Skyring I am not sure how much BF42 you played but essentially your arguement is BF should just become like every other shooter, ignoring the huge fanbase who have enjoyed the different gmeplay model it offers in contrast to Halo, CoD, etc.
If players are firing without thinking and you still have a reload penalty then the best players are still going to win the fight every time.
Ammo limitations in BF42 a) made you ration your weapons and b) work as a team--take out APCs, hold key points with ammo depots, etc.
It had a strategic impact you are overlooking in that you couldn't be holed up forever or have an unstoppable onslaught if you didn't hold an ammo resource. Good use of the map and teamwork with APCs became really important, as well as defending these resources. It was a nice compliment in a Macro-Micro "War versus Battle" modle. Flag capture being the maco-goal/war, but each battle/micro-confrontation revolving around individual conflicts often about strategically exploiting your resources.
Even with regenerative health the best players will still win.
BF is a team game and this is a move away from teamwork and more toward arcade action.
Further, the point of BF was the best TEAM won, not the best shooters. The fact my newbish friends could be medics, engineers, man AA, protect a flag, etc and play the game as a team member and have fun--even though they cannot hit the broad side of a barn--was something that made BF42 different (among other things).
There are a lot of FPS that reward the best player for their shooting skill.
The market really lacks quality team-play shooters that, while not insulting unskilled gamers as well as rewarding skilled gamers, balance a game model that creates effective roles for players of a wide range of skills and playstyles.
These changes however place the focus of the gameplay much more in actually taking part in the action and less on pure survival skills.
The only time I felt like I was just "trying to survive" in BF42 was a) when I was defending and awaing backup or...
b) when I was playing how you suggest: assuming my awesome shooter skills and jumping right into the action and finding Tanks >>>>> Assault
crap players can still have fun but not ruin it for everyone else.
BF42 already allowed great players to be great (unless they stupidly think they can run and gun like CoD4, Halo, Quake, etc all the FPS idiots who thinks every game should play like Quake, and if not, it is broken) but it allowed unskilled gamers to play a very important role in winning the game. The only major problem with BF42 in this regards is it didn't give points for support roles outside of flag capping. There were issues with mini-map flag sorting, TKing, arty needed a better implimentation, bots sucked and SP was non-existant, no variable map scaling, trees and terrain could be a big hurdle to manuevering tanks, etc.... but the only thing that was a detourant to the game model was there wasn't enough visual reward for gamers who played a team role--other than seeing the other team get crushed. That said I played a TON with 4 players in a single room (onlineplay) and the reward for working as a team, even with low scores, and seeing the other team get crushed by solid teamplay was very rewarding. Not to mention the class balance and gunplay were spot on.
Game will still suck though, its Battlefield and made by Dice afterall.
You are more than welcome to go back to CoD4, although CoD 1943 should be out soon
