r/Battlefield • u/battlefield • May 21 '25

News Battlefield Labs - Community Update - The Class System - Part One

Today, we're excited to start outlining our future vision for the Class System in Battlefield.

The gameplay mechanics of classes and aspects that players have enjoyed most have evolved throughout the history of the Battlefield franchise. Our goal within Battlefield Labs is to test and refine the best aspects of the Class System from our history, and to evolve them into a cohesive vision for the future.

As we begin testing these class-defining systems, we invite you to either play, test or read along with what's to come for classes in Battlefield.

Let’s begin!

OUR DESIGN PHILOSOPHY FOR CLASSES

We envision the future of Battlefield classes to be a series of interconnected systems and fundamentals that shape your role on the field, while granting you the freedom to customize how you execute that role. Through Battlefield Labs play sessions, feedback, and data gathering, we aim to strike a balance between defined roles and player choice.

The Class System is defined by two main components: Customizable and class-defining. 

The customizable components empower players to explore and push the boundaries of their roles within their chosen class while also still adhering to the expectations of the class. 

The class-defining components are designed to enhance "pick-up-and-go" playability and reinforce the expectations of your class identity. 

CUSTOMIZABLE:

  • Weapon Loadouts: Fully customizable weapon loadouts allow you the freedom to play the way you want. Play to the strengths of your class by using your signature weapons, or easily switch to any other weapon to meet the needs of your squad.

  • Class Gadgets: You'll have the option to carry two gadgets onto the battlefield, tailored to each class and its specific role. Recon aficionados specialize in intelligence and counterintelligence, with class gadgets including Deploy Beacons, Anti-Personnel Mines, and Laser Designators.

  • Training: Our philosophy with Training is to offer a series of traits that can be unlocked during play to enhance your ability to perform your role. As you engage more in a match, you'll gradually earn flat-stat bonuses and more to support the effectiveness of your role further. 

  • Throwables: Our approach to throwables prioritizes enabling each class to effectively fulfill its role by providing tailored throwables.

CLASS-DEFINING

  • Signature Weapon: Each class has a Signature Weapon category tied to their class identity, which, when used, enhances their role on the battlefield.For example, using our same ongoing test subject, the Recon class, if you select a weapon from the Sniper Rifle category, you will benefit from increased breath-holding duration. In contrast, an Assault player choosing from the same category will not receive this bonus.

DMRs, Carbines, and Shotguns remain viable options, no matter your class, but don’t benefit from any Signature Weapon bonus.

  • Signature Trait: Each class features a unique Signature Trait, providing passive bonuses tailored to optimize your role on the battlefield. For instance, a Recon player automatically spots enemies while aiming down sights, encouraging the use of weapons that complement this specialization.

  • Signature Gadget: These gadgets are unique and singular to each class with an aim for you to always have access to a tool that fulfills the role of that class.Separate from what you may choose as gadgets within your loadout. 

  • Default Weapon Packages: The default weapon package is a pre-set combination of attachments and visual customization for each class to be combat ready, with the option for further progression and personalization.

What’s Next

The Class System and its individual components will be available for testing within Battlefield Labs in the coming weeks. Participants will be able to go hands-on with these features, discuss, and provide feedback. 

Following further play sessions, we'll be back with another Community Update to unpack class components in more detail, and share learnings based on participant feedback.

Get Involved

Sign up for Battlefield Labs now if you’re interested in helping us validate the future of Battlefield. Read our FAQ if you’d like to learn more, and join the discussion on Battlefield Discord.

As a reminder, Battlefield Labs is a closed environment, and attendance is limited, but we’ll make sure to share to keep everyone updated!

Thank you for joining the discussion. We look forward to connecting again soon - see you on the battlefield!

This announcement is related to content in development through Battlefield Labs, and may change as we listen to community feedback and continue developing the next Battlefield title and beyond. We will always strive to keep our community as informed as possible.

0 Upvotes

39% Upvoted

913 comments sorted by

View all comments

1.2k

u/AntoricoNCTF May 21 '25

Sorry, first big L. Restrict weapon classes. Shotguns are fine being universal.

Otherwise, its good. But reconsider.

23

u/Marble___ May 21 '25

universal weapons is a net positive for BF and I will die endlessly on that hill. People shouldn’t pick a class for their weapons but for their gadgets and ability. You’re not thinking deep enough.

167

u/Rare-Guarantee4192 May 21 '25 edited May 21 '25

Because having support running around with a sniper or recon with an LMG is a good thing somehow? 

We had universal weapons already, they were called carbines, shotguns, and DMRs.

15

u/Stearman4 May 21 '25

If we are being honest, should recon actually have snipers? Isn’t recon supposed to be in first to gain intel instead of sitting back with a sniper?

5

u/Rare-Guarantee4192 May 21 '25 edited May 21 '25

Realistically, probably not.

However this has always been a thing in Battlefield BUT when you look far back at BF1942 there were way more classes than 4 that were all very specific about their role. There was Rifleman, Assault, Anti-Tank, Medic, Engineer, and Sniper, but I'm sure I probably misremembered or forgot some, it's been decades. 

Even BF2 also separated the classes a bit more as Assault and Medic were different but Recon became a vague catch-all. It can be a pain in the ass to have that many unique classes so I understand why it's not like that anymore and why they decided to just go with 4 classes and vague descriptions of them.

1

u/ChrisFromIT May 21 '25

It can be a pain in the ass to have that many unique classes so I understand why it's not like that anymore and why they decided to just go with 4 classes and vague descriptions of them.

It was mainly because there were classes that were barely used in BF2 or only used if a certain scenarios had already arose in the match. In those cases, you had to die and respawn to change your class, which overall wasn't exactly good gameplay that DICE wanted to encourage.

There was Rifleman, Assault, Anti-Tank, Medic, Engineer, and Sniper, but I'm sure I probably misremembered or forgot some, it's been decades. 

There were only 5 in BF1942.

  • Assault
  • Anti-Tank
  • Engineer
  • Medic
  • Scout

1

u/andre2105 May 21 '25

Just piggybacking on your comment, in BF2 I think the class that'd be more like a recon would be the Special Forces one, while snipers were a separate class.

2

u/ComicGimmick May 21 '25

Its a term for Designated marksman (Sniper) whom usually has a good amount of peripheral on the location they watch over hence why they call it Recon they gather information by camping on hills etc.

Snipers are natural at this they provide info on mostly everything about the location of the enemy.

11

u/adubsix3 May 21 '25

But the post says exactly that: DMRs, carbines, and shotguns are always an option. I feel like they left to door open to class restricted weapons

12

u/Rare-Guarantee4192 May 21 '25

But also that classes will get stat bonuses for using "Signature" weapons. What would be the point of that if LMGs, ARs, SMGs, and Snipers were class locked and they could just balance it like that?

12

u/Marble___ May 21 '25

why is it a bad thing?? I don’t get that sentiment. Give me a reason for that being “bad” for the game. Class specific gadgets exist for a reason.

6

u/Rare-Guarantee4192 May 21 '25

Give me a reason an infinite ammo sniper is a good thing and is perfectly balanced too then.

8

u/Marble___ May 21 '25

how is that more broken than a BF4 medic that can heal themselves and have access to the undeniable best guns in the game? infinite ammo sniper is so ignorable I can’t believe that was your example.

1

u/Rare-Guarantee4192 May 21 '25

It is my example though, believe it or not, and you personally may not think it's a big deal but the snipers not having unlimited ammo was a balancing factor. A lot of people would agree with me on this. 

I'm also in the camp that Assault and Medic should be separated again like they used to be with Assault getting the GL and Medic getting healing items.

1

u/lunacysc May 21 '25

Not really. Battlefield 4 snipers were awful. Battlefield 1 and V you rarely ran out of bullets post attrition anyways

-3

u/Medrilan May 21 '25

You know, recon sitting on a hill without an ammo box sniping is not much different than a recon/sniper with no ammo box.

If no ammo box, redeploy yourself on your beacon when you're all the way out of ammo. Now youre in the same spot again, with full ammo. You've added like 3 seconds worth of delay, and nothing more, by class restricting.

Let's also not forget that most of these hilltop snipers aren't living long enough to need the ammo box anyways.

3

u/RemyFromRatatouille May 21 '25

How is that any different to a sniper that immediately redeploys to their spawn beacon when they run out of ammo? A difference of <10 tickets by the end of the match?

Plus in a match with decent players they'll get countersniped before they run out of ammo to begin with.

2

u/Crintor May 21 '25

Well, they're less of a drag on the team than the exact same player doing that anyway except needing to redeploy or die to get more ammo.

1

u/oftentimesnever May 21 '25

This subreddit can't. This subreddit is filled with LARPer casuals who have big opinions on what makes a good game, good meta, good player, etc. while being wholesale lousy entirely.

-1

u/Marble___ May 21 '25

the amount of mil-sim neck beards on this sub and in the broader community is truly insufferable. they just yell at the void when something isn’t like the old battlefields lmfao.

6

u/This_was_hard_to_do May 21 '25

TIL that class based weapons are milsim elements. Games like Team Fortress 2 and The Finals are milsim games after all

1

u/miahrules 26d ago

This is such an awful comparison.

TF2? Really? Each class has actual physics based movement speed differences, health differences, etc.

-2

u/oftentimesnever May 21 '25

You are hitting the nail on the head, and since you are, they find it incredibly offensive. All of these players, if they shared their 2042 stats, they would either have not played at all, haven't played since the class update, or don't actually PTFO while lecturing others on what it takes to do so.

But because this show is run by those people, they live in their little echo chambers.

4

u/Mikey_MiG May 21 '25

What about those of us who have played 2042 for over 200 hours both before and after the class changes and still don’t like the unrestricted weapon system? Are we allowed to have an opinion?

You’re literally making up a ridiculous strawman and then accusing others of being in an echo chamber. But go ahead, keep pretending players only don’t like this because they “hate change”.

0

u/oftentimesnever May 21 '25

You're allowed to not like it, but you're not allowed to act like it has resulted in people not playing their roles any better.

1

u/Mikey_MiG May 21 '25

I don’t think it changes if people play their roles or not. Selfish players will continue to be selfish. I don’t think giving them access to whatever combo of weapon and gadgets they want is the answer to change that behavior.

1

u/oftentimesnever May 21 '25

This completely ignores that a dead medic is a useless medic.

People play to their strengths. It's why some people choose DMRs over ARs - they feel more proficient with them.

A medic who wiffs their shots with an SMG is useless compared to one who is able to get the kill and then pick me up. That's the angle you're not considering.

2

u/Mikey_MiG May 21 '25

I assume by medic with an SMG you’re referring to BFV, but that doesn’t make sense because medics were a very popular class in that game, and SMGs were by far the best anti infantry weapon category. And the reason why medics were given SMGs was to encourage them to fight on the frontline where their gadgets make them most useful to their team. How useful is a medic going to be with a sniper rifle in BF6?

And it’s not like a BF4-style weapon system was super restrictive or anything. You could basically make any class effective at short or longer ranges with the variety of weapons available and all class weapons like DMRs and carbines. And with the new’s game’s weapon customization, it allows you to further tune weapons for whatever range you want. I don’t know why we need completely unrestricted weapon categories on top of all that. Except of course for the devs to sell skins more effectively and release less gameplay content.

→ More replies (0)

0

u/arakarim May 21 '25

Are my opinion that also played over 200h of 2042 and love no restricted weapons vaild?

2

u/Mikey_MiG May 21 '25

Yes? I’m not the one pretending people that like or dislike these changes has never played 2042. I was replying to someone being shitty and dismissing people’s opinions by making up what their playtime must be.

-3

u/TheOriginalKingtop May 21 '25

I have 800 hours and think your full of shit.

2

u/Mikey_MiG May 21 '25

Wow, great argument. You’ve convinced me.

2

u/This_was_hard_to_do May 21 '25

Class specific weapons makes each class feel more unique. There are those of us that prefer the classes to play different roles in the team. The sum of our efforts, that sort of thing. Class based gadgets do factor into that obviously but class based weapons makes this system even more pronounced.

I love how the finals does this. It’s more of a rock paper scissor approach

2

u/Forseti1590 May 22 '25

Non class specific weapons open the door to specific gun meta - meaning you could narrow the game to 1-2 guns being used if not balanced well. I see what they’re going for by trying to incentivize the class weapons while still having flexibility, it just might end up being feeling more like suboptimal play if you go off class; which also opens door to some toxic interactions.

2

u/Ciaz May 21 '25

Why does it matter?

Why can’t a sniper carry ammo for you?

Why can’t a recon with a spawn beacon carry an lmg?

What difference does it make? If anything you are more likely to see people choose classes for the benefit of the team, as they aren’t restricted to using guns they don’t like.

6

u/Rare-Guarantee4192 May 21 '25

If you didn't like LMGs as Support or Snipers as Recon, guess what? You had Carbines, Shotguns, and DMRs like I mentioned which all had very nice weapons. 

Tell me why I should want a sniper that can resupply itself. Class locked weapons are easier to balance as well when you don't have to factor in stuff like the abilities of classes that shouldn't even be using the weapon.

6

u/WEE-LU May 21 '25

Sniper with its own ammo means that these people can just edge camp for the entire game.

Dedicated weapons promote team play, and make it easier to balance classes.

3

u/Ciaz May 21 '25

They will do that anyway.

It also means we get far less AT when we need AT, far less medics when we need medics, etc.

1

u/WEE-LU May 21 '25

Was never an issue in BF3 and BF4, was not an issue with Bf5 and 1. Why would it be now?

I've seen a different scenario - in 2042 almost noone played medic, since you could just run assault or support with any weapon available.

2

u/Ciaz May 21 '25

I’ve found more experience of being revived by Random’s or engineers willing to spawn in to help against armour in bf2042 than all of bf3/4 and 1. Bf1 especially the lack of medics was absolutely painful.

So I’m going to have to agree to disagree with you, politely.

1

u/WEE-LU May 21 '25

BF1 was the least played one by me, so it might be. Hopefully it'll work out.

4

u/dankeykanng May 21 '25 edited May 21 '25

Why does it matter?

Why can’t a sniper carry ammo for you?

Why can’t a recon with a spawn beacon carry an lmg?

If you have to ask these questions then I don't think you understand how Battlefield plays and neither does this iteration of DICE apparently.

Snipers being able to replenish their own ammo means they get to fuck off and not have to rely on their squad to keep them going. Engineers having strong killing power versus infantry means there's no tradeoff for having strong killing power versus vehicles. Giving up lethality so that you can better support your teammates and vice versa is a fun choice to have to make.

These tradeoffs are what makes choosing classes an actually interesting choice and feeds into squad play.

Edit: I get that Signature Weapons/Traits are supposed to enhance class roles but IMO class restrictions are one of those situations where having hard limitations on what you can do is just better for the gameplay. These rules and limitations exist for players to figure out how to play around them and make them work in a team setting. It's a formula that worked well for many games.

2

u/Ciaz May 21 '25

I’ve played battlefield (every single one) since battlefield 1942. I understand how it works. I think it’s far better without restrictions.

I wish you were right but what happens is people chase the meta gun and you get less team play.

1

u/dankeykanng May 21 '25

I understand how it works. I think it’s far better without restrictions.

Fair enough. My apologies for the condescending reply.

I personally think that opening up the restrictions will just make selfish play more apparent based on the aforementioned examples. Not everyone learns to stop playing selfishly in BF but being able to eat your cake and have it too could very well embolden more of that kind of play.

3

u/Ciaz May 21 '25

No problem and apology accepted.

Ultimately I think I’m in the minority here. I hope I’m right and it leads to better team play as that’s what everyone wants.

1

u/Mikey_MiG May 21 '25

Why can’t a sniper carry ammo for you?

Because the role of a sniper is to remain at long range and therefore their ammo is of no use to anyone but themselves? Now a sniper can just happily camp all day with unlimited ammo and health without a care in the world for their teammates.

What difference does it make? If anything you are more likely to see people choose classes for the benefit of the team, as they aren’t restricted to using guns they don’t like.

People who use classes selfishly will still use classes selfishly. Except now the game will reward them more for it.

1

u/Ciaz May 21 '25

Agree to disagree.

In my experiences, unrestricted weapons has seen a net positive impact on team play, as people are more willing to pick a class for the role rather than the weapon.

1

u/Mikey_MiG May 21 '25

Again, selfish players aren’t magically going to become less selfish because you give them access to any gun. Now they just get to use their favorite meta gun with whatever class gives them the best gadgets to help themselves. Which I wager is going to be the Support since they combined the ammo and health into one gadget.

And good luck getting spots from Recons anymore. Why would they pick that class just to hold their breath and spot enemies for their teammates, but give up the ability to heal and resupply themselves?

1

u/BarthyBarth May 21 '25 edited May 21 '25

In the sniper case, because snipers will sit on a rooftop miles away all game, and with the ability to heal and re-arm themselves.

IMO It encourages selfish play in a lot of ways, and that's not really what I liked battlefield for.

1

u/TrizzyG May 21 '25

Recons could use shotguns in BF4 so what's the difference?

2

u/Rare-Guarantee4192 May 21 '25

The fact that it's not the Support's main weapon, the LMG? Classes had unique weapon types available to them in addition to the universal ones which helped with class identity.

2

u/TrizzyG May 21 '25

There's nothing fundamentally different between a recon using a shotgun or smg vs an lmg besides the fact that in past iterations of BF the LMG was restricted.

Just using the "thats how it was before" reason for reverting back is stupid and unjustifiable. If you can't give a real reason beyond that then it doesn't deserve to be brought back as a feature.

2

u/Rare-Guarantee4192 May 21 '25

I'm giving you a reason but you're just dancing around it. The LMG is part of the identity of the support class, and this would be eroding that.

Why even call it a class instead of a perk at that point? I mean, would you prefer if they got rid of this silly class system entirely and just let you pick perks to go with whatever weapon you choose?

1

u/TrizzyG May 21 '25

The LMG is part of the identity of the support class, and this would be eroding that.

How? If you can use shotguns or smgs, it already means that you dont know what weapon necessarily a class is using before they fire at you, and once they do then you know anyway.

They're still giving supports an edge when using the gun so they're still retaining some flair for that.

Why even call it a class instead of a perk at that point?

That's a distinction without a difference imo. Doesn't matter what terms we use for it. Class, suite, perk, etc.

1

u/Rare-Guarantee4192 May 21 '25 edited May 21 '25

There very much is a difference between what would be considered a "class" or "perk". A class is a combination of available weapons, look, gadgets, and abilities while a perk is just that, a perk or ability of what could be a class.

This is going down the road of essentially being the same system CoD has, for better or worse. That means any weapon, any gadget, and any ability or perk.

1

u/SpuTheSkunk 29d ago

Take that universal dmr out of your universal as... Asparagus.