Battlefield Tri-hard

Like this:

Assault
-Assault Rifles
-Grenade Launchers
-Mobile spawn point
-Two grenades
-Pistol

Medic
-Shotguns
-Defibrilator
-Med kit
-Grenade
-Pistol

Support
-Machine Gun
-Ammo box
-Binoculars
-Grenade
-Pistol

Engineer
-SMG
-Repair Tool
-Rocket
-Grenade
-Pistol

Recon
-Sniper rifles
-C4
-SOFLAM
-Grenade
-Pistol

Shotguns for medics puts emphasis on the medic-ing and prevents the player from abusing the fact that he has a medkit. Hard to camp distances when you are limited to using a scattergun. More realistic slugs would allow greater range, but not to the outrageous level of accuracy and distance that BC2 takes it. SMGs for engineers serves much the same purpose, but I give them SMGs just so there's an excuse to put SMGs in the game. I'd be fine with giving them assault rifles as well. I'd also be fine with letting anybody use shotguns, but medics are forced to use ONLY shotguns. I feel having two grenades on the Assault class is compelling enough to make me want to play Assault. Binoculars on the support class would be for calling in a mortar strike to the commander, so that he can either direct fast air or an actual artillery barrage. Since support is support, I figured it would be his job to do that. I leave lasing to recon because that requires more sneaking than a simple phone call. Anybody can call in an air strike, but not everyone can get in close enough to lase undetected.

In addition, we might also reintroduce class-specific armour levels. Assault and support get extra body armour, Medic and Engineer are average, and Recon is light. It makes sense, because Assault and Support are the primary firepower of a squad and they are supposed to make an area safe for the combat engineer or medic to do his job. Recon isn't supposed to get into thick firefights.

i thought about the shotgun thing for medics, and while it does make sense for close range, it makes it difficult for a medic to engage enemies before reviving anybody. i know i wouldnt play medic half as much if i was restricted to only a shotgun. i like to shoot things and zap things, and i love my machine guns. then again, i was introduced to battlefield through bad company 2, so i dont really know how bf2 played or what was going on with classes there. all i know is to me, it makes sense that i can revive somebody, then crouch in front of them and suppress the area while they get up and get re-situated and reload. with a shotgun i would either run out and fire blindly at my enemies, or do a derp revive and hope my buddy gets behind something before he dies again.

but youre right, there is that issue with abusing LMGs. i know ive run off on my own a few times and just killed things with my pile of ammo. medic, in bc2 at least, kind of has a dual role for me. i either sit with my friends and revive them, or go off and knife everybody from behind then fire wildly at all the enemies sitting back and hanging around.
E: oh your idea involves assault and support clearing the area for the medic to do his job. i guess a shotgun would work there, but it would be nice if there were still those universal weapons like the thompson and the m14 that medic could use. i still wouldnt play medic without the firepower.

While I can relate, I will say that that method of medic play is precisely the reason why it doesn't work. It is not conducive to team-play, and team-play is [supposedly] the Battlefield way. It's not the medic's job to suppress, it's the rest of the squad's. They are supposed to cover you while you revive, and then cover you while you both retreat. You are not supposed to be a one-man ambulance/bullet hose combo. But yeah, you got where I was coming from. Same goes for Engineers. Assault and Support should be distracting a tank, while the Engineer gets up behind him and plants an RPG in his ass. Alternatively, the Recon should be lasing so that an Engineer can fire a guided rocket for top-damage (or so a jet/helicopter can let loose with an anti-armour missile and forget about it).

As for medics in BF2, also over-powered. They got assault rifles just like the Assault class, but not the armour or grenade launcher. However, they could just sit back and pour fire on while a medkit keeps them alive and a support gunner keeps them supplied. It essentially made the Assault class pointless, because that grenade launcher was nigh useless in the face of everybody having shitloads of frags on them.

It's all about squad-level synergy.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Warsaw

Is that what BF3 looks like on PC, or is that a BC2-like mock-up? It looks nothing like that on 360. The map takes up the entire right hand with the weapons being on the bottom. The menu text takes up the left side of the screen.

---

A redditor made that a few days ago. It's at the top of the BF3 sub-reddit.

Holy fuck, Destruction 3.0 (make sure you watch in 1080p):

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=emGXp-qRrVg

Gulf of Oman, map of the year! I'm starting to doubt that Wake Island will be my favourite Back to Karkand map.

One gameplay annoyance I have is that if I'm playing on a map without aircraft, and I had equipped a Stinger in a previous match that had aircraft, then I can accidentally enter battle carrying a totally useless rocket launcher if I forgot about it.

A minor but much-appreciated fix would be to make such launchers un-selectable when on maps without aircraft. On the other hand, it does mean I see less RPG-against-infantry spamming than in BC2.

Also, is it just me, but are helicopters easier than ever to take down with tanks compared to BC2? Or maybe it's just netcode.

Naw, just stupid pilots. RPGs in BF3 are also not as effective against infantry as they were in BC2.

That trailer was awesome, especially the tactical forklift thing.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Warsaw

Naw, just stupid pilots. RPGs in BF3 are also not as effective against infantry as they were in BC2.

---

I barely played BC2 so I wouldnt like to compare it to BF3, however in BF3 I have no issues killing infantry with RPGs and SMAW. I have over 100 kills alone with the RPG.

The kill-radius doesn't appear to be as big, so I end up with a hit-marker more often than a straight up kill. It makes sense, since these things are supposed to be firing shaped-charges rather than plain high explosives.