Page 1 of 1
Heros in BF3, for or against?
Posted: Thu Feb 17, 2011 8:48 am
by Sam
So I was just reading through a bit of BF1 vs BF2 discussion. Obviously a major difference between the two was the introduction of heros, namely jedi and sith characters.
Some say that it spiced things up a bit mid combat and was balanced as both sides had access to a hero. Put in the right hands it could turn the tide of battle in favour of one team.
Others say it absolutely killed the concept of the origional game, of just being another soldier in a larger fight.
I personally think that the heroes should be taken of the game and replaced with another soldier class, that is unlockable towards the end called Jedi Knight or Sith Warrior , with significantly less power than an actual hero. Maybe even be your own designed/customised character, i.e you choose thier atributes, look, force powers and speed from a point pool or something.
I remember playing polis massa on BF2 as the CIS, unlocking Darth Maul and quite happily get around a 100 or so kills. Not even three experianced human players on the other side could take me down.
Anyway, you know where I stand, what do you think?
Re: Heros in BF3, for or against?
Posted: Thu Feb 17, 2011 11:23 am
by ploplyguy
I am against playable heroes, but I like the idea of unlocking a melee character halfway through the match. I still think there should be heroes, but they fight alongside you, similar to BF1.
OH andI am not against having hero only matches like Assault as long as the heroes' controls are better.
Re: Heros in BF3, for or against?
Posted: Thu Feb 17, 2011 4:04 pm
by Scott
I am also against heroes. I wouldn't even want a custom class.
I was thinking, why is it in a universe like Star Wars with many weapons, and if Galactic Battlegrounds has proved anything, that there are also lots of unit types, that there are only 5 (?) classes in BF. There could be 10+ for each side easily. I'd love to have a class hierarchy to climb as you play. There could be loads: Gatling gun - place down to use, flamethrower, units that can climb on vehicles and place bombs to explode that also have melee "claws", etc, etc. I say screw heroes, add more unique classes.
Re: Heros in BF3, for or against?
Posted: Thu Feb 17, 2011 4:48 pm
by ploplyguy
More classes would be perfect for bigger battles but I think non playable heroes like BF would be sweet... and you could only kill em by blowing them off ledges or running em over lol
Re: Heros in BF3, for or against?
Posted: Thu Feb 17, 2011 6:50 pm
by spartan64
I chose yes. BF3 game-play should be kept as it is. But heroes should spawn rather than your character transforming into one.
Re: Heros in BF3, for or against?
Posted: Thu Feb 17, 2011 9:03 pm
by Scott
spartan_sixtyfour wrote:BF3 game-play should be kept as it is
I disagree. If it is than we're just going to get BF HD.
spartan_sixtyfour wrote:But heroes should spawn rather than your character transforming into one.
They did spawn

Re: Heros in BF3, for or against?
Posted: Thu Feb 17, 2011 10:47 pm
by Kelevra
I think more than five or six classes might be a little bit overwhelming. Using the existing classes as a basis, and allowing you to customize your equipment loadout might be a bit better. The Battlefield games have been doing just fine with that.
I didn't have too much of an issue with playable heroes. The issue was that in Battlefront 2 the player was already the strongest thing on the field, so letting them be a hero only made things even more one-sided. In singleplayer, at least.
Re: Heros in BF3, for or against?
Posted: Thu Feb 17, 2011 11:06 pm
by Scott
Kelevra wrote:I think more than five or six classes might be a little bit overwhelming. Using the existing classes as a basis, and allowing you to customize your equipment loadout would be a bit better.
I don't share the same overwhelming feeling but a hybrid of the Battlefield system and the numerous possibilities in the Star Wars universe would probably satisfy me as well.
All this talk makes me want a Battlefield: Warhammer 40K. That'd be epic.
Re: Heros in BF3, for or against?
Posted: Fri Feb 18, 2011 1:56 pm
by spartan64
spartan_sixtyfour wrote:But heroes should spawn rather than your character transforming into one.
They did spawn

[/quote]
Not in Renegade and Elite squadron.
Re: Heros in BF3, for or against?
Posted: Tue Feb 22, 2011 2:44 pm
by Watchful-Jedi
I really liked the Heroes and the extra dynamic they bring so I would say yes, but then again I was only able to play Battlefront Offline. With having a limited time to use them I would think that can’t affect the game so much as to have the lesser skilled players win the game? But then again I guess I can see how in the right hands they could devastate the gameplay.
I think they should be in Battlefront 3 but if you don’t want them then turn them off and if you do then turn them on. If there is plenty of rooms with and without I think everybody should be happy.

Re: Heros in BF3, for or against?
Posted: Tue Feb 22, 2011 5:33 pm
by iceytoa1
No stupid ass kills=time=life thing, just life/time lose all the life before time then unlucky but lose all the time and still have life then awesome.
Re: Heros in BF3, for or against?
Posted: Tue Feb 22, 2011 11:28 pm
by ploplyguy
iceytoa1 wrote:No stupid ass kills=time=life thing, just life/time lose all the life before time then unlucky but lose all the time and still have life then awesome.
Yea I think time is just stupid... just give em health