Say NO to game balancing, YES to bug fixes

[Silencer_X]

The purpose of this thread is to voice my concern for the way Battlefield 2 is currently heading. After testing out the new Beta patches, I have been led to the conclusion that perhaps EA has got it all wrong.

BF2 has been out for around one year now, and has gone through numerous tweaks in order to achieve a fair balance between weapons, classes and vehicles. I believe the current balance is fine as it is. Personally I believe EA should be working on fixing the major bugs in the game, ESPECIALLY the issue concerning crash to desktop, and full server crashes.

I fail to find words to express my disappointment and frustration in regards to the way EA has handled its patching. More often than not, the patches have introduced more bugs than it has solved.

Rather than pandering to the needs of the whingers, EA should set its sights on fixing the major bugs which run rife within their code.

In regards to game balancing, the simple fact is people are always going to whinge. If you remove people's ability to dodge and evade an attack, they will work another way to win in a skirmish. So if the good players start getting really accurate with their weapons, since they are unable to dodge and evade, what next? Make weapons less accurate? From memory, EA's main motivation behind BF2 was fun and gameplay first, realism second. If people want ultra realistic war combat, perhaps they should look elsewhere.

Seriously, people need to adapt to the gameplay, rather than whinge about it because they cant adapt their gaming style. The good players will always find techniques to win, the whingers will always whinge. I am all for EA removing exploits such as C4 throwing, but not totally warping the game style just to make the whingers happy, because they will never be happy.

Please EA, dont ruin what is a currently a very good, very fun and well balanced game.

[USARANGER]

Re: Say NO to game balancing, YES to bug fixes

i agree with u. bf2 is fine, u kno, balanced and all. well, there r some small things, like the j10, but who cares. this game would be boring if everything was exactually the same and balanced. its good enough as it is now. dice and ea should really try to fix the bugs, not change useless crap that nobody wants changed. most of the bf2 community WANTED squadhopping, there was never any complaints about it, but dice decided to take it out. and a uav hovering over the battlefield?? probablly the stupidest and most useless change ea has ever made. just fix the bugs and glitches, ea/dice, and DONT CHANGE ANYTHING!!

[inflatable]

Re: Say NO to game balancing, YES to bug fixes

I was happy when they adressed to overly powerfull airpower in BF2.. So I can't say I fully agree with you.. Some balancing things sometimes just have to be fixed because it makes the game more fun for everybody..

You're right about balance and realisme.. Games should be fun with good balance, even if that means it's less realistic.. Airpower in real life is dominating, but in a game it's just not fun.. In games some things can be dominating, but there should always be a counter.. The rock, siccors, paper principle..

[Silencer_X]

Re: Say NO to game balancing, YES to bug fixes

I was happy when they adressed to overly powerfull airpower in BF2.. So I can't say I fully agree with you.. Some balancing things sometimes just have to be fixed because it makes the game more fun for everybody..

You're right about balance and realisme.. Games should be fun with good balance, even if that means it's less realistic.. Airpower in real life is dominating, but in a game it's just not fun.. In games some things can be dominating, but there should always be a counter.. The rock, siccors, paper principle..

The main motivation for my post was the way EA proposes to change infantry movement and potential kit modifications. I was particularly disappointed to see that they were considering changing the current medic and support kits to essentially make them an overall weaker class to play. Since i rarely fly jets, I dont have much room for comment about the matter of jet balancing.

From experience though, jets and air units have been pretty tough, perhaps they should include handheld stingers for Anti-Tank classes?

[BioDiaperX]

Re: Say NO to game balancing, YES to bug fixes

I agree 100%. If it's not balanced, deal with it. Just be better than the ones with the advantage. The bugs are the biggest problems. Good topic.

[AP_piano295]

Re: Say NO to game balancing, YES to bug fixes

But are the bugs or the balance issues more anoying? When getting carrier raped by J10's I would have to say balance. This is my only remaing balance concern in the game because it is such BS.

[inflatable]

Re: Say NO to game balancing, YES to bug fixes

The main motivation for my post was the way EA proposes to change infantry movement and potential kit modifications. I was particularly disappointed to see that they were considering changing the current medic and support kits to essentially make them an overall weaker class to play. Since i rarely fly jets, I dont have much room for comment about the matter of jet balancing.

From experience though, jets and air units have been pretty tough, perhaps they should include handheld stingers for Anti-Tank classes?

Afaik those modifications are only done when playing infantry-only.. Which is a mistake anyway (the infantry-only I mean), because I think there's much better games outthere if you want infantry-only teambased gameplay like that.. BF2 should stick to what it's made for, and that's not infantry-only gameplay obviously.. But if people want it, ok give it to them, just don't screw with regular BF2, I agree..

I also agree with the stinger thing, I've been thinking the same thing for a very long time now already.. Why is there no anti-air infantry class?

I agree 100%. If it's not balanced, deal with it. Just be better than the ones with the advantage. The bugs are the biggest problems. Good topic.

No, wrong! Games should be balanced.. It SUCKS if you can't do anything back to someone that's using a advantage in the game.. You can have all the skill in the world, but it's useless if you have no means to fight back.. I've been slaughtered many times in the past by air-whores that where dead-meat once I met them on the ground.. At least now we have something (somewhat effective AA) to fight them once they're up in the air savely away from the true battlefield.. It could still be better though, see the stinger comment above.. I agree with AP_piano295 that balance-issues like that are far more annoying then the odd-bug..

Not saying they shouldn't fix bugs aswell offcourse.. They should fix both.. And they are..

[XmetallicaXguitarstX]

Re: Say NO to game balancing, YES to bug fixes

The main motivation for my post was the way EA proposes to change infantry movement and potential kit modifications. I was particularly disappointed to see that they were considering changing the current medic and support kits to essentially make them an overall weaker class to play. Since i rarely fly jets, I dont have much room for comment about the matter of jet balancing.

From experience though, jets and air units have been pretty tough, perhaps they should include handheld stingers for Anti-Tank classes?

Uhh... don't even mention hand-held stingers. (you don't want to give them any more crazy ideas do you...)

You don't even fly jets...

Put yourself in the jets perspective for a minute... actually, make that the JSF (F-35B). You have to worry about other jets that have a huge advantage over you, then you have ground AA (fixed), and then now, you have all these guys, that you don't even know where they are, they now have hand-held stingers..

What would now be the POINT of getting into a jet? You wouldn't be able to do jack with all the hand-held stingers.. that you can't see.

It's already bad enough with the disadvantage you have against other jets, and then the AA to catch you off guard as you are running from/chasing the other jet, but NOW... you have who knows how many AT's running around with f*cking hand-held stingers... you are going to die soo fast you have no idea.



Please.... NEVER make suggestions about a whole other side of the game you don't even play. You only see the one side of it.. and that is the infantry side, and of course it will be "nerf the planes".

[BioDiaperX]

Re: Say NO to game balancing, YES to bug fixes

No, wrong! Games should be balanced.. It SUCKS if you can't do anything back to someone that's using a advantage in the game.. You can have all the skill in the world, but it's useless if you have no means to fight back.. I've been slaughtered many times in the past by air-whores that where dead-meat once I met them on the ground.. At least now we have something (somewhat effective AA) to fight them once they're up in the air savely away from the true battlefield.. It could still be better though, see the stinger comment above.. I agree with AP_piano295 that balance-issues like that are far more annoying then the odd-bug..

Ok I guess I didn't post exactly what I was thinking. . . in my experience with a certain game (not BF2), the sides were fairly balanced, but not identical. Different weapons, different types of vehicles, but in the end, it all worked out. On the sequel to said game, they made each side exactly identical. This just ruined it. So what I'm trying to say about BF2 is that it should be balanced, yes, but the equipment offered to each team should not be basically the same thing with different skins. I know that's not the case, but that's what it's starting to become. Nerf this gun to make it statistically even with this gun. No. Don't do that. Give each side a unique advantage over the other that takes skill and brains to use.

[Sung_Do_Chuck]

Re: Say NO to game balancing, YES to bug fixes

NO to game balancing, YES to bug fixes!

[Michael]

Re: Say NO to game balancing, YES to bug fixes

Hand-held stingers would make helicopters permanent ground ornaments.

[Turnip]

Re: Say NO to game balancing, YES to bug fixes

The jets have the ability to dodge, and avoid flying over these target points, therefore the advantage must be in the hands of those with less maneuverability, and less ability increase in skill that would overcome the opponent. In other words jets should be the ones adapting and overcoming the ground based AA, not vice versa. Its like the tank vs anti tank, the tank is at an obvious advantage but a good AT soldier will still be able to kill them due to using the tanks weakness, being bad maneuverability and vision.

If they made the anti tank soldier large, slow, and have tunnel vision, then made the tank small, stealthy, and maneuverable the AT soldier would stand 0 chance. That is the current state of AA vs jets. I hope you can understand my analogy.

[LahLahSr]

Re: Say NO to game balancing, YES to bug fixes

If the gameplay imrproves and more balance is introduced by patches, by all means keep balancing.

If it's the other way around and it also introduce new major bugs, then by all means stop.

Considering the track-record of BF2 and the very poor condition the game was in when it was released to begin with - perhaps they should find better designers, coders and testers.

Cheers :-)

[Auto-ER-]

Re: Say NO to game balancing, YES to bug fixes

But are the bugs or the balance issues more anoying? When getting carrier raped by J10's I would have to say balance. This is my only remaing balance concern in the game because it is such BS.

The Essex has TWO AA weapon systems on it. People get raped on the carriers because no one ever wants to man them. A plane attacking the carrier will have a choice, destroy the AA or take out the guys on deck, even if they aren't all that good at taking out the jets, they are annoying enough to help get your air up, if your air is bad, you'll reap it.

The bugs are way more annoying than balance. balance is only as good as the players. Put a crappy pilot in the J10 and an ace in the F35, and the J10 isn't overpowering. You can't code REAL bablance, all you can do is make everything equal, but even then, the players that aren't as good are still going to use it as an excuse for losing, and that's just a fact of video games.

[inflatable]

Re: Say NO to game balancing, YES to bug fixes

Uhh... don't even mention hand-held stingers. (you don't want to give them any more crazy ideas do you...)

You don't even fly jets...

Put yourself in the jets perspective for a minute... actually, make that the JSF (F-35B). You have to worry about other jets that have a huge advantage over you, then you have ground AA (fixed), and then now, you have all these guys, that you don't even know where they are, they now have hand-held stingers..

What would now be the POINT of getting into a jet? You wouldn't be able to do jack with all the hand-held stingers.. that you can't see.

It's already bad enough with the disadvantage you have against other jets, and then the AA to catch you off guard as you are running from/chasing the other jet, but NOW... you have who knows how many AT's running around with f*cking hand-held stingers... you are going to die soo fast you have no idea.



Please.... NEVER make suggestions about a whole other side of the game you don't even play. You only see the one side of it.. and that is the infantry side, and of course it will be "nerf the planes".

You don't have to be a flyboy to know what's going on.. Seeing people get insane K/D ratio's in planes tells you enough..