Infantry only mode, worst idea ever.

[Paul Day]

Re: Infantry only mode, worst idea ever.

wtf man. almost four months since the last post. and you bring it back because you think its stupid?

[JTF2_darkloop]

Re: Infantry only mode, worst idea ever.

well put alpha, and yeah lets not flame plz. it bothers me.

[hM-glassjaw]

Re: Infantry only mode, worst idea ever.

Wow, old thread. Oh well, I'm bored at work and will chime in.

The OP's description of I/O mode is slightly exaggerated but he isn't too far off.

Here is my 2 cents.

I play I/O because point and click artillery, tank whores, over powered attack choppers and ace pilots ruin all the fun for me. BF2 with vehicles simply has too many easy ways to kill opponents. How many times have you been in the zone just wrecking shop on everyone you come across only to have all that momentum come to a screeching halt because artillery was dropped right on your head? Or even worse, it was from your own commander? I know I'm partially at fault if that happens but you can't always stop what you are doing and just run away. I loved BF 1942 because you had to work really hard to get kills and it wasn't instant death if you came across a tank. Also the anti-air flak cannons were actually useful against pilots.

I/O has it's fair share of problems, there is no disputing that. Here are a few that are very common.

Nade spam anyone? People throw grenades left and right and if there is support near by you might as well grab your ankles and kiss your *** goodbye. If they limited grenades to say, assault class only, or didn't allow ammo packs to resupply grenades, I/O would be much more enjoyable.

Booooo! to incompetent teams that can't get out of their own base. Road to jololololbad is the main offender here. If US has a weaker team they will be pinned down in their own base for the ENTIRE ROUND. Break out your deer hunting sniper rifles because that will be the only way you can kill anyone without racking up massive amounts of deaths.

The way I see it, both modes have their fair share of weaknesses and strengths. I just choose the lesser of two evils FOR ME. Remember, that FOR ME part is crucial. Also, all of my friends love to play I/O mode and I'm through playing in random squads or trying to play lone wolf so I stick with whatever my friends are playing since playing in a coordinated squad is the best way to play this game.

[etf-danno]

Re: Infantry only mode, worst idea ever.

So the OP's determination of 'doom and gloom' never really panned out, did it?

He thought I/O would rip into the very fabric of the BF2 community... well guess what? It didn't.

For one of the longest posts in time... History itself came in and replied...

'nope.'

[cloustron101]

Re: Infantry only mode, worst idea ever.

Lol I would have let this post die, as it should, if it weren't for the post above me....

I/O mode is a spam fest as mentioned earlier, no doubt at all.

On Strike at Karkand the sky is esentially black with grenades, the entire length of the round. I/O mode is an unbalanced piece of junk. It saddens me seeing the mass amount of servers switching over to it.

I'm sorry I just can't believe theres anything to a mode where all the teams doing the entire time is throwing grenades at each other.

Very rarely you actually get some squad action going, then it can actually be *gasp* fun, but I don't believe it could ever hope to balance out the mass spamming that occurs most of the time.

My verdict: I/O could have been good, but due to poor balance testing, turned into rubbish.
No it didn't "rip the fabric of BF2 apart" but it is spreading like a sickly virus...one server host at a time...

Oh and to all those who seem to argue it requires "mad skillz" to play this mode, your only kidding yourselves I'm sorry.

[imported_Elder]

Re: Infantry only mode, worst idea ever.

IO only is good for maps that shouldn't have vehicles on it to begin with. For example karkand, mashtuur, or sharqi. I think if they would have just editted those maps to take out everything except maybe transport choppers and jeeps (with the machine guns taken out) it would have been a lot better from the get go. Tanks completely ruin karkand. It's like the map team was thinking one day "ok we made this amazing infantry map, it's too good, how do can we make it suck some serious ***? Tanks! Of course!"

[AlphaCueUp]

Re: Infantry only mode, worst idea ever.

IO should be unranked, just as co-op is...

then there would be about 5 IO servers up, there would still be 20 millyun 24/7 karkand FF=0 HIGH POINTS servers up cuz at the end of the day.....its all about the points.....

[proto]

Re: Infantry only mode, worst idea ever.

Wrong wrong wrong.

Vehicles are in the maps for a reason. Because BF2 is a game created around vehicles. The maps were developed around vehicles.

Initial stalemate in Karkand is easily broken by a Tank and APC. With neither of them? It can last the whole round. Don't get me started on the gatehouse stalemate.

Same with the initial Jala. stalemate.

Sharqi is the only map that isn't insanely unbalanced in IO mode.

Why would they take the Mounted MG off the top of the transports? That's retarded. Now we're all gonna be reading posts about Humvee Seat Switching nubz.

Tell me IO is balanced...tell me...

The game, and maps, were developed with the basis of vehicles in mind. Which is why CPs are so far apart(with the exception of City Maps, which is how they should be either way).

They should have just added blood in BF2 and given it an M rating...I doubt this would have happened...

Oh...and kudos to the person who revived such an old thread. Real smooth...first post and all. /sarcasm

[solofowaffles]

Re: Infantry only mode, worst idea ever.

off topic,but where the hell did planewhore go?

[imported_Elder]

Re: Infantry only mode, worst idea ever.

Wrong wrong wrong.

Vehicles are in the maps for a reason. Because BF2 is a game created around vehicles. The maps were developed around vehicles.

Vehicles don't need to be in every map. In 42 there were certain maps that were infantry only maps, or tank only maps, or even plane only maps. In BF2 there is nothing like that, although all the maps have different flags and terrain, the setup for them is exactly the same. It's boring.

Initial stalemate in Karkand is easily broken by a Tank and APC. With neither of them? It can last the whole round. Don't get me started on the gatehouse stalemate.

With good players this is exactly the opposite, tanks and APCs only increase the chances of stalemates. Good tankers don't rush to the front lines and try to take on everyone like a pubtard because a good team will have a ton of AT people ready to take them out. Tanks stay at a distance shooting at other tanks and trying to survive. In a match everyone knows how deadly tanks are so it's usually the main focus on a map like karkand, you'll see c4 jeeps and tons of AT trying to take out and then steal the enemy tank. Although armor may break up stalemates in pubs, it certainly doesn't with two competent teams. Don't blaim the map for issues cause by retarded players.

Sharqi is the only map that isn't insanely unbalanced in IO mode.

There are tons of maps that aren't imbalanced (unbalanced isn't a word).

Why would they take the Mounted MG off the top of the transports? That's retarded. Now we're all gonna be reading posts about Humvee Seat Switching nubz.

Because in an infantry map if vehicles are put in for transport they should be in there for TRANSPORTATION, not as mobile MG stations. Transport vehicles can be very deadly when in the right hands.

Tell me IO is balanced...tell me...

It's more balanced than the regular game. You now only have to deal with map imbalances instead of both map and VEHICLE IMBALANCES (for example F35 vs J10), which are way worse than a disadvantage caused by the terrain or flags.

The game, and maps, were developed with the basis of vehicles in mind. Which is why CPs are so far apart(with the exception of City Maps, which is how they should be either way).

Yes and those type of maps should have vehicles. However maps such as jala, karkand, mashtuur, and sharqi are much better without vehicles.

[-Shifty-]

Re: Infantry only mode, worst idea ever.

All speculation...have you tried IO?

I don't want to say "go find another server if you don't like it" but geez dude this is awesome for us groundpounders. Yes I use the medic kit but I'm competent in all kits (see all gold badges). You need medics, so what if there are 64 of them running around, guess what, its harder you get more kills, your score jumps through the roof and your kept alive no matter what.

An engineer will be used because of the powerful shotgun.

Anti tank has the DAO.

Snipers will become better because they know they have to get the one shot kill now.

Spec Ops are fast and lethal with the C4. They dont' just use that for armor you know.

Assault same as always.

Remember infantry only is up to the server owners. If people complain or the server is empty because no more armor guess what? They'll flip the switch.

That's sorta what I wanted to say....

[PuncH2]

Re: Infantry only mode, worst idea ever.

Vehicles don't need to be in every map. In 42 there were certain maps that were infantry only maps, or tank only maps, or even plane only maps. In BF2 there is nothing like that, although all the maps have different flags and terrain, the setup for them is exactly the same. It's boring.


With good players this is exactly the opposite, tanks and APCs only increase the chances of stalemates. Good tankers don't rush to the front lines and try to take on everyone like a pubtard because a good team will have a ton of AT people ready to take them out. Tanks stay at a distance shooting at other tanks and trying to survive. In a match everyone knows how deadly tanks are so it's usually the main focus on a map like karkand, you'll see c4 jeeps and tons of AT trying to take out and then steal the enemy tank. Although armor may break up stalemates in pubs, it certainly doesn't with two competent teams. Don't blaim the map for issues cause by retarded players.


There are tons of maps that aren't imbalanced (unbalanced isn't a word).


Because in an infantry map if vehicles are put in for transport they should be in there for TRANSPORTATION, not as mobile MG stations. Transport vehicles can be very deadly when in the right hands.


It's more balanced than the regular game. You now only have to deal with map imbalances instead of both map and VEHICLE IMBALANCES (for example F35 vs J10), which are way worse than a disadvantage caused by the terrain or flags.


Yes and those type of maps should have vehicles. However maps such as jala, karkand, mashtuur, and sharqi are much better without vehicles.

elder has spoken, /thread

[Spookius]

Re: Infantry only mode, worst idea ever.

Just to add a little fight to the OTHER side of the argument...

I LOVE I/O, and I never playe medic. You said basically all the kits are useless, let me review them a little differently.

Assault: Projectile grenades are good for firing more accurately than thrown ones, and smoke cover is useful in areas covered by snipers. (in vehicle maps assault are much more useless, as they are best against enemy infantry, which is less inportant in vehicle maps)

Engineer: Yes, engineers wrench and mines are completely useless, but in the tight alleys and buildings of maps like Karkand or Mashtuur, their shotguns are extremely deadly. When the enemy has some little bottleneck holed up real well I QUITE OFTEN take engineer just so I can run at them with a gauge.

Spec Ops: Spec ops are still useful as they need to be. Their powerful weapons make them essentially an assault trooper for those who would rather have C4 than a smoke grenade. And C4 is hella useful. It's just a big huge grenade that you have to set yourself, and can be used as a more versatile claymore.

Anti Tank: Though weak, their weapons all have fast fire rates (with the exception of the DAO, see my engineer bit) which are useful in close quarters, and with the right aim and target area you can easily make good use of the launcher, I do it all the time. Think of it as a grenade, except instead of it arcing toward the enemy and landing for a second, it goes directly where you are pointing when you throw it, gets there in under a second, and explodes instantly.

Support: I think support were MADE for I/O. Because there is not tanks/helis/bombers that turn support basically impotent, they are extremely useful for holding down areas and pounding enemy squads. They also can provide suppressing fire, and the ammo packs are very helpful to have when defending a position with a team.

Medics: Sure medics can heal/revive. So what? **** them. I get more kills than you can beleive every day by shooting down a soldier, watching a ******* medic jump out from behind a dumpster and revive the one I just killed, then killing him again before he can stand up. Rinse and repeat, since 75% of medics think it's more necessary to pointlessly revive a teammate who is directly in my line of fire than to kill me first.

Snipers: In my opinion, snipers were also meant for I/O. They can fire from farther than other troops can see, and can easily and cleanly remove support/turrets or just dug in troops who are stopping an advance. Takes 3/4 hits to the body to kill? If I have my scope on someone, they're getting it in the head, buddy.

Also, if the grenade spam (which is the only thing I dislike in I/O) is too much of a problem, then maybe don't hop on the bandwagon with all the special needs kids who sprint straight forward at the start of the map and then stand in the enemy grenade radius. You know, that period near the beginning where the scoreboard instantly gets covered by greande kills? If you can learn to survive this (don't worry, remember riding a bike seemed hard once too), you can get into good enough positions to avoid the grenades and hit the enemy before they have a chance to throw them or are in a good spot to do so.

Next, you say squad action rarely happens? Yet you think squads are more useful when the squadleader is flying around in a J10, providing nobody an extra spawn, your best sniper is driving a tank and the 2 medics are sitting in a Linebacker out of AA missles wishing one of them had chosen support? Dont try to argue it. Also don't get me wrong, I LOVE playing large vehicle maps, I love them equally so to I/o ones. I usually play about 2 rounds of each whenever I get on. I need a balance. I just see your initial post to be ignorant and it seems like you just came out of a Karkand as MEC screaming "HOW CAN WE LOSE WE STARTED WITH THE WHOLE CITY" right before you came to the forum.

Oh, another thing. I/O is not imbalanced. I/O EQUALIZES everyone. Take these examples.

Support Vs Specops. Battle.
Medic Vs Anti Tank. Battle.
Engineer Vs Sniper. (depending on location) Battle.
Assault Vs Medic. Battle.

K now some big fat vehicle map examples:

Support Vs T90. Extermination.
Specops Vs DPV coming straight at you. Extermination.
Sniper Vs M1A1. Extermination.
Anti Tank Vs F-35B overhead. Extermination.
Medic Vs Artillery. Extermination.
APC Vs Engineer atleast 8 feet away. Extermination.

See, in I/O there are very few situations where you CANNOT defeat your attacker. Vehicle maps in comparison are pretty much a large version of rock paper scissors.

Back me up on this troops!

Rant over. Continue.

[Maxor127]

Re: Infantry only mode, worst idea ever.

I don't remember if I responded to this or not, but I completely agree with the original poster. That's why I play Counter-Strike: Source a lot more now because BF2 is pretty much dead and CS:S has superior infantry combat. They should've at least included a server filter to filter out infantry only maps. I don't know who bitched about wanting to have this option or who thought it was a good idea, but I think it's boring playing on a 64-player map with 32 people and running around on foot with a bunch of medics and camping snipers. The Battlefield series excels at vehicle combat. It's why people bought this game and it's why people play. Infantry Only is why I don't play much anymore. The server browser is **** since the last patch and 80% of the servers are I/O. And it's too hard to find a decent server with a decent amount of people on it. I/O should've been restricted to unranked too. Or at least to 16-player size maps. Then it might be fun sometimes.

[ElFipso]

Re: Infantry only mode, worst idea ever.

Battlefield without vehicles is like cereal without milk, it just doesn't make sense.

I would say it is milk without cereals! I like both with and without...

The initial problem with the IO mode is that people use it for their stat-improvement. So in the end, the whole stat system, which btw is great, is the one and only reason why people comlpain about the game. If you wouldn't care for your stats you wouldn't complain that much about nadespammers spawncampers etc. ... You would maybe even join them ;-)
It's not the game mode that ruins the game for some people. It is not the bug or the glitch that ruins the game for most of the people.
It's US the players that ruin the game for others. If everybody would play fair, we wouldn't have a problem. The player is responsible of the way the game is played.
Fair gaming would be easier without bugs/glitches etc.! I agree with that. But it is the Nadespammer who spams nades. It's the vehicle whore who whores vehicles. It's the glitcher who exploits glitches.
And still, you have the choice to play with or without vehicles. So you have the choice to get naded or bombed, lol.

Just my HO

FipZ
btw, I love IO