The only classes it needs are
Soldier
Engineer
Medic

Soldier would be the normal default class we have currently. The offense class.
Engineer would be able to do things like set up barbed wire, plant machine guns, and has more blocks but a weaker gun. The defense class.
Medic would be able to hand out med packs, inject enemy soldiers with poison, and would have a weaker gun. The supporting class.

Instead of a healer I'd rather have enemies drop health kits only your team can use to encourage moving up towards the objective instead of having long ranged duels

Either no classes, or only rifle and LMG. No sidearms

Have crafting of health and ammo supply outposts which should be a hassle to build and replenish you slowly. Barbed wire blocks too: simple up-pointing grey chevrons on 4 sides, transparent otherwise.

No vote for me.

I wouldn't really have a problem with TWO classes- soldier and builder. But anything more than that I am against, because it would change the game too much, and not in a good way.

I think I would prefer no classes, but I don't see why it can't be an optional feature if the devs feel like implementing it.

I think the fun of this game is everyone being able to do everything equally. The simple gameplay is made complex through player actions that result in unique scenarios every time you play. A class system does nothing to improve this, and I think makes a simple game unnecessarily cluttered.

That's not to say that there shouldn't be other weapons though. A mounted machine gun would add to the realism of what has become a primarily trench warfare game.

Or just let the servers decide. Let people play how they want to, I guess.

Any additional guns should only be able to clear blocks as fast as the rifle. Ie no machine gunning down whole bunkers in seconds from a distance.

I second moving to classes. Especially introducing an engineer class would help with too many people going autistic and just building for fun. A simple system, maybe Soldier, Medic, Engineer.

Medics would be near useless because people rarely come out of firefights alive if they get hit once and engineers would encourage excessive building.

Customizable loadouts are the way too go, but not with too many options because you'll start getting redundancy and unbalance.

This game doesn't need classes, it's fine as-is.

Having problems attacking solo into a mass of people building? GOOD. You aren't supposed to be able to rambo your way in and kill everyone. Get organized or join a different server where people are fighting.

Quit trying to turn this game into every other game out there.

Agreed. The loadout is a good idea. I mean, everybody can play the way he wants, without overpowered and fixed classes of some sort. But I agree, not TOO many options. But we need a few. Perhaps three a sort.

Making a draft here: https://spreadsheets.google.com/ccc?key=0ArH9r3YErotLdG9yV1oyeVZqU2RnMDRlZW11eFB6bGc&hl=en&authkey=CMfIsrUJ

I have used a three-category system. One with guns, one with utility tools, and one with miscellaneous weapons.

I think having pickaxe, shovel, and blocks split is a good idea. Builders barely ever need to destroy something, tunnelers pretty much only need a shovel, and joykills that make stuff collapse would only need a sledgehammer.

Everybody has blocks. Blocks are the most important part of this game.

For better destruction, I was thinking 4x4 explosion satchel charges and I believe tools should be fixed.

For loadouts, I was thinking a shotgun and handgun as possible rifle replacements, with an additional slot for a mounted weapon if you took the handgun. The mounted weapons would be the mortar and of course heavy machine gun. Mounted weapons should be deployed and packed up with their own key to avoid scroll wheel clutter. The shotty would let you take more explosives.

Mines shouldn't be treated like equipment, they should be a constant between lives resource gained through special means to keep them from just being spammed everywhere.

Maybe a fourth slot for a special support item that halves your explosives, but I can't think of anything.

We're gonna need a sweeper.

You can already assume different jobs based on what your team is doing, I see no need for classes unless you think people are too dumb to take on a job without having it handed to them on a silver platter (which is sometimes true). For example, a team could have a group of attackers, a few people building a fast route to the tent and front line bunkers, and a group of intel defenders. And even within that, you can differentiate even more. Attackers usually benefit from having some of them come head-on while others try to flank the enemy. Builders near the intel or really anywhere else could always use a few soldiers to cover them, since it's easy to miss that approaching enemy when you're busy laying blocks down.

Does "loadout" just mean you chose your weapons and items? If so I think it's funny that people are against them but for classes. Classes are just loadouts that you can't change...why would be in favor of less customization? I think it would be cool to have just a few more items - a pistol with more than 10 bullets, maybe a tnt charge. Even just being able to choose what to take using the current items would be great: You could take just a rifle and grenades, allowing you say 120 bullets and 6 grenades. You could take just a pick and shovel, allowing 200 max blocks. Something like TNT should require that you take 2 less items (it's heavy!)

I think "classes" might be too strong of a concept. Allowing players to switch out weapons to fill different roles could work, though.

I love the idea of a mortar in this game. While powerful, it would leave the user very vulnerable from the lack of a rifle. Figuring out an aiming system may be tricky, though.

When it comes to a machine gun, I also like that idea as long as the MG needs to be deployed to be usable... or at least just horribly inaccurate if it's not deployed. If done properly, it could be fantastic for suppressing fire and defending a location.

With the above two ideas, ammunition becomes an obvious problem. Allow players to exchange their blocks for ammunition boxes. I thought about switching out grenades, first... but requiring players to sacrifice defensive and utilitarian capabilities to help with the offense makes more sense. It would end up creating a need for supply lines, too. Once the player hands over the ammunition, they can either commit suicide to get more ammo, or remain to help cover the mortars or MGs.

Things like Thompsons, though... I'm absolutely against. I like the rifles as the primary weapon.

if there was to be a class system, it should be kept simple

scout:scoped rifle, sidearm, 1 grenade, ability to call out positions and people for your team
medic/ammo: ability to revive and give ammunition, sidearm
soldier: standard rifle, grenades, pick axe, but it takes longer to destroy blocks
miner/builder: pistol, pick axe, shovel, ability to mine faster and have a high block count

I don't think there should be classes, after all this is world war 1 and every soldier was armed with portable pickaxe and shovel combination while holding grenades and rifles. If there was a distinction, then soldier would stay the same, with max blocks at like 25, while the other class called SAPPER (builder doesn't fit but wait theres more!) who can set up det packs and who would be able to build 2 blocks at once.

But it still wouldn't be a good idea.

WiiMote, blocks are an important part of the game so you shouldn't be able to switch them out. I'm more in favor of being able to swap out grenades for machine gun ammo and mortars.

It's also important to know when you shouldn't be using blocks.

Having ammo is also an important part of the game. I honestly would much rather lose my grenades than blocks as well, but I think that's really why I should lose my blocks instead.

The way I see it, if I'm losing grenades to ammo, I won't think twice. I'd give up the grenades in a heartbeat. But if I have to sacrifice my blocks, then I'd stop to think about it:

"Do they need ammo? Will they end up needing it? If I bring it but it's not used, the blocks would have been better to help with defense, but if they run out of ammo, they become useless."

Also, remember, only one person needs blocks and a pick to keep building.

I would use loadouts but keep it simple. Everyone keeps digging tools and blocks, they are an integral part of the game. Also everyone gets a pistol which functions like a rifle but inferior in every way (less damage, accuracy, range and no headshots)

That leaves the main weapon slot and the explosives slot

options for main weapon slot:
Rifle - like it is now, powerful and versatile, most players will want to pick this

Heavy MG - Fast firing and unlimited ammo but takes a long time to set up and pick up, it has only a limited angle of fire and the operator can't move while using it. Bullets can't break blocks so it can only be used defensively.

SMG - only effective at short range but gives the player a speed boost. Unless you make a surprise attack the SMG always loses vs. a rifle, making it only viable if you want to make a stealth run.

For the explosives slot:
Grenades - like they are now, ideal for combat

Mines - for defensive use, explode when stepped on or shot but disappear when the owner dies, only a set amount can be placed

Demolition charges - to take out buildings and maybe collapse tunnels

One could think of loads of other weapons to add flamethrowers, mortars, mustard gas, barbed wire, shotguns etc. but I think that would detract from the simplicity of this game

How about unlockable classes? Wouldn't that make everithing easier? I dont want noobs dewces griefing my base with loads of tnt. I mean this would be better. The simplest class should be private (a.k.a. the one that is in the game right now) And then we should have achievments to unlock some races or even couple achievments for a class?

An achievement system? So, create player accounts that are saved in a database which track the exploits of every player, reward them when they reach a certain number of said exploits, and hope that those same players don't decide to troll other players?

-----------

I absolutely love the rifle as a primary weapon. It's reasonably true to World War 1 as well. I think allowing for side arms (which were rather uncommon, often only seen in the hands of officers) and SMG's would retract from the game.

The WW1 machine gun was a huge bulky weapon that required several men to operate and would constantly over heat, especially with inexperienced users. It weighed over 100 pounds, and was often fired in short bursts. If such a weapon were to be implemented, I'd highly suggest it being only usable while deployed, that it take several seconds to deploy (to discourage constant movement), overheating be a constant issue, and slow movement while walking with it. It could still be a powerful weapon used properly, but the majority of players would prefer a rifle.

As for mortars, they were actually fairly common. The idea was that the high arc of the explosive would land in the trenches that infantry would use. The high arc would also allow soldiers to fire them from the protection of a trench. I honestly think that mortars would have a very strong place in this game. The bulky size would also be something I think should slow a player's speed down, and ammo would be limited.

As for ammunition supplies. To me, that's a no brainer for the two above items. Riflemen would rarely "need" a resupply of ammo. A machine gun or mortar would often run out, though.

Personally, I don't know how I feel about demolition charges or mines. The demo charges could have some merit, replacing a grenade, and effectively acting as a sort of triggered mine as well. They could fill a nice slot for a trap item, and deal with some of the issues that mines have at the same time. They'd disappear on the user's death, so that they couldn't trigger one when they respawn. Mines should disappear as well, and should probably decay after a time... but I don't think they even existed during WW1 anyways.

I've said it before and I'll say it again, people are thinking way too far ahead with classes and weapon loadouts; personally I'd like to not have them in at all, but if thwy do end up in there, it's going to be a very long way down the road of development.

I think it's good with one class. Meybe just at start change weapon? Like
Choose weapon :
Sniper
Rifle
~~

And about the defenders/builders on spawn. Im sniper men. I can kill all of them with some luck.

Today i was on Vega2 and there was a castle on spawn. Not problem, one time 32 players online and i killd 11 mens inside of it. And 11'th was killd by a pick ; D

No classes +1

Another vote for NO classes. EVERY player has the freedom to play in ANY way, ALL the time, on an equal footing.

Boy I would love a builder class.

I think their should be two classes and no choosing weapons i think you should get a rifle (like you have now with mid range) , pick-axe , spade , sniper rifle (for range and does little damage up close) , shot gun (for up close use sucks with range , builder only gets this but soldier also gets this) , and grenades (with more range the longer you hold them) , blocks (only builder gets) , and a med pack (only heals 25 health once but can be refilled at base)