Battlefront3.net

Customization doesn't interest me that much because of how quickly it can ruin the balance of a game. I think we should focus on how they can improve how the pre-existing (or possible new) classes already work and interact with each other.

The only thing that I really wanted in BF is the ability to change weapons. I play a lot of shooters and so that basically removes most of the shooter effect.

Legion 2.5 wrote:The only thing that I really wanted in BF is the ability to change weapons. I play a lot of shooters and so that basically removes most of the shooter effect.

Customizing classes is not the staple of the shooter genre. The staple would be the shooting aspect. Shooters have just recently embraced class types and weapon loadouts. One thing I liked about BFII is that if you were with another real person, you chose a class that would compliment your teammates class. Then, if the scenario changed, you would have to fight it out and suffer the consequences or find a CP to change at. Thus giving it a more realistic feel.

Scott wrote:

Legion 2.5 wrote:The only thing that I really wanted in BF is the ability to change weapons. I play a lot of shooters and so that basically removes most of the shooter effect.

Customizing classes is not the staple of the shooter genre. The staple would be the shooting aspect. Shooters have just recently embraced class types and weapon loadouts. One thing I liked about BFII is that if you were with another real person, you chose a class that would compliment your teammates class. Then, if the scenario changed, you would have to fight it out and suffer the consequences or find a CP to change at. Thus giving it a more realistic feel.

Another thing to note about changing weapons. I'm handy with a rifle myself, but I've also tried out a shotgun, and had trouble using it. Soldiers are the same way: They 're trained with a specific set of weapons, and suddenly changing to another weapon and being able to reload it quickly, shoot accurately, and being able to handle the recoil properly is about as unrealistic as a pig flying. So that doesn't make sense to have it in a "everyday soldier" game like BF.

Arosenivai wrote:

Scott wrote:

Legion 2.5 wrote:The only thing that I really wanted in BF is the ability to change weapons. I play a lot of shooters and so that basically removes most of the shooter effect.

Customizing classes is not the staple of the shooter genre. The staple would be the shooting aspect. Shooters have just recently embraced class types and weapon loadouts. One thing I liked about BFII is that if you were with another real person, you chose a class that would compliment your teammates class. Then, if the scenario changed, you would have to fight it out and suffer the consequences or find a CP to change at. Thus giving it a more realistic feel.

Another thing to note about changing weapons. I'm handy with a rifle myself, but I've also tried out a shotgun, and had trouble using it. Soldiers are the same way: They 're trained with a specific set of weapons, and suddenly changing to another weapon and being able to reload it quickly, shoot accurately, and being able to handle the recoil properly is about as unrealistic as a pig flying. So that doesn't make sense to have it in a "everyday soldier" game like BF.

than make the weapon loadouts dependent on soldier class. rifle men can only use rifles, shotgunners shotguns, ext. just give different types of rfles with different stat to compliment how a play likes to play.

BobaFett wrote: than make the weapon loadouts dependent on soldier class. rifle men can only use rifles, shotgunners shotguns, ext. just give different types of rfles with different stat to compliment how a play likes to play.

then there's always the question of balancing.

mquondam wrote:you should be able to choose your soldier's gender at the very least. the alliance sniper was the only woman character. also, a simple species change would be cool (ie. rodian, gungun, weequay) these subtle changes will make everyones character unique while not affecting game balance.
EDIT: oh and i want to make a fat pilot like in episode 4 (joke)

hmm... wouldn't that make armies look... un-uniformed? I mean they need to have uniform... right?

RationalRoss wrote:
hmm... wouldn't that make armies look... un-uniformed? I mean they need to have uniform... right?

Well yes and no. The CIS wasn't exactly uniform when you think about it, neither were the rebels, but the empire and republic certainly were.

I think changing gender would basically through it into chaos.

Legion 2.5 wrote:I think changing gender would basically through it into chaos.

And extremely unnecessary

I do admit that it is working good for Halo Reach but it will not work for a game like BF3.

Legion 2.5 wrote:I do admit that it is working good for Halo Reach but it will not work for a game like BF3.

No point of comparing it especially considering it hasn't come out

I think the B2's should be special units for the CIS though

Arosenivai wrote:I think the B2's should be special units for the CIS though

Wrist rockets are a bit too easy of a kill.

Scott wrote:

Arosenivai wrote:I think the B2's should be special units for the CIS though

Wrist rockets are a bit too easy of a kill.

In BF1? definitely. In BF2? not so much.