>>715691634
Battlefield has always sucked at doing team work because there's no selfish player incentive. Pressing 3 to drop a medbag for a teammate simply isn't fun and every BF game has been terrible at creating cooperation between players. There's no reward beyond points and players care way more about their KDR than some stupid points on the leaderboard.

Classes only having one weapon type or maximum of two is similarly silly. It's not done for muh realism or for muh gameplay but half the time its done because it's "tradition." Its effects on gameplay wind up making one class the go to (whoever has assault rifles). The other result is that depending on the map and the ranges of engagements, one class usually gets screwed the hardest (whoever gets stuck with SMG's) and another class super powerful (snipers) on long range maps. The inverse ends up happening on CQB maps. You can see this most clearly in Battlefield 1/2 and from what I hear V as well

>>63980801
the real problem is that we keep making tiny mouse guns with high capacities but they shoot either .80 or 9mm making them too snappy for the average person to want to bother shooting with regularly.

we need the .32 to come back but this time not semi rimmed

>>508227645

>>713156503
Resources aren't scarce in any RE game and none of the RE games are scary.

Battlefield is way better when it apes COD and prioritizes infantry gameplay. DICE should just tell vehicle faggots to fuck themselves and give them like 2 wide open maps with no cover and make rest of the maps like achi baba, devastation, al marj, propaganda