"Deeper gunplay and mechanics"... Why is scope glint in this game then?

1235»

Comments

  • MachoFantast1c0
    1834 postsMember, Battlefield, Battlefield 1, CTE, BF1IncursionsAlpha, Battlefield V Member
    Hawxxeye wrote: »
    Hawxxeye wrote: »
    Kunstula wrote: »
    Because double standards. DICE has a clear bias against the scout class. Look at how low they put the damage of bolt action rifles and how ridiculously fast they drop from max to min damage, while giving all other weapons a massive long range buff by removing spread. Put slow rechamber and reload speed for bolt action rifles while automatic weapons have higher damage with faster reloading on top of that and you have the recipe for very bad weapon balance.
    With drag added there is already a sufficient countermeasure in place to greatly reduce the effectiveness of extreme long range sniping. Glint only exists as a hand holding mechanism for players with very poor situational awareness and positioning, it was never intended for balance even though many keep repeating that lie over and over.

    You mean they hate them like when releasing Bf1 where they increased velocity, added a sweet spot, nerfed all other classes ttk into the ground, and made it impossible to hit anything at most ranges...unless you had a medic rifle where you could fire very slow to hit at range. I can clearly see the hate.
    I must had played a different BF1 then cause never had I felt that the enemy snipers were a huge threat and every auto weapon was a bullet hose within its intended range.

    Enemy snipers weren't a huge threat? Now that we know you'll say anything to further your agenda it weakens your whole argument.

    What agenda are you talking about?!
    I only said that I never found a situation in BF1 where people would say " these enemy snipers are destroying us we cannot capture this objective". On the other hand I saw a lot of "These allied snipers are a liability cause not enough of us push on the objective".

    Let me bridge the gap for you guys. Joker plays Ops, the defending team on which is rife with prone snipers (and supports, I'd imagine). He also plays on console, which suffered for a long time from over-aggressive auto-rotation on irons, carbines and low-zoom marksman scopes. Combined with sweet spot bodyshot kills, it is easy to understand how that could make for a less than ideal playground.

    On the other hand, you (and I) play mostly other than Ops, on PC. So not only are competent, accurate and lethal scouts few and far between, they are also easier to counter. So for the most part I can agree that enemy snipers are rarely a real threat, and the frustration mostly concerns passive team mates.

    Joker please correct me if I was badly off.
  • Hawxxeye
    4087 postsMember, Battlefield 3, Battlefield 4, Battlefield Hardline, Battlefield, Battlefield 1, CTE, BF1IncursionsAlpha, Battlefield V Member
    edited October 2018
    Actually I play Mostly Ops and shock ops over conquest in BF1 (more than twice my conquest rounds), I do not know why the Ops do not show in my profile. There were no times where I found defending snipers to be more dangerous than defending LMG "snipers".
    .
    I stand that at least from PC point of view any cases where it seems that a sniper is strong is due to map design and aim assist related mechanics. Also in all but the longest of ranges there are better alternatives on other classes, especially post medic and support accuracy buffs in BF1.
    Post edited by Hawxxeye on
  • Sixclicks
    5047 postsMember, Battlefield 3, Battlefield 4, Battlefield, Battlefield 1, Battlefield V Member
    edited October 2018
    The aim assist with auto rotation on console does make infantry style bolt actions trivial to use. Especially ones with short ranged sweetspots. The same applies to shotguns though. Regardless, that has little to do with scope glint since scoped rifles don't benefit from auto rotation. It also has little to do with BFV since auto-rotation will either be completely gone or significantly less effective based on dev comments on the matter.
  • theONEFORCE
    2843 postsMember, Battlefield 3, Battlefield 4, Battlefield Hardline, Battlefield, Battlefield 1, CTE, BF1IncursionsAlpha, Battlefield V Member
    Hawxxeye wrote: »
    Hawxxeye wrote: »
    Kunstula wrote: »
    Because double standards. DICE has a clear bias against the scout class. Look at how low they put the damage of bolt action rifles and how ridiculously fast they drop from max to min damage, while giving all other weapons a massive long range buff by removing spread. Put slow rechamber and reload speed for bolt action rifles while automatic weapons have higher damage with faster reloading on top of that and you have the recipe for very bad weapon balance.
    With drag added there is already a sufficient countermeasure in place to greatly reduce the effectiveness of extreme long range sniping. Glint only exists as a hand holding mechanism for players with very poor situational awareness and positioning, it was never intended for balance even though many keep repeating that lie over and over.

    You mean they hate them like when releasing Bf1 where they increased velocity, added a sweet spot, nerfed all other classes ttk into the ground, and made it impossible to hit anything at most ranges...unless you had a medic rifle where you could fire very slow to hit at range. I can clearly see the hate.
    I must had played a different BF1 then cause never had I felt that the enemy snipers were a huge threat and every auto weapon was a bullet hose within its intended range.

    Enemy snipers weren't a huge threat? Now that we know you'll say anything to further your agenda it weakens your whole argument.

    What agenda are you talking about?!
    I only said that I never found a situation in BF1 where people would say " these enemy snipers are destroying us we cannot capture this objective". On the other hand I saw a lot of "These allied snipers are a liability cause not enough of us push on the objective".

    Let me bridge the gap for you guys. Joker plays Ops, the defending team on which is rife with prone snipers (and supports, I'd imagine). He also plays on console, which suffered for a long time from over-aggressive auto-rotation on irons, carbines and low-zoom marksman scopes. Combined with sweet spot bodyshot kills, it is easy to understand how that could make for a less than ideal playground.

    On the other hand, you (and I) play mostly other than Ops, on PC. So not only are competent, accurate and lethal scouts few and far between, they are also easier to counter. So for the most part I can agree that enemy snipers are rarely a real threat, and the frustration mostly concerns passive team mates.

    Joker please correct me if I was badly off.

    That is a pretty accurate assessment.
  • StormSaxon
    384 postsMember, Battlefield 3, Battlefield 4, Battlefield Hardline, Battlefield, Battlefield 1, CTE Member
    You can already remedy scope glint. By not taking a scope.
  • theONEFORCE
    2843 postsMember, Battlefield 3, Battlefield 4, Battlefield Hardline, Battlefield, Battlefield 1, CTE, BF1IncursionsAlpha, Battlefield V Member
    StormSaxon wrote: »
    You can already remedy scope glint. By not taking a scope.

    But remember, their goal is play aggressive scout on flags so they need scopes...
  • Sixclicks
    5047 postsMember, Battlefield 3, Battlefield 4, Battlefield, Battlefield 1, Battlefield V Member
    edited November 2018
    StormSaxon wrote: »
    You can already remedy scope glint. By not taking a scope.

    But remember, their goal is play aggressive scout on flags so they need scopes...

    Scopes help a lot with headshots. Especially in BFV where you pretty much have to be landing headshots or you're dead 99% of the time. I PTFO with scoped weapons in BF1 all the time. If iron sight bolt actions actually did a reasonable amount of damage on body shots with the ability to quickly follow up with your pistol, I wouldn't really care about the scopes.

    Regardless, I'm just going to end up using the iron sight SLRs instead. Bolt actions suck in BFV.
  • Hawxxeye
    4087 postsMember, Battlefield 3, Battlefield 4, Battlefield Hardline, Battlefield, Battlefield 1, CTE, BF1IncursionsAlpha, Battlefield V Member
    Sixclicks wrote: »
    StormSaxon wrote: »
    You can already remedy scope glint. By not taking a scope.

    But remember, their goal is play aggressive scout on flags so they need scopes...

    Scopes help a lot with headshots. Especially in BFV where you pretty much have to be landing headshots or you're dead 99% of the time. I PTFO with scoped weapons in BF1 all the time. If iron sight bolt actions actually did a reasonable amount of damage on body shots with the ability to quickly follow up with your pistol, I wouldn't really care about the scopes.

    Regardless, I'm just going to end up using the iron sight SLRs instead. Bolt actions suck in BFV.

    Bolt action snipers are meant to be comedy relief in BFV anyway. Did you saw what happened to that sniper on the church in the map reveal video earlier
  • theONEFORCE
    2843 postsMember, Battlefield 3, Battlefield 4, Battlefield Hardline, Battlefield, Battlefield 1, CTE, BF1IncursionsAlpha, Battlefield V Member
    Sixclicks wrote: »
    StormSaxon wrote: »
    You can already remedy scope glint. By not taking a scope.

    But remember, their goal is play aggressive scout on flags so they need scopes...

    Scopes help a lot with headshots. Especially in BFV where you pretty much have to be landing headshots or you're dead 99% of the time. I PTFO with scoped weapons in BF1 all the time. If iron sight bolt actions actually did a reasonable amount of damage on body shots with the ability to quickly follow up with your pistol, I wouldn't really care about the scopes.

    Regardless, I'm just going to end up using the iron sight SLRs instead. Bolt actions suck in BFV.

    You wouldn't be hard scoping up close so why would glare be an issue?

    Also, I'm not sure what you are getting at about the iron site vs scope weapon damage thing. They do the same damage in most cases, ie G98 scoped vs G98 infantry have the same damage model.
  • Sixclicks
    5047 postsMember, Battlefield 3, Battlefield 4, Battlefield, Battlefield 1, Battlefield V Member
    Sixclicks wrote: »
    StormSaxon wrote: »
    You can already remedy scope glint. By not taking a scope.

    But remember, their goal is play aggressive scout on flags so they need scopes...

    Scopes help a lot with headshots. Especially in BFV where you pretty much have to be landing headshots or you're dead 99% of the time. I PTFO with scoped weapons in BF1 all the time. If iron sight bolt actions actually did a reasonable amount of damage on body shots with the ability to quickly follow up with your pistol, I wouldn't really care about the scopes.

    Regardless, I'm just going to end up using the iron sight SLRs instead. Bolt actions suck in BFV.

    You wouldn't be hard scoping up close so why would glare be an issue?

    Also, I'm not sure what you are getting at about the iron site vs scope weapon damage thing. They do the same damage in most cases, ie G98 scoped vs G98 infantry have the same damage model.

    Yeah, and that damage is too low. That's the point. They're not really worth using in CQB with iron sights as a result unless you're always getting headshots. Scopes make it easier to do that. I know it does the same damage regardless of sights/optics.

    Like I said, I'll mostly be using the SLRs with iron sights on Recon because I don't feel that the bolt actions are worth it unless you're sitting way back trying to cherry pick some headshots.
  • Popa2caps
    576 postsMember, Battlefield 3, Battlefield 4, Battlefield Hardline, Battlefield, Battlefield 1 Member
    edited November 2018
    A6zXqn1.jpg
    Funny
Sign In or Register to comment.

Howdy, Stranger!

It looks like you're new here. If you want to get involved, click one of these buttons!