Weekly BF

Has anyone else switched games because of the recent patch?

Comments

  • BrianLocal1
    510 postsMember, Battlefield 4, Battlefield Hardline, Battlefield, Battlefield 1, Battlefield V Member
    I've been playing less, but COD WW2 kinda sucks now, so I havn't found a better WW sim yet.

    Did they add infinite sprint or it still goes on cooldown after a few seconds?

    Yeah cooldown. I just find it kinda low on content and they try to sell you supply drops too much.
  • kreepypriest
    393 postsMember, Battlefield 4, Battlefield Hardline, Battlefield, Battlefield 1, CTE, Battlefield V Member
    being going back and forth from battle front 2 and cod once and a while..if i have a few platoon members on i’ll load up bf1
  • grrlpurple
    823 postsMember, Battlefield, Battlefield 1, CTE, Battlefield V Member
    I haven't moved on but am playing less and enjoying it a whole lot less than that.
  • HANSGRUBER30
    3018 postsMember, Battlefield 3, Battlefield 4, Battlefield Hardline, Battlefield, Battlefield 1, CTE, Battlefield V Member
    edited February 2018
    This TTK patch has taken the jam out of my doughnut and I have been playing less, just a suggestion DICE LA, don't let the work experience boy mess up one of EA's premier titles with his idea on how to make the game more forgiving for the Hellriegel users and forcing most other classes to stay back.

    Had a go last night, I was going to play the Sea of Thieves beta but my friends wanted some help playing the new operation campaign with trying to getting the attackers going, it was a no go, we didn't even take the first sector.

    We have the last DLC coming out at the end of the month I couldn't careless.

    Sea of Thieves is out on the 20th of march which I'm hyped for, the last game I was this hyped for was BF1.........oh well what a sad way to end a brilliant games life

    P.S is any one else playing the Sea of Thieves beta? if so do you need a new crew hand?
  • RRedux
    672 postsMember, Battlefield 3, Battlefield 4, Battlefield, Battlefield 1, Battlefield V Member
    Been playing it less, the performance issues just get worse and worse, the constant laggyness is making it less enjoyable to play.
  • quietstormNC
    126 postsMember, Battlefield 4, Battlefield Hardline, Battlefield, Battlefield 1, CTE, Battlefield V Member
    edited February 2018
    i think the slow TTK is what drove most players away in the first place!
  • Pelliy
    2228 postsMember, Battlefield 4, Battlefield, Battlefield 1, CTE, BF1IncursionsAlpha, Battlefield V Member
    MigueTK wrote: »

    I don't consider myself a pro player but at least above average, and I've noticed that even if I get the drop on someone they turn around and kill me with much higher consistency. That's even if you can get close enough to surprise them since CQC is too fast now that favors automatic weapons.


    I'm curious to know what average in this game is to you. No offense, not trying to insult you or anything but your stats say that you are average. I am having fun with TTk2.0 but its not without faults and it definitely needs some work, especially the LMGs.
  • MigueTK
    679 postsMember, Battlefield 3, Battlefield 4, Battlefield, Battlefield 1, CTE Member
    MigueTK wrote: »

    I don't consider myself a pro player but at least above average, and I've noticed that even if I get the drop on someone they turn around and kill me with much higher consistency. That's even if you can get close enough to surprise them since CQC is too fast now that favors automatic weapons.


    I'm curious to know what average in this game is to you. No offense, not trying to insult you or anything but your stats say that you are average. I am having fun with TTk2.0 but its not without faults and it definitely needs some work, especially the LMGs.

    I would consider an average player as someone who doesn't join the forums, and doesn't read the patch notes, they also don't know about some of the other game mechanics like squad orders and callouts. And yeah my stats aren't good since I have 1/10th the amount of play time on BF1 and am trying to unlock the remaining DLC weapons. I never saw BF1 as a "complete" game and played it pretty casually since launch.
  • RomioiStrategos
    402 postsMember, Battlefield, Battlefield 1, CTE, Battlefield V Member
    It baffles me that you call BF1 an old game when it's merely over a year old. Pacman is an old game, Halo CE, Age of Empires II. Not this.
  • theONEFORCE
    2843 postsMember, Battlefield 3, Battlefield 4, Battlefield Hardline, Battlefield, Battlefield 1, CTE, BF1IncursionsAlpha, Battlefield V Member
    fortress66 wrote: »
    MarbleDuck and the Symthic brigade tell us to adapt.

    Fair enough. I adapt.

    I get called a camper because I adapted to the new LMG meta.

    You can't win with these 'competitive', 'hardcore' players. Use a Hellriegel/Automatico/Shotgun in CQB, and they'll whine. Use an SLR at mid-range, and they'll whine. Use an LMG from a defensive position, and they'll whine. Use a bolt-action rifle at it's intended range, and they'll whine. Nothing but whining, no matter how you play the game. They wanted a TTK change, and when you try to change your own playstyle to actually do well in the game, they complain to no end. Apparently, you aren't a true BF player unless you you're running and gunning with a goddamn LMG or SLR at CQB, even though that is a death sentence now.

    It's actually a bit hilarious.

    People are overly dramatic. I play support the most and use the bar storm and parabelum low weight and i still win close combat against assault, medics. IM doing better than before.. I dont need to camp behind. Stop with the non sense. First 2 3 nights after the patch dropped, i had an hard time but its now good and i play close to the action with no problem.

    If you are able to consistently beat Assaults, and more than one person at a time at that, with a Parabellum MG14/17 or BAR Storm (even though that gun received more nerfs than buffs) at close-range, then you must be playing against total noobs. Any half-decent squad of Assaults will make short work of a good Support player.

    Honestly speaking, a Madsen LW/Trench is far better in CQB. The Parabellum has insane recoil, below-par hip-fire spread and quite a bit of ADS time as of this patch. The BAR is great for fighting one enemy, or two people standing next to one another, but that 20 round magazine paired with a very fast fire rate makes it inadequate against most. Hell, if you use the BAR, you will lose against Automaticos and Hellriegels, simply on the basis of those guns having faster TTKs. Shotguns will also be an instant CQB death sentence, especially when they've become much more consistent now.

    If you catch an Assault off-guard, you can kill them with just about any gun, even a Kolibri. That doesn't mean that you will consistently win against them. Also, Medics aren't very good at CQB, so of course you can kill them with certain LMGs in CQB. Still, even a Parabellum is going to constantly lose to a Fedorov Avtomat or Autoloading 8. Most SLRs will also beat LMGs at mid-range, as long as the Medic gets the first shot in; Supports have to handle a fair bit of recoil, but Medics have fairly accurate rifles now.

    You also appear to have a K/D of 0.84. Even a terrible player such as myself has a K/D above 1.0, which at the very least shows that I can get more kills than deaths.

    Lastly, we have to look at DICE LA's own philosophy behind this change. They explicitly mentioned that Supports are supposed to lose against Assaults in CQB almost every singe time. They raised the ADS time to avoid making LMGs 'reactionary' (their words, not mine), and they added an ADS spread nerf to make using ADS even harder in CQB. Not to mention the fact that Assault weapons have received hefty CQB damage buffs, making them even harder to kill. DICE LA explicitly stated that Support is for medium range. I used to be able to run around with just about any LMG before this patch hit; even the Browning MG1917 Low Weight was usable as a run-and-gun LMG to some extent. However, I am now playing the class correctly: as a defensive class, able to use it's bipod at range, and also for suppression, which you can't do with the piddly 20 rounds in a BAR.

    DICE LA wants Support and Medic to struggle in CQB, because they wanted the classes to stick to their intended ranges. Supports and Medics, according to this development team, were never really meant to compete with Assaults. You're running around with the Support class? You're doing it wrong. If you want to play aggressively, Assault is much better. It's like trying to snipe with the Medic class: you can certainly do it, but that doesn't mean that you should do it.

    It is much harder to perform well in CQB as Support - this is an objective fact.

    All the raw TTK numbers and "this should beat this" and "this should beat that" have nothing to do with how the actual game plays out. All engagements are different, very few are 1 vs 1 raw TTK offs and even good players miss a lot of shots.

    If you are going into this thinking you can't beat X because of Y like its the law then I can see why you're struggling with the update.
  • Ferdinand_J_Foch
    3409 postsMember, Battlefield 3, Battlefield 4, Battlefield, Battlefield 1, CTE, BF1IncursionsAlpha, Battlefield V Member
    fortress66 wrote: »
    MarbleDuck and the Symthic brigade tell us to adapt.

    Fair enough. I adapt.

    I get called a camper because I adapted to the new LMG meta.

    You can't win with these 'competitive', 'hardcore' players. Use a Hellriegel/Automatico/Shotgun in CQB, and they'll whine. Use an SLR at mid-range, and they'll whine. Use an LMG from a defensive position, and they'll whine. Use a bolt-action rifle at it's intended range, and they'll whine. Nothing but whining, no matter how you play the game. They wanted a TTK change, and when you try to change your own playstyle to actually do well in the game, they complain to no end. Apparently, you aren't a true BF player unless you you're running and gunning with a goddamn LMG or SLR at CQB, even though that is a death sentence now.

    It's actually a bit hilarious.

    People are overly dramatic. I play support the most and use the bar storm and parabelum low weight and i still win close combat against assault, medics. IM doing better than before.. I dont need to camp behind. Stop with the non sense. First 2 3 nights after the patch dropped, i had an hard time but its now good and i play close to the action with no problem.

    If you are able to consistently beat Assaults, and more than one person at a time at that, with a Parabellum MG14/17 or BAR Storm (even though that gun received more nerfs than buffs) at close-range, then you must be playing against total noobs. Any half-decent squad of Assaults will make short work of a good Support player.

    Honestly speaking, a Madsen LW/Trench is far better in CQB. The Parabellum has insane recoil, below-par hip-fire spread and quite a bit of ADS time as of this patch. The BAR is great for fighting one enemy, or two people standing next to one another, but that 20 round magazine paired with a very fast fire rate makes it inadequate against most. Hell, if you use the BAR, you will lose against Automaticos and Hellriegels, simply on the basis of those guns having faster TTKs. Shotguns will also be an instant CQB death sentence, especially when they've become much more consistent now.

    If you catch an Assault off-guard, you can kill them with just about any gun, even a Kolibri. That doesn't mean that you will consistently win against them. Also, Medics aren't very good at CQB, so of course you can kill them with certain LMGs in CQB. Still, even a Parabellum is going to constantly lose to a Fedorov Avtomat or Autoloading 8. Most SLRs will also beat LMGs at mid-range, as long as the Medic gets the first shot in; Supports have to handle a fair bit of recoil, but Medics have fairly accurate rifles now.

    You also appear to have a K/D of 0.84. Even a terrible player such as myself has a K/D above 1.0, which at the very least shows that I can get more kills than deaths.

    Lastly, we have to look at DICE LA's own philosophy behind this change. They explicitly mentioned that Supports are supposed to lose against Assaults in CQB almost every singe time. They raised the ADS time to avoid making LMGs 'reactionary' (their words, not mine), and they added an ADS spread nerf to make using ADS even harder in CQB. Not to mention the fact that Assault weapons have received hefty CQB damage buffs, making them even harder to kill. DICE LA explicitly stated that Support is for medium range. I used to be able to run around with just about any LMG before this patch hit; even the Browning MG1917 Low Weight was usable as a run-and-gun LMG to some extent. However, I am now playing the class correctly: as a defensive class, able to use it's bipod at range, and also for suppression, which you can't do with the piddly 20 rounds in a BAR.

    DICE LA wants Support and Medic to struggle in CQB, because they wanted the classes to stick to their intended ranges. Supports and Medics, according to this development team, were never really meant to compete with Assaults. You're running around with the Support class? You're doing it wrong. If you want to play aggressively, Assault is much better. It's like trying to snipe with the Medic class: you can certainly do it, but that doesn't mean that you should do it.

    It is much harder to perform well in CQB as Support - this is an objective fact.

    All the raw TTK numbers and "this should beat this" and "this should beat that" have nothing to do with how the actual game plays out. All engagements are different, very few are 1 vs 1 raw TTK offs and even good players miss a lot of shots.

    If you are going into this thinking you can't beat X because of Y like its the law then I can see why you're struggling with the update.

    I'm basing it off of experience. The Assaults that I usually come up against are using Hellriegels, Automaticos and shotguns. Most LMGs will not win against those SMGs in a fight where both people are going head-to-head. Your chance against multiple Assaults is even lower.

    I tried to play aggressively with LMGs in CQB, but I only had success against enemies that I caught off guard. This sometimes worked, but sometimes, you come across enemies who can't be caught unaware. I got tired of constantly losing CQB fights in the first few days, until I tried to change my playstyle - something TTK 2.0 proponents have been telling everyone else to do in this forum. I become more careful. I tried to fight enemies at a distance. I made sure to avoid fighting Assaults in CQB as much as possible, and instead use Telescopic LMGs from a distance.

    The result? More kills, and less deaths. My K/D has actually slightly increased ever since the patch came out, so whilst I did initially struggle with the update, I eventually got better. The problem is that a more careful approach is often considered as 'camping', and 'hardcore' players will only consider constant running-and-gunning as the only acceptable playstyle. DICE LA have literally stated that they want Support players to lose more against Assaults in CQB - they wanted LMGs to no longer be 'reactionary'. Sure, if you find a bunch of idiots, you can win with just about anything, and the same could be said about encountering large groups of unaware enemies. But the fact of the matter is, that DICE LA wanted Support to move to medium range, and out of CQB. If you look at LMG usage on Battlefield Tracker, you can see that aggressive LMGs, such as the BAR Storm and Parabellum Low Weight, have seen a drop in usage, whereas Telescopic LMGs, except for the BAR, have seen a modest increase. The new Support meta clearly favours those who are able to use their LMGs at range, rather than use them as if they were SMGs with a lot of ammo.

    A lot of players say, "Well, I managed to do really well with (so-and-so LMG) and dominated in CQB!", but this is purely anecdotal. They may have been playing against terrible opponents. They may be fantastic at flanking. They may have perfect aim.

    Hell, I managed to kill a Parabellum user with a Kolibri once, without even using any other gun. I also managed to kill an Automatico user in a 1-on-1 fight with just a Kolibri as well, but I'm not going to use these examples to say that the Kolibri is a close range powerhouse. There was also this one time, in an Operations match, where I used my MG1917 Telescopic to kill a large horde of attackers, simply by using hip-fire. If I said nothing else, you'd assume that this gun was great for CQB, but I'd have neglected to mention several important factors; a teammate had thrown a smoke grenade near the enemies, thereby disorienting them to the point that even a hip-firing MG1917 Telescopic can outright murder them.

    That being said, it isn't impossible to get kills with a BAR/Parabellum in CQB. The Madsen is also decent in this regard, from time to time. Maybe you're an exceptional or above-average player that can make just about any LMG work in close range. However, it is unreasonable to expect anyone to use LMGs in a way that is specifically discouraged by DICE LA. I play to my strengths instead of trying to overcome my weaknesses; ever since I adopted this line of thought, I've started to enjoy this game once again.
  • G-Gnu
    1422 postsMember, Battlefield 3, Battlefield 4, Battlefield, Battlefield 1, CTE, BF1IncursionsAlpha, Battlefield V Member

    Lastly, we have to look at DICE LA's own philosophy behind this change. They explicitly mentioned that Supports are supposed to lose against Assaults in CQB almost every singe time. They raised the ADS time to avoid making LMGs 'reactionary' (their words, not mine), and they added an ADS spread nerf to make using ADS even harder in CQB. Not to mention the fact that Assault weapons have received hefty CQB damage buffs, making them even harder to kill. DICE LA explicitly stated that Support is for medium range. I used to be able to run around with just about any LMG before this patch hit; even the Browning MG1917 Low Weight was usable as a run-and-gun LMG to some extent. However, I am now playing the class correctly: as a defensive class, able to use it's bipod at range, and also for suppression, which you can't do with the piddly 20 rounds in a BAR.
    Then we come to the question of the week: What is medium range in this game????
    They more or less removed Support from a defined roll in this game when it comes to gunplay , you can adapt but it will make you run around try to get in to a good position drop down and hope that the game lets you deploy the bipod on that particular patch of ground on the map, then pray to any god or entity of your preference that no sniper saw you or else you are a head shorter before you planted yourself on the ground. After clearing all that you discover that you have buried your gun and your head in the ground and have no line of sight so you need to crawl a bit forward to get the line and if you are lucky the battle is not over when all is set and ready to go.
    Otherwise it more or less up to chance if you come out on top running and gunning, with a twinkle of skill in the mix though.

  • mrtwotimes
    791 postsMember, Battlefield 3, Battlefield, Battlefield 1, Battlefield V Member
    Still play pretty much daily. I'm not sure what even changed in game, always seems the same to me.
  • Sixclicks
    5075 postsMember, Battlefield 3, Battlefield 4, Battlefield, Battlefield 1, Battlefield V Member
    edited February 2018
    Tried playing last night for a little. Each of the 3 games I joined was one team getting spawn farmed. I left each of them, logged off, and went back to Monster Hunter World. Can't be bothered to waste my free time just trying to find a somewhat balanced game.

    Not to mention there was only a single screen-full of populated Conquest servers at the time (about 11pm EST).
  • BaronVonGoon
    6817 postsMember, Battlefield 3, Battlefield 4, Battlefield Hardline, Battlefield, Battlefield 1, CTE, BF1IncursionsAlpha, Battlefield V Member
    Sixclicks wrote: »
    Tried playing last night for a little. Each of the 3 games I joined was one team getting spawn farmed.

    Play some more. Because this unbalanced servers argument infecting the forums has taken a life of its own. Play some more and see, plenty of balanced games.
  • theONEFORCE
    2843 postsMember, Battlefield 3, Battlefield 4, Battlefield Hardline, Battlefield, Battlefield 1, CTE, BF1IncursionsAlpha, Battlefield V Member
    edited February 2018
    Sixclicks wrote: »
    Tried playing last night for a little. Each of the 3 games I joined was one team getting spawn farmed.

    Play some more. Because this unbalanced servers argument infecting the forums has taken a life of its own. Play some more and see, plenty of balanced games.

    My baby had nightmares last night and I found TTK 2.0 hiding under her bed removing balance from BF1 matches.
  • BaronVonGoon
    6817 postsMember, Battlefield 3, Battlefield 4, Battlefield Hardline, Battlefield, Battlefield 1, CTE, BF1IncursionsAlpha, Battlefield V Member
    Sixclicks wrote: »
    Tried playing last night for a little. Each of the 3 games I joined was one team getting spawn farmed.

    Play some more. Because this unbalanced servers argument infecting the forums has taken a life of its own. Play some more and see, plenty of balanced games.

    My baby had nightmares last night and I found TTK 2.0 hiding under her bed removing balance from BF1 matches.

    Haha yea heresay as illogical as it might be still always takes a life of its own.
  • mrtwotimes
    791 postsMember, Battlefield 3, Battlefield, Battlefield 1, Battlefield V Member
    ttk.jpg

    This is what it seems like...
  • DarkestHour138
    992 postsMember, Battlefield 3, Battlefield 4, Battlefield Hardline, Battlefield, Battlefield 1, CTE, Battlefield V Member
    The balance is completely off. I've found a couple decent matches but I'd say it's less than 10% of matches played are balanced now. So Yes I have left and am playing more BF4 and other games.
Sign In or Register to comment.