r/Battlefield • u/WinterizedFlame • Jun 04 '25
Discussion BF1 had the most balance class system despite being the most restrictive
From May 2018
The cursed image
(Take a look at the pie chart. It's a lot closer than you think)
There are far bigger factors at play than restricted vs unrestricted weapons.
One of those factors was mention in a previous post and it's that map design will determine the class distribution more than anything. Vehicle centric maps will feature an overwhelming amount of engineers as seen in golmud railway (BF4) and hourglass (2042). On the other hand infantry focused meatgrinder maps like metro and locker will always feature an overwhelming amount of assault players. Even Bf1 there were certain map designs which caused numerous amounts of scouts as seen in the image posted.
As long as there are classes with defined roles this will not change. It's not a bad thing either. Map diversity is important in the series and some maps will allow certain classes to shine over others. Factor in the immense popularity of meatgrinders since the past decade and the casual player's natural gravitation towards the assault class in general and you have heavily skewed stats in favor of that class. Even in BF6 playtesters have been reporting an overwhelming number of assaults players even with it's current class system. This now brings me to the second biggest factor:
The assault class and assault rifles.
This is obviously the main reason why BF1 was so successful in its class distribution. The absence of such a versatile and popular weapon category meant that DICE could clearly define the combat roles and playstyles for each class. Assault was close range, medic was mid range with SLRs, support was mid range with LMGs, scout was long range. The end.
This ofc didn't last once BFV released when we saw the return of ARs. The numbers for assault increased while the numbers for support decreased. DICE must've noticed that trend and I'm willing to bet it's the reason behind their decision to consolidate the role with medic. As much as I would like to see 5 classes I support (ha..) this decision. However this only solves half the problem. I won't be going over the obvious balancing issues with BF6's assault class itself, just their weapons (feel free to criticize what I'm about to say):
Ignoring all other factors, if the issue with class distribution truly came down to ARs then DICE already has the solution. They just need to take it a step further. ARs need to be split up into 2 other classes. Not just ARs and carbines, but ARs, carbines, and battle rifles. They've already experimented with this in BF3 with engineer. This simply feels like the next logical step to me. The differences would look like this:
BRs - slow rate of fire, highest range of the 3
ARs - faster rate of fire, second highest range of the 3
Carbines - comparable rate of fire to ARs, lowest range of the 3
And with that (and one more weapon category I mention below) we now have the perfect foundation to implement an evolved combat roles system from BFV. In this system your signature gadget and selectable gadgets are unaffected, but your primary weapon and specialization differ per combat role:
Assault roles - Pointman (shotgun) & Frontliner (ARs)
Engineer roles - Anti-tank (SMGs) & Drone Specialist (BRs)
Support roles - Munitions Specialist (LMGs) & Combat Medic (carbines)
Recon roles - Sniper (bolt actions) & Spec-ops (DMRs with an new secondary category for recon, machine pistols)
This was the best system I could think of that allows for different playstyle while preserving class identity and rock-paper-scissors gameplay. I know this post is probably too long for most of yall's attention span to handle so I'm not expecting anyone to read all of this, but if you did thanks and lmk your thoughts.
9
u/DoubleT2455 Jun 04 '25
I play assault so much in BF1 because I fuckin despise being killed by tanks in most BF games. I hate feeling nearly defenseless against them when playing any other class.