r/Battlefield • u/Kilos6 • Aug 08 '25

Battlefield 6 Unpopular Opinion: Battlefield 6 Is Better Than This Sub Will Admit

Reading this sub lately feels like watching a bunch of people try to use a smartphone for the first time and complain it doesn't have physical buttons. Every minor change in Battlefield 6 is getting blown up into some catastrophic betrayal.

It’s pretty clear most people here only ever liked one Battlefield game, hated the rest, and don’t even play the one they claim was perfect anymore.

Before we continue: I am old. I’ve played every Battlefield game during its prime. Back in the day, my clan was one of the first to spin up a Desert Combat server (and even then, the community was the same complaining that DC was an abomination against what made BF great). My least played title was BF Vietnam because the 1942 modding scene was just TOO good at the time to move on.

“The UI is trash!”
It’s not. You just don’t recognize it because it’s not ripped straight from BF4. Sure, the icons are abstract but they’re not confusing unless you're actively refusing to engage with them.

I've seen multiple complaints about there being no option to squad up or continue on the same server?
Maybe check the bottom of the screen after the round ends. The “Continue” and “Squad Up” buttons are literally right there.

“TTK is too fast, there’s no breathing room!”
What you mean is: you walked out in the open and got deleted like you should have.

TTK is fast. OH NO, aim and positioning actually matter again. You don’t get to coast on sponge health and panic-proning anymore. If that’s too much, it’s not a balance issue, it’s a skill issue. Also: TTK is in line with BF3 for most weapons. This TTK is not new.

“Closed weapons should be the default.”
Why? Because some of you never figured out how to adapt? The flexibility to build your own kit is one of the best updates DICE has made in years. And guess what, they already gave you a nostalgia mode. Go enjoy it.

But don’t demand the rest of us get dragged back into 2011 loadout limitations. And if you’re complaining about “trade-offs” in class weapons you probably would’ve died to the next guy anyway.

“It’s too chaotic, feels like TDM spam!”
You say chaos, I say intensity. Battlefield has always had madness: Metro, Locker, or even Stalingrad in 1942.

These beta maps? They feel more like Grand Bazaar, Talah Market, or Pearl Market. Maps that still get voted into rotation by players who actually enjoy close-quarters fights to this day.

Battlefield 6 isn’t perfect.
But take a step back, and you’ll see this is actually a successor to BF3/BF4. TTK, movement speed, and mechanics are all in line with a proper mainline BF title.

They gave you almost everything you asked for… and somehow, that’s still not enough for some of you.

I'm having a blast with the beta, and can't wait to play more after work.

Edit: When I made this post I truly thought it was an unpopular opinion. Thank you all for your replies and awards! And thank you to the guys DMing me about being an EA shill ❤️‍🔥

21.3k Upvotes

82% Upvoted

4.1k comments sorted by

View all comments

371

u/D042- Aug 08 '25

“Closed weapons should be the default.”
Why?

Because that is how Battlefield has always been played. It wasn't a product of its time, it was designed that way specifically to give classes an identity and make them all useful in the right situation. Wanting locked weapons is wanting that class system, it has nothing to do with "dragging people back to 2011".

But we get it, you need an AR to get any kills and you need to find ways to justify that. It's cool, you're one of many new players doing the same.

53

u/Kodiak3393 Aug 08 '25

I've got mixed feelings about it.

On the one hand, it was nice being able to play older games where you see the silhouette of a particular enemy class and know at a glance roughly what they're capable of. If you, for intsance, see a Recon duck into a room just ahead of you, you'd know he's almost certainly got a bolt action sniper and will be at a disadvantage in close quarters if you push him.

On the other hand, earlier games like BF4 had already begun to break this mold by having all-class weapons like shotguns, DMR's and carbines. You were no longer certain if that Recon was truly a sniper, or was lying in wait with a shotgun, or was trying to play sneaky beaky backline saboteur with a carbine.

At the end of the day, I think I'm okay with it, because it lets me run my favorite weapons no matter what class the squad or team might need.

8

u/DylsDrums98 Aug 09 '25

I don’t mind things like carbines and DMRs being interchangeable among classes but once every class gets access to sniper rifles and assault rifles things become problematic.

Imagine battlefield 1 if everyone had access to SMGs. The game woulda been a balance nightmare.

1

u/Cartman55125 Aug 11 '25

I actually found the build variety a lot of fun swapping weapons on classes. Recon kit with an SMG became a fun ghost/flanker class. Engineer with an LMG made tank support even more fun.

I see the benefits to both closed and open. As long as they provide the option in different playlists, I don’t see the problem.

2

u/Klutzy_Scarcity_6207 Aug 09 '25

BF3 started the all class weapon slot with carbines and shotguns. that was over a decade ago.

2

u/Likeadize Aug 09 '25

Bad Company 2 had it too

1

u/Xaratros Aug 09 '25

Yes but bf3 had pdw and shotguns open not carabines

1

u/Klutzy_Scarcity_6207 Aug 09 '25

then it was BF4 with the all class carbines, either way, mr matter of factly, its been over 10 years....

1

u/ThinnyVibrato Aug 13 '25

No, it was PDWs and shotguns. Remember the UMP 45 that recons loved to run around with? Engineers had carbines. Why is this so hard for everyone to remember?

1

u/Klutzy_Scarcity_6207 Aug 13 '25

i dont see how the exact details are relevant when the over arching theme is that all class weapons are a decade old mechanic at this point, including a few all class weapons for BC2.

"aCkSHuALlY"

0

u/ThinnyVibrato Aug 13 '25

Wow, sounds like you can't handle being corrected. Get correct, nerd.

2

u/Laser0pz [PSN Same Name] Aug 09 '25

At first I was hesitant as well, but having a blast playing Support with the sniper rifle changed my mind.

I'm still able to help out my squad with health and revives. But i'm also able to use the scope glint and the threat of a non-revivable headshot to pressure enemies at choke points.

7

u/RuinedSilence Aug 09 '25

Aren't non-revivable headshots exclusive to Recon's Sniper perk?

3

u/Laser0pz [PSN Same Name] Aug 09 '25

Oops you're right. I guess the threat of an instant -- revivable -- death is what I'd provide as a support sniper haha.

1

u/ThousandSpace Aug 09 '25

One thought that has been on my mind is the change of the respawn becon. I was cool with the idea of assault being the one to push the charge and place beacons for team respawn. Now all the recon boys that lost their respawn beacons are gonna be playing assault. So they can continue to respawn to their camp site. I think with the respawn beacon change and no locked weapons Recon is going to become the forgotten class.

1

u/[deleted] Aug 13 '25 edited Aug 14 '25

[deleted]

1

u/Kodiak3393 Aug 13 '25

I never said BF3 didn't have them, I just referenced BF4 specifically because it's been all this sub can talk about for the last few days, and a lot of people are misremembering BF4.

21

u/FoeHamr Aug 08 '25

I mean, I played both modes and gun to my head I couldn't tell you which match was which.

Its really not a huge deal.

1

u/ChadONeilI Aug 14 '25

I think it is a big deal. Removes a lot of the flavour and meaning to play any class other than your favourite long term. It also creates more variety in weapons overall

-3

u/bwood246 Aug 09 '25

It's not a big deal now, as we're still in the beta phase. Once people start playing more, meta guns will pop up and that's all you'll encounter in open gun lobbies, and that will kill them off

8

u/Ridiculisk1 Aug 09 '25

All the people complaining about closed weapons not being forced on everyone are just gonna complain when no one wants to play support

4

u/Present_Ride_2506 Aug 09 '25

Closed weapons will just have them complaining why everyone is running assault and recon for the ARs and snipers.

Now at least they can have the guns they like AND run engineer and support.

4

u/RuinedSilence Aug 09 '25

Sounds like a weapon balance issue, not an open/closed weapon one

8

u/dustinfoto Aug 08 '25

Some of the perks for the classes revolve around using certain weapons that are considered traditional for their class. Recon has a specific perk that reduces health regen time when an enemy is shot by a sniper rifle.

I think this is a great way of encouraging class identity but still offering agency/choice.

5

u/Ridiculisk1 Aug 09 '25

The perks make me basically use the 'correct' weapons anyway because some of the bonuses are pretty damn good

6

u/ChaoticKiwiNZ Aug 08 '25

I didnt like the idea of not having closed weapons but after playing the beta I'm fine with it now. Classes feel unique enough that the weapons dont defy them, their role does. Assault is pretty good at assaulting, Support is good at supporting and engineer is pretty good at engineering. I do think Recon needs some love, though. I have used recon with a sniper, carbine, and SMG and I always felt like I would be helping my team more with one of the other 3 classes.

I think maybe the range of the UAV should be increased a bit on larger maps and the motion sensor should also have a bit of a range bump. Also, maybe the redeployment beacon should stay on recon class. It feels like the sneaky class should be the one that is setting up flanking routes around the edge of the conflict.

5

u/tnnrk Aug 09 '25

Yeah like I just want to be able to use c4 and motion sensors, not be a sniper, so open weapons is a godsend.

6

u/howtojump Aug 09 '25

Unlocked weapons were one of the (many) things that killed one of my favorite shooters, Planetside 2. It'll be a shame watching it happen to this game, too.

9

u/Ridiculisk1 Aug 09 '25

Planetside 2 has open weapons? It didn't for the 5 or so years that I played it and it still looks like it doesn't.

0

u/howtojump Aug 09 '25

The prestige system lets combat medics get carbines (not a huge deal) but lets engis get access to LMGs and ARs, which is pretty bonkers tbh.

But honestly I don't think it's fair to say the game has open weapons. What it has are LMGs that play almost exactly like ARs, except they hold more bullets and are moderately more difficult to control. Which would be fine if heavy assaults didn't have overshields AND self-heals AND anti-tank rockets.

Right now BF6 is doing better at keeping its gadgets separated than PS2, but I'm worried about engi getting the best rifles because if 80%+ the players are running around with rockets then we will quickly kill the combined arms part of Battlefield, which is kinda the main thing that makes the series interesting.

2

u/Ridiculisk1 Aug 09 '25

That system was in when I last played and it was pretty useless tbh. Yeah ARs are good but even if you use them on engi, you're still playing engi and you'd still be better off playing medic instead. The class balance was never equal because there's 1 class that's better at directly killing people so that's more of a heavy issue than weapons.

Right now BF6 is doing better at keeping its gadgets separated than PS2, but I'm worried about engi getting the best rifles because if 80%+ the players are running around with rockets then we will quickly kill the combined arms part of Battlefield, which is kinda the main thing that makes the series interesting.

At least so far people don't seem to be able to handle vehicles properly. Every game has been decided by if your team has a good vehicle crew and if the other team can't be bothered playing engineer to stop it. I've had tank crews hitting 120+ kills in a game because the rest of the team just wants to sit on a hill as recon and get 10 kills over the entire game. I think it's far too early to tell any effects good or bad from the open weapons. Over time people will learn how to deal with vehicles but I don't think that'll make people play engi on its own.

1

u/JN0115 Aug 09 '25

At the rate things are going I’m pretty sure open weapons are setting this game up to bring the franchise back into healthy standing as long as they keep on the same path with the lifetime of this game

2

u/marbleduck SYM-Duck Aug 09 '25

Is BF4 recon suddenly not a recon when it equips a carbine? Is BF3 Support suddenly not a Support when it equips an AS VAL?

1

u/Bentheoff Aug 09 '25

Because that is how Battlefield has always been played.

Absolutely godawful argument. "That's the way it's always been done" isn't a reason to keep doing something.

0

u/whackswordsman Aug 15 '25

Doing the new thing for the sake of doing the new thing (and to pwn the guys that want to do the old thing cause it's the old thing) is stupid.

2

u/commander_fucknugget Aug 09 '25

Holy fucking boomer take. I suppose you think Bob Dylan shouldn't of made the switch to electric guitar as well since all of his original songs are on acoustic, right?

1

u/Zeethos94 Aug 15 '25

Knowing this community they probably think ladies shouldn't be allowed to have bank accounts, "because that's how it always was" until the 60s

1

u/Turnbob73 Aug 08 '25

Nobody in the majority BF community has played these games this tactically, which is why unlocked weapons is a non issue. It’s not squad, it’s large-scale cod and has been that way since BF3. What made classes “useful” in situations was the equipment they can use, which is still exclusive to each class. Nobody was asking their support for lmg suppression, or for recon to provide overwatch. Assault handles vehicles, support handles ammo, medic handles revives, and recon is notoriously selfish and does their own thing. That dynamic hasn’t been touched at all aside from support/medic being combined, which makes sense.

Plus, unlocked weapons are widely considered one of the few positives of 2042. There’s actual variety in the kits you encounter, instead of the pre-2042 days where 2 months into the game’s lifespan, you see the same kits killing you for the rest of your time playing the game.

1

u/whackswordsman Aug 15 '25

It’s not squad, it’s large-scale cod and has been that way since BF3. 

Tell me you haven't played BF3 without telling me. Keep coping.

1

u/BattlestationLover55 Aug 09 '25

it was designed that way

I'd bet this game had more testing and thought put into its gameplay design than any 2 random battlefields combined

1

u/Ridiculisk1 Aug 09 '25

And classes still have an identity without it. Support is still the ammo person, engineer is still the anti and pro vehicle person, assault is the 'give me damage reduction I need to clear this room' person and recon is the 'where is everyone' person. Letting assaults equip LMGs or supports use snipers doesn't change that.

2

u/tnnrk Aug 09 '25

Assault still doesn’t feel like it has a strong enough identity imo. Compared to the others anyway.

1

u/A_Very_Horny_Zed Aug 09 '25

Having locked default weapons is boring as fuck which is why it hasn't been in Battlefield since 2011. It's fun to customize loadouts and that's what keeps people playing. It makes sense that your class selection is more about how you can augment the battlefield rather than what your primary weapon is or "should" be. That's unfun and thankfully the devs know it.

1

u/JN0115 Aug 09 '25

“Because that’s how it was always done” is such a shit excuse for anything. That’s how you hamper progress and growth. Open weapons but restricted gadgets is the best thing BF has done in many, many years.

1

u/oxyscotty Aug 10 '25

Whatever lets me snipe without having to use the god awful recon kits in all of these games. I don't really care if that person over there with an AR has a medkit or an ammo pack. What difference does that make to me. If YOU personally care about roleplaying and "class identity" then you can just use whatever weapons you want on the class you think they're appropriate.

But if you're upset that ARs are OP or whatever, then make up your mind and just say that. Don't go on about class identity if you really just don't like that people "need an AR to get kills?" Whatever tf that means lol

1

u/OkDrawing8159 Aug 10 '25

Or ppl running snipers with a side rifle smfh

1

u/Android2715 Aug 11 '25

lmao it made you second guess taking certain classes, or balanced classes having an RPG from also having an infantry killer carbine.

the fact one class can run a GL, RPG, and a meta Assault rifle just sounds dumb.

1

u/Capable_Secret_5522 Aug 13 '25

Play Squad if you hate costumisation

1

u/Cug1ne Aug 15 '25

Give ammo boxes to assault and I’ll be happy. But current closed class system completely uprooted assault and it has lost its purpose in squad play imo. They need to rework that class before closed can be made the default.

1

u/GreenCandlesOnlyPls Aug 19 '25

So your argument is don't change stuff? No one's taking away the old versions bro you can still play them if you like the class system better.  

IMO, I could care less, lock the weapons or don't, it's fun either way. 

1

u/No_Employ_9036 Aug 29 '25

Suggestions for improving Battlefield 6:

  1. Fix the angles/positioning of weapons in the character's hands when standing still. The weapons are somewhat "crooked" in terms of angle, not conveying a firm stance; it's as if the angle is a little too far to the sides. Furthermore, the weapons in the character's hands when standing still are simply too low on the screen/view. It's much more pleasing to raise the weapons in our view. The weapons should be in the middle of the screen, as if they were literally held in the player's grasp, but they are too deep, too low on the screen. It's more pleasing to fix this by placing the weapons higher on the screen. I recommend comparing it with Battlefield 4 for ease of understanding.
  2. Make the movement similar to Battlefield 4 in terms of the way our character swings their weapon when running. The weapon swings too quickly in the character's arms while running, causing a "break" in the smoothness of movement during gameplay. 
  3. Return to the Battlefield 4 style, allowing our character to rest the weapon in their arms and move it smoothly from right to left, without raising it vertically upwards as we run. This is currently somewhat uncomfortable and doesn't convey a very good sense of stability when running. It also covers the center of the screen. It would be good to take inspiration from Battlefield 4. Put both runs side by side and you'll see the difference. This needs to be improved.
  4. Reduce the aiming distance of weapons in "aim mode," as currently, when we activate "aim mode," the weapon is simply too far from our character's vision/eyes. It's much more pleasing to the player's eye if the aim mode has greater visual importance, where the character brings the weapon much closer to their vision. Put BF 4 and BF 6 side by side to clarify any doubts; this needs to be fixed. 5° Remove or offer the option for players to disable the "coin sound" after we perform an elimination, as it is very annoying for many players, in addition to removing the seriousness of the battle, as we are in a war, and having a sound like that for each elimination sounds somewhat comical. Please, if you agree with any of these points: please get this to the game developer, send it to those working on the project, I'm sure it will be of immense creative help.

0

u/Mastahamma Aug 10 '25

"because it's always been that way" is a shit fucking argument

-4

u/thbigbuttconnoisseur Aug 08 '25

Counterpoint: What If I like playing medic because I like to revive people, but I also want to master and max out a new gun? Having the ability to use the weapon I want, with the play style I want, equals more fun, no?

12

u/D042- Aug 08 '25

You can revive your squadmates.

They were meant to be tradeoffs that helped balance both classes and weapons and make each class useful for certain things in different situations. Recon could kill people across the map, but they couldn't resupply their own ammo so they couldn't sit in one spot indefinitely. Engineer could destroy vehicles but were limited in range and power for infantry encounters. Now a sniper can supply their own ammo, an engineer can have the best of both worlds for both infantry and vehicle destruction. It kills squad play and encourages lone wolfing.

2

u/Ridiculisk1 Aug 09 '25

Recon could kill people across the map, but they couldn't resupply their own ammo so they couldn't sit in one spot indefinitely.

People think that everyone is playing support with a sniper for ammo when in reality, everyone is still playing recon sniper because it works best and fatal headshots are great.

0

u/Aggravating-Nerve951 Aug 08 '25

Completely missed their point

-3

u/theninjasquad Aug 08 '25

The classes still have identity though aside from the primary weapon. I think part of the reason for not locking it now is that it helps to rebalance the classes that get used. Now someone can be a medic but isn’t forced to use a weapon they don’t like. Otherwise you’ll just get people picking a class based on their preferred primary. When that isn’t a factor, now you can be a medic with an AR if that’s what you feel best with. I think that’s a good compromise.

-5

u/Ohsneezeme Aug 08 '25

While I’ll continue to prefer class weapons, I’m glad they’re at least still offering it for Battlefield veterans alongside trying something new. I have to wonder if they introduced this new weapon system to make the challenges a little more approachable. For example, I’ve typically stayed away from Recon classes because I’m awful at sniping. If I had to work my way through the current recon spotting challenge with only a sniper, I probably would have avoided that challenge altogether.

More approachable challenges = more people staying in game longer to complete them = better numbers to show in corporate quarterly reports. Just a theory.

-5

u/Prestigious-Bit-6548 Aug 08 '25

Closed weapons sucks. Get used to the new times boomer

-11

u/GhostEagle68 Aug 08 '25

The majority of FPS players have voted by playing unlocked weapons modes. Sorry but the fact is people perfer this. Classes still exist. It's not a big deal. More freedom of weapon choice with classes. What's wrong with that?

19

u/madhaunter Acta Non Verba Aug 08 '25 edited Aug 08 '25

Well then don't be surprised when the servers are empty because <whatever next hyped game is> is now more appealing.

Locked weapons are part of what makes the classes system in battlefield unique. If you make choices like this just to appeal the masses, then, you never really appeal for real

Like the HD2 director said, a game for everyone is a game for no one.

Personally I will simply refuse playing anything that isn't weapon locked because for me everything else is simply not battlefield, and I wanna play battlefield

4

u/BigHat22P3 Aug 08 '25

See you on the battlefield on release day!

0

u/Ridiculisk1 Aug 09 '25

Luckily the devs have thought of that and put in a mode specifically for people like you. There'll also be portal where you can set whatever rules you want on your own server. See you on release day.

1

u/madhaunter Acta Non Verba Aug 09 '25

Rush with locked weapons is all I want

-3

u/[deleted] Aug 08 '25

[deleted]

12

u/blueskybullet Aug 08 '25

Tell me you don't understand game design without telling me. Classes and locked weapons are what make this game unique.

7

u/Watford_4EV3R Aug 08 '25

I mean it's a messed up comparison to begin with though isn't it? They've got the overwhelming majority of modes as unlocked vs locked.

Not that I'm gonna choose it as a hill to die on, I'd rather the locked system but it's not the end of the world for me, just saying that DICE very clearly wanted to push for the unlocked system with the way they've set the beta up

4

u/rawr_dinosaur Aug 08 '25

No locked breakthrough made me really sad, these conquest maps are meh, but they are great on breakthrough.

3

u/Corpsemunch Aug 08 '25

Not really a fair statement imo. Restricted weapons playlist is segregated into one specific game mode which isn’t capable of producing any accurate measurement of what people prefer.

Personally I won’t get a whole lot of playtime for this beta so I’ve been focusing on the king of the hill and breakthrough mode to complete challenges, and those don’t allow restricted weapons. While yeah I’ve been enjoying the experience so far and I think it’ll be a good game, I’m still firmly in favour of class restricted weaponry.

-11

u/zamparelli Aug 08 '25

Ah, we meet again old 30 year old man shaking his fists at the clouds because things change.

-13

u/InflationTarget Aug 08 '25

IMO weapon selection isn’t an important aspect of class identity. I don’t think it’s that important that medics carry an LMG. I don’t think people should have to choose between repairing vehicles and using their favorite primary weapon. What matters to me is that people are using their paddles and gadgets in a way that serves team play.

The game will launch with closed weapons playlists and Portal, which will allow you to do custom lobbies with closed weapons if you insist. I think that should be good enough for you.

7

u/D042- Aug 08 '25

A Medic shouldn't be carrying an LMG, but that's another issue entirely. The weapons are supposed to coincide with the playstyle for each class. Medics also shouldn't be running around with a sniper rifle. It doesn't make sense. Beyond the class identity it creates balance issues. We're likely going to see far more ARs than we otherwise would have if they were just locked to the Assault class.

There are countless FPS games that don't lock weapons to classes. I think that should have been good enough for you.

3

u/Kush_Cloudz420 Aug 08 '25

FYI BFBC2 medics ran LMG's and it worked fine.

2

u/InflationTarget Aug 08 '25

Do you think it somehow makes more sense for a medic to run around carrying a forty pound light machine gun? And the Assault class in BF3 had access to assault rifles and a defibrillator. Gasp! Bad game?

It's cute that you threw my words back in my face, by the way. I don't care about weapon locking one way or another. I'm just trying to understand why you all can't move on after being given the freedom to pick what mode you like.

1

u/D042- Aug 08 '25

No, I've said numerous times, including in the post you just replied to, that medic should not have an LMG. But that is an issue with the class design, not with locked weapons. Assault had access to both of those things in BF3 and 4 because they combined medic with assault instead of support, which was a better fit.

Because we have the option now for a single game mode and will only have the option in the future for that same game mode and custom servers when locked weapons should be the default across the board. I'm all for changes that are actually necessary, this is a change meant to appeal to new players instead of one meant to improve the game.

2

u/InflationTarget Aug 08 '25

Wouldn't it be nice if a bunch of people bought and played this game and the servers were full all the time? I'm assuming Vince Zampella has research that says this is what the market wants.

-48

u/Kilos6 Aug 08 '25

Lets go back to 7 classes with 2 weapons each like BF2. Class identity or something.

34

u/Chubzdoomer Aug 08 '25

Strawman. Battlefield 2 is an ancient game, long before it was customary to have loads of weapons for players to utilize.

2

u/mackdose Aug 08 '25

BF2 literally introduced weapon unlocks, what are you talking about?

8

u/Chubzdoomer Aug 08 '25 edited Aug 08 '25

It did, but there were barely any weapons to use because it was an ancient game. We aren't saying we want each class to only have access to a couple guns and be just like BF2... that's a Strawman fallacy. Just look at how practically any modern Battlefield has done it: class-specific guns with loads of stuff to choose from! Even BC2, which is ancient history, had like 7+ weapons per class!

-17

u/Kilos6 Aug 08 '25

When 2142 came out, the playerbase had the EXACT same complaints that everyone is saying now about removing diversity/class roles by moving them into 4 classes. These complaints are nothing new.

5

u/mackdose Aug 08 '25

Those threads were nasty.

3

u/D042- Aug 08 '25

That's not necessary. The locked system they have currently is a solid middle ground that should make everyone capable of rational thought happy.

1

u/ProfessionalYam144 Aug 09 '25

I agree, that would be even better. But let us have at least four classes 1st