I just wanted everyone to be able to easily read the entire reason. I think lot's of people are not getting the full story.

"Prone ? we won?t be implementing prone in the game, primarily as a balance issue for the recon class.

We playtested extensively here, and with prone the recon class becomes invisible, which is really imbalances the game.

As I?m sure you?ve noticed from the Beta, the recon class is powerful enough already?"

This won't stop the complaining.

Most people don't want balance in games if it means taking something away from them. You can give all the reasons you want and people just won't care... all they see is 'what's missing' and nothing of the added benefits.

Then of course, you have the wannabe snipers that want to be completely invisible irregardless of balance.

yes im aware of this, haha

Didn't seem like a big deal to me.

> I just wanted everyone to be able to easily read the
> entire reason. I think lot's of people are not
> getting the full story.
>
> "Prone ? we won?t be implementing prone in the
> game, primarily as a balance issue for the recon
> class.
>
> We playtested extensively here, and with prone the
> recon class becomes invisible, which is really
> imbalances the game.
>
> As I?m sure you?ve noticed from the Beta, the recon
> class is powerful enough already?"

Beings how I sure don't want to step on anyones toes by voicing an opposing and unimportant opinion, concerns for logical fairness and the realism of a game but could you please explain to me how the recon class becomes invisible if it is allowed to go prone?
Does the recon class actually disappear if it's allowed to go prone?
Does that mean that if all soldiers in the game could go prone all soldiers would be invisible?

And if you could also, please explain to me the theory behind insisting on developing, promoting and forcing this so called balance idea in a war game, are there balance features in a real war? Hmmm.

What are the added benefits of every soldier not being able to go prone?

Is a wannabe sniper any different then a wannabe balance advocate?

Why should there be balance in a war scenario?

And oh yeah, having concern for the quality of a game, communicating and voicing opinions within TOS isn't complaining IMO, differing opinions are not wrong or is it complaining unless of course someone doesn't think there should be two sides to every issue.

> I just wanted everyone to be able to easily read the
> entire reason. I think lot's of people are not
> getting the full story.

The 'Full Story' isn't described in any of your posts.

> "Prone ? we won?t be implementing prone in the
> game, primarily as a balance issue for the recon
> class.

Not with those game destroying red dots! Red dots are the balance issue.

> We playtested extensively here, and with prone the
> recon class becomes invisible, which is really
> imbalances the game.

Yeah right, the devs probably had problems getting the hitboxes to work and it would have left another bug in the game. How could they be 'invisible' with red dots?

> As I?m sure you?ve noticed from the Beta, the recon
> class is powerful enough already?"[/b]

Because of unbalaced character classes and underpowered automatic weapons. Oh and overpowered pistols. That is what makes the recon class powerful.

at great distances the recon class being prone was extrmely difficult to see, if not impossible, and for gameplay reasons (not realism) the prone option was removed.

It wouldnt make sense to disable prone on only the recon class so they disabled prone all together.

You could be Invisible in Battlefield 2/MC. What's the difference?

Add a Kill cam like BF 2 and there will be no problem. Is it that hard?

It must be hard. Zerk 16 didn't respond to my post. He has no answers.

yeah going prone in BF2 made u "invisible" (i prefer "hard to see" - no one is truly invisible) at long distances but that in itself was not a problem. Ive played over 1,000 hours on BF2 and its never been an issue for me or my friends.

if u were a sniper then u rely on invisibility at long distance and its up to enemy snipers to either kill them or "paint" them so other guys can get up close and give them the good news. Plus if u get pinged, death cam tells u where the killer is hiding.

the Spec Op class can also scope and kill from distance in BF2 MC with the SMG and, if lying down, is "invisible". Again, not a problem.

so why stop prone now? this new assault gun must be incredibly powerful over medium to long distances! and that sounds like a drag.

> at great distances the recon class being prone was
> extrmely difficult to see, if not impossible, and for
> gameplay reasons (not realism) the prone
> option was removed.
>
> It wouldnt make sense to disable prone on only the
> recon class so they disabled prone all together.

zerk16 I do appreciate your reply but man I have to tell you that even though I know you're probably being sincere with your thinking here, I still can't agree with your logic here if you actually believe the reasons or even rational when it comes to the whole thing making any sense being even close to reality even for a game?
"at great distances the recon class being prone was extrmely difficult to see, if not impossible, and for gameplay reasons (not realism) the prone option was removed."

And? at great distances the recon class being prone is extrmely difficult to see, if not impossible, and for gameplay reasons (not realism) the prone option was removed?????
And as I've said over and over AND?
The point I have personally been trying to make during all these discussions is, What Possible Gameplay Reasons could be so important play value wise that it warrants not including one of the most natural physical actions any soldier can do, Go PRONE?

You have finally made a very valid, agreeable and profound point here, it makes no sense to disable prone on only the recon class so they disabled the option all together?
Hot Dang! there it is in a nutshell, why make prone disabled for any soldier, that's the point I've been trying to stress all this time!

Not to mention that even without prone players still find ways to be Invisible in Bad company. The hilly area across the bridge on the first target area on Oasis for example. Players will always find ways. Why Dice thinks this is untrue is quite unclear to me. Players have even found ways to use the squad spawn to unfair degrees.

So in the end there is no reason prone can't be in the game.

In the end Zerkis you play the game. Players will have their tactics, and those opposing them will squash those tactics. Just as it happened in BF2 it will happen in BFBC.

Next time you talk to dice give these reasons on why they have to well thought out reasons on why prone can't be in the game.

Well I guess old Zerk gave up on this one. He attempted to make sure everyone knew why Prone couldn't be in the game only to get every reason why Dice was wrong and why it should be in the game.

DRAINAGE....DRAINAGE....Zerk you boy.

Hey....if you have a milkshake and I have a milkshake, and I have a straw. This is the straw, and I take it way way over here. Then I bring it way on back until it lands in your milkshake...

I....DRINK....YOUR.....MILKSHAKE. I DRINK IT UP.

Message was edited by: Emperor Sulla (EA.com)

> DRAINAGE....DRAINAGE....Zerk you boy.
>
> Hey....if you have a milkshake and I have a
> milkshake, and I have a straw. This is the straw, and
> I take it way way over here. Then I bring it way on
> back until it lands in your milkshake...
>
> I....DRINK....YOUR.....MILKSHAKE. I DRINK IT UP.
>
> Message was edited by: Emperor Sulla (EA.com)

what the....?