How can DICE view the C4/UAV "TACTIC" a legit tactic when the majority of the players don't?

I don't get it. People complain about it in-game, they complain about it on the forums on xbox.com, GameFAQS, and even the official Battlefield forums. Yet DICE states that they aren't going to do anything to it cause its LEGIT.

Thats BS. That tactic and Magnum ammo are the only two things that make me rage in this game

eh they couldn't take it out independently of removing the option of sticking C4 to any vehicle.


First-base it's usually impossible to stop but every other base I've found it to be non-issue if you're keeping an eye on things.

No I understand that it would be hard to stop or take out. But atleast nerf it. If it blew the UAV up I would be fine with it, but it doesn't. DICE just seems too lazy to actually do something about it.
I know they are nerfing C4 damage against MCOMs shortly, but that still won't do anything if they can just fly away. All its gonna help is make it take longer to do.

I don't have a problem with it.

eh I don't see it much anymore, when they do I can usually bomb the UAV station with a Gustav.


Then again Rush in general sucks because you can't force the Attackers to actually...attack. Needs a time limit or something.

Because they CAN'T FIX IT.

I think it has to do with the engine. Frostbite (right?) is complicated. I think if they made it not stick to the UAV it'd probably be like that for all other vehicles. Same with the friendly fire vehicle thing. It's not so bad with tanks, but with helicopters you're gonna have some butthurt scrub Gustav you while you take off, or someone who does it for the lulz (like me ). That's why when you attack your own chopper in the air the physics of it being hit with the rocket still happens.

Make the M-coms emit a jamming signal in a short radius around it that disables vehicles. I don't think tanks and choppers usually get close to an M-com to kill it, so it would pretty much work only against UAVs (which will limit it totally) and ATVs (which you can get out of near enough to arm the charge).

Really? *head shake*

I never had a problem with it once I figured out that people were doing it. The way I see it you should be looking out for the UAV regardless of whether is has explosives on it or not.

DOOMSDAY+ZOMBEE=UAV TACTIC DENIED!!!

The thing I hate about rush anymore is that EVEYONE C4's the Mcomms whether it's with the UAV, Jihad Jeep, or just 5 guys all running up and laying C4. I played rush on Sunday and it was just boring. I was able to to protect one of ours on defense but on attack my team would just steamroll them every time! It was suck and boring!

*hides C4 behind back*

Who uses C4 anyway?

HAHA I use it ALL the time on conquest! Not so much on rush anymore. Using it on the mcomms just seems to have taken a lot of the fun out of it for me. I like the thrill of an arm and then being able to defend that bastard!

I'm trying to destroy 500 vehicles still. SO I roll with C4 a lot. But I also like to plant the Mcomm with C4 too. Usually on those Mcomms that are not defended at all.

This is where I stand.

In conquest, it does not even matter, since UAV station is contestable.

In rush, IF they allow defenders to spawn among the squadmates away from defender's base to totally assault into attacker's base, then I would say it is legit, since this would mean that it is contestable, though they would have to tweak it so that the UAV station gets destroyed automatically when the base changes, and it moved in Isla (since it stays at first base of attackers, and while atackers get transports, defenders have to run/swim/steal-a-jet-ski to get to attacker's base).

it has taken the fun out of the game for me. I even get pissed when my team does it. I wanna take the objective by setting the charge off, not C4.

I think C4ing the objective ruins the pacing and flow of the game, honestly. That last match I played on Arica Harbor had my blood boiling. Literally, all the enemy team did was suicide C4 rush the M-COMMs. There is nothing you can do when your team is mostly composed of randoms to stem the tide.

DICE also said that the knife was fine and the AN-94 was perfectly balanced with the other weapons a while ago. >_> Game developers from any company worry me sometimes.

Actually Dice said that they hadn't observed enough usage with the AN94 to justify nerfing it, not that it was perfectly balanced. Because patching in any game is a pain in the ass because they have to seek update certification for two platforms.

That was of course before it rocketed up the total kill share.


As for the knife it's perfect. It shouldn't work on somebody engaged in shooting you, end of story in any game.

If you want to dispatch an enemy stealthily without a silenced weapon or if you want a dog tag it works perfectly.

knife is good cept for sometimes, needs just a little buff, no much at all

JDM_Jev wrote:Actually Dice said that they hadn't observed enough usage with the AN94 to justify nerfing it, not that it was perfectly balanced. Because patching in any game is a pain in the ass because they have to seek update certification for two platforms.

That was of course before it rocketed up the total kill share.


As for the knife it's perfect. It shouldn't work on somebody engaged in shooting you, end of story in any game.

If you want to dispatch an enemy stealthily without a silenced weapon or if you want a dog tag it works perfectly.

Broken hitboxes on the knife =/= balanced. It's fine the way it swings and everything, but if it connects, it should still kill them instantly.

And I'm saying that, when you come across someone at close-range, they shouldn't warp through gunfire and kill you instantly.


In that regard it's perfect, because in 415+ hours of Battlefield that hasn't happened to me once. I didn't even play Black Ops for 15 minutes before it happened to me at least a dozen times, because I like shooting guns in shooter games and in that game that actually hurts you.


In BF when you're behind someone and when they stop moving, it works. That's good.

The knife is fine. You have to be a bit delicate. When you have their back I notice you can't just run up and hit it while moving. It's more effective to hit it while standing still. The only times I miss is when they move, but that's legit. I just dislike all the lines said, "You want some of this?". The Russians are quiet and the Army needs to put a cork in their mouth in this game.

the knife is definitely broken. it's not supposed to work like it does now.

just look at your stats for it. it usually only kills half the time it gets a hit.

A hit would be considered a kill. That's just a glitch, same with the 40mm shotgun tallying 24 shots fired to your total instead of 12 and me having over-100% accuracy with the Gustav because I wounded more-than one player with the rocket.

I'm still gonna use C4. I always use it for my C4 traps on the MCOMs though. Most effective and fun way IMO.

JDM_Jev wrote:A hit would be considered a kill. That's just a glitch, same with the 40mm shotgun tallying 24 shots fired to your total instead of 12 and me having over-100% accuracy with the Gustav because I wounded more-than one player with the rocket.

ah, i see. it's still obviously broken though, i doubt they meant for you to clearly see yourself stabbing someone and have it do 0 damage.

i'm all for it not being as effective as in COD, as a matter of fact i think games should start going back to how it was in CS where you had to equip your knife, but it's still clearly not working as intended. if you stab someone and blood comes out i'd say it is safe to say that it should cause some damage.

Eh, I've played too much Battlefield to want to see the melee actually being good.


With the high-health people probably wouldn't even try to shoot at close-range. Hell, the health is lower in CoD and half the time I kill people at close-range I see them try to reflex-knife from 8 feet away.

It's pathetic actually. And when they're within 5 feet I always die *rage*

And seeing blood come out without a kill is just a hit detection error. Saying 'that's not working as intended' is like saying every time a gun fails to get a hit marker it's indicative of the fact that the gun should clearly be fixed.

You notice it more with the knife because when you fail a lunge you're stuck recovering for so long.

i don't want melee to be good either. i just want the stuff i'm seeing on the screen to make sense. a clearly accurate stab that does zero damage doesn't make any sense to me.

you said it yourself, it encounters hit detection errors. unless you're implying that they intentionally added these errors than it looks like you know it isn't working as intended too.

eh


I guess I'll give ground there, I hate melee'ing in any game. If it draws blood then yeah it should work but how could they possibly go about fixing that?

Without making it overly reliable and preferable to using a gun at close-range.

they should just do something like counter strike did.

like have it so you have to equip it and stab someone in the back to kill them. front stabs would just take about 60 damage.

i completely agree with you that knives shouldn't be a powerful weapon in an FPS game, they should only be a means of embarrassing your opponent.

I liked the Bad Company 1 system where it was a knife-swing with no lock-on. Equipping it would work too in my mind.

2142. Where you had the art of timing your knife swing JUST as you get close to the enemy. And the sweep knifing and the airslash that wasn't possible without the secret technique.

And bring back the dogtag on your knife for a certain number of tags.

Or make it like the team fortress 2 Spy knife

Spy Knife would own. Hell that is the only time I use the knife.

Just chuck they Spy class into BC2 obviously

I've been frontstabbed while going full auto on guys, so it happens. I only knife when I catch someone unawares, but that usually back fires and I get RKS. They really need to improve the mechanics of the knife.