From E3 video content published this resupply method looks like a joke. Flying into a beacon in air to resupply? What happened to the creativity you use to exhibit Dice? Why not make a landing area on maps like battlefield 3, but then require players to land once supplies and munitions are spent to obtain more supplies. This is identical to what happens in the field.
It would be nice to see this improvement implemented and not a turn for the worse which is exactly where it’s heading.
Because it’s a game and crash landing while resupplying is not fun. Having to fly back to a ‘base’ is a compromise. It’s not a flight sim.
I would rather see a airstrip where you do I flyby for health/ammo.
If ‘Flying into a beacon in air to resupply’ is here to stay I would rather see it replaced for something like a observation balloon acting as supply/health. Maybe it is because of early alpha.
I vote for a catapult system where pilots request ammo and support players chuck supply packs at them
all options are on the table, make the right move DICE
Lol crash landing? You must be trash for a pilot man.. I’ve played every battlefield on market and it is more than feasible.. I landed planes in bf3 every chance I could get. There is no skill required for dumping payloads and resupplying near immediately.
This is the worst addition I’ve read and seen in action this far. Its taking the game 16 steps back and adding an element that is unappealing, just like the power up system in battlefront..
Crashin in the ground while flying also ain’t much fun. Let’s make planes invunerable to crashes at all! Fun first!
That’s like bumpers for kids at the bowling alley. No thanks
Depending on how often one would have to resupply, I think that could be too time consuming.
Landing once in a while is fun (I do it on Sinai sometimes to repair or even pick up squad mates) but having to do it 10ths of times in every game quickly makes it quite repetitive and boring. What if your fighter only get to start with ammo to take out one bomber, enemy has two so you shoot down one and then your are almost out of ammo and must land to resupply… The purpose is not to make the flying more realistic I think. It is to get the planes out of the way to give ground troops some breathing space. I have not seen much BFV flying but I can imagine the planes being a bit faster than in BF so the strafes will be coming more often and without the reload it might just be too much. Still, having to land put restrictions on map design and generally creates more problems than it solves.
Perhaps a combination would be nice. Have som maps with a strip (when it fits) where you get more ammo stocked up than in an ‘air resupply’ making it worthwhile to do the landing and takeoff. It would be kind of cool landing on a carrier in the Pacific when the tides of war comes to that.
The planes in bf1 are not designed to land. Even I get damaged by doing so.
A singleplayer campain is the perfect inviroment to learn the ropes of flying including taking off and landing.
Because it is “hard” to do it is extremely rewarding if you succeed.
Youtuber Battle(non)sense suggest a thing like flight assist so beginners are a little bit helped with the controls.
Turning off flight assist you unleash the full potential of the aircraft.
Where are good old times when in BF2 people wouldn’t dare to use any aircraft before they spent some time training offline.
Flying was NEVER hard. From day 1 I was pretty decent at Battefield 3 Jets. WW2 planes are even EASIER. If you can’t land who’s fault is that? What are you even doing flying?
We should’ve had runways to takeoff and land own. Instead we have Icons in the air. What is this? Mario Kart?
I do not think landing/takeoff in itself is the problem. It just that it is somewhat time consuming. You first need to fly to the airstrip, then land, then resupply, turn the plane and take off. You also need to avoid pesky pilots like me who do not hesitate a second from shooting the planes at any point in this sequence.
Of course it’s feasible and of course I didn’t mean people would crash every time.
Most people don’t fly planes because they like flight sims. Landing a plane isn’t exciting unless there is a good chance of crashing which would, of course, be ridiculous.
“This is the worst addition I’ve read” Lol. It’s simply an improvement on having infinite ammo in order to fit in with that BF5 general concept.
Like I said, it’s a compromise. I imagine they didn’t want infinite ammo and they didn’t want flightsim style boredom of regular landing.
I can understand flightsim fans wanting to land, but “16 steps back and adding an element that is unappealing”? Nah. It’s several steps forward without walking into the realms of flightsim.
The airstrip fly-by would be fine, but it would be very restrictive on the map design to have to always have an airstrip on both sides of each battle.
I didn’t like the floating ammo icon - it was very Mario Cart - yeah some kind of observation balloon would be nice.
And, yeah, it is Pre-Alpha.
Yeah this is really the way to go. Most maps should adhere to the now current model as it best balances gameplay balance needs but throwing in a map or two that pays homage to the old maps with a runway is a nice touch. I’m totally for that as long as it is designed intelligently and makes sense and doesn’t compromise game balance.
I really wish people would stop with the unnecessary invective towards the in flight rearm. I mean the last two games have had in flight rearm and nobody was saying “LOLZ GTAV!” Only thing different is now you have to do it over your base. It’s not like this mechanic was pulled out our bums. There’s a reason behind it.
Agreed on the notion that the current setup seems rather sloppy and kinda off-putting. Would it be unrealistic to have a sort of refueling simulation (of ammo though) airplane doing rounds close by to the base and any plane requiring refill will have to fly and stay close to it for like 5secs? Said plane would be always visible in the minimap.
I am aware that even this scenario has its holes but anything to avoid flying through a magic beacon in the skies.
Airstrips don’t need to be anything fancy. Just a a small strip of grass suffice.
Also Aircraftcarriers, yum yum. Preferable pilotabIe and sinkable.
And if you really must get rid of those pesky and dreadfull airstrips. I would like to have some airtime flying towards the Battlefield…
Instead of a 2 minute timer on the planes make it a 1.5 minute timer but spawn further away from the Battlefield. So you have the feeling you coming from abroad.
Make it a one way ticket. A little bit like the retreating army in Operations. You can go out but you can’t go in.
So the flyingarea is as big as your enemies. (so it is in no way a safe-zone)
Uh, No. Landing was never time consuming in Battlefield 3 and 4.
How long did it take your plan to cross a map in Battlefield 1? 30 seconds? Yeah that’s not long at all.
30 seconds? And how many times would you need to reload in a 20 minute match? 10 times? And now long to land? 15 seconds?
So throwing around rough figures you might spend one third of the match time ‘reloading’.
Funz.
Look that’s rough figures, but whatever, as I said before it’s about weighing up fun against balance against authenticity and for me and most players, it’s not a flightsim and the fun isn’t to be had in flying to a base, landing and taking off.
Yeah the floating Mario-Powerup-style thingy was iffy, but if it required a fly-by of a balloon over a fuel/ammo dump I’d be happy.