[Suggestion] Weapon Proficiency(Passive Cert-Line)

That is one of the great benefits, you spend 1,500 certs for the passive unlock and gain access to the Assault Rifles you already own, and same for the Carbines you own going to your Combat Medic. If you play both support classes regularly and have weapons on each, then this is a great blessing to have, since suddenly you spend 1,500 certs and have access to a whole array of weapons. Pick and choose at your own accord, find the weapon that suits your playstyle to the most accurate qualities. That is the benefit of having both of these weapon classes on both support classes.

How about just give everything weight? You can pick whatever you want (with a few restrictions), but the point is that ultimately your character is limited by weight.

So an Engineer (or a Medic) running around with an assault rifle means that they carry fewer grenades or something.

Maybe soldiers have two limits, a fighting load and a combat load. The fighting load might be 50 pounds, while the combat load is 75 pounds (convert to metric as necessary).

Infiltrators and LAs would have lower load limits. HAs might have slightly higher load limits to accommodate a single heavy weapon.

Exceeding the fighting load would result in movement penalties. This would include sprint speed and duration, scope sway, ADS speed, weapon switching speed, movement speed, etc.
Exceeding the combat load would result in extremely sluggish movement and injury over time. At a certain percent over the combat load an infantryman would become immobile.

Essentially it would be similar to PS1, which is more interesting in that you can tailor a character to your individual playstyle.

One change: Make it so heavies don't have SMG proficiency by default, and make that be the one they get. Not ARs.

This adds a lot of realism, but that's a pretty massive overhaul to the game. PS1 had a pretty great system but it doesn't translate over to PS2 what with the class system it has comparatively. I think for now my idea here(After some adjustments from the original post) is a better, more simple, fit to adding some diversity to the game. Where a weight system would require some huge stat changes to every weapon and ultimately make all classes pointless, mine is a simple passive cert which would require minimal implementation(It's just a little bit of weapon access codes after all).

That's actually a pretty great idea, also throughout this thread I've concluded that Heavies wont get Assault Rifles, unfortunately I can't edit that in the original post. But giving Heavy Assault an SMG Proficiency cert is certainly a great way to balance the class, though those who currently own and use them may be a tad bit annoyed at having to spend 1,500 certs to use them again.

[EDIT] Perhaps those who already own an SMG get immediate access to this proficiency? I don't see a good way to give it to Heavies who use SMGs already, and if not I can feel a pretty big uproar coming from that side of the community.

I'd also be interested to know what loadout configuration people would try if this idea ever became a reality. I assume most would focus on Engineer, but there must be some people curious about the effectiveness of Carbines on Medic, right?

No.

Carbines are VASTLY superior in CQB due to the near SMG-like tiny cone of fire in hipfire mode. AR are VASTLY superior at long range due to their higher accuracy. The two weapon classes are drastically different performers depending on range-to-target.

Versatility? Like engineers who can resupply, drop mines that can kill any target, drop turrets that can kill any target, equip carbines that are sick in CQB or the deadliest anti-max rifle in the game that can snipe maxes with a 12x scope if you want, and toss grenades that stick to people, and take suits that allow more mines or grenades? You mean those totally NON VERSATILE, USELESS guys?

Come on.

Gotta 100% agree on that one.

This kinda sounds not unique to me but more as those boring "mostly-the-same-guns" mashups we see in modern variants of the Battlefield series.

There are already specialised guns for different combat situations within the type of the gun category.
As example some of the NC carbines:

- Mercenary: Good allrounder
- GD-7F: CQC
- AC-X11: Long range
- Razer-GD23: Mid range to long range
- Gauss Compact-S: More versatile allrounder due to underbarrel options and 3-bullet burst fire mode

(Also you gotta mention you can adapt certain guns like the AC-X11, Gauss-Saw etc. as headshot machine in CQC if you learn their handling. This also counts partially for other empires guns like the VS LMG Ursa or the TR LMG TMG-50 as example.)

Good old TR Cycler-TRV heavy, eh ?

Remember: 845 RPM : 60 seconds x 143 bulletdamage = 2013,91 Damage Per Second on 10 metres
+ Overshield ? No thanks too much balance for me here .*

Sorry but this sounds blatantly unfair giving veteran players a distinctive advantage as Rikkit mentioned earlier.

No offense against you pal, but I'd personally like the restrictions of certain weapon types to a certain class.
That's what makes them more unique for me IMHO ( Also why don't you just play the class, use their special weapon category and learn using their different sub-variants designated for different combat scenarios like CQC, mid range and long range ? ).
Aside from that atleast for the Heavy Assault, Combat Medic and Engineer shotguns, SMGs and the battlerifle are also a valuable option.



*You found some sarcasm ! + 5 EP

That's not at fault to the Engineer, that's a fault of the Combat Medic not having as much equipment as it should. Support roles shouldn't be made unique based on their weapon selection, that defeats the entire purpose of being support... Medic deserves much more than it already has but in reality how much can we give them? Some utilities perhaps, maybe a deployable or two centred around healing/shielding. Engineers however are the very definition of versatile, this is their class advantage in the entire game... they can perform in almost any scenario provided they are equipped for it.

Some changes should be made to the class to even reduce it's versatility, I suggested fixing Tank Mines so they shouldn't be used against stationary targets, but that caused an uproar from the community(I still maintain that it should happen). Tank Mines should be for MAXes and destroying moving targets, while C4 is designed for stationary targets.... that was too hard a concept for the community to grasp however, so they pleaded the case of versatility and player ingenuity(It's exploiting a weapon... if you have to deal friendly fire in order to achieve a goal, it is clearly abuse of equipment).

I feel as though you may have overlooked many key elements of this suggestion... first of all while present in the original post, later on the idea for Assault Rifles on Heavy Assault was scrapped completely, you didn't seem to get the memo like most people and tried to use it against the idea as a whole. Second, the unlock costs 1,500 certs... most weapons are 1,000 certs. A new player looking to buy a weapon is likely willing to spend 1,000 and as such it is not a major stretch to spend 1,500... after all you gain immediate access to the default weapon of that category as well as the availability of every other weapon in it. That is a bargain if you ask me.

I agree, certain weapons should be restricted to certain classes, but when it comes to the most basic support roles, they deserve much more than your typical soldier so that they can perform to their best of their preference. People seem to get this idea that Assault Rifles are superior to Carbines, they both have their roles and they both can perform outside them. The weapons themselves are not dramatically different however... giving access of both types to both support classes allows players to be able to find the perfect weapon for their playstyle.

I think the real issue of this idea is that the Medic has fewer toys than the Engineer, which I think we can all agree should be remedied soon. They should have access to some medical based deployables, perhaps some shielding utilities. The Medic could even have access to equipment which provides buffs to themselves and/or their team, this would certainly make them much more versatile in their own right.

Repeat: COME ON. Medics can already get assault rifles for long range, battle rifle for REALLY long range, SMGs for close range, and shotguns for "I put the barrel against your backpack" range. How much more versatility do you need? They can also get C4 to blow up vehicles, grenades that raise the dead, a heal gun, and a deployable that restores shields. How many more toys do they need? They can even rank up a passive that turns any vehicle into a rolling heal gun.

So you're complaining about the overall versatility of both Combat Medic AND Engineer? You may not understand how support works then... when you play support classes, your job is to be more capable than your opponent, be it ability, utility, or weapon, your advantage comes from preparation and strategy. This is something the designated "fighting" classes have little of... the infiltrator will run and hide until they get your back, the light assault will fly up high and wait in ambush, and the heavy assault will run in completely oblivious and pop a shield for instant advantage. The medic? You could try use that self-heal of yours to stop bullets, but even max rank wont save you if your enemy is a half decent player... your advantage comes from healing between fights, not in them. And don't get me started on engineer, any enemy who lets me deploy a turret mid fight to kill them was likely not playing the game at all.

Support need more versatility, that is how they are balanced in the game... this suggestion is a very easy and balanced way of doing so. If people think one weapon type is more powerful than the other, good for them... but if that were true then why are engineers and medics so evenly matched in combat at all ranges? It comes down to skill, and situation.

That the addition of assault rifles to heavy assaults was scratched is good, haven't read so far into it, that's why I replied to your main thread of which I assumed you'd edit it in your latest additions and stuff .

But you're basically assuming that a new player who has not really an idea of game mechanics knows what kind or type of weapon in this game suits him best ? That's a bit of a stretch honestly.
Also as new player your first 1500 certs (for the rankups until level 15) should not really be spent on a different gun or another weapon tree as suggested by you, that's why most of the starter weapons have to be somewhat new player friendly and "should" be good allrounders.
Your first certs should rather be spent on class abilities as example Nano-Weave, Jetpacks more generally Medpacks and so on.

Also I still stand by my previous post that classes can get with their special weapon type and it's sub-variants, plus shotguns, SMGs and the battlerifle enough variety for all kinds of combat situations.
THIS COUNTS FOR THE HEAVY ASSAULT, THE COMBAT MEDIC AND THE ENGINEER.

No. Support roles deserve their own stuff and gimmicks but they don't deserve much more than your regular attack units.
An example for a worst case scenario would be a situation like in Battlefield 2 were the medic was a slightly lighter regular trooper with medic tools and therefore outclassing the standard ground trooper.
He had the same assault rifle as your regular ground trooper, also his medic tools like the defibrillator and the medpacks made him even more valuable. The only thing the normal ground trooper had going for him was insignificantly better armor and an underbarrel grenade launcher (btw the medic did also have a HE grenade so yeah...).


Also I just have to echo Drewbicus what is it that you're so obsessed with the support classes needing more options especially kinda attack class specific stuff like carbines and LMGs ?
I mean therefore the class and weapon distinction is there so they are more specialised and unique.

So you're complaining [gotta re-use your phrase there buddy ] that he doesn't understand playing support but you're kinda upset about the KILLING POTENTIAL of a SUPPORT CLASS (which actually comes well equipped with enough guns for nearly all situations) ?
LOL. (Yes I like my letters big)

Nice contradiction. If they are basically performing the same (you should actually verify that claim with valid statistics) then why do you need the other classes (here Medic & Engineer) weaponry ?

The logic I have for the cert cost is the player is already looking for a weapon, I'm not saying new players should spend their certs on weapons but if they so choose to, this isn't a bad way to go. Quite honestly the game should have been designed from the start so that Engineers had Assault Rifles, and Carbines were left exclusive to Light Assault, that way the support classes would be on par with each other as they should be. They are not fighting classes yes, but that doesn't mean they shouldn't be able to defend themselves in any situation. Unfortunately that is a change that can never happen, Engineers have had Carbines for too long, and to replace them would cause the community to cry out about an update revert, like they do with almost every update. People don't like the idea of change is what I'm finding.

I maintain the philosophy that the difference between Assault Rifles and Carbines comes down to individual preference, therefore it does not become unreasonable for support classes to have access to both. Engineer gets a buff to it's ranged arsenal, and Medic gets a buff to it's close quarters arsenal. This makes them more capable overall but still less effective than the main fighting classes as they have combat aiding abilities... some would argue that the Medic does as well, but if said Medic is participating in more close quarters fighting due to using a carbine then it's quite apparent they are sacrificing the advantage they have with self-healing, as that is more useful to survival at longer ranges.

No, YOU appear to be complaining about their versatility as if they somehow LACK it. They don't lack for versatility at all. They're great as they are, and giving them each other's primary weapons isn't going to magically make them better or more versatile. both ALREADY have weapons that are solid at point-blank, short, medium, long, and really-long range. The only real difference is that the carbines give the engi a little more oomph at short to med range, and medics ARs give them a little more oomph at medium to long. Having that one difference in effectiveness does NOT mean they are "not versatile."

Also, I understand support perfectly well. YOU seem not to. Support does not mean "more capable than". It means you are utilitarian to your teammates. Medics offer health and shield support, engis offer resupply support and repair. I am not sure how you do not grasp that this is the essence of being a supporting class. Support is not supposed to be the huge damage dealer. That's the role of the heavy. It's not supposed to be the mobility king. That's the light assault. It's not supposed to be sneaky. That's the infil. It's not supposed to be the shock troop - that's the MAX unit.

Seriously, medics and engis already do the job of supporting the battle really, really well. Their guns are NOT what make them "support" with the possible exception of the crossbow with spotter bolts because those, too, help the team out.

But then you play the Medic mostly as Assault Class with a bit of medic abilities thrown in the mix ? Why don't you use Med-Kits then if you're going more for the Rambo kind of approach ? I mean otherwise you wear just too many hats at once .
You gotta make your choice pal. That's what's great about games like PS2.

This is a shooter, because of that we must look at support differently than you would in other games... if I were just a support class my Engineer would have access to pistols as well as my regular equipment, I'd be stuck to vehicles and keeping away from the fight, only defending myself if I absolutely must. Same goes for the Medic, but in a game with very few class options and quite a lot of killing potential from everything but support(Due to abilities) it is vital that support is fully capable of defending itself as well as, if not better than, the classes who have distinct and unique advantages in most fights. The balance here is skill, and strategy... good support knows their limits and when not to extend beyond them... if a heavy/light assault, or infiltrator dies, it's no big deal, but if you die as support, that's detrimental to the team as a whole. Being capable of adapting not only tactically, but equipment wise as well is a great benefit to support as a whole. Engineers who can be further away from the fight if they so choose, so they can sustain repairs and keep people supplied. Medics who can get real cozy with the frontline, so they can heal the wounded and revive the fallen. They can do it now yes, but what if they could do it even better? That is what this suggestion is about, it's about giving support the ability to perform their duties in every situation, but also being able to specialize in a certain range that lines up perfectly with your playstyle.

No, you kinda DON'T have to "look at support differently." Both medics and engis already have a huge selection of guns that handle every situation possible, including both having variants with under barrel grenade launchers. No other classes in the game have so many situations covered as they do. They're jacks of all trades already but you're trying to make them have everything. Taken to its conclusion your logic would be to just scrap classes entirely and give every ability in the game to every player simultaneously. After all, shouldn't infils be more versatile and be able to use shotguns and missile launchers? Shouldn't light assaults get sniper rifles? Why can't a max heal people? They just need to be more versatile.

Please, please let this go. There is absolutely no rational gain to just handing weapon types out to other classes. Your ideas for interesting engi deployables sound neat, but this suggestion is off the mark.