I don't know many people, if any, over the years that did not take BF seriously. No one expects Arma, but I, and I pretty much I think most people expect serious squad play without the harsh realism.
yeah, I was being polarizing in a sense. I don't actually expect actual arma mentality; some of those guys are next level autist, just the strategy/squading type.. I'm someone who does favor comms and gravitate toward tactical shooters.. and personally I never really could get that out of BF series, its been ultimately the most run n gun of all the franchises before call of duty moving into the "modern warfare2/blackops" era of the series.
I could be wrong, but from memory the last time role/class even really mattered with any sort of weight was BF2. BC/2 always felt as if it was more bring the player, not the class.. and BF3, while doing any class, it ultimately didn't matter unless you were trying cheeky combo's.. it doesn't help that the BF community is super split on what they demand out of the gameplay.. and also doesn't help that BF1 and BF5's gameloop was pretty garbage/grindhouse-y void of any sort of cognitive shooting.
I think if they can figure out this "massive" map thing, and somehow cater to both the vehicle whores, and cqb sweats.. its possible to bring back the strategy if they just allow people to be in essential hit squads because thats pretty much the depth of any sort of tactical/strategy you can get out of a BF franchise, is being able the sole squad that goes around holding/back capping.. and giving points/areas resource benefits, and so on.. otherwise its just torrents of zergs and grindhouse fiesta. TTK does matter too, but its such a touchy too much/too little.
I quit BF4 early because the PS4 servers was unplayable for way too long. I have it free from Twitch/Amazon prime? and debating giving it a go for a little bit. Bulk of my hours playing the franchise has been 1942/Desert Combat, BC1 and 2, and BF3.
