Bf3 scope glint, bf4 scope glint, bfh scope glint and bf1 scope glint!!

Comments

  • SLAYER_Of_PIGS
    685 postsMember, Battlefield 3, Battlefield 4, Battlefield Hardline, Battlefield, Battlefield 1, CTE, Battlefield V Member
    DingoKillr wrote: »
    DingoKillr wrote: »
    I hope they listen this thread and remove glint.

    If they 'listen' to this thread, they'll see all the people who want glint removed unable to come up with any valid reason, so it wont be removed.


    You should hope they dont listen to this thread.

    1) broken distance balance mechanic - as it impact players that are closer more then those further away.
    2) broken implementation - is visible when a player is inside and current highly visiable. Still trying to confirm if still visiable thru smoke and gas like BF4.
    3) we have not seen the weapons customization only weapons variants. So based on what we have that means at least 2 variants are not going to be used.
    4) drag and sweet spot encourage players to be at around 100m and no further then 400m. 100m is a range at which every weapon in BF1 can operate at.


    So what was you valid reason to keep?



    Even having passive 3D spotting any players that is more then 500m is a better anti-camping then glint.

    @DingoKillr

    1. It allows players to quickly visualize the point of danger, at 40m or 400m. Allowing them to retreat, not take you out. (You cited your opinion, not facts)

    2. Hiding in a house, shouldn't make you invisible, the implementation works as it does, because it would be abused, resulting in ranged campers with no negative impact for being terrible. (This was your opinion, not fact). Smoke should be fixed.

    3. There will be customization, nice strawman argument. (Your opinion that no customization would happen).

    4. No, it functions similar to drop, this is due to increased bullet velocity. (This was your incorrect opinion).

    Valid reason to keep? There is no valid argument against it. Maybe go learn what a fact is before you make another condescend list.

    555, Valid reason to keep? none after all what valid facts have you presented.

    1. Funny how you stated to like using 1895-TR up to 200m, why is that? So you do not give a warning to your target when you ADS but you are fine giving unfair treatment to those that use 1 scope type.

    2. You call it a opinion but it is fact it is fact that glint works inside a house and highly visible, YYHU6Ky.png It is your opinion that only 1 scope type on the BA should be visible from inside a house while all other scopes on BA and other weapons can remain invisible.

    3. Prove it. Vehicles are going to have variants and appear to have no customization.

    4. I don't know what you think you are answering but has nothing to do with what I was talking about. Glint does not encourage players to move forward drag and sweet spot do.

    lol this is the point that here I am light on a sniper who's job it is to remain unseen is frankly ridiculous.

    I agree
  • SLAYER_Of_PIGS
    685 postsMember, Battlefield 3, Battlefield 4, Battlefield Hardline, Battlefield, Battlefield 1, CTE, Battlefield V Member
    it was introduced in BF3 as a direct result of all the crying about snipers in BFBC 2.

    Got any proof?

    I have circumstantial evidence do you have any proof or evidence that I am incorrect ?.

    the fact that you only have circumstantial evidence is all the proof he needs.

    unless you can proof without reasonable doubt that glint was being added as a direct result of people crying, it simply remains an assumption on your part.
    nothing more and nothing less.

    Well I don't need to prove it because I'm not that bothered weather he you or anyone else believes it or not . That and you do realise that circumstantial evidence is acceptable in a court of law direct proof is better. However in the absence of direct proof circumstantial can and is used as proof to convict people. I also have an ability to use common sense to anyone that has even a small amount of it its obvious why they added glint.
    Trokey66 wrote: »
    it was introduced in BF3 as a direct result of all the crying about snipers in BFBC 2.

    Got any proof?

    I have circumstantial evidence do you have any proof or evidence that I am incorrect ?.

    My circumstantial evidence says yours is incorrect, prove me wrong.

    What is your evidence then ? . Mine is that BFBC 2 had OHK sniper rifles no sway no glint and the amount of crying over snipers was immense. Then in BF3 we get no OHK sway is added and so is glint. That's my evidence that glint was added as a result of crying so what's the evidence you have that says I'm wrong ?.

    That doesn't look like evidence to me. It looks like clutching at straws. It looks like putting 2 and 2 together and coming up with a lemon.

    Nothing gets nerfed or buffed because of people crying. Changes happen through obvious imbalance and/or well constructed posts and videos explaining balance issues or other ideas.

    People will cry about anything. If you really think devs change their game because of a bunch of crybabies then you are an utter fool.

    I've seen so many crying posts that dont result in any changes whatsoever to convince me its got nothing to do with crying.

    If it did, we'd see glint removed for the beta, because the amount of tears over the glint is higher than any other subject (i'm using tears per minute here).

    So you just as I thought you have no evidence and have resorted to insults.

    I have as much evidence as you do.

    I said if you think it was changed because of people crying you are a fool. That's not resorting to insults, thats giving an honest opinion on your opinion.

    So instead of trying to debate my post, you cry about somebody calling you a fool.

    Typical.

    If you cried less and instead actually debated, perhaps you might get the changes you so hope for.

    You do not have as much evidence as I do BF forums pre BF3 during the time of BFBC 2 where chocablock with people crying about snipers. There was much more crying over that then there has been crying over anything else. If you think the amount of crying over it did not contribute to the addition of glint in BF3 then its you that is the fool. my point is that dice should of and could of come up with something better by now.

    Show me where I said that nobody cried.

    Again, people crying is not evidence for reasons of change.
    it was introduced in BF3 as a direct result of all the crying about snipers in BFBC 2.

    Got any proof?

    I have circumstantial evidence do you have any proof or evidence that I am incorrect ?.

    the fact that you only have circumstantial evidence is all the proof he needs.

    unless you can proof without reasonable doubt that glint was being added as a direct result of people crying, it simply remains an assumption on your part.
    nothing more and nothing less.

    Well I don't need to prove it because I'm not that bothered weather he you or anyone else believes it or not . That and you do realise that circumstantial evidence is acceptable in a court of law direct proof is better. However in the absence of direct proof circumstantial can and is used as proof to convict people. I also have an ability to use common sense to anyone that has even a small amount of it its obvious why they added glint.
    Trokey66 wrote: »
    it was introduced in BF3 as a direct result of all the crying about snipers in BFBC 2.

    Got any proof?

    I have circumstantial evidence do you have any proof or evidence that I am incorrect ?.

    My circumstantial evidence says yours is incorrect, prove me wrong.

    What is your evidence then ? . Mine is that BFBC 2 had OHK sniper rifles no sway no glint and the amount of crying over snipers was immense. Then in BF3 we get no OHK sway is added and so is glint. That's my evidence that glint was added as a result of crying so what's the evidence you have that says I'm wrong ?.

    That doesn't look like evidence to me. It looks like clutching at straws. It looks like putting 2 and 2 together and coming up with a lemon.

    Nothing gets nerfed or buffed because of people crying. Changes happen through obvious imbalance and/or well constructed posts and videos explaining balance issues or other ideas.

    People will cry about anything. If you really think devs change their game because of a bunch of crybabies then you are an utter fool.

    I've seen so many crying posts that dont result in any changes whatsoever to convince me its got nothing to do with crying.

    If it did, we'd see glint removed for the beta, because the amount of tears over the glint is higher than any other subject (i'm using tears per minute here).

    So you just as I thought you have no evidence and have resorted to insults.

    I have as much evidence as you do.

    I said if you think it was changed because of people crying you are a fool. That's not resorting to insults, thats giving an honest opinion on your opinion.

    So instead of trying to debate my post, you cry about somebody calling you a fool.

    Typical.

    If you cried less and instead actually debated, perhaps you might get the changes you so hope for.

    Semantics doesn't mean you are behaving positively.

    Calling someone a fool in a round about way isn't much different than stating they are a fool.

    Typical that you didn't get a response to your question.

    Wtf? I basically said that his line of thought is stupid. How could I say that in a positive way? I explained my reasons for thinking that like I do. It wasn't just a "you're a fool" post.

    Out of the two of us, i'm the one actually backing up my views with reasons for thinking that way.

    And maybe if every anti glint crybaby in this thread wasnt labelling every pro glint poster as "sniper hater" they would have a slightly more friendly response from me.


    I'm still yet to see anybody post a legit reason why removing glint would not give snipers little reason to move.

    I didn't say you claimed no one cried about it I am saying you have zero evidence circumstantial or otherwise that it did not contribute to the addition of glint. Common sense tells us it was a contributing factor. As for a legit reason as to why removing it would not increase camping how do you know it was introduced in order to prevent camping ?. It introduction was simply a way of allowing players to know when a sniper was aiming at them it has nothing to do with camping. Yes that's my opinion but that's all any of us have unless you have a direct line to dice or can quote from an official press release then anything and everything any of us say is just opinion. At least that's true when discussing something along the lines of why we have glint and weather or not it should be removed.

    What you are doing is being slightly aggressive in your responses by saying that a view point is stupid or that I'm a fool . That kind of response is generally a characteristic response of someone who is losing a debate.

    We can't look at bc2 vs bf3? Didn't the sniping issue and camping become less of an issue?

    Yes it did become less of an issue that's true and glint played a part in that I'm not disagreeing there. I just feel that there must be better ways than sticking a big light on a class who's job it is to remain unseen. If you look at the glint in the screenshot in the post above that glare is obviously a bullet magnet and completely ridiculous is that really acceptable of a AAA title ?. I understand its use in BF3 but we have since had BF4/ BFHL and now BF1 is that not enough time to come up with a better solution ?.

    I agree
  • SLAYER_Of_PIGS
    685 postsMember, Battlefield 3, Battlefield 4, Battlefield Hardline, Battlefield, Battlefield 1, CTE, Battlefield V Member
    Glint must be removed
  • Trokey66
    9163 postsMember, Battlefield 3, Battlefield 4, Battlefield Hardline, Battlefield, Battlefield 1, CTE, Battlefield V Member
    Glint must be removed

    And replace it with what?
  • SLAYER_Of_PIGS
    685 postsMember, Battlefield 3, Battlefield 4, Battlefield Hardline, Battlefield, Battlefield 1, CTE, Battlefield V Member
    Trokey66 wrote: »
    Glint must be removed

    And replace it with what?

    With nothing what want u replace, they placed glint after bc2, now its time to remove, or i suggest to set a limit at number of sniper.
  • KingTolapsium
    5491 postsMember, Battlefield 3, Battlefield 4, Battlefield Hardline, Battlefield, Battlefield 1, CTE, BF1IncursionsAlpha, Battlefield V Member
    edited July 2016
    Trokey66 wrote: »
    Glint must be removed

    And replace it with what?

    With nothing what want u replace, they placed glint after bc2, now its time to remove, or i suggest to set a limit at number of sniper.

    So only a couple people camp?

    What if only bad players pick the sniper, locking out everyone else by camping so they wouldn't lose their spot as sniper.

    Wouldn't that make snipers camp even harder?
  • Trokey66
    9163 postsMember, Battlefield 3, Battlefield 4, Battlefield Hardline, Battlefield, Battlefield 1, CTE, Battlefield V Member
    Trokey66 wrote: »
    Glint must be removed

    And replace it with what?

    With nothing what want u replace, they placed glint after bc2, now its time to remove, or i suggest to set a limit at number of sniper.

    Why is it 'time' to remove it?

    And setting limits on class players is bloody stupid because limit one class, limit them all.
  • rock1obsta
    3819 postsMember, Battlefield 3, Battlefield 4, Battlefield Hardline, Battlefield, Battlefield 1, Battlefield V Member
    A1G1U1 wrote: »
    A1G1U1 wrote: »
    It's just absurd and unreal as f*ck right now. Your scope shouldn't be lit up like a sun on the sky. Especially on night maps. Sun needs to be in front of you to make it happen. If it's in your rear 180, it won't. In real life, if you suspect glint is gonna cause you problems, there's a cover you can attach to your scope (can't remember the name of it in english), to prevent it from happening. But I suspect there's more money in pleasing all the people crying about snipers so whatever. Just remove them all together and don't trick people.
    Are you a hardscoper

    The exact opposite.

    It's just stupid.
    I remember when I came back to Bf after a while and saw somebody halfway accross the map and thought like "damn, why are these dumb people using tactical light". Then I realized it's a camping sh*thead with a sniper rifle in his hands. Just voiced my opinion. If anything, I think they could take it down a little bit so it wouldn't be so laughable.

    Lol....thats what I thought when I first noticed the glint. I went on BL & asked why some clownpuncher was using a flashlight with a sniper rifle :p

    In all seriousness, keep it, but tone it down and make it situational, i.e. in direct light.
  • SLAYER_Of_PIGS
    685 postsMember, Battlefield 3, Battlefield 4, Battlefield Hardline, Battlefield, Battlefield 1, CTE, Battlefield V Member
    edited July 2016
    Trokey66 wrote: »
    Glint must be removed

    And replace it with what?

    With nothing what want u replace, they placed glint after bc2, now its time to remove, or i suggest to set a limit at number of sniper.

    So only a couple people camp?

    What if only bad players pick the sniper, locking out everyone else by camping so they wouldn't lose their spot as sniper.

    Wouldn't that make snipers camp even harder?

    O my god u are so obsessed by what other players do, think to make your best. Others players do what they want
  • SLAYER_Of_PIGS
    685 postsMember, Battlefield 3, Battlefield 4, Battlefield Hardline, Battlefield, Battlefield 1, CTE, Battlefield V Member
    edited July 2016
    Trokey66 wrote: »
    Trokey66 wrote: »
    Glint must be removed

    And replace it with what?

    With nothing what want u replace, they placed glint after bc2, now its time to remove, or i suggest to set a limit at number of sniper.

    Why is it 'time' to remove it?

    And setting limits on class players is bloody stupid because limit one class, limit them all.

    Have u ever played sometime with number of snipers limited? I played on pc with bc2 and all servers set this thing, are they all stupid?! No! So dont say bullshits
  • KingTolapsium
    5491 postsMember, Battlefield 3, Battlefield 4, Battlefield Hardline, Battlefield, Battlefield 1, CTE, BF1IncursionsAlpha, Battlefield V Member
    Trokey66 wrote: »
    Glint must be removed

    And replace it with what?

    With nothing what want u replace, they placed glint after bc2, now its time to remove, or i suggest to set a limit at number of sniper.

    So only a couple people camp?

    What if only bad players pick the sniper, locking out everyone else by camping so they wouldn't lose their spot as sniper.

    Wouldn't that make snipers camp even harder?

    O my god u are so obsessed by what other players do, think to make your best. Others players do what they want

    Lol, it's all about what other people do. That's what balance is about.

    I play well, regardless.

    I am here to discuss balance. Not trying to boost my own playstyles.
  • SLAYER_Of_PIGS
    685 postsMember, Battlefield 3, Battlefield 4, Battlefield Hardline, Battlefield, Battlefield 1, CTE, Battlefield V Member
    edited July 2016
    Trokey66 wrote: »
    Glint must be removed

    And replace it with what?

    With nothing what want u replace, they placed glint after bc2, now its time to remove, or i suggest to set a limit at number of sniper.

    So only a couple people camp?

    What if only bad players pick the sniper, locking out everyone else by camping so they wouldn't lose their spot as sniper.

    Wouldn't that make snipers camp even harder?

    O my god u are so obsessed by what other players do, think to make your best. Others players do what they want

    Lol, it's all about what other people do. That's what balance is about.

    I play well, regardless.

    I am here to discuss balance. Not trying to boost my own playstyles.

    Balance!? Who said glint is for balance?
    Bc2, bc1, bf2, bf1943, bf vitnam, bf 1942 were balanced without glint. Have u ever heard about this games?
    So i say u again and again, glint, is introduced for permit to others players to avoid snipers, they put it after bc2, when producers were tired to hear so many complains about to be killed by snipers. How many times i have to say it?
  • owltro
    3356 postsMember, Battlefield 4, Battlefield Hardline, Battlefield, Battlefield 1 Member
    Trokey66 wrote: »
    Glint must be removed

    And replace it with what?

    With nothing what want u replace, they placed glint after bc2, now its time to remove, or i suggest to set a limit at number of sniper.

    So only a couple people camp?

    What if only bad players pick the sniper, locking out everyone else by camping so they wouldn't lose their spot as sniper.

    Wouldn't that make snipers camp even harder?

    O my god u are so obsessed by what other players do, think to make your best. Others players do what they want

    Lol, it's all about what other people do. That's what balance is about.

    I play well, regardless.

    I am here to discuss balance. Not trying to boost my own playstyles.

    Balance!? Who said glint is for balance?
    Bc2, bc1, bf2, bf1943, bf vitnam, bf 1942 were balanced without glint. Have u ever heard about this games?
    So i say u again and again, glint, is introduced for permit to others players to avoid snipers, they put it after bc2, when producers were tired to hear so many complains about to be killed by snipers. How many times i have to say it?
    They can remove glint, but if they do, they gotta add vapor trails.
  • SLAYER_Of_PIGS
    685 postsMember, Battlefield 3, Battlefield 4, Battlefield Hardline, Battlefield, Battlefield 1, CTE, Battlefield V Member
    owltro wrote: »
    Trokey66 wrote: »
    Glint must be removed

    And replace it with what?

    With nothing what want u replace, they placed glint after bc2, now its time to remove, or i suggest to set a limit at number of sniper.

    So only a couple people camp?

    What if only bad players pick the sniper, locking out everyone else by camping so they wouldn't lose their spot as sniper.

    Wouldn't that make snipers camp even harder?

    O my god u are so obsessed by what other players do, think to make your best. Others players do what they want

    Lol, it's all about what other people do. That's what balance is about.

    I play well, regardless.

    I am here to discuss balance. Not trying to boost my own playstyles.

    Balance!? Who said glint is for balance?
    Bc2, bc1, bf2, bf1943, bf vitnam, bf 1942 were balanced without glint. Have u ever heard about this games?
    So i say u again and again, glint, is introduced for permit to others players to avoid snipers, they put it after bc2, when producers were tired to hear so many complains about to be killed by snipers. How many times i have to say it?
    They can remove glint, but if they do, they gotta add vapor trails.

    Why?
  • owltro
    3356 postsMember, Battlefield 4, Battlefield Hardline, Battlefield, Battlefield 1 Member
    edited July 2016
    owltro wrote: »
    Trokey66 wrote: »
    Glint must be removed

    And replace it with what?

    With nothing what want u replace, they placed glint after bc2, now its time to remove, or i suggest to set a limit at number of sniper.

    So only a couple people camp?

    What if only bad players pick the sniper, locking out everyone else by camping so they wouldn't lose their spot as sniper.

    Wouldn't that make snipers camp even harder?

    O my god u are so obsessed by what other players do, think to make your best. Others players do what they want

    Lol, it's all about what other people do. That's what balance is about.

    I play well, regardless.

    I am here to discuss balance. Not trying to boost my own playstyles.

    Balance!? Who said glint is for balance?
    Bc2, bc1, bf2, bf1943, bf vitnam, bf 1942 were balanced without glint. Have u ever heard about this games?
    So i say u again and again, glint, is introduced for permit to others players to avoid snipers, they put it after bc2, when producers were tired to hear so many complains about to be killed by snipers. How many times i have to say it?
    They can remove glint, but if they do, they gotta add vapor trails.

    Why?
    There's gotta be some way of being able to tell where the shooting sniper is, considering how one well-placed bullet could kill you. Really, if it were up to me, I'd add a scope glint/bullet trail combo based on the weather.
    SUNNY
    • scope glint
    • no bullet trail
    -
    FOGGY
    • no scope glint
    • bullet trail
    -
    RAINY
    • weak scope glint
    • weak vapor trail

    What do you think, pig slayer? Of course, if they keep scope glint, they'd have to fix the indoors thing, the dust/smoke thing, etc.
  • Shadowmane01
    209 postsMember, Battlefield 3, Battlefield 4, Battlefield, Medal of Honor Warfighter Member
    owltro wrote: »
    owltro wrote: »
    Trokey66 wrote: »
    Glint must be removed

    And replace it with what?

    With nothing what want u replace, they placed glint after bc2, now its time to remove, or i suggest to set a limit at number of sniper.

    So only a couple people camp?

    What if only bad players pick the sniper, locking out everyone else by camping so they wouldn't lose their spot as sniper.

    Wouldn't that make snipers camp even harder?

    O my god u are so obsessed by what other players do, think to make your best. Others players do what they want

    Lol, it's all about what other people do. That's what balance is about.

    I play well, regardless.

    I am here to discuss balance. Not trying to boost my own playstyles.

    Balance!? Who said glint is for balance?
    Bc2, bc1, bf2, bf1943, bf vitnam, bf 1942 were balanced without glint. Have u ever heard about this games?
    So i say u again and again, glint, is introduced for permit to others players to avoid snipers, they put it after bc2, when producers were tired to hear so many complains about to be killed by snipers. How many times i have to say it?
    They can remove glint, but if they do, they gotta add vapor trails.

    Why?
    There's gotta be some way of being able to tell where the shooting sniper is, considering how one well-placed bullet could kill you. Really, if it were up to me, I'd add a scope glint/bullet trail combo based on the weather.
    SUNNY
    • scope glint
    • no bullet trail
    -
    FOGGY
    • no scope glint
    • bullet trail
    -
    RAINY
    • weak scope glint
    • weak vapor trail

    What do you think, pig slayer? Of course, if they keep scope glint, they'd have to fix the indoors thing, the dust/smoke thing, etc.

    I would be ok with vapour trail and maybe tracers for low light situations. In all honesty though I don't think that's going to happen but glint will stay. Glint gives a sniper away before he takes the shot vapour trail only happens after the shot has been taken. Glint is there so you can take action before you get a bullet through your cranium. I'm not a fan of it but my guess is like 3D spotting its here to stay.
  • DingoKillr
    4356 postsMember, Battlefield 3, Battlefield 4, Battlefield, Battlefield 1, CTE, BF1IncursionsAlpha, Battlefield V Member
    owltro wrote: »
    owltro wrote: »
    Trokey66 wrote: »
    Glint must be removed

    And replace it with what?

    With nothing what want u replace, they placed glint after bc2, now its time to remove, or i suggest to set a limit at number of sniper.

    So only a couple people camp?

    What if only bad players pick the sniper, locking out everyone else by camping so they wouldn't lose their spot as sniper.

    Wouldn't that make snipers camp even harder?

    O my god u are so obsessed by what other players do, think to make your best. Others players do what they want

    Lol, it's all about what other people do. That's what balance is about.

    I play well, regardless.

    I am here to discuss balance. Not trying to boost my own playstyles.

    Balance!? Who said glint is for balance?
    Bc2, bc1, bf2, bf1943, bf vitnam, bf 1942 were balanced without glint. Have u ever heard about this games?
    So i say u again and again, glint, is introduced for permit to others players to avoid snipers, they put it after bc2, when producers were tired to hear so many complains about to be killed by snipers. How many times i have to say it?
    They can remove glint, but if they do, they gotta add vapor trails.

    Why?
    There's gotta be some way of being able to tell where the shooting sniper is, considering how one well-placed bullet could kill you. Really, if it were up to me, I'd add a scope glint/bullet trail combo based on the weather.
    SUNNY
    • scope glint
    • no bullet trail
    -
    FOGGY
    • no scope glint
    • bullet trail
    -
    RAINY
    • weak scope glint
    • weak vapor trail

    What do you think, pig slayer? Of course, if they keep scope glint, they'd have to fix the indoors thing, the dust/smoke thing, etc.

    Those that arguing for Glint as a distance balancer talk about Sniper being kilometer away. In BF1 with bullet drag that is not possible and we don't have the 20x or 40x scopes.

    It is not about Snipers it is about 1 scope. Why does there need to be a way to tell if the player is using a high power scope?
    If you are using the Gewehr in its sweet spot you are less than 126m . There is no difference currently in stats between variants only the scope of 6x compared to 4x. Yet the 6x has glint.

    You are talking about vapor trail for high power scopes only while other weapons with low powered scopes have none, yet both can be used at the same distance. Unless you place on all weapons I don't see the point.

    A better solution to long distance is to have all weapons have a vapor trail or glint only visible after a set distance.
  • owltro
    3356 postsMember, Battlefield 4, Battlefield Hardline, Battlefield, Battlefield 1 Member
    edited July 2016
    DingoKillr wrote: »
    owltro wrote: »
    owltro wrote: »
    Trokey66 wrote: »
    Glint must be removed

    And replace it with what?

    With nothing what want u replace, they placed glint after bc2, now its time to remove, or i suggest to set a limit at number of sniper.

    So only a couple people camp?

    What if only bad players pick the sniper, locking out everyone else by camping so they wouldn't lose their spot as sniper.

    Wouldn't that make snipers camp even harder?

    O my god u are so obsessed by what other players do, think to make your best. Others players do what they want

    Lol, it's all about what other people do. That's what balance is about.

    I play well, regardless.

    I am here to discuss balance. Not trying to boost my own playstyles.

    Balance!? Who said glint is for balance?
    Bc2, bc1, bf2, bf1943, bf vitnam, bf 1942 were balanced without glint. Have u ever heard about this games?
    So i say u again and again, glint, is introduced for permit to others players to avoid snipers, they put it after bc2, when producers were tired to hear so many complains about to be killed by snipers. How many times i have to say it?
    They can remove glint, but if they do, they gotta add vapor trails.

    Why?
    There's gotta be some way of being able to tell where the shooting sniper is, considering how one well-placed bullet could kill you. Really, if it were up to me, I'd add a scope glint/bullet trail combo based on the weather.
    SUNNY
    • scope glint
    • no bullet trail
    -
    FOGGY
    • no scope glint
    • bullet trail
    -
    RAINY
    • weak scope glint
    • weak vapor trail

    What do you think, pig slayer? Of course, if they keep scope glint, they'd have to fix the indoors thing, the dust/smoke thing, etc.

    Those that arguing for Glint as a distance balancer talk about Sniper being kilometer away. In BF1 with bullet drag that is not possible and we don't have the 20x or 40x scopes.

    It is not about Snipers it is about 1 scope. Why does there need to be a way to tell if the player is using a high power scope?
    If you are using the Gewehr in its sweet spot you are less than 126m . There is no difference currently in stats between variants only the scope of 6x compared to 4x. Yet the 6x has glint.

    You are talking about vapor trail for high power scopes only while other weapons with low powered scopes have none, yet both can be used at the same distance. Unless you place on all weapons I don't see the point.

    A better solution to long distance is to have all weapons have a vapor trail or glint only visible after a set distance.
    good point, then let's remove scope glint. vapor trail is stil necessary, although this is how it should be, IMO
    SUNNY
    barely visible vapor trails
    -
    FOGGY
    easily visible vapor trails
    -
    RAINY
    visible vapor trails
    I base this on the assumption that humidity affects the visibility of vapor trails. Can anybody confirm or deny this?
  • ShinoobyIsOP
    61 postsMember Member
    @KingTolapsium, Ive been watching your arguements the last couple of pages as I took a break from this thread, and I have a bone to pick and a few critisims to make.
    .
    You have been knocking everyone upside the head with constant "get gud" remarks, and explaining how glint does not affect a skilled recon. Im going to stop you right there, thinking that you have the right to speak on behalf of skilled recons at all is insulting. Im a skilled recon, and Ill speak for myself. Your telling people to PTFO, well why dont you PTFO some more, and get gud yourself. As long as you feel its ok to belittle someone elses opinion here with constant get gud remarks, ill keep reminding you that your worth to your team is half that of mine. SO why dont you stop promoting these noobish mechanics that dumb the game down so you can just about contribute to your team on the back of this cheap mechanic. Glint is a noobish crutch.
    .
    I think the majority of us here are asking for it to be tweaked so it dosent punish recons PTFOing, and does punish recons that are off the map not helping the team. I dont think this is an unrerasonable ask, yet according to some of the responses here, it should be glaringly apparent that the goal of some is to watch this class burn to the ground. Considering it takes ~0.3500 of a second to react to glint according to the average lag (assuming that is 100ms ping, a generous margin) and the time it takes for sight-brain-reaction to happen, it should be clear that even the greatest recon player to have ever lived, or will ever live, is still going to suffer the effects of this crutch of a mechanic. Unless your claiming to be so good as to constantly quickscope headshot the majority of enemies you come across in less than a third of a second, and would like to submit some video evidence of you doing so, Im going to debunk your claim as total BS.
    .
    Actually much of what you are saying seems to be one big logical err, on your part. You saying "balance is balance", as the closing point to your non arguement, is a nothing statement. Many have proved that it does affect recons running around PTFOing at the exact same ranges as their squadmates, only trying to keep engagements in their preferrered range of 80-130m, while enemies try and close the gap to wreck recons in their preferred range. Yet only this class suffers this HUGE negative. If you suggest using an acog or RDS, please dont. Ive already explained why this is silly in a previous post, you may aswell be using an automatic if your using those sights. Your throwing away the whole point of the class, and the classes stregnths.
    .
    As ive asked others in this thread, id like to ask you three questions so everyone here can get an idea of your real motives, to see if your trying to nerf this class because you want to see it burn to the ground, and actually dont care about balance, or if you are on the pursuit of real class balance, and dont want to remove depth from this game. Im sure youll find a way to skirt around answering it though, just like @Trokey66 & @Jihad_Jockey ....Now where did that popcorn gif go?!

    Jeff191919 wrote: »
    I am suggesting we look at heavily tweaking the mechanic so that it punishes snipers camping in the hills, but does not punish recons running around capping/defending flags. My question to you is: If DICE implemented some changes to scope glare, why is it that you would object to this? Why would this now be a problem if it still succeeds in punishing useless recons? If its "supposedly" such a minimal, or non existant problem for recons PTOing, as you and others have clearly stated many many times, why would it bother you to see it tweaked as above? If not for a completely unjust hatred of the class itself...




  • Turban_Legend80
    4753 postsMember, Battlefield 3, Battlefield 4, Battlefield Member
    I dont need to prove glint is there to prevent campers, because clearly i've already stated I believe it was added for balance reasons. The reason I want it to stay is because removing it would give the sniper little reason to move - I dont see how that is beneficial to a game that has included major changes to promote teamwork.
    @Jeff191919 - This is my stance on glint in case you missed it last time, or the other 10-20 times i have posted it in this thread.
    I can agree tweaking it a bit more might be needed. But its already been tweaked for BF1 and the snipers are still clearly crying. So whos to say any more tweaks to the glint will stop snipers crying?
This discussion has been closed.