There are a number of pages, so some of this, most of this will be rehashed, but I will give a little background first. Commander mode is an example of Dice listening (it was one of the things people constantly bitched about BF3 lacking) but not implementing something properly. It is an idea that could be brilliant but instead detracts greatly from the game (I'll get into why in a moment). Overall BF4 was obviously rushed. Nothing was complete and nothing had polish. This isn't news, and there isn't really much I can add to the conversation. It was still fun broken. It has improved. It is still fun. It is still broken in many ways. They did not balance the maps (or really even complete them), the vehicles, perks, the new gadgets, or commander mode. The only reason people aren't bitching about specific guns being unbalanced more is due to the fact that dying to all of them feels the same, getting zapped by a time wizard. I also suspect the vast majority of EA DICE resources, as in almost all, are going to future game development. Hopefully they got enough egg on their face and lawsuits in their pants that the next release will be less broken. I am however very skeptical that major overhauls will be performed on vehicle or commander mechanics. There will be tweaks such as gunship respawn time, reload rate, repair rate, damage, which are totally necessary, but won't really address some of the underlying problems.
In BF3, if you took right reactive armor damage (reactive armor was on all sides on light armor, all sides except front on MBTS, and each one absorbed a rocket but could be repaired for those who don't know) on the RU light armor it appeared as rear and rear appeared as right, but only on certain maps and only on the little icon. Switching seats or getting out but back in would make your reactive armor appear to be in tact, but not really there, that's where this bug could become troublesome for someone who didn't know. MBTs (maybe just Abrams, I can't remember) took rear damage when moving with SHIFT, which could actually be used to your advantage if you had rear reactive. There were a ton of other weird things with each vehicle. It was like this from release day until I quit for BF4, I suspect it still is.
I am typically a conquest 64 player, so what I say pertains to conquest 64 and not other game modes.
What I look for when I try to find a server:
-People actually in the server, server doesn't die after one team gets bitch slapped once
-Team shuffle between rounds so that people can take turns bitch slapping/being bitch slapped
-Conquest
-Not instant spawn
-Not 3000 ticket
-Kick/ban for blatant griefing (including racism/homophobia)/glitching and of course cheating
-No kick/ban for killing people
-Low ping for me, not full of high pings (most places won't ping limit due to difficulty of seeding, but some places are just infested with 95% people who obviously live no where remotely close to the server location. I also work nights, so my options are often limited)
-A good rotation of maps, preferably adaptive maps (Metro plays wonderfully with 24-30, is loathed by the majority of 64 player conquest players who aren't stats driven)
-No commander mode
Again these are all personal preference that I could easily explain why I prefer them. I have noticed that most people who play lots of conquest 64 and do not play a single map or setting agree on most points. The reason I don't play non conquest often is not because the idea behind the game modes is bad, but because the mechanics are broken. Obliteration, parachutes and glowing SHOOOOOT ME as bomb carrier ruin it. Rush can be amazing, but asset allocation is often very bad. Many maps just don't work with certain player counts, often times objectives within the same map will favor far different player counts. In low ticket rush games, people don't attack with the balls necessary to make it, in high ticket rush games, things typically devolve into a brand of campfest that does not appeal to me personally.
I think most people who play conquest 64 settings that span the maps (not niche map players) enjoy the same types of games I do, super close games that go back and forth win or lose, games with teams that both relentlessly push when needed, games where you hear the end music and contemplate coming back with pads if you could only save 2 people and not die. Win or lose, those games give me a BF boner.
Take a look at what commander mode brings to the table for both the person playing commander and the grunts on the ground (remembering how simplistic the interface is).
-Gunship
-Scan (inf/vehicle/emp <- lumping all that shit)
-Cruise
-Vehicle Drop
-HVT
-Ammo drop
-Communication with squads
I won't argue with someone who says being a commander is fun simply because why argue opinion. I happen to think it is entirely too simplistic for the power that it wields. I will argue that commander mode and the actions a commander seriously detract from the strategy of the game and the balance for those on the ground. It is simplistic but ultra powerful. Ideally commander mode would put 2 strategic minds against one another with constant back and forth communication with squad leaders. Momentum would shift. Squads would rally behind orders. People would have sex with each other's mothers. Tactical decisions from above would influence the game. Unfortunately the 2 biggest things a commander does to influence the game (from the super tactical screen where he taps a button and a location on the map, woooooo) are scans and gunships. These don't lead to tactical shifts, these lead to bottlenecks, and one sided supremacy. They also place an unnecessary weight on the gunship objectives.When there is one commander, it is such a ridiculously unfair advantage. It isn't impossible to win, but your team better be much better. I dislike things that unbalance games out of the gate. BF doesn't need help being unbalanced within an individual game. Even with 2 commanders, one team will start to win. The other team will have less and less room. This area will be lit by the gunship, and paratroopers, and no one can move out of it undetected. Flanks are killed before they begin. Armor coming out of base to alleviate this stress is bombarded by parachuting SRAWS, Javs on hills, multiple tanks, the gunship itself, and has 1 active protection and 1 set of rounds to navigate this. People who manage to make it out of spawn are greeted by a scan, gunship rounds, and a whole bunch of shit they can't fight. It becomes shooting fish in a barrel, and if you're an average player you're gonna be the fish half the time. I do not enjoy being on either side of this.
I personally think that if the gunship were just changed into a paradrop site, it would be the most important objective on most maps. When you add guns, a screwed up timer, the ability to see everything, the ability to shoot at the point that controls it, and an infinite flight time (I think it should be like bomber, there's a warning, it comes, you shoot shit, it passes), the game goes to hell. For people who say, it's just hit it with 5 of these, or kill it with AA, and it's down. It's easy to kill. You obviously aren't the people trying to retake the gunship checkpoint. At the very least the gunship completely ties up one of your major assets. The influence/ammo this person (typically it's gonna be AA or jet if the gunship is being popped constantly) is using on a gunship are no longer directed at helping his team. This assumes he doesn't have problems of his own.
-Gunship: favors winning team, terribly unbalanced in power, duration of activity, respawn, checkpoints that control gunship are generally in the open and completely covered by gunship (Wavebreaker being the exception)
-Scans: kills flanks, something crucial to a team coming from behind
-Cruise: Make what you want of it. it isn't game breaking, but I feel the best use for it is getting people from annoying buildings. The game is too vertical, I don't think the solution is to have a missile, but to prevent fuckers from getting up there in the place.
-Vehicle drop: ha
-HVT: needs some tweaking, a minor concern
-Ammo drop: I dislike finite ammo on vehicles, but that's another 10 pages of why, but I do like the tactical feel an ammo pack gives to armor in the area. I also like changing kits on it. Can't complain about this one.
-Communication with squads: really just doesn't happen on a large basis, but potentially a great benefit
________________________________________________________________
then this discussion could get some fresh ideas. He is really good at BF4 and can bring some solid feedback.
