summarize the text:  What's up guys my name is Ace, and a little while ago I saw a Reddit thread pop up, and I thought this would actually make for a great video topic. Today I wanted to share a list of the primary elements in Call of Duty Vanguard that I hope never see the light of day again in Call of Duty. Now just to be clear this video isn't going to be talking about any bugs or technical issues or really specific nitpicky balancing items as well. These are more so the conscious design elements that they've introduced in Vanguard or in some cases brought back from some previous games that I just feel don't add to the gameplay experience at all. And in many cases, they take away from the gameplay experience for me. Now, obviously with a video like this, it is going to be highly subjective, so it's totally fine if you guys disagree. and if you do with any of these points, please let me know why in the comments down below. And diving right in, keeping in mind this is in no particular order, let's start it off with a brand new feature that they introduced in Vanguard that we've never seen before in Call of Duty, and this is the suppression system. Now for those that aren't aware, this is a very slight slowdown that you get to your movement speed when an enemy shoots near you. This also applies if they're hitting you, but even if they're near misses and they're shooting near you, your movement speed will be slowed down slightly. Now to be clear, I don't think this is a major annoyance with the game or anything. It's not a game breaker for me, and if it really is a problem, you can always use the dauntless perk in order to fully counter suppression. But at the end of the day, when I look at the suppression mechanic, the big question that pops into my mind is what does this add to the gameplay experience? How does this make the gameplay any better than the alternative, which is not having it at all? And I really just can't think of a solid answer for this. I don't feel players should be rewarded in any way whatsoever if they're missing their target. And also, it's not like this is a fun mechanic to use. This doesn't really add anything to the person that's shooting at an enemy player. It doesn't make them feel good about their gameplay or anything. It's just one of those useless sort of mechanics that was introduced that only really serves to add frustration. And going off of that, this just brings us to the next thing on my list, which is the piercing vision perk, which does work hand in hand with the suppression mechanics. So when you shoot near a target, or if you shoot a target directly, they will glow through walls for a very short period of time. In my opinion, a mechanic like this just doesn't fit well with the gameplay of Call of Duty. In a lot of ways, it can really feel kind of cheap, like you're getting free kills that you really don't deserve to be getting by any means and again yes there is a counter to this if you use dauntless it completely counters suppression which means it completely counters piercing vision but with this one i just feel like it can take away from the integrity of the gameplay design in general i don't think there should be anything in the game that allows you to see players through walls just by shooting in their direction. If it's a piece of equipment or something like a snapshot grenade that we've seen in the past, I can live with that. That's an interesting piece of equipment that can be used in very interesting and tactical ways. But when it comes to just getting that free information for shooting at an enemy player, it just cheapens the experience with gunfights. And I guess just on a fundamental level, I disagree with having a mechanic like this in place, even though at least in my opinion this isn't a game breaking element, it's just a questionable element that I feel Call of Duty is better off without. Moving on to the next element that was introduced with Vanguard that I hope we don't see return, at least not to the same extent. This is destructible environments. Now I do anticipate this one might be slightly more controversial. I think there may be some players out there that actually quite like the destructible environments, but to me, they've always just felt more like a gimmick than anything. Like if all of the destructible walls and areas on the map were simply removed by default, so it was as if they had all been destroyed already. Would that really have a significant impact on how that map plays? In my opinion, no. I think if anything, it just leads to some more frustrating situations, like those times where you have a destructible wall that you should be able to just sprint through and break through, and yet the interaction with that is really inconsistent. So sometimes it works just fine and you sprint through it just fine, and then other times you don't do anything different, or at least it seems like you're doing nothing different. You're at a full tactical sprint, and yet you just run into that wall and stop suddenly, and it totally screws up your route. Additionally, I've noticed a lot of strange interactions with the areas where there is destruction. So there's often inconsistency with how aim assist works through a destructible area. So you might have one of these areas that has been completely destroyed, and yet when you're aiming at an enemy through that gap, you get no aim assist sometimes, and that's almost definitely due to the fact that that's a destructible area, and it's like the aim assist system is still picking up some cover between you and the enemy player. Or sometimes when you look through one of these destructible areas that's still fully intact, you will see enemy name tags through that. So sometimes these destructible areas give you a false sense of safety because enemies shouldn't be able enemy name tags through that. So sometimes these destructible areas give you a false sense of safety because enemies shouldn't be able to see you through that, but it turns out they can via your name tag. And as a result, I would say generally speaking, these have more of a negative impact than a positive impact on the gameplay. With one key exception, and this is the destructible doors. If Call of Duty continues to insist on bringing doors into the multiplayer experience, I really hope they follow the Vanguard model by making it so you can shoot holes through them and see targets through them just fine if you do that, or you can straight up destroy them entirely and eliminate them from the equation. In my mind, that's the right way to handle doors if there are going to be doors in multiplayer. After that, let's talk about something that Vanguard didn't introduce, but they have carried forward from a previous Call of Duty game. And this is the Modern Warfare 2019 style mini map that doesn't display unsuppressed gunfire as a red dot, unless your team has a UAV or spy plane in the air, or in the case of Vanguard, unless you're running the radar perk. Now I've discussed this topic at great length in the past, and it is something I could easily talk about for like a full 20 minutes, so I don't necessarily have time to get across all my points in this one video. But I'll just pick out a couple of my stronger arguments against this style of minimap. And one of the biggest arguments is I feel this style of minimap significantly slows down the general gameplay pacing compared to the older style minimap that did show unsuppressed fire on the map as a red dot for everyone. The way I've seen this play out over the years is the more information you give players as to the general location of where enemies are or the positions where enemies are camping, the more likely those players are to seek out fights. Whereas when you hide that information, the fear of the unknown causes people to play a lot more cautiously and a lot more slowly. And on top of this, when you fire an unsilenced gun, now you know the enemies know where you're going to be, and it's likely in your best interest to keep on the move and reposition yourself. Additionally, another argument I have against this is I feel it contributes to more snowballing in games, where when one team starts to gain an advantage, that advantage grows exponentially and it leads to more blowouts. And the reason this happens with this current style of minimap is the moment your team gets a spy plane or UAV in the air, now you not only get the sweeping effect with the UAV, which is the primary reason that you would want to earn a UAV or a spy plane, you also now get a traditional minimap where anybody that fires an unsuppressed gun, they will show up on the radar, whereas on the flip side for the other team that doesn't have that spy plane in the air, they don't get any of that same information for unsuppressed fire. So there's now a much larger gap between a team that has a spy plane up and a team that doesn't have a spy plane up, and that effect can absolutely snowball because the first team to get a spy plane up, now they're more likely to get more and more spy planes up than anybody on the enemy team that doesn't have that same information. Now, moving on to the next element on my list here that I hope never returns to the Call of Duty franchise, this is the lack of factions, or at the very least, the lack of an ability to very clearly identify who is an enemy and who is a teammate by simply looking at the character model. Without any heads up display elements, no name tags, none of that, just looking at a character model you should be able to easily tell if that's a friendly or an enemy player. And that can be done in multiple ways. Either have factions, so if you are on the generic good guy team, then everybody that's on your team will be a member of that good guy squad. Whereas if you're on the quote unquote bad guy team, then all of your enemies are going to be the good guy team. Either that, or if you are going to mix and match player models so that you can use the same character no matter which side you're playing on, then I feel there needs to be some clear distinction on the character model that will tell you whether that's a friend or a foe. Again, without relying on any name tags or anything or peering, because sometimes those appear inconsistently, or sometimes you see one of those name tags, but it turns out it's your teammate's name tag who's across the map, and it just happened to appear directly over the head of one of the enemy players. So if that's the case, go the Black Ops 4 route. Put some red lights on the character models for enemy players and green lights or blue lights for teammates. Simply put, the information should be made available to you so at a glance at a character model without a heads-up display element, you should be able to tell if that's a friend or a foe. Next up, something that Vanguard introduced that in my experience seems to be universally hated. This is the MVP screen, as well as MVP voting. And my issue with this isn't so much that it exists, it's more so that it feels like it's just a massive waste of time. I understand why they want to integrate something like this. They want to be able to have more cosmetics that you can show off to other players, and they want to be able to market those fancy cosmetics that they make, and by forcing people to watch that, that's one way to do it. So if something like this will return in the future, at the very least, I hope they allow you to do a little bit more while this is going on. Maybe they could have a tab that's on the side, so they still sort of force you to watch the MVP animations, but at the same time, you can see this tab, and and you can scroll through it and maybe see more metrics from the match you just played. Maybe you could see all the medals you earned in that match or any of the challenge progress that you've made or any challenges you've completed. Why not give access to all of that and provide some utility to this to players so they don't feel as though their time is just being wasted and they don't feel as though they're being exploited and marketed to in a game they've already paid full price for. Next up, something that Vanguard did that isn't necessarily completely new, but I feel like they just sort of took it to the next level. This is extremely long weapon grinds. In Vanguard, especially if you're playing without double XP, it takes an extremely long time to go from level 1 to the maximum level for most guns. And when you add to the fact that many of the really good attachments are unlocked super late in a weapons level, that leads to a lot of frustrating gameplay imbalances for a long period of time. It's okay if there's some imbalance there as long as it's not extended for too long, but I feel like there is just too much of a gap for too long between players that don't have a weapon leveled up versus players that do have their weapon fully leveled. And I think this has definitely created issues in Vanguard where a lot of players just disengage from the system because the grind is too long and they just don't have the time or the interest in putting that much time just to max out a weapon. Now, if they want to maintain the ability for players to grind for longer, for those that like the longer grinds, I think the perfect solution is bring back weapon prestiging. We've seen this in many previous Call of Duty games, where once you max out a weapon, give us the ability to prestige it, start from scratch again, and work our way through the levels, unlocking all our attachments again. And in doing so, give players a reward, like the ability to put their clan tag on the weapon model, or maybe have a kill counter or something. These are all things that we've had access to in the past, and I feel those systems worked quite well. So why not bring them back? And so the next thing I've got on my list, this is having three combat pacing options. Now, to be clear, in many ways I actually like the combat pacing system, and I think it's got a lot of positives to it. And I think with some adjustments and iteration, we may end up with a great combat pacing system in a future Call of Duty game. So I'm not saying I want to get rid of it entirely, I just think having three separate options breaks up the player base far more than is necessary, and I feel this does harm the game overall. In my opinion, at most, we should have two combat pacing options. A classic option, which is more of like the standard traditional 6v6 style pacing, and then a blitz or chaos style option, which will provide a higher player count on the same maps, and those matches will obviously be a whole lot more chaotic. And don't get me wrong, this isn't because I hate the assault pacing or anything. I think assault plays great. I just don't like the fact that the player base is now split up three different ways, and because of that, it's not like you can consistently find assault matches anyway. If you want to play assault, you're most likely going to be playing a whole lot of blitz matches or tactical matches because you won't find the player base in Assault. But finally, for my list of the top elements from Vanguard that I hope we never see again in Call of Duty, and this one, unfortunately, I'm not feeling super optimistic about, but I'm still gonna say it anyway, this is whatever spawn system they are currently using. I know a lot of people will call it squad spawns, but in Domination, at least, that's not the case. It's not a squad spawn system based on many, many hours of careful spawn analysis. But whatever they've got going on right now, it is far worse than the traditional spawning system that we used to see in Call of Duty games. So I don't know what they screwed up, starting with Modern Warfare 2019 spawns, which appears to have carried over at least largely to Vanguard. with Modern Warfare 2019 spawns, which appears to have carried over at least largely to Vanguard, but whatever the changes they made to the spawn algorithm, I really don't wanna see it return to the Call of Duty franchise. And with that, that's pretty much time to wrap up the video, but I guess there's one last thing that I should at least just mention here, and that's disbanding lobbies. I know I've talked about this at great length in the past. I think this has had a very serious negative impact on the Call of Duty franchise, and I absolutely despise it, but that's all I'm going to say about that there. And this is where I want to hear from you guys in the comment section below. What are the conscious design elements that were made for Vanguard that you hope never see the light of day again in a Call of Duty game? And I just want to remind you, we're not talking about technical issues and bugs, we're talking about conscious design decisions. If you enjoyed the video, a like rating is always appreciated. And don't forget to subscribe for more if you haven't already. I'll talk to you guys next time. Thanks for watching!