No Vehicle option details

[Talus]

Re: No Vehicle option details

I'd love to jet and chopper respawns to be ZERO seconds.

That way, more people get a turn.

You're waiting...YOU get it.

Re: No Vehicle option details

The question is. If EA in bfroe don't allow ranked servers, that don't allow the use of vehicles because they say is unbalance and a way to stat pad. Why they are making this now? Hope they have big refund to al those server they closed for this. EA and Dice would have to respond to them. Free server or give them money back. Some of those that got there server closed can have legal action against EA. EA would be breaking there own ROE with this in ranked. And by that, closing all those server was unfair. Better keep it unranked. Hope you know what you doing Dice. Theres money involve in this.

This is software right? The software industry never sells its "goods." It sells "rights" to use its intellectual property (the code). It's pretty clever because it really means they can do whatever they want. When you "buy" their software you are really only buying a license for it. To buy a license, you have to agree to their terms. Have you looked at the license agreement for the software for the ranked servers (or just the normal software if there is nothing specifically aimed at ranked servers)? I wouldn't be surprised if it gives EA the right to revoke the license whenever it wants for whatever reason it wants or to make changes in the game whenever it wants. Besides, nobody is forcing a server to upgrade to 1.4.

Re: No Vehicle option details

you want nice infantry mode?

take ANY 16p map, remove tanks, apcs, a.helis, jets, remove arty, leave transport, up the ticket ratio to 400%, let 64 players in, have fun - meat grinder :)

but, as many other things, it is much to hard for dice to understand. same as problem with plane whoring - make plane spawn time ZERO seconds. this way you cant CLAIM a plane for entire round TKing others, anybody can have his chance. simple, and you know - it works unranked :)

Re: No Vehicle option details

No need to explain the issues with the 2x HP - its already been discussed earlier in this thread.

So far there are three solutions to this 'No Vehicle option' that I've seen:

• 0 vehicles except RIB on water maps:
  Pros: No pesky Armor/Jets to deal with. Combat is focused between infantry. Massive Infantry vs. Infantry Battles. Runners to back or underdefened bases will always be on foot instead in a vehicle or parachuted in - clear battlefronts will be set. USMC carriers will rarely have their assets destroyed by SpecOps who usually have a transport helicopter to get them there. No more cartillery to kill snipers or destroy artillery.
  Cons: Do you really want to run to the next flag? Some maps would never be played. The Medic kit will be godly while the Engineer kit useless. No one would be able to go around choke points (as has been mentioned earlier in this thread) in a vehicle. Much more difficult for enemy to 'baserape' the USMC carrier since they don't have Planes, APCs or transport helicopters. The maps are not designed for a vehicle-less experience - maps are too large. 6-man Medic squads will be common. Commanders will no longer be able to use cartillery.
  
• 'Vehicle-lite' (all armor replaced with Heavy Jeeps, AA vehicles with Light Jeeps, Littlebird and Attack Helicopters with Transport Helicopters, and Jets removed):
  Pros: Its still BF2. All classes will still be useful. The game will be fast since everyone has access to transports. Transport vehicles are balanced and have plenty of counters (AT rockets, AT mines, Snipers, sustain automatic fire, Grenade Launcher, TOW), and won't unbalance the game.
  Cons:: Possibly too many transport vehicles on some maps. May have gangs of vehicles that just run over people.
  
• 'Vehicle-lite neutered' (all vehicles removed except transports; Littlebirds and transports have their .50 cal guns removed; all mounted guns, including TOW, removed):
  Pros: People can still get to the front lines of combat to have infantry vs. infantry battles with these neutered transports. No one will be able to camp using the .50 cal of a Jeep. Vehicles would only be used as transports, for the most part.
  Cons: Transport vehicles will have no way to defend themselves. Models will have to be reworked to remove the guns and gun/turret positions reworked to be passenger seat (may be difficult?)

That's all I can come up with at this time. Personally, I think BF2 should not try to be like CS:Source. CS:Source was designed for very small infantry vs. infantry maps. BF2 has very large maps and not having vehicles in the game make moving around laborious and time consuming. One thing gamers don't like is waiting...that's why they like maps like Karkand because they can get to the action pretty quickly - baring the squad hopping feature that was disabled in 1.30.

To make a pure infantry-only change to BF2 you would have to remake maps much smaller because of the distances people will have to walk.

Re: No Vehicle option details

Hey guys,
I find I am a bit vague on how much of this discussion is based off play experience on different maps using the new option and how much of it is based on speculation.

I am speaking with the designers and the question I cant answer is "Which maps have they tried and how many rounds etc etc...?"

This only work on city maps. All the others are desing for tanks, apc, AA, jets, heli. Getting out of the carrier in wake and arrive to land to only see a AT guy launching a single rocket and blowing up the little boat is no fun.

One thing they should always change is the Rib. Make them go faster in all BF2.

Nobody gets to land in them against a team with comander. They get spoted and boom. They are useless.

Heck..why not remove the AT class altogether while they're at it....

Hey while they are at it. Why not remove all the guns . And make it knife and pistol.

If they make this ranked without nerfing damage and giving some transport it would be a stat padding mode.

And other thing is, by people saying leave some transport vehicles. It would not be a INFANTRY ONLy MODE. With this DICE should notice that even the same people that want infantry only, are saying to you (DICE) that the maps without vehicles don't work!

If you want infantry only make some city maps for those. Leave the other jet maps alone.

Even the new city map in 64 players is vehicle based. LOL

Why don't dice make some money out of this and design some infantry only city maps and sell them as a booster pack. This way those that want this would buy that booster pack. You make money, you leave bf2 alone has it is desing for vehicle. And every one would be happy.

[Dangerdog]

Re: No Vehicle option details

Good feedback all around guys.

I may be way off base here but please let me know if this solution is a nicer fit to what everyone seems to be requesting:

1. Leave current option
2. Add new server option that is also no vehicles but does not have the modified settings for soldiers.


The debate on whether to include FAV vehicles is something I am really eager to see. I know its pretty much impossible to have a full opinion when most of it is roughly "I think having FAV's would help this option", but any feedback is good feedback.

Also for the bug fix vs new design implementation. It should be noted that the new vehicles setup is something that falls almost entirely onto a designers work load and not a programmers (bug fixer) work load. So when things like this come around its not at the cost of time spent bug fixing.

Sorry to digress there but please keep the quality feedback rolling its very helpful.

I think this comment should be reposted here, it covers the assumption that this mode is taking away from valuable bug fixing time.

Re: No Vehicle option details

The question is. If EA in bfroe don't allow ranked servers, that don't allow the use of vehicles because they say is unbalance and a way to stat pad. Why they are making this now? Hope they have big refund to al those server they closed for this. EA and Dice would have to respond to them. Free server or give them money back. Some of those that got there server closed can have legal action against EA. EA would be breaking there own ROE with this in ranked. And by that, closing all those server was unfair. Better keep it unranked. Hope you know what you doing Dice. Theres money involve in this.

[Dangerdog]

Re: No Vehicle option details

First, I'm sure they have more than one person working on fixing the bugs, this is something that might have been handed off to an intern to work on for all we know.

Second, Nobody is forcing you to play IO just like nobody is forcing people to play on maps with jets in them or maybe too much armor for their tate, it’s optional, service is voluntary you’re not being drafted; the core game is still there and will be just as popular as ever.

I agree, even though there is a server variable which you could use to filter on using an external server browser like qtracker there should be a way to only bring up IO servers, perhaps under the pull-down menu option where you can choose Conquest or Co-op.

If IO ends up being viewed as an upset to the rank and award system I imagine it’ll remain unranked, that may be an unfortunate necessity given some peoples obscure views over the value placed on the rank system as it would forgo the ability to track stats.

Re: No Vehicle option details

Here are the problems I have with IO:

First, DICE is intent on adding options, tapping resources that could be used instead to fix the bugs currently in place. By working on the bugs and current game play problems only, we'd have a patch sooner rather than later. I don't need yet another gameplay change; I need the red-tag bug fixed, the karkand hotel glitch eliminated, and several other problems remedied.

Second, everyone here purchased BF2 knowing vehicles are involved in the game. The maps are designed to play with vehicles, adding IO would eliminate the value of certain maps, or throw out the balance altogether. Who wants to play Gulf of Oman or Kubra Dam in IO? Why would I want to walk around those maps when I can drive? Karkand and Mashtuur City would easily be stalemates, as the infantry would have no jeeps to speed around choke points or have armor to help punch through them. Plus, Iron Gator is pretty much an IO map. If IO is so popular, why don't I see it on more map rotations? Instead of adding an IO option, make Road to Jalalabad like Iron Gator and leave it at that.

Finally, I don't want to have look through different settings or load a map to learn that said map is IO. I want to hop in a game and play, knowing that serverABC's Sharqi is the same as serverXYZ's Sharqi.
Besides, why make an IO option that actually goes against BF2's ROE? Why not make a Pistols and Knives option, or an Assault only option?

[Dangerdog]

Re: No Vehicle option details

I was just condensing down Planewhores tirade into the perils of adding Infantry Only to Battlefield 2 while cutting to the heart of his argument (see this post).

Personally I don’t see this as a detriment to the game but an asset, just like in BF2142 you’ll see both Titan and Conquest modes of play, both will be ranked, one could say that Titan focuses more on infantry combat because there are no flag caps and the only way you’ll actually win the game is for soldiers to destroy their enemy’s reactor inside the Titan.

Re: No Vehicle option details

So what's wrong with that? Then they can all hang out at the helipad like in 'Mine' and shoot each other. :laugh:

Seriously, all it takes is to look at the options when you click on a server name to see if it says, "Infantry Only 0" or "Infantry Only 1".

[Dangerdog]

Re: No Vehicle option details

The argument against it so far seems to be that people who pretty much only enjoy the jets/armor/arty random killing are afraid this might become too popular and they wouldn’t have the selection of servers to choose from, and like minded people would gravitate towards regular Battlefield servers and there would be even more contention for the limited vehicles that are in the game, thereby affecting their game.

Re: No Vehicle option details

I'm utterly baffled at people's reactions to the addition of an infantry only OPTION. Emphasis on the important fact there.
Anyone would think half of you were being forced to only ever play the game this way or that it was destroying the basic game for everyone. It isn't. Why deprive people who want to play without jets/arty randomly killing them every few minutes of being able to do so? Again: It's an option. Why shouldn't it be ranked? The fact that people will get higher accuracy and general weapons scores as opposed to the Karkland alley whores? Well... so what?

You do not have to play it that way, though I for one am willing to give it a fair try because as has been mentioned, Wake seems like it'd be interesting to play this way for one. If you don't like it, fine. Don't play it. It's an additional option for people that adds some variety and new ways to play maps. Why not just get over it and let those of us who want to do so enjoy it? We aren't going to stop you playing your "classic" BF2 or ***** that you can use vehicles. Why try to prevent us playing this way? It doesn't affect you.

[Talus]

Re: No Vehicle option details

Right...I play ranked because I KNOW I am less likely to run into any 'funny business' with custom settings or rules and that the server is going to be of a certain quality.

[Dangerdog]

Re: No Vehicle option details

If people didn't want to play them, we wouldn't even be having this discussion.

People play MODS because they WANT to....not because they're ranked.

Having all the unlocks already I don’t play ranked for points or increasing rank, tracking stats is sometimes interesting to look at but the real reason I enjoy playing ranked is that there’s consistency to the game, I don’t have to worry about not having a custom user made map that’s in rotation or that someone made alterations to the gameplay rules which are only apparent once you’ve joined a server, it’s alterations of these types which can be quite annoying for multiplayer games that give free reign over game servers.

Beyond that ranked servers also generally provide a better overall experience with regard to being setup to accommodate things like 64 players properly, I don’t relish the idea of connecting to a low ping non-ranked server only to find out that it’s being hosted off of someone’s DSL internet connection.