Pretty much. When you have 4 Engineers pop up like Meerkats and take a tank out like it was the equivalent of a parent dealing with a toddler having a temper tantrum you know it's just not balanced. You just know that DICE just read posts of players saying "but I as an Engineer I should be able to take on a tank, that's what the class is for", omitting any notion of team work or tactics based on objective play, rather making it a deathmatch game with a few distractions.
This isn't really a BF title in the traditional sense, the core team play just isn't there.
Give engineers shotguns and close range SMG's only. You will not see anywhere near the amount of Engineers we do now.
Pretty much. When you have 4 Engineers pop up like Meerkats and take a tank out like it was the equivalent of a parent dealing with a toddler having a temper tantrum you know it's just not balanced. You just know that DICE just read posts of players saying "but I as an Engineer I should be able to take on a tank, that's what the class is for", omitting any notion of team work or tactics based on objective play, rather making it a deathmatch game with a few distractions.
This isn't really a BF title in the traditional sense, the core team play just isn't there.
Exactly. Currently there is no downside to being an Engineer, no compromise to be made. I guess this was to be expected though and looking at it now the writing was on the wall in BC2 because they were given SMGs with silencers which again shows how they were stepping back from previous games in the series where team play and tactics made up for the shortcomings of each class, not just "moar weaponz!".
How many engineers should be needed to kill a tank? It's the tank's fault for getting in close without infantry support. The RPGs are so slow you can dodge them over any decent distance. I fired an RPG at a boat and remember thinking, it's like a flare.
How many engineers should be needed to kill a tank? It's the tank's fault for getting in close without infantry support. The RPGs are so slow you can dodge them over any decent distance. I fired an RPG at a boat and remember thinking, it's like a flare.
Completely agree, tanks are NOT supposed to be machines of pwnage, they should HAVE to be supported by infantry. If a tank zerg's an infantry nest, they absolutely SHOULD be killed.
Also, it seems no one is running with reactive armor...that's YOUR fault. I'm still having NO problems racking up kills with the tank. Really, with reactive, smoke, and guided, I'm still laughably powerful against infantry, as long as I'm not playing stupid.
Now, as for broken, you SHOULD be talking about the TV missile boost (which is getting fixed). I mean, granted, I'm a heliwhore and I love to see Zargon going >40-1 as my gunner, but OHKs against MBT is too much.
Im pretty sure in real life tanks are machines of pwnage against men with small arms. :biggrin:Completely agree, tanks are NOT supposed to be machines of pwnage, they should HAVE to be supported by infantry. If a tank zerg's an infantry nest, they absolutely SHOULD be killed.
Also, it seems no one is running with reactive armor...that's YOUR fault. I'm still having NO problems racking up kills with the tank. Really, with reactive, smoke, and guided, I'm still laughably powerful against infantry, as long as I'm not playing stupid.
Now, as for broken, you SHOULD be talking about the TV missile boost (which is getting fixed). I mean, granted, I'm a heliwhore and I love to see Zargon going >40-1 as my gunner, but OHKs against MBT is too much.
Assault: L85+heavy barrel. Super accurate and controllable under full auto fire. Also has the fast ADS movement speed which is a huge huge tactical advantage.
I still stand around for a good 15-30 sec before I leave the base! Old habits are hard to break.
The AN 94 assault rifle actually got a pretty nice buff but I still don't see as many people using it as I do. It was already incredibly accurate before but now I swear these bullets are laser guided with almost zero recoil.
friggin badass.
Currently there is no downside to being an Engineer, no compromise to be made.
Now those two classes are combined with main weapons that are reasonably effective both up close and at range.
yea and i 100% disagree with that i have no idea who he is but its wrong. it was everywhere, especially metro sien and bazar
Completely agree, tanks are NOT supposed to be machines of pwnage, they should HAVE to be supported by infantry. If a tank zerg's an infantry nest, they absolutely SHOULD be killed.
Also, it seems no one is running with reactive armor...that's YOUR fault. I'm still having NO problems racking up kills with the tank. Really, with reactive, smoke, and guided, I'm still laughably powerful against infantry, as long as I'm not playing stupid.
Now, as for broken, you SHOULD be talking about the TV missile boost (which is getting fixed). I mean, granted, I'm a heliwhore and I love to see Zargon going >40-1 as my gunner, but OHKs against MBT is too much.
Im pretty sure in real life tanks are machines of pwnage against men with small arms. :biggrin:
I like to keep my games somewhat realistic, RPG 7's should be little more than an annoyance to an M1 Abrams. If they want to keep the damage they are inflicting on tanks now, they should toss the RPG7 and give the engineers RPG 29's (Vampir).
One thing I think would help is to add the coax as something that doesn't need to be 'equipped' or switched to. I'd gladly give up the zoom key to be able to use the coax without switching back and forth between the main gun
Granted I don't play Engi nearly as much as assault but in my experience I have to disagree with the 'no downside' and 'at range'. The L85 is vastly superior at range than anything the engineers get and 99% of the time I will win that matchup
Yep, and I can live with that in the game if........... there arent 10 SOFLAMS and 20 jav toting egineers on a map.and the javelin is 1hk from hundreds of yards. IRL.
I definately agree that tanks are too easy to take out now. Heck - the chain gun on the heli can take it out without the need to reload let alone the TV missile issue.
One thing I think would help is to add the coax as something that doesn't need to be 'equipped' or switched to. I'd gladly give up the zoom key to be able to use the coax without switching back and forth between the main gun
I could swear that I wasn't getting warning signals enough last night as well. A couple of times I got killed by a Jav from a good distance away with no 'lock on' sound
And I would ask for a moment of silence for a special soldier who joined me as my coax gunner - by chocie! - despite my suicidal tendancies
.
..
...
....
.....
......
Bout damn time
Granted I don't play Engi nearly as much as assault but in my experience I have to disagree with the 'no downside' and 'at range'. The L85 is vastly superior at range than anything the engineers get and 99% of the time I will win that matchup
Point is, it's not really about the strength of the tanks, it's not about the strength of the engineers, it's about the sheer number of players that opt for the engineer class because it has no drawbacks and is a one stop solution for almost anything on the battlefield. Your experience with tanks maybe "OP" but that could be for a number of reasons, including looking after your KD rather than going for objectives.
It created teamwork. Teamwork is non existent in BF3, because engineers are so good at everything in the first place, there is no incentive to play other classes. Engineers can do everyone's job 90% as well as the specialized classes, and thats BS.
I definately agree that tanks are too easy to take out now. Heck - the chain gun on the heli can take it out without the need to reload let alone the TV missile issue.
I use engineer against infantry more than tanks. Even on Metro lots of people run engineer. I supposed you could make them less attractive in some way to reduce the numbers. You make it so that the engineer only has a shotgun like in BF2, people will move to support or assault, then you have 1 or two tanks dominating the map. If there were more tanks on the map at any given time, then fine, but there is not enough to go around to keep the tanks in check. The engineers are keeping the vehicles balanced, which seems better for the other 90% who dont have a vehicle.
There wasnt all that much teamwork in previous Battlefields. I was reminded of this a couple of weeks ago when I was playing BF2142. Sure you have a squad or two using teamwork to great effect, but most people where playing it like they play BF3. I know personally I used to lone wolf it as spec ops or a sniper in BF2.
Easy. Give engineers only shotguns, give us back the AT4, more damage to armor than RPG, almost no splash. Engineers are fixed. Good engineers can take out tanks at will, and the # of people playing Engineer is minimal.
Must have just glanced it then because an accurate shot post-patch from an rpg will now deal critical damage. Also dodging only works if you have space and most maps in BF3 don't provide this near objectives. As for any engineers popping up playing whack-a-mole it is just as difficult for friendly infantry to shoot them as it is for the tank, usually even more so because at least the tank can destroy some cover that they usually duck behind.
My issue isn't the amount of engineers it should take, you couldn't have played BF2 much because you didn't get what I was saying. The problem isn't that it takes relatively few engineers to take out a tank, the problem is that there are so many at any given time that tanks are always vulnerable. It was a very different story with BF2 because they were given a weak primary weapon to compensate. As a result Anti-tank guys in BF2 had to stick with their team mates to survive infantry battles and then provide anti vehicle support when needed. Now engineers don't need that support so they can be anywhere and they are much more common.
The balance is fundamentally broken because of this. Even the most skilled tank drivers are merely an annoyance now unless they are excellent shooters at very long range. The idea of a tank is to provide another tactical layer to the combat, but it's been treated as if it was a damage and armour perk in a deathmatch game like Quake 3 or Unreal Tournament. Past BF games never played like this.
As others have said, launch day balance was actually pretty spot on, and only a few bugs needed tweaking here and there.
I shouldn't be able to solo in a tank and take on anything that comes at me. I have to make a choice given the scenario - do I need coax here, or do I want guided or canister shells? Am I on a team where nobody is playing together, or am I going to have a dedicated gunner/CITV guy with me? Those decisions and choices are what make the game diverse and balanced, not giving everything to everyone at once.
Just because you happen to have a weapon that is better than what Engineers normally get does not mean Engineers don't have downsides. Engineers get amazing force projection up to long medium range. 99% of the time, the STARTING rifle is more than enough to win engagements at longer ranges. Its not the fact that other classes happen to get better weapons, its that the Engineer gets weapons that works perfectly well for most situations.
I do not think that is true. but I cannot prove it persay
I have a feeling that it would just let the tanks run wild on the map. Many engineers die when they are trying to take out the tanks, not just by the tanks, but by the other infantry. Crippling them with shotguns mean they cant take their shot at the tank then take out the infantry shooting at them. It would kill the class, and unbalance the game towards the tanks favor.
Now I am going by how the game is played, not the idealized teamwork version where the engineer would have squad mates watching his/her back. It seems good the way it is now. If a player thinks the tanks die too quickly, then they can be a team player and support the tanks by being assault or support and take out the engineers. But people wont, because thats not how the game is played.
Amazing? 99% of the time? Perfectly well? I guess we will have to disagree then. I dislike playing an engineer because - outside of a vehicle - I simply do not have nearly the anti-perosnal weapons available to be nearly as effective as I can be with the other classes