The system now is too easy to rank up. Anybody can be level 150 by playing a lot, I don’t like it. Rank should be based on experience and in game achievements, for example, get rank 1-1000 exp,rank 2 2000 exp and kill 5 in a game,rank 3 -3000 exp revive 2 people and kill ten in a game . I feel that this is a better ranking system,
You just completely ruined any sort of suggestion by including an ending that is essentially “anyone who disagrees with me is wrong”.
In terms of the idea itself, It’s not that it’s that bad of an idea, but some people like playing in particular ways. For example I am a die-hard medic, I don’t want to have to snipe 40 people to go up to the next rank. It’s forcing people to play in ways that they don’t want to, and that’s typically a bad system to employ. Then again on the other hand it incentivises diverse play which I suppose could be a good thing. I personally don’t mind the current ranking system, whether it’s considered easy or not. I tend to respect lower level players that perform well better than I do average but high ranking players.
That’s not bad actually. I would like that one, I just don’t want the one we have. I loved battlefield ever since bad company and I want something more challenging. When I play I’m always in the top 3, and I want something that will truly test my abilities
It would definitely have to have class role requirements per rank as well. 10 revives, 10 supplies, 10 repairs, 10 designation kills (pld/soflam) etc. increased throughout the ranking. Maybe not forcing each class role on you, but say if you only liked Assault. Each progression required more squad/team play. 100 revives, 200 heals … 125 revives, 250 heals etc.
I don’t really snipe or fly jets, but I agree that a ranking system that requires experience from all aspects of the game would be good. If you absolutely don’t want to play like that, then you just don’t rank up. It’s not a big deal. But it would be great to know that those who have reached higher ranks actually have better-than-average knowledge of the game.
people caring about rank is a joke. it was never an accomplishment, and adding stupid achievements to it like Warhawk of BF2 is the EXACT same thing. you just force people to play a little bit longer.
maybe the lesson is that you guys need to stop worrying about what everyone else is doing.
yeah, but the complaint is that anyone can get to max rank with MORE PLAYING time. no one we’re really talking about is that inexperienced. they’re whining that people can simply earn max rank after a few hundred hours if they keep grinding.
Perhaps an simpler solution would be to let your class carry the rank, instead of your soldier as a whole…Each class you play can have a rank - 140 medic, 100 recon, 84 support, 12 engineer → drop the lowest and take the top 3 avg = 108 rank
Prob not the best solution, but an idea. Plus if you like to play one class only maybe you could display that as your soldier - display medic class, so we all see rank 140
just some ideas, down on this digital paper
EDIT: Or keep the 140 rank for each class idea, and when you achieve that you become a general - each rank of 140 is a star, so if you reach rank in the classes + commander you will be a 5 star general.
I am not really thinking about that to be honest. I just want a bigger variety in ranks and the ranking system to be unique. In the end of the day this is not the thing I play the game for.
well, i feel that the majority of the complaining if from people who felt like they earned something with the rank and are upset that people who just play a lot can get it, even if that’s what they essentially did in the first place. the ranks are just a glorified leveling system keep moving the goal posts anyways, its like, why even bother?