QUOTE(Stryker9 @ 11/01/07 3:00pm)

Ah Yes, the gaming balance !! We have to put up with the loss
of RL for the players to be able to play both sides with equal
chance. This type of gameplay stifles tactical creativity which I
would love to see more of in gaming....
JIM
There are ways to do that too. Different soldier types, with limits of each type, etc.
Though what would probably be more realistic would be if people spawned in a weapons storehouse, and there was a limited number of weapons in each storehouse! Maybe the storehouse would repawn a new batch of weapons once or twice a game to simulate "re-supply" but if there were 20 PPSH's to start, they be gone after 20 different people picked them up until the re-supply. Then you make all guns realistic, so yes, perhaps a MP-44 is a weapon of choice for most soldiers, but you're going to run out and have to use the lesser weapons if your aren't careful! Same with tanks. Instead of re-spawning 20 second after they are destroyed, they'd actually only be occasional respawns during "re-supply" time.
Anyway, it'd be cool, but no one tries this stuff. IMO, games like Battelfield 1 and 2 really miss the boat by offering 1-2 gametypes. Why not 6-7 types, with this being one of them. So much work goes into making fancy grahpics and animations and stuff, and yet, innovatiive multiplayer gametypes seems to be lacking IMO.
For evidence, see MOH Airborne. Just 2 versions of basic CTF and deathmatch! Yeesh. What were those morons thinking? They deserve to have failed.