Is there a need for assault??

[AlphaCueUp]

Re: Is there a need for assault??

assault is assault, i preffer chicken myself but hey, it cant snow every thursday

[Beerman]

Re: Is there a need for assault??

I think that since you cant jump in shoot anymore the GL wouldnt be a noob weapon so revert it back to 1.12 stats, but id still use my G3

[MidnightOps]

Re: Is there a need for assault??

Well assault players are harder to kill. They are equiped with body armor, that's why they have a short sprint.

[Rangersos]

Re: Is there a need for assault??

I really think ppl dont use it, is due to badging? what badges can you pull off on really?

And It would be more practical if EA/Dice made it more realistic with 20-24 203's shells than what, 7? oooh - real grenadiers have approx 22 loads on them, whats that all about?

[AlphaCueUp]

Re: Is there a need for assault??

i like assault....i hardly even noticed the changes they made with the GL, because i never used it at point blank range, while hopping around like a l00n....the bounce is only an advantage, it allows me to bounce it to where i would not be able to normally......i love smoke grenades....the only problem with them, is they provide cover for the enemy as well, and there isnt enough

a random poof of smoke is a sign "incoming target"

[[AE]LoneWolf]

Re: Is there a need for assault??

i know that flashy's can blind APC's now, maybe not tanks, but its damn usefull, better then smoke, then a teammate can c4 em, thats the only reason i'm ever assualt

[fore a lot]

Re: Is there a need for assault??

What he said: ^^^^

The problem is the GL lag and the bounce...and the lack of any real explosion radius....

And other than the Gl there is no point to assault, don't get me wrong, I used the assault rifle more than the GL, but the gl PLUS the gun made the assault a kit to be reckoned with.

Now that its basically just the gun theres no point, as the PKM just owns the AKs and the m16...and the g3 just plain compared to the PKM.....

G3: Limited ammo, inaccurate, 20 shots per mag
PKM: Unlimited ammo, highly accurate, 100 shots per mag

That says it all....

Don't even mention flashbangs or smoke....the ability to supply teammates way surpasses that...

Gotta agree with Alocrr. If youre stll doing good with assault after 1.2, you can do much better with PKM. Assault is simply useless now. PKMers are the new assault class with unlimited nades/bullets. Gotta play more until EA nerf it

for some reason i find the m16 for assault much mroe reliable than the m16 for medic..and when i think of when i had the demo and couldnt wait to get teh actual game..i would imagine a platoon rushing a base and assualts lauching nades while sprinting..but that doesn tseem to happen much anymore

It could be the assault soldiers have armour so they can suck in more bullets than non-armour medic. But they should be exactly the same.

Same as most ppl think DAO are better than Jackhammer(including me). The truth is AT got armour, and the engy got wrench

[redrider]

Re: Is there a need for assault??

I used to be a hard core assault player. I would start my attack with a Granade from about 50 to 75 meters and switch to my rifle. Usually using a complete clip then duck under cover, relaod both and repeat. I have killed 5 enemy with one granade from the GL during a flag capping attempt. Now since 1.2 I have a hard time killing anyone with the GL, I fire, they take 2 steps to the side, and the granade launches, while they fill me full of holes? I get killed and they get 2 points? Ive only been able to find one thing it can still do properly and that is, it works pretty good for getting a sniper on a roof when he has the ladder blocked with a claymore. I dont usually flame people but anyone who says the assault kit didnt change, didnt use it before and dont have a clue. Its been denuttered (is that a word?). I entered a room and, I used to fire a nade at the opposite corner then switch to rifle and finish off anyone left but this time I fired the GL as always and the granade went through the wall and I switched to my rifle but couldnt use it untill the nade exploded which was 1.5 seconds later. So all I did was get killed. Another time (today even) I shot my GL at an on coming humvee, used to make the humvee burst into flames, after the 1.5 second delay (I counted it) the granade hits the humvee and bounces off. Where? I dont know, I got killed.
Anyone can prove what Im telling you is right. All you have to do is play a round (same map both times) with Assault (any weapon) then play a round with another class (support, medic, spec ops, engineer) see which you score the most points with. It wont be assault. Assault troops should be the ones who lead the attack, at the tip of the spear. If you do that with the kit the way it is now your gonna have a very dull spear.
I think the point I was trying to make was that EA (or whoever) needs to take the nerf off the assault kit, its been denuttered long enough. . . . . . .Red

[gungho]

Re: Is there a need for assault??

well I think they need to give the G3 more ammo for sure then id be happy it runs out far to quick

It all about balance. You need to depend on your support team mates to resupply you, not just run off on your own.

[EliteRazgriz666]

Re: Is there a need for assault??

its all aobut skill if you can accurately hit targets at distance with the GL you will own a support guy every time.

lol i used to always use GL but stopped usin it afta every1 called it "noobtubin" i used to b quite good aswell long distance shots. I havent played assault long time and it is still my most played kit:hmm:

[snuggnads]

Re: Is there a need for assault??

Assault is the Grunt kit, of course there is a point to it. Support class should support the Assault who can run and gun, Support cant run and gun, support is only good from a distance. The assault is the "in your face" close quarters type of kit, but is also quite useful from afar. Screw people who call others noobs for using the GLs, thats what they are there for. You soften a target at a distance with it, then switch to normal fire and finish them off.

No point after the patch. Can't run & gun. GL useless. There should be a role for Assault, but EA/Dice decided to kill the class.

So, yes Assault is dead......everyone should be happy now, right?

Also, if you didn't play the assault class, you should at least give it a go for a round, just for a good laugh. M203/GP30's taking strange trajectories, being absorbed into the ground, hitting something and then a long delay before a worthless blast, etc. Funny stuff. Just don't worry about your KDR that round, it will be sad.

[Eddy01741]

Re: Is there a need for assault??

Off topic: elite razgriz, ur the first BF2 gamer that plays AC5 that i've seen here as well, nice man, i like the avatar. I'm in the process of trying to find a Yellow 013 Su-37, but nice to see other AC5 gamers.

On topic:
After the patch, the G3 is great, but the prob is, teh PKM is better at EVERYTHING besides running and gunnin. So support, medic, and spec ops are looking way better than assault. I say the game was better pre-1.2 patch. Nooblaunchers (THE ORIGINAL NAME, before somebody came up with noobtuber) weren't even that bad, only like 2 of them on each team on good servers usually. But 1.2 EA just had to go to the extreme, BUFF the PKM (cause noobs thought they should be able to hit a target 100m away while standing (u can in real life though, but this is arcade), so EA gave it to them. And, to top it off, they STILL don't give assault some more smoke nade, or give them better working smoke nades, u should see smoke nades in America's Army, they're so damn effctive, more so than smokes on tanks or APCs.

[aLLyBOOM]

Re: Is there a need for assault??

there is not really much point... they can send grenades further, whooop de dooo.... a med pac is better...

[smileyman111]

Re: Is there a need for assault??

One word: flashbang.

[Wreck0]

Re: Is there a need for assault??

I play Assault occasionally for some G3 fun. It's a powerful gun for in-your-face fighting, and even at medium range.