# Things confirmed in the last hour or so: **URL:** \ **Category:** General Discussion\ **Created:** [May 10, 2016, 6:02pm UTC](https://battlefieldforum.co/t/things-confirmed-in-the-last-hour-or-so/101094 "2016-05-10T18:02:00Z")\ **Posts on this page:** 20\ **Page:** 2
**Author:** ![Lordmang4](https://battlefieldforum.co/letter_avatar_proxy/v4/letter/l/e19b73/32.png) [@Lordmang4](https://battlefieldforum.co/u/Lordmang4)\ **Post date:** [May 11, 2016, 2:42am UTC](https://battlefieldforum.co/t/things-confirmed-in-the-last-hour-or-so/101094/21 "2016-05-11T02:42:00Z")
> [@CasualHorseRMax](#): > > Hahahahah have to say you surprised me there ;D I’m known for my creativity and pushing the envelope when it comes to gaming ideas. Of course, it rubbed some tryhard gamers the wrong way on the old Battlelog forums… ---
**Author:** ![ThePoolshark](https://battlefieldforum.co/user_avatar/battlefieldforum.co/thepoolshark/32/103801_2.png) [@ThePoolshark](https://battlefieldforum.co/u/ThePoolshark)\ **Post date:** [May 11, 2016, 2:47am UTC](https://battlefieldforum.co/t/things-confirmed-in-the-last-hour-or-so/101094/22 "2016-05-11T02:47:00Z")
> [@afnav130](#): > > > [@ThePoolshark](#): > > > > > [@Peccath](#): > > > > > > > [@ThePoolshark](#): > > > > > > > > There was a Q&A session on Twitter with a dev who confirmed this. > > > > > > > > Also, another tidbit was that certain stationary machine guns are going to be class weapons, so while not 100% authentic, they did it for fun and class balance > > > > > > What does that mean? There are stationary machine guns around the map and only certain class can “enter” them? How about stationary AAs? > > > > Sorry, I explained it badly. Essentially there were weapons that weren’t carried in WW1, they were stationary only. However, in the realm of fun and making kits equal, they made them so they are essentially LMG’s that a class gets. > > If this is true, it’s hilarious. What a joke. Everything has to be balanced. Why? For the 12 year olds. So your gonna be hauling around at running speed stationary weapons? Brilliant. WW1 my a\*\*. > > This game will be filled with 12 year olds. Good luck with that. If DICE goes this route, it will hurt. Many, many people are expecting near close to authentic WW1 as possible. When things like this start coming out, the interest will drop. It won’t fail because of the setting, it will fail because of things like this. What? It is still authentic, but for the sake of a balanced and fun game, they are taking creative liberties. If you want a WW1 sim, you are looking in the wrong place, and I don’t suggest you buy this game. I think people still confuse authenticity and realism. The weapons are authentic, the era is authentic, the game is not at all realistic. Never was meant to be ---
**Author:** ![Bertominus\_Rex](https://battlefieldforum.co/letter_avatar_proxy/v4/letter/b/71c47a/32.png) [@Bertominus\_Rex](https://battlefieldforum.co/u/Bertominus_Rex)\ **Post date:** [May 11, 2016, 2:52am UTC](https://battlefieldforum.co/t/things-confirmed-in-the-last-hour-or-so/101094/23 "2016-05-11T02:52:00Z")
> [@afnav130](#): > > > [@ThePoolshark](#): > > > > > [@Peccath](#): > > > > > > > [@ThePoolshark](#): > > > > > > > > There was a Q&A session on Twitter with a dev who confirmed this. > > > > > > > > Also, another tidbit was that certain stationary machine guns are going to be class weapons, so while not 100% authentic, they did it for fun and class balance > > > > > > What does that mean? There are stationary machine guns around the map and only certain class can “enter” them? How about stationary AAs? > > > > Sorry, I explained it badly. Essentially there were weapons that weren’t carried in WW1, they were stationary only. However, in the realm of fun and making kits equal, they made them so they are essentially LMG’s that a class gets. > > If this is true, it’s hilarious. What a joke. Everything has to be balanced. Why? For the 12 year olds. So your gonna be hauling around at running speed stationary weapons? Brilliant. WW1 my a\*\*. > > This game will be filled with 12 year olds. Good luck with that. If DICE goes this route, it will hurt. Many, many people are expecting near close to authentic WW1 as possible. When things like this start coming out, the interest will drop. It won’t fail because of the setting, it will fail because of things like this. Balance is an important part of any game. Even Counter-Strike tries to balances it’s weapons, except it takes their purchase values into consideration. More powerful weapons are more expensive, and so there’s a higher risk/reward there. The changes they made might not even be unbelievable to expect. The M1919 Browning was a medium machine gun, and in Call of Duty: World at War you could shoot that thing while standing. Treyarch actually went to a shooting range to see if this was possible, and it was. I don’t have a single clue about history, but all I’m saying is… if they stretch reality, then it might not even be that much of a stretch. Just because a weapon wasn’t used in a specific way in real life, doesn’t mean it’s impossible. Sometimes developers have to bend the rules to create an experience they believe is more enjoyable. ---
**Author:** ![afnav130](https://battlefieldforum.co/letter_avatar_proxy/v4/letter/a/22d042/32.png) [@afnav130](https://battlefieldforum.co/u/afnav130)\ **Post date:** [May 11, 2016, 2:55am UTC](https://battlefieldforum.co/t/things-confirmed-in-the-last-hour-or-so/101094/24 "2016-05-11T02:55:00Z")
> [@ThePoolshark](#): > > > [@afnav130](#): > > > > > [@ThePoolshark](#): > > > > > > > [@Peccath](#): > > > > > > > > > [@ThePoolshark](#): > > > > > > > > > > There was a Q&A session on Twitter with a dev who confirmed this. > > > > > > > > > > Also, another tidbit was that certain stationary machine guns are going to be class weapons, so while not 100% authentic, they did it for fun and class balance > > > > > > > > What does that mean? There are stationary machine guns around the map and only certain class can “enter” them? How about stationary AAs? > > > > > > Sorry, I explained it badly. Essentially there were weapons that weren’t carried in WW1, they were stationary only. However, in the realm of fun and making kits equal, they made them so they are essentially LMG’s that a class gets. > > > > If this is true, it’s hilarious. What a joke. Everything has to be balanced. Why? For the 12 year olds. So your gonna be hauling around at running speed stationary weapons? Brilliant. WW1 my a\*\*. > > > > This game will be filled with 12 year olds. Good luck with that. If DICE goes this route, it will hurt. Many, many people are expecting near close to authentic WW1 as possible. When things like this start coming out, the interest will drop. It won’t fail because of the setting, it will fail because of things like this. > > What? It is still authentic, but for the sake of a balanced and fun game, they are taking creative liberties. If you want a WW1 sim, you are looking in the wrong place, and I don’t suggest you buy this game. > > I think people still confuse authenticity and realism. The weapons are authentic, the era is authentic, the game is not at all realistic. Never was meant to be I don’t think it’s fun when you have unrealistic balances that make you say..“WTF? That’s not right”. And I’m not alone. You can have plenty of fun with it being realistic. Stop catering to 12 year olds. Also, I don’t know how often Battlefield is fun, for serious players. It’s challenging and that’s fun in its own special way. If people want “fun”, they can go play Call of Duty. Authenticity goes out the window when you make it unrealistic. Those two schools of thought are incompatible. If people could understand that we’d all be better off. ---
**Author:** ![ThePoolshark](https://battlefieldforum.co/user_avatar/battlefieldforum.co/thepoolshark/32/103801_2.png) [@ThePoolshark](https://battlefieldforum.co/u/ThePoolshark)\ **Post date:** [May 11, 2016, 2:55am UTC](https://battlefieldforum.co/t/things-confirmed-in-the-last-hour-or-so/101094/25 "2016-05-11T02:55:00Z")
He is pretty closed minded based on some of his comments, you are probably better off not trying to debate this with him… lol ---
**Author:** ![Rev0verDrive](https://battlefieldforum.co/letter_avatar_proxy/v4/letter/r/7993a0/32.png) [@Rev0verDrive](https://battlefieldforum.co/u/Rev0verDrive)\ **Post date:** [May 11, 2016, 2:59am UTC](https://battlefieldforum.co/t/things-confirmed-in-the-last-hour-or-so/101094/26 "2016-05-11T02:59:00Z")
The Authentic vs Realism parts have been confusing a lot of people. Yet, if the game went realistic and bolts were the only weapons the majority had to play with it would be ohk all the way and crying forever. Most would be barely out of spawn before dying. Gameplay is King! ---
**Author:** ![afnav130](https://battlefieldforum.co/letter_avatar_proxy/v4/letter/a/22d042/32.png) [@afnav130](https://battlefieldforum.co/u/afnav130)\ **Post date:** [May 11, 2016, 2:59am UTC](https://battlefieldforum.co/t/things-confirmed-in-the-last-hour-or-so/101094/27 "2016-05-11T02:59:00Z")
> [@ThePoolshark](#): > > He is pretty closed minded based on some of his comments, you are probably better off not trying to debate this with him… lol Close minded? I’m pointing out inconsistencies in your explanations. You do understand that the majority of posts here asking for what they would like are all items currently in BF4, right? So what’s the point if the 12 year olds just want the same stuff? It means the same game. What’s the point in that? ---
**Author:** ![ThePoolshark](https://battlefieldforum.co/user_avatar/battlefieldforum.co/thepoolshark/32/103801_2.png) [@ThePoolshark](https://battlefieldforum.co/u/ThePoolshark)\ **Post date:** [May 11, 2016, 3:00am UTC](https://battlefieldforum.co/t/things-confirmed-in-the-last-hour-or-so/101094/28 "2016-05-11T03:00:00Z")
> [@Rev0verDrive](#): > > The Authentic vs Realism parts have been confusing a lot of people. Yet, if the game went realistic and bolts were the only weapons the majority had to play with it would be ohk all the way and crying forever. Most would be barely out of spawn before dying. > > Gameplay is King! Yea, people just aren’t getting the fact you can have authenticity and be unrealistic… definitions are hard ---
**Author:** ![afnav130](https://battlefieldforum.co/letter_avatar_proxy/v4/letter/a/22d042/32.png) [@afnav130](https://battlefieldforum.co/u/afnav130)\ **Post date:** [May 11, 2016, 3:03am UTC](https://battlefieldforum.co/t/things-confirmed-in-the-last-hour-or-so/101094/29 "2016-05-11T03:03:00Z")
> [@Bertominus\_Rex](#): > > > [@afnav130](#): > > > > > [@ThePoolshark](#): > > > > > > > [@Peccath](#): > > > > > > > > > [@ThePoolshark](#): > > > > > > > > > > There was a Q&A session on Twitter with a dev who confirmed this. > > > > > > > > > > Also, another tidbit was that certain stationary machine guns are going to be class weapons, so while not 100% authentic, they did it for fun and class balance > > > > > > > > What does that mean? There are stationary machine guns around the map and only certain class can “enter” them? How about stationary AAs? > > > > > > Sorry, I explained it badly. Essentially there were weapons that weren’t carried in WW1, they were stationary only. However, in the realm of fun and making kits equal, they made them so they are essentially LMG’s that a class gets. > > > > If this is true, it’s hilarious. What a joke. Everything has to be balanced. Why? For the 12 year olds. So your gonna be hauling around at running speed stationary weapons? Brilliant. WW1 my a\*\*. > > > > This game will be filled with 12 year olds. Good luck with that. If DICE goes this route, it will hurt. Many, many people are expecting near close to authentic WW1 as possible. When things like this start coming out, the interest will drop. It won’t fail because of the setting, it will fail because of things like this. > > Balance is an important part of any game. Even Counter-Strike tries to balances it’s weapons, except it takes their purchase values into consideration. More powerful weapons are more expensive, and so there’s a higher risk/reward there. > > The changes they made might not even be unbelievable to expect. The M1919 Browning was a medium machine gun, and in Call of Duty: World at War you could shoot that thing while standing. Treyarch actually went to a shooting range to see if this was possible, and it was. > > I don’t have a single clue about history, but all I’m saying is… if they stretch reality, then it might not even be that much of a stretch. Just because a weapon wasn’t used in a specific way in real life, doesn’t mean it’s impossible. Sometimes developers have to bend the rules to create an experience they believe is more enjoyable. If you have no idea about history then you have nothing to bring to the conversation about historical circumstances. Sorry, it’s just true. I wouldn’t be on a nuclear engineering board bringing my opinion because, well, I’m not a nuclear engineer. “Just because a weapon wasn’t used in a specific way…” Really? You don’t care for realism in any way? Cmon. Also, referencing Call of Duty in regards to any product from Dice is and should be blasphemy. ---
**Author:** ![ThePoolshark](https://battlefieldforum.co/user_avatar/battlefieldforum.co/thepoolshark/32/103801_2.png) [@ThePoolshark](https://battlefieldforum.co/u/ThePoolshark)\ **Post date:** [May 11, 2016, 3:05am UTC](https://battlefieldforum.co/t/things-confirmed-in-the-last-hour-or-so/101094/30 "2016-05-11T03:05:00Z")
Realism is not what this series has EVER been about. Not sure why you are still beating that drum… ---
**Author:** ![Bohunk\_l](https://battlefieldforum.co/user_avatar/battlefieldforum.co/bohunk_l/32/101385_2.png) [@Bohunk\_l](https://battlefieldforum.co/u/Bohunk_l)\ **Post date:** [May 11, 2016, 3:06am UTC](https://battlefieldforum.co/t/things-confirmed-in-the-last-hour-or-so/101094/31 "2016-05-11T03:06:00Z")
> [@ThePoolshark](#): > > > [@Rev0verDrive](#): > > > > The Authentic vs Realism parts have been confusing a lot of people. Yet, if the game went realistic and bolts were the only weapons the majority had to play with it would be ohk all the way and crying forever. Most would be barely out of spawn before dying. > > > > Gameplay is King! > > Yea, people just aren’t getting the fact you can have authenticity and be unrealistic… definitions are hard Especially for 12 year olds Now dynamic vehicle damage, that’s something I’ve been looking for since BF3 was announced ---
**Author:** ![Avarik](https://battlefieldforum.co/user_avatar/battlefieldforum.co/avarik/32/101251_2.png) [@Avarik](https://battlefieldforum.co/u/Avarik)\ **Post date:** [May 11, 2016, 3:08am UTC](https://battlefieldforum.co/t/things-confirmed-in-the-last-hour-or-so/101094/32 "2016-05-11T03:08:00Z")
> [@afnav130](#): > > If you have no idea about history then you have nothing to bring to the conversation about historical circumstances. Sorry, it’s just true. I wouldn’t be on a nuclear engineering board bringing my opinion because, well, I’m not a nuclear engineer. “Just because a weapon wasn’t used in a specific way…” Really? You don’t care for realism in any way? Cmon. > > Also, referencing Call of Duty in regards to any product from Dice is and should be blasphemy. As a person who plays a lot of flight simulations besides Battlefield…I can only say that the more realistic a game becomes, the less fun it will be. Realistic games, especially simulators, are considered for the most part educational rather than actual games, and the fun produced from them is in the satisfaction of “I did it, I managed to do X!”. I am all up for making games more authentic and not necessarily realistic, but sacrificing realism for the sake of balance/gameplay/etc is not a major concern for me, especially in a Battlefield game. ---
**Author:** ![JuveOG1105](https://battlefieldforum.co/letter_avatar_proxy/v4/letter/j/eada6e/32.png) [@JuveOG1105](https://battlefieldforum.co/u/JuveOG1105)\ **Post date:** [May 11, 2016, 3:21am UTC](https://battlefieldforum.co/t/things-confirmed-in-the-last-hour-or-so/101094/33 "2016-05-11T03:21:00Z")
> [@afnav130](#): > > > [@ThePoolshark](#): > > > > He is pretty closed minded based on some of his comments, you are probably better off not trying to debate this with him… lol > > Close minded? I’m pointing out inconsistencies in your explanations. You do understand that the majority of posts here asking for what they would like are all items currently in BF4, right? So what’s the point if the 12 year olds just want the same stuff? It means the same game. What’s the point in that? I don’t think you get what everyone is saying. If the game was super realistic like you want it it wouldn’t be fun that’s a fact. Every gun would essentially be a ohk. You’d literally be dead in a matter of seconds depending on where you spawned and the circumstances of the match. Not to mention historically speaking if you want the game to be super realistic we’d be fighting trench foot and other diseases more than the enemy. I don’t think you realize how bad this war was. ---
**Author:** ![Keif68](https://battlefieldforum.co/user_avatar/battlefieldforum.co/keif68/32/100928_2.png) [@Keif68](https://battlefieldforum.co/u/Keif68)\ **Post date:** [May 11, 2016, 3:25am UTC](https://battlefieldforum.co/t/things-confirmed-in-the-last-hour-or-so/101094/34 "2016-05-11T03:25:00Z")
> [@Lordmang4](#): > > > [@CasualHorseRMax](#): > > > > Hahahahah have to say you surprised me there ;D > > I’m known for my creativity and pushing the envelope when it comes to gaming ideas. Of course, it rubbed some tryhard gamers the wrong way on the old Battlelog forums… If I remember correctly. People had an issue with you spamming COD threads. Am I correct? ---
**Author:** ![Lordmang4](https://battlefieldforum.co/letter_avatar_proxy/v4/letter/l/e19b73/32.png) [@Lordmang4](https://battlefieldforum.co/u/Lordmang4)\ **Post date:** [May 11, 2016, 3:26am UTC](https://battlefieldforum.co/t/things-confirmed-in-the-last-hour-or-so/101094/35 "2016-05-11T03:26:00Z")
> [@Keif68](#): > > > [@Lordmang4](#): > > > > > [@CasualHorseRMax](#): > > > > > > Hahahahah have to say you surprised me there ;D > > > > I’m known for my creativity and pushing the envelope when it comes to gaming ideas. Of course, it rubbed some tryhard gamers the wrong way on the old Battlelog forums… > > If I remember correctly. People had an issue with you spamming COD threads. Am I correct? BF can learn quite a bit from COD. Ideas are ideas, no matter where they come from (even COD). But like I said, ideas rub some gamers the wrong way… ---
**Author:** ![Keif68](https://battlefieldforum.co/user_avatar/battlefieldforum.co/keif68/32/100928_2.png) [@Keif68](https://battlefieldforum.co/u/Keif68)\ **Post date:** [May 11, 2016, 3:29am UTC](https://battlefieldforum.co/t/things-confirmed-in-the-last-hour-or-so/101094/36 "2016-05-11T03:29:00Z")
> [@Lordmang4](#): > > > [@Keif68](#): > > > > > [@Lordmang4](#): > > > > > > > [@CasualHorseRMax](#): > > > > > > > > Hahahahah have to say you surprised me there ;D > > > > > > I’m known for my creativity and pushing the envelope when it comes to gaming ideas. Of course, it rubbed some tryhard gamers the wrong way on the old Battlelog forums… > > > > If I remember correctly. People had an issue with you spamming COD threads. Am I correct? > > BF can learn quite a bit from COD. Ideas are ideas, no matter where they come from (even COD). > > But like I said, ideas rub some gamers the wrong way… I’m all for opinions. Most of the people on battlelog aren’t. Lol ---
**Author:** ![Bertominus\_Rex](https://battlefieldforum.co/letter_avatar_proxy/v4/letter/b/71c47a/32.png) [@Bertominus\_Rex](https://battlefieldforum.co/u/Bertominus_Rex)\ **Post date:** [May 11, 2016, 3:29am UTC](https://battlefieldforum.co/t/things-confirmed-in-the-last-hour-or-so/101094/37 "2016-05-11T03:29:00Z")
> [@afnav130](#): > > > [@Bertominus\_Rex](#): > > > > > [@afnav130](#): > > > > > > > [@ThePoolshark](#): > > > > > > > > > [@Peccath](#): > > > > > > > > > > > [@ThePoolshark](#): > > > > > > > > > > > > There was a Q&A session on Twitter with a dev who confirmed this. > > > > > > > > > > > > Also, another tidbit was that certain stationary machine guns are going to be class weapons, so while not 100% authentic, they did it for fun and class balance > > > > > > > > > > What does that mean? There are stationary machine guns around the map and only certain class can “enter” them? How about stationary AAs? > > > > > > > > Sorry, I explained it badly. Essentially there were weapons that weren’t carried in WW1, they were stationary only. However, in the realm of fun and making kits equal, they made them so they are essentially LMG’s that a class gets. > > > > > > If this is true, it’s hilarious. What a joke. Everything has to be balanced. Why? For the 12 year olds. So your gonna be hauling around at running speed stationary weapons? Brilliant. WW1 my a\*\*. > > > > > > This game will be filled with 12 year olds. Good luck with that. If DICE goes this route, it will hurt. Many, many people are expecting near close to authentic WW1 as possible. When things like this start coming out, the interest will drop. It won’t fail because of the setting, it will fail because of things like this. > > > > Balance is an important part of any game. Even Counter-Strike tries to balances it’s weapons, except it takes their purchase values into consideration. More powerful weapons are more expensive, and so there’s a higher risk/reward there. > > > > The changes they made might not even be unbelievable to expect. The M1919 Browning was a medium machine gun, and in Call of Duty: World at War you could shoot that thing while standing. Treyarch actually went to a shooting range to see if this was possible, and it was. > > > > I don’t have a single clue about history, but all I’m saying is… if they stretch reality, then it might not even be that much of a stretch. Just because a weapon wasn’t used in a specific way in real life, doesn’t mean it’s impossible. Sometimes developers have to bend the rules to create an experience they believe is more enjoyable. > > If you have no idea about history then you have nothing to bring to the conversation about historical circumstances. Sorry, it’s just true. I wouldn’t be on a nuclear engineering board bringing my opinion because, well, I’m not a nuclear engineer. “Just because a weapon wasn’t used in a specific way…” Really? You don’t care for realism in any way? Cmon. > > Also, referencing Call of Duty in regards to any product from Dice is and should be blasphemy. I reference games that are relevant to the discussion. History is only relevant as far as the foundation of Battlefield goes. Battlefield 1 is set in World War 1, which means that it’ll strive to be faithful in the objects and weapons used to create an authentic setting. HOW those objects and weapons are used may differ to improve the gameplay experience. It’s always been like that for the Battlefield series. Take Battlefield 1942, some weapons weren’t used very much in the real war… however, they were still chosen to be incorporated in the game for the sake of balance. Jetpacks weren’t used, but they were incorporated into the expansion. Battlefield has always bent the rules, and it was never about realism. ---
**Author:** ![Rev0verDrive](https://battlefieldforum.co/letter_avatar_proxy/v4/letter/r/7993a0/32.png) [@Rev0verDrive](https://battlefieldforum.co/u/Rev0verDrive)\ **Post date:** [May 11, 2016, 3:30am UTC](https://battlefieldforum.co/t/things-confirmed-in-the-last-hour-or-so/101094/38 "2016-05-11T03:30:00Z")
> [@afnav130](#): > > I don’t think it’s fun when you have unrealistic balances that make you say..“WTF? That’s not right”. And I’m not alone. You can have plenty of fun with it being realistic. Stop catering to 12 year olds. Also, I don’t know how often Battlefield is fun, for serious players. It’s challenging and that’s fun in its own special way. If people want “fun”, they can go play Call of Duty. Authenticity goes out the window when you make it unrealistic. Those two schools of thought are incompatible. > > If people could understand that we’d all be better off. The best example I can think of at the moment (Fireball has got a weeee bit of a hold on me) is the Javelin in BF4 (BF3 Dragon). What’s the point even having it? IRL (realism) it’s a one hit kill, single man fired, tank killer. To top that they used a vastly inferior M136 CS (AT4) as a pick up. Pick ups are supposed to be in all tense and purposes superior to anything available in a kit for a specific job/role. That’s the way it’s been in all FPS games and it’s inline with common sense. **Gameplay trumps realism and authenticity.** If every weapon/thing in BF4 was truly authentic and realistic (I’d like it cause I’m HC) BF would not hold the playerbase it has. Everything would kill in one hit basically. Tanks as as they are wouldn’t be on the field for long. Counters on all aircraft would fail for realistic reasons vs ping/lag. Heat seekers utilize a dual band systems. UV and infrared as a counter countermeasure. Flares don’t work like in the movies. No aircraft in the game would actually survive a spawn for more than 30 seconds given there was someone fighting against it. Thus creative liberties in the sake of gameplay. Case and point … BFV Mod PoE. It provided modern warfare to an extent. What we knew was possible and on the verge in 2004. This is all Classic.. nothing HC. What the AJ should be doing. [![Video: BF:V PoE A10 Thunderbolt](https://battlefieldforum.co/uploads/default/original/3X/2/0/201c668fe897840c92fbe0f282b49175658739ea.jpeg "BF:V PoE A10 Thunderbolt") ](https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=_Fl-MXSw5S8) What the AH should be doing (not even including the gunner is AI, human would be even more brutal). [![Video: BFV Poe Apache](https://battlefieldforum.co/uploads/default/original/3X/2/6/2644aecf3d782240d180b1533b7058e3de1865d3.jpeg "BFV Poe Apache") ](https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=DqmAg4olpm8) What Jets air to ground should be doing. [![Video: BattleField Jetting air to ground](https://battlefieldforum.co/uploads/default/original/3X/7/b/7b94ab6a5fba2af962178369346a6fbc8c040a97.jpeg "BattleField Jetting air to ground") ](https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Q-vb5CeE7nw) Most of the modern gaming community (market) cant handle this. ---
**Author:** ![afnav130](https://battlefieldforum.co/letter_avatar_proxy/v4/letter/a/22d042/32.png) [@afnav130](https://battlefieldforum.co/u/afnav130)\ **Post date:** [May 11, 2016, 4:02am UTC](https://battlefieldforum.co/t/things-confirmed-in-the-last-hour-or-so/101094/39 "2016-05-11T04:02:00Z")
> [@ThePoolshark](#): > > > [@Rev0verDrive](#): > > > > The Authentic vs Realism parts have been confusing a lot of people. Yet, if the game went realistic and bolts were the only weapons the majority had to play with it would be ohk all the way and crying forever. Most would be barely out of spawn before dying. > > > > Gameplay is King! > > Yea, people just aren’t getting the fact you can have authenticity and be unrealistic… definitions are hard You can’t be authentic and unrealistic. Not in a literal sense. It would be like having a Spad that goes Mach 1. That’s not authentic, that’s unrealistic. If it could go 100mph, that’s authentic, not unrealistic. Concepts 101 ---
**Author:** ![TheButtCarcass](https://battlefieldforum.co/user_avatar/battlefieldforum.co/thebuttcarcass/32/103769_2.png) [@TheButtCarcass](https://battlefieldforum.co/u/TheButtCarcass)\ **Post date:** [May 11, 2016, 4:07am UTC](https://battlefieldforum.co/t/things-confirmed-in-the-last-hour-or-so/101094/40 "2016-05-11T04:07:00Z")
> [@ThePoolshark](#): > > There was a Q&A session on Twitter with a dev who confirmed this. > > Also, another tidbit was that certain stationary machine guns are going to be class weapons, so while not 100% authentic, they did it for fun and class balance Liked, and subscribed.™ [Previous page](https://battlefieldforum.co/t/things-confirmed-in-the-last-hour-or-so/101094.md?page=1) [Next page](https://battlefieldforum.co/t/things-confirmed-in-the-last-hour-or-so/101094.md?page=3)