What features HAVE to be in the next Battlefield game for it to be good?

[ElliotLH]

---

@Rose_Ukki_Cute wrote:

I hope they return to team work core:

• Platoon support and customised community and official servers on server browser. No quick match making.

• Soldier classes with dedicated purposeful roles without overtly vague customisation.

• Chain of command and asset gameplay.

• Meaningful destruction and level design where dynamic elements are under warfare shaping strategy real time. Choice of classes matters within squad and team level.

• Class and game mechanic design favoring symbiotic interaction with others—complementation; squad wide class restrictions of other classes than standard rifleman like in Insurgency Sandstorm and Hell Let Loose.

---

Other than the class restrictions, I agree with these. 

[Anobix]

---

@SharpGoblin wrote:

... and a single player campaign.

---

The single player campaigns for BF are almost always terrible (I thought BC2's was decent, but those had memorable characters and some humor). We had hoped that with the lack of a SP campaign for 2042 that there'd be more MP content thougb... well lol.

As others have said, it's been beaten to death but:

Dedicated/persistent servers and rentable ones (if my buddies and I want to pay for a 100tick server for a group with rcon and such then we should be able to).

- Quick match isn't an issue, per se, just that there needs to be a button to browse servers next to it you don't want just to get randomly slotted into some random game.

No specialists

- Classes have been a mainstay since creation of BF. I think the ablity to choose whatever weapon though, but having the "specialization" to the class type may be the balancing act (recon better with snipers like after the class rework here).

Roadmap for post-launch content, and more than a single map and a few guns each "season".

IDC about skins, I won't personally ever buy them (sorry Dice), I don't mind earning them like the DICE/DICE LA Camo in 4 though.

I honestly like the T/+ menu for weapon versatility. Maybe not having even more ammo types so that you're more dependent on support to have ammo, but otherwise I liked the idea.

Crossplay, in theory, is fine. I prefer to know that there is a higher chance to hit a full server, especially later on in a game's lifespan. But if the amount of hamstringing that had to happen to get it to this point (low tick-rate, very inconsistent netcode, etc) then I'd prefer it without, sadly.

Platoon support/support for more than 4 people to reasonably play together without screwing around timing queue presses and hoping, or joining on a random person on your friends group and waiting to get into the server...

Destruction, and agreed, I don't need "Levolution" but the ability to take down a wall/open a window/etc is such a key experience and has been for over a decade.

[TTZ_Dipsy]

I know they've already said just how difficult it actually is to do, but I'd love to see more night/dusk maps and if they bring back single player, I wish to see more of those maps/levels be used in multiplayer.

Full platoon and RSP support should be priority #1 - I feel losing out on those really kneecapped the replayability

[Rose_Ukki_Cute]

---

@ElliotLH wrote:

---

@Rose_Ukki_Cute wrote:

I hope they return to team work core:

• Platoon support and customised community and official servers on server browser. No quick match making.

• Soldier classes with dedicated purposeful roles without overtly vague customisation.

• Chain of command and asset gameplay.

• Meaningful destruction and level design where dynamic elements are under warfare shaping strategy real time. Choice of classes matters within squad and team level.

• Class and game mechanic design favoring symbiotic interaction with others—complementation; squad wide class restrictions of other classes than standard rifleman like in Insurgency Sandstorm and Hell Let Loose.

---

Other than the class restrictions, I agree with these. 

---

It serves for balancing purpose: no longer medic trains, spam of engineers' rockets or hill-humping snipers in abundant numbers. This works well on Hell Let Loose for example, limits can still be circumvented while sacrificing unit benefits.

[ElliotLH]

---

@Rose_Ukki_Cute wrote:

---

@ElliotLH wrote:

---

@Rose_Ukki_Cute wrote:

I hope they return to team work core:

• Platoon support and customised community and official servers on server browser. No quick match making.

• Soldier classes with dedicated purposeful roles without overtly vague customisation.

• Chain of command and asset gameplay.

• Meaningful destruction and level design where dynamic elements are under warfare shaping strategy real time. Choice of classes matters within squad and team level.

• Class and game mechanic design favoring symbiotic interaction with others—complementation; squad wide class restrictions of other classes than standard rifleman like in Insurgency Sandstorm and Hell Let Loose.

---

Other than the class restrictions, I agree with these. 

---

It serves for balancing purpose: no longer medic trains, spam of engineers' rockets or hill-humping snipers in abundant numbers. This works well on Hell Let Loose for example, limits can still be circumvented while sacrificing unit benefits.

---

It's mostly a difference of opinion really, and I personally just don't want to be limited in what I can choose in what I see as a largely casual arcade shooter.

[RanzigeRidder2]

---

@TTZ_Dipsy wrote:

I know they've already said just how difficult it actually is to do, but I'd love to see more night/dusk maps and if they bring back single player, I wish to see more of those maps/levels be used in multiplayer.

Full platoon and RSP support should be priority #1 - I feel losing out on those really kneecapped the replayability

---

@TTZ_Dipsy Yet with Nivelle Nights from BF1 they've proven it can be done. awesome map that was! Same with Prise de Tahure, less epic than Nivelle Nights but still a great night map.

My take on the features that NEED to be in the next Battlefield:

• CONTENT! And a regular addition of it including Maps, Guns, Vehicles, Gadgets, NOT SKINS
• Server browser with persistent servers
• Franchise staple gamemodes need to be available at ALL times: Conquest 64, Breakthrough 64, Rush and TDM
• Proper class system (4 classes; Assault, Support, Engineer, Recon)
• NO specialists
• 2 or more factions with distinctive operators, distinctive as in easily recognizable friend from foe, but also what class your opponent has.
• 4-man squads
• Destruction and Levolution. No tornados, sandstorms and other non-value added stuff that looks nice in a trailer but gets annoying in-game after the first awe
• Proper progression tree when it comes to unlocking guns, vehicles and their attachments
• Single player campaign 
• Clan and platoon support
• Crossplay OFF per default
• Balance between infantry vs vehicles. Rock, scissor, paper!
• MnK support on console for those who want it
• A scoreboard, including ping of all players
• NO auto targeting and stuff like robodogs and sentry-guns
• Stuff like grapplehooks and wingsuits either get rid of it, or make it available as a selectable gadget to all classes sacrificing another gadget. And limit the gadgets to 1 slot.
• NO 3rd person animations

[MADMAC50K]

Basically, go back to the winning formula:

1. Server Browser

2. More maps, and better map design

3. Map destruction

4. Better balance for air vehicles - stop making them OP

5. Better class system with gadgets that are actually effective

6. More focus on infantry gameplay

7. Promote and reward teamplay better.  Don't try to force it by making certain things need a squad to accomplish.

8. Get rid of infinite ammo and counter measures for vehicles - limit their use, or make them have to replenish ammo.

9. Bring back the uncaps as safe zones, and move them further away from first flag to prevent spawncamping.

10. Bring back fixed AA/ AT at locations across the maps.  Make them buildable if needed, but bring them back!

[Rose_Ukki_Cute]

---

@ElliotLH wrote:

---

@Rose_Ukki_Cute wrote:

---

@ElliotLH wrote:

---

@Rose_Ukki_Cute wrote:

I hope they return to team work core:

• Platoon support and customised community and official servers on server browser. No quick match making.

• Soldier classes with dedicated purposeful roles without overtly vague customisation.

• Chain of command and asset gameplay.

• Meaningful destruction and level design where dynamic elements are under warfare shaping strategy real time. Choice of classes matters within squad and team level.

• Class and game mechanic design favoring symbiotic interaction with others—complementation; squad wide class restrictions of other classes than standard rifleman like in Insurgency Sandstorm and Hell Let Loose.

---

Other than the class restrictions, I agree with these. 

---

It serves for balancing purpose: no longer medic trains, spam of engineers' rockets or hill-humping snipers in abundant numbers. This works well on Hell Let Loose for example, limits can still be circumvented while sacrificing unit benefits.

---

It's mostly a difference of opinion really, and I personally just don't want to be limited in what I can choose in what I see as a largely casual arcade shooter.

---

You know what, after thinking topic clearly I am on same page about that limitation thing. Let server administrator create their own experience while on official one there shouldn't be any limits. Best of both worlds!

[Rose_Ukki_Cute]

Can we have artillery observer and artillery commander type of classes like in Insurgency Sandstorm in next game? 'Artillery observer' or signaller could additionally place spawn beacons and 'artillery commander' could be same as squad leader having access to binoculars and various assets. I really enjoy carrying that radio around and chasing commander, haha 😆

[ElliotLH]

---

@Rose_Ukki_Cute wrote:

---

@ElliotLH wrote:

---

@Rose_Ukki_Cute wrote:

---

@ElliotLH wrote:

---

@Rose_Ukki_Cute wrote:

I hope they return to team work core:

• Platoon support and customised community and official servers on server browser. No quick match making.

• Soldier classes with dedicated purposeful roles without overtly vague customisation.

• Chain of command and asset gameplay.

• Meaningful destruction and level design where dynamic elements are under warfare shaping strategy real time. Choice of classes matters within squad and team level.

• Class and game mechanic design favoring symbiotic interaction with others—complementation; squad wide class restrictions of other classes than standard rifleman like in Insurgency Sandstorm and Hell Let Loose.

---

Other than the class restrictions, I agree with these. 

---

It serves for balancing purpose: no longer medic trains, spam of engineers' rockets or hill-humping snipers in abundant numbers. This works well on Hell Let Loose for example, limits can still be circumvented while sacrificing unit benefits.

---

It's mostly a difference of opinion really, and I personally just don't want to be limited in what I can choose in what I see as a largely casual arcade shooter.

---

You know what, after thinking topic clearly I am on same page about that limitation thing. Let server administrator create their own experience while on official one there shouldn't be any limits. Best of both worlds!

---

I guess another compromise would be an official mode akin to hardcore (or just an official HC mode if you're into that). I do think that could work well as it's similar to what you proposed originally, but officially supported and in the main menu.