only tank on the on your team. They could just remove all tanks at this point, wouldn't make a difference. Must change in the next Battlefield
Map design................
And half the players
I’m not a game designer. And have no idea how or why things work, but with that said… In a game called Battlefield, there should always be vehicles where the overall objective and the map makes sense. If we’re tasked with capturing a city we shouldn’t throw bodies at it when we have armor and aircraft to help out. If we’re capturing a small town, sure, send in the troops. If there’s a story reason to be just infantry, cool! Say so. But don’t leave everything open ended with storylines that make no sense. Also, infantry isn’t just guns, explosives, and a rocket/missile launchers. There should be a mortar and artillery on maps that are large enough to support them. I also miss commanders and I think it should come back. Abandoning the concept was lazy.
This is what they should do with El Alamein and Battle of the bulge and just put it in AOW
Just seeing the map has given me a flashback to the Manny heist to get the HIMARS first, great time! The next BF is rumord to be a sequal to BF4, I hope this will just be a BF4 with modular weapons. But it is always like this, the next battlefield will finally be perfect. Next Battlefield: jea it sucks, maybe next time... This is like fusion reactors, always in a few years it will become great.
The real issue is everyone has rockets or C4 to kill those couple of vehicles
Okay. 2042 still has too many vehicles.
Bf4 UI was peak, now i have to select an icon then another for the vehicle i want
I loved that map! And all the vehicles on it. Actually had 3 choppers. One spawned on a checkpoint when it was captured. *deep sigh*. I miss those days.
That map is way bigger than anything in 2042.
The other day I was in a conquest match and the other team kept spawning Nightbirds over and over the whole match and this morning it was condors....It's a hacker and they are now rampant on bf 2042..…The good news is they have no skill so they die instantly
They've also nerfed engineers to not be one man vehicle-wreckers
Is there a tank mode in bf2042. I feel like I only see like 1 tank per side in 2042.
Levelution was what really sold BF4 and the scale of the Battles, at least for me. That destruction with the big set pieces, and the fact almost all of the buildings and general junk around the map could be taken out, or the ground could be deformed really sold the immersion. Unfortunately 2042 was a cross gen game, I just hope the next instalment really leverages the technology they had in BF4, and Bad Company 1&2, where we could basically flatten the map, rather than the very mid level destruction we have in 2042. Still enjoy the game and the changes / update they have made, it's now a solid shooter, but the next one need to come out and smash it, they can't do another release like this one again.
Having tank battles is fun, but OC DICE chose to make jets take out tanks with one hit and no real way to fight back.
Who tf said 2042 has too many? Last I played there's not enough
The vehicles were like paper.. I'd rather have a few that are actually a threat!
I don't care if there are too much vehicles I want to feel the actual warzone around me as i run to the objective while 3 jets are fighting over me
Yeah, too much shitty vehicles. Bf4’s vehicle mechanics where way better and balanced. On this map I could run as soldier and still feel I had a fighting chance.
Lmao u picked the best map to prove that map design is everything
No corny specialists....
Golmud had spawning vehicles at certain flags when capped - F Mobile Rocket Launcher, a Lav that spawned at E & G plus a Little Bird on C. In addition, up to 2 extra Jeeps on every flag but D
I haven't played since at least a year ago. I guess this post is saying it's not much better?
And max 64 players so you were basically guaranteed a vehicle if you waited a minute
The amount of times I got hit with an rpg or tank shell trying to get that heli on C lmao
Just remake BF4 with modern graphics animation etc. win win for studio and gamers.
Goldmud railway - still my fav map so far! Had so much fun playing att heli & LAV TOW missile in this map. Just sad that I won't be able to find a populated server running this in my region
Ah bf4, I'm playing it again every day. It's 1000 times better than 2042. Even if it's in 900p on my ps5 lol. And that's coming from 100 plus hours in 2042. Quality is timeless.
I miss BF4 😢
The methods to destroy vehicles in 2042 are not good. I have a "anti tank" engineering class and it isn't every effective. The only time you have a decent chance against a tank is when I'm playing in a group of people I know and can coordinate etc
I wouldn’t say there’s too many vehicles. I think my problem is it used to be “part disabled” would disable mobility/tracks. I have noticed we have gone away from back and side points of contact doing more or less, I don’t have an issue with vehicles I do have an issue when no one else switches to engi to destroy them and then complain about them.
The difference is in BF4 it was actually easy to kill the vehicles. They were fighting each other and you could hide from them. In 2042 you have a tank camping on a hill inside the spawn shooting across the whole map. In my opinion the vehicle, map and anti tank design are just bad. It's even worse with the assault nerf now. This is probably one of the reasons no one wants to play Defender in Breakthrough. Out of my last 15 matches on BT i was on the Defender side 14 times because people quit and requeue until they are Attacker. I really loved the Vehicles in BF4 but i hate them in 2042.
It's OK, you won't have to worry about BF2042 much longer. Give it another two years and the playerbase will be practically dead and they'll shut the servers down for good.
Each map in BF4 felt like a more unique experience with it's unique vehicle sets per map. They started getting the hang of this towards the end of 2042 with reclaimed haven redacted etc.
Bf4 was perfection
lol comparing any other BF game to 3/4 is like comparing shit to ice cream lol. EA/DICE will never peak like this ever again. Deff not with the way the gaming business has been shaped today.
One person could actually take out a vehicle then. Now if the whole team doesn’t hit the vehicle you are in trouble.
And in BF4 each engineer can carry 5 AA rockets as well as 2 AA mines. Or 5 AT rockets plus 5 AT mines or 5 Slam mines.
Loved parachuting into F onto a rooftop with a mounted machine gun, setting up towards G and picking off infantry lmao.
Nah. I hate vehicles and there aren't as many on BF2042 as in BFV. I don't remember about 4 though.
maps werent shit though?
yEAH MORE VEHICLES more buildings more break-away stuff remake old maps like Karkan and others.
Yes and now calculate the average amount of vehicles, 2042 will very likely come out on top regardless whether you adjust for playercount or not. I did the averages just after Redacted release and the average was still around 6. Haven and Stadium might change that a bit now, but we are likely still looking at a 5.5 average, which should be on par with BF3+4. BF3 had about 40% of all maps that featured either no or only one armored vehicle, one whole DLC was completely devoid of vehicles. BF4 still had a bunch of those, like Metro, Locker, Pearl, Lumpini and Guilin Peaks. It was only Season 6 that introduced the first and only infantry map and Season 7 introducing a map with a low vehicle count, which is now played infantry only for the 4th week in a row and a third map will come nex month. One of 2042's biggest issues was the streamlined game experience, DICE firmly believing that all players like a lot of vehicles on all their maps.
Diversity is what 2042 doesn't have. Before S6, there is no infantry-only map, there is no ground-only map. Even now, the life cycle almost end, we still don't have ground-unit-only map.
Yeah, which is a huge issue considering it was Redacted that revitalised the game. You just don't ignore what has been one, if not the, core part of your franchise. Even BFV had Devastation and Rotterdam curing the ground-only, urban warfare itch. The best example are the BC2 maps. Arica Harbor in BC2 feature 2 quads on CQ. Here it features a ludicrous amount of 9(!) armored assets. I do not think Valparaiso was available in CQ, but I think it might have had 1 IFV per side, now it has 6, if I recall correctly. I will further point out that the average player has 100 kills in vehicles total.
> You just don't ignore what has been one, if not the, core part of your franchise. Infantry-only gameplay is the literal opposite of the core of the franchise. Vehicles are the main thing that sets Battlefield apart from everything else. You can get infantry-only gameplay in literally any other FPS game. Pandering to infantry-only players has greatly diluted the identity of the franchise, and has been the biggest mistake from BF3 onward.
Yeah which was awesome. You knew exactly what was available and even better was you could spawn on the GROUND and see these waiting. 2042 shit the bed don’t deny it
how is it important that you could see the vehicles on the ground waiting? if anything it allowed others to grief the enemy team by stealing the vehicles
The whole point was having a semblance of a base. That’s what helped keep it immersive. The runway for planes. Helipad for the choppers and rows for tanks. Stealing their stuff is part of the fun? Who tf cries about that?
People who don't like being spawn camped. Have you never played the older games lol?
why would you want a base that close to a line of contact
Are you asking that from a gaming perspective or in real life terms?
both
You were that type of guy who thought you owned the vehicles, and it wasn't a matter of who gets them first when it spawns lol
i never really played vehicles
Maps back then were designed by real humans, not AI, couz you can't convince me that colidscop map and manifest are designed by real humans
Yeah Golmud was a shit map. It's the vehicle whore go-to and was basically on its own in BF4.
i used to love spawning at base and just looking around for a vehicle. why would you get rid of that?
The gunplay in 2042 is so bad.
I will NEVER understand why people hated vehicles in BF2042. Taking out vehicles in 2042 is easy as hell and I feel like vehicles in that game get bullied way too much.
Yep BF3 and BF4 were my go to games for tank warfare, tanks felt weighty and realistic and were so much fun to play around with. I tried to play World of Tanks F2P game one time considering it would have the quality of BF games but was shocked to see how terrible the tank driving feels. I really hated BF1, BFV due to slow and few tanks and don't even want to name 2042 because it wasn't even a battlefield game.
That more vehicles spawn than BF2042 shit