BF3 Armored Kill DLC vehicle inventory concerns

With the Battlefield 3 Armored Kill DLC fast approaching there’s much to be excited about, but there is a concern that the 20 new vehicles are not enough for the size of the maps that will be available, especially Bandar Desert. The problem is some of the smaller maps have had just about as many vehicles, so you would have assumed that a bigger inventory would have been made available.

There’s also a concern that the maps are just too big this time round and most of the time will be spent looking for a contact to engage, something that is not an issue with smaller maps. However, wouldn’t life be boring if we had the same size maps and not a way for you to explore an expanse in some new vehicles?

You can see some of these vehicles in action for yourself in this video footage, and it’s clear to see that you will not be searching the desert for the enemy, as they are all over the place. So the concern by some that things will be a little boring is a bit of a non-issue really, but we agree that more vehicles would have been nice.

However, we do like the fact that you can’t just choose any vehicle because you have to think tactically, the reason why is because there is so much area to cover and choosing the wrong vehicle could cost you, just think what you need to do before you make your choice – at the end of the day the best thing to do is just plan your attack.

If you had the choice would you rather smaller or larger maps, and if you go for the latter then what would be the ideal number of new vehicles that the developer could bring to these larger maps?

 
  • Vindel

    Methinks you have reading comprehension fail, Pete. That doesn’t mean all 20 new vehicles are on the map all at once, or that they are the only vehicles you can choose from. Look at the trailer again. There are still vehicles from the original game available.

  • Vindel

    How does map size really affect the number of vehicles you need? Aren’t there the same amount of players?

    • A Gamer

      More vehicles means you get to traverse the landscape faster. Imagine a map even the size of Kharg Island (which is going to be considerably smaller than this desert map) and then take away all of the vehicles. Can you imagine how much time it would take to find an enemy even with 64 players? First of all, reaching a flag would take a few minutes and trying to take all of them would be a pain. In hardcore mode it would be quite cool since it would be more realistic and it would be reminiscent of ArmA but in a normal situation it would suck and even more so in this map.

    • http://www.facebook.com/people/Jon-Wax/100000900235855 Jon Wax

      right now, bf3 and bf in general has devolved into cod style gameplay because of map design: aside from even the biggest maps being “small” they dlute the true feelilng of a battlefield match. and i’m not talking about day to day pub room matches, i mean a TRUE clan battle between good clans is diluted by the smallness of the maps. it kills the creativity and originality of thought. it turns the game from chess into checkers. the funnels are a method of telling the player what to do.

      the largest change the big maps make would be the one in regards to “reinforcement”: with a bigger map, as a player, you have to ”read” the map and interpret the data to save yourself from wasting a trip reinforcing a location if the distance to location is something beyond your means. from that point, a smart player would deduce that since said location fell, the next logical place of enemy presence will be the current flag on which the player is standing. the larger map, unlike gulf of oman for instance, will give more time to prep an area for an incoming offensive and thereby turns the game back into more of a thinking “sport” and less of a twitch game. Add in clan skill and the game swings back away from the ez mode culture.

      Peace
      B