Attrition video -- Levelcap

Comments

  • ragnarok013
    3431 postsMember, Moderator, Battlefield 3, Battlefield 4, Battlefield Hardline, Battlefield, Battlefield 1, CTE, BF1IncursionsAlpha, Battlefield V Moderator
    VBALL_MVP wrote: »

    Because it's a FIRST PERSON SHOOTER . Shooting skill is integral. Traversing to the next supply crate is NOT a skill. Maybe if we put two rats on the map and one piece of cheddar on the supply crate, whichever gets to it first is the more skillful rat.
    Skill isn't the only thing involved. Decision-making is in play. You should ask the devs for a game where there is only one map that is entirely flat and no objects in it, where everyone always has the same gun. Then you will have a pure skill game.

    Traversing isn't a skill, but going there to be prepared is an aptitude.
    No because if person A has better gun skills and better awareness than player B, whatever secondary skills player B has are just that, secondary skills.

    I feel bad for you. You are trapped inside some idealogy that has never existed. Every FPS has secondary factors that can determine whether or not someone wins a gun fight: like health, ammo, position advantage, team help.

    "I'm more skilled". Ok. And you are playing a team game with uncontrollable variables. Have fun projecting that ideology on reality and demanding it go your way.

    Fine. We disagree on the definition of 'skill'. I thought under the controlled confines of first person shooter, skill was easy to define but I guess not. Forget skill. I don't even know what the central point of our discussion is anymore. Let's get in to the nitty gritty:

    Player A:
    4 k/d, 3 kills per minute, 500 hours in the game.

    Player B:
    0.8 k/d, 0.5 kills per minute, 500 hours in the game.

    1) How would *you* define and characterize these players in terms of performance in Battlefield?

    2) Who is more likely to be affected by ammo scarcity? Meaning whose stats and specifically kills per minute are more elastic to the introduction of ammo scarcity?

    If you answered anything other than 'Both' to #2 then we agree that the dev team introduced a mechanic that affects one group of players more so than it does another. In other words, it reduces the skill gap makes things just a little easier for one player group at the expense of another player group.

    Some think this is ok and call it a challenge. Yes it is a challenge and we'll all adapt. Doesnt change the fact that the devs introduced a game mechanic that they knew would negatively affect one group and not affect the other as much.

    I dont see how it makes things easier for one group than the other. Player B is under 1 K/D...I don't think they will agree that they have anything easy.


    Player B is more unlikely to run out of ammo before being killed, and as a result the scarcity affects them less.

    I'm not convinced that it necessarily makes things more difficult for Player A... but it does create limitations to viable engagements. If we're talking purely about being a slayer, then your slaying potential is hindered by the limited ammo. Whether that's good or bad is really up to the player, and what kind of experience they want.

    The big issue for me is that I simply just found it tedious to deal with. I love the ammo depots as they encourage players to stick around objectives, but the frequency of their interaction became a chore. It also severely limited suppression and bullet penetration for any role outside of support... I found that to be fairly dull as well.

    Well seeing as how support carries the lmg's and mmg's it is literally their job to suppress the enemy. The bullet penetration works for EVERY class, not only support. And why are you guys still whining about the ammo when they have already made changes to the starting amount and how much you can pick up off of corpses? There will also be ways to resupply that we have not even seen yet, like the towable supply stations. Go find somthing that is actually broken (if you can) and cry over that.

    You can't reasonably use bullet penetration without burning ammo. A game like R6:Siege gives you a ton of ammo, far more than you actually need to kill 5 opposing players... but you use that ammo to poke corners, suppress enemies, and spray walls.

    Even with Alpha 2 attrition, I just don't believe there's enough ammo to fully utilize suppression and bullet penetration on assault or medic. I would need a support player with me to feel comfortable with burning ammo like that.

    If you don't like a topic, then just don't click on it. There are a lot of topics that I'm indifferent on, and I simply don't participate in them.

    1.Don't knock it till you try it.


    There's been two alphas and a beta, we've tried it.
  • madman001able
    611 postsMember, Battlefield 3, Battlefield 4, Battlefield, Battlefield 1, Battlefield V Member
    VBALL_MVP wrote: »

    Because it's a FIRST PERSON SHOOTER . Shooting skill is integral. Traversing to the next supply crate is NOT a skill. Maybe if we put two rats on the map and one piece of cheddar on the supply crate, whichever gets to it first is the more skillful rat.
    Skill isn't the only thing involved. Decision-making is in play. You should ask the devs for a game where there is only one map that is entirely flat and no objects in it, where everyone always has the same gun. Then you will have a pure skill game.

    Traversing isn't a skill, but going there to be prepared is an aptitude.
    No because if person A has better gun skills and better awareness than player B, whatever secondary skills player B has are just that, secondary skills.

    I feel bad for you. You are trapped inside some idealogy that has never existed. Every FPS has secondary factors that can determine whether or not someone wins a gun fight: like health, ammo, position advantage, team help.

    "I'm more skilled". Ok. And you are playing a team game with uncontrollable variables. Have fun projecting that ideology on reality and demanding it go your way.

    Fine. We disagree on the definition of 'skill'. I thought under the controlled confines of first person shooter, skill was easy to define but I guess not. Forget skill. I don't even know what the central point of our discussion is anymore. Let's get in to the nitty gritty:

    Player A:
    4 k/d, 3 kills per minute, 500 hours in the game.

    Player B:
    0.8 k/d, 0.5 kills per minute, 500 hours in the game.

    1) How would *you* define and characterize these players in terms of performance in Battlefield?

    2) Who is more likely to be affected by ammo scarcity? Meaning whose stats and specifically kills per minute are more elastic to the introduction of ammo scarcity?

    If you answered anything other than 'Both' to #2 then we agree that the dev team introduced a mechanic that affects one group of players more so than it does another. In other words, it reduces the skill gap makes things just a little easier for one player group at the expense of another player group.

    Some think this is ok and call it a challenge. Yes it is a challenge and we'll all adapt. Doesnt change the fact that the devs introduced a game mechanic that they knew would negatively affect one group and not affect the other as much.

    I dont see how it makes things easier for one group than the other. Player B is under 1 K/D...I don't think they will agree that they have anything easy.


    Player B is more unlikely to run out of ammo before being killed, and as a result the scarcity affects them less.

    I'm not convinced that it necessarily makes things more difficult for Player A... but it does create limitations to viable engagements. If we're talking purely about being a slayer, then your slaying potential is hindered by the limited ammo. Whether that's good or bad is really up to the player, and what kind of experience they want.

    The big issue for me is that I simply just found it tedious to deal with. I love the ammo depots as they encourage players to stick around objectives, but the frequency of their interaction became a chore. It also severely limited suppression and bullet penetration for any role outside of support... I found that to be fairly dull as well.

    Well seeing as how support carries the lmg's and mmg's it is literally their job to suppress the enemy. The bullet penetration works for EVERY class, not only support. And why are you guys still whining about the ammo when they have already made changes to the starting amount and how much you can pick up off of corpses? There will also be ways to resupply that we have not even seen yet, like the towable supply stations. Go find somthing that is actually broken (if you can) and cry over that.

    You can't reasonably use bullet penetration without burning ammo. A game like R6:Siege gives you a ton of ammo, far more than you actually need to kill 5 opposing players... but you use that ammo to poke corners, suppress enemies, and spray walls.

    Even with Alpha 2 attrition, I just don't believe there's enough ammo to fully utilize suppression and bullet penetration on assault or medic. I would need a support player with me to feel comfortable with burning ammo like that.

    If you don't like a topic, then just don't click on it. There are a lot of topics that I'm indifferent on, and I simply don't participate in them.

    1.Don't knock it till you try it.


    There's been two alphas and a beta, we've tried it.

    Hmmm...could have sworn they made the changes after the alpha and beta. Or am i wrong? Hmmmmm.
  • Hawxxeye
    6329 postsMember, Battlefield 3, Battlefield 4, Battlefield Hardline, Battlefield, Battlefield 1, CTE, BF1IncursionsAlpha, Battlefield V Member
    VBALL_MVP wrote: »

    Because it's a FIRST PERSON SHOOTER . Shooting skill is integral. Traversing to the next supply crate is NOT a skill. Maybe if we put two rats on the map and one piece of cheddar on the supply crate, whichever gets to it first is the more skillful rat.
    Skill isn't the only thing involved. Decision-making is in play. You should ask the devs for a game where there is only one map that is entirely flat and no objects in it, where everyone always has the same gun. Then you will have a pure skill game.

    Traversing isn't a skill, but going there to be prepared is an aptitude.
    No because if person A has better gun skills and better awareness than player B, whatever secondary skills player B has are just that, secondary skills.

    I feel bad for you. You are trapped inside some idealogy that has never existed. Every FPS has secondary factors that can determine whether or not someone wins a gun fight: like health, ammo, position advantage, team help.

    "I'm more skilled". Ok. And you are playing a team game with uncontrollable variables. Have fun projecting that ideology on reality and demanding it go your way.

    Fine. We disagree on the definition of 'skill'. I thought under the controlled confines of first person shooter, skill was easy to define but I guess not. Forget skill. I don't even know what the central point of our discussion is anymore. Let's get in to the nitty gritty:

    Player A:
    4 k/d, 3 kills per minute, 500 hours in the game.

    Player B:
    0.8 k/d, 0.5 kills per minute, 500 hours in the game.

    1) How would *you* define and characterize these players in terms of performance in Battlefield?

    2) Who is more likely to be affected by ammo scarcity? Meaning whose stats and specifically kills per minute are more elastic to the introduction of ammo scarcity?

    If you answered anything other than 'Both' to #2 then we agree that the dev team introduced a mechanic that affects one group of players more so than it does another. In other words, it reduces the skill gap makes things just a little easier for one player group at the expense of another player group.

    Some think this is ok and call it a challenge. Yes it is a challenge and we'll all adapt. Doesnt change the fact that the devs introduced a game mechanic that they knew would negatively affect one group and not affect the other as much.

    I dont see how it makes things easier for one group than the other. Player B is under 1 K/D...I don't think they will agree that they have anything easy.


    Player B is more unlikely to run out of ammo before being killed, and as a result the scarcity affects them less.

    I'm not convinced that it necessarily makes things more difficult for Player A... but it does create limitations to viable engagements. If we're talking purely about being a slayer, then your slaying potential is hindered by the limited ammo. Whether that's good or bad is really up to the player, and what kind of experience they want.

    The big issue for me is that I simply just found it tedious to deal with. I love the ammo depots as they encourage players to stick around objectives, but the frequency of their interaction became a chore. It also severely limited suppression and bullet penetration for any role outside of support... I found that to be fairly dull as well.

    Well seeing as how support carries the lmg's and mmg's it is literally their job to suppress the enemy. The bullet penetration works for EVERY class, not only support. And why are you guys still whining about the ammo when they have already made changes to the starting amount and how much you can pick up off of corpses? There will also be ways to resupply that we have not even seen yet, like the towable supply stations. Go find somthing that is actually broken (if you can) and cry over that.

    You can't reasonably use bullet penetration without burning ammo. A game like R6:Siege gives you a ton of ammo, far more than you actually need to kill 5 opposing players... but you use that ammo to poke corners, suppress enemies, and spray walls.

    Even with Alpha 2 attrition, I just don't believe there's enough ammo to fully utilize suppression and bullet penetration on assault or medic. I would need a support player with me to feel comfortable with burning ammo like that.

    If you don't like a topic, then just don't click on it. There are a lot of topics that I'm indifferent on, and I simply don't participate in them.

    1.Don't knock it till you try it.


    There's been two alphas and a beta, we've tried it.

    Hmmm...could have sworn they made the changes after the alpha and beta. Or am i wrong? Hmmmmm.
    I do not really trust any changes made without them being given to us for testing.
    No plan survives contact with the players.
  • SMK_GAMING_2
    775 postsMember, Battlefield 4, Battlefield, Battlefield 1, CTE, BF1IncursionsAlpha, Battlefield V Member
    I liked the difficulty of the beta, but I understand that many did not so I am happy to see that they have adjusted the attrition system. Also to those in here discussing changes made since the beta test, are you aware that DICE release weekly DEV Talks videos discussing new things and changes made. Their devs are also releasing nearly daily bits of info on twitter regarding BFV.
  • Hawxxeye
    6329 postsMember, Battlefield 3, Battlefield 4, Battlefield Hardline, Battlefield, Battlefield 1, CTE, BF1IncursionsAlpha, Battlefield V Member
    I liked the difficulty of the beta, but I understand that many did not so I am happy to see that they have adjusted the attrition system. Also to those in here discussing changes made since the beta test, are you aware that DICE release weekly DEV Talks videos discussing new things and changes made. Their devs are also releasing nearly daily bits of info on twitter regarding BFV.
    This is part of why hate things like twitter. They use that thing instead of their own official forums to discuss things out
  • SMK_GAMING_2
    775 postsMember, Battlefield 4, Battlefield, Battlefield 1, CTE, BF1IncursionsAlpha, Battlefield V Member
    Hawxxeye wrote: »
    I liked the difficulty of the beta, but I understand that many did not so I am happy to see that they have adjusted the attrition system. Also to those in here discussing changes made since the beta test, are you aware that DICE release weekly DEV Talks videos discussing new things and changes made. Their devs are also releasing nearly daily bits of info on twitter regarding BFV.
    This is part of why hate things like twitter. They use that thing instead of their own official forums to discuss things out

    See they release bits of info which of course doesn't warrant a website post on its own. But across a week it can be quite a bit of information. Maybe should post up a summery of information from twitter posts on their website. The weekly dev talk videos on YouTube though I'm pretty sure are linked on the website
  • Sixclicks
    5075 postsMember, Battlefield 3, Battlefield 4, Battlefield, Battlefield 1, Battlefield V Member
    edited October 2018
    Hawxxeye wrote: »
    I liked the difficulty of the beta, but I understand that many did not so I am happy to see that they have adjusted the attrition system. Also to those in here discussing changes made since the beta test, are you aware that DICE release weekly DEV Talks videos discussing new things and changes made. Their devs are also releasing nearly daily bits of info on twitter regarding BFV.
    This is part of why hate things like twitter. They use that thing instead of their own official forums to discuss things out

    Their official posts on these forums don't seem to get a ton of views or comments. It seems like a lot of users just scroll past the bookmarked posts at the top. I think they get a lot more feedback on Reddit and Twitter, so they go there more often. I just keep a tab open for some of the devs' Twitters and a tab for the Reddit page to check now and then to try to keep up to date.

    I personally prefer these forums over Reddit - mainly because posts/comments that go against the grain don't get downvoted out of sight. Everyone can say their piece. But of course the devs are going to go with whatever gets them the most feedback though.
  • DeadlyDanDaMan
    615 postsMember, Battlefield 3, Battlefield 4, Battlefield, Battlefield 1 Member
    2. In regards to alpha 2, I disagree. If they add an additional mag on top of alpha 2, bringing it up to 5 mags - then maybe? It would really depend on the ammo depot placements, the quantity of ammo depot placements, and the quantity of ammo from corpse drops. I doubt they'll be generous, based on the direction of the beta.

    DICE has already stated that they have increased the amount of ammo you start with and the max amount of ammo you can carry since the Beta.

    The beta decreased the starting ammo and max ammo from alpha 2. Them increasing it says nothing at all, unless they specify the amount that they increased those by.

    No, they didn't. The STG had 93 total bullets allowed in Alpha 2 and in the Beta. Go watch videos on Youtube and you will see that I am correct.

    I don't need to watch youtube videos - I played them, and you are incorrect. The STG in Alpha 2 spawned in with 3 mags, with a max capacity of 4 mags. The beta lowered that back down to Alpha 1 - spawning in with 2 mags, with a max capacity of 3 mags.

    Youtube videos will show this difference.



    Very beginning of the video, STG has 93 total rounds. This is Closed Alpha 2.



    6:04 STG with 93 total rounds of ammo. This is the Open Beta.

    Tell me again how wrong I am?
  • TyroneLoyd wrote: »

    Pc mate. Was in Germany for the past two years but finally moved back to the states so haven't really been on much. Controllers just arent my thing :/ and I would never use a xim on console rather not cheat the system.

    ahh. ok. so sad.
  • A_Cool_Gorilla
    1374 postsMember, Battlefield 3, Battlefield 4, Battlefield Hardline, Battlefield, Battlefield 1, BF1IncursionsAlpha, Battlefield V Member
    2. In regards to alpha 2, I disagree. If they add an additional mag on top of alpha 2, bringing it up to 5 mags - then maybe? It would really depend on the ammo depot placements, the quantity of ammo depot placements, and the quantity of ammo from corpse drops. I doubt they'll be generous, based on the direction of the beta.

    DICE has already stated that they have increased the amount of ammo you start with and the max amount of ammo you can carry since the Beta.

    The beta decreased the starting ammo and max ammo from alpha 2. Them increasing it says nothing at all, unless they specify the amount that they increased those by.

    No, they didn't. The STG had 93 total bullets allowed in Alpha 2 and in the Beta. Go watch videos on Youtube and you will see that I am correct.

    I don't need to watch youtube videos - I played them, and you are incorrect. The STG in Alpha 2 spawned in with 3 mags, with a max capacity of 4 mags. The beta lowered that back down to Alpha 1 - spawning in with 2 mags, with a max capacity of 3 mags.

    Youtube videos will show this difference.



    Very beginning of the video, STG has 93 total rounds. This is Closed Alpha 2.



    6:04 STG with 93 total rounds of ammo. This is the Open Beta.

    Tell me again how wrong I am?

    Sure thing - you are without a doubt 100% wrong.

    At 1:48 in the first video, notice how he gets ammo, putting him at 124 total bullets? That's a total of 4 mags, which just isn't possible in alpha 1, or beta.
  • nanananamimimimi
    107 postsMember, Battlefield 3, Battlefield 4, Battlefield, Battlefield 1, Battlefield V Member
    edited October 2018

    [removed due to inaccuracy of the quote]

    HAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHA XD lmao XXXDDDDDDDDDDDDDDHAHAHAxxxxxxxxxxxxxxD
    Post edited by LOLGotYerTags on
  • nanananamimimimi
    107 postsMember, Battlefield 3, Battlefield 4, Battlefield, Battlefield 1, Battlefield V Member
    edited October 2018
    [removed due to flamebait]
  • LOLGotYerTags
    13442 postsMember, Moderator, Battlefield 3, Battlefield 4, Battlefield Hardline, Battlefield, Battlefield 1, CTE, BF1IncursionsAlpha, Battlefield V Moderator
    @nanananamimimimi
    Maybe not flaming others will help.

    I have removed your comment this time, Next time will be an infraction.
    
    
  • DeadlyDanDaMan
    615 postsMember, Battlefield 3, Battlefield 4, Battlefield, Battlefield 1 Member
    edited October 2018
    2. In regards to alpha 2, I disagree. If they add an additional mag on top of alpha 2, bringing it up to 5 mags - then maybe? It would really depend on the ammo depot placements, the quantity of ammo depot placements, and the quantity of ammo from corpse drops. I doubt they'll be generous, based on the direction of the beta.

    DICE has already stated that they have increased the amount of ammo you start with and the max amount of ammo you can carry since the Beta.

    The beta decreased the starting ammo and max ammo from alpha 2. Them increasing it says nothing at all, unless they specify the amount that they increased those by.

    No, they didn't. The STG had 93 total bullets allowed in Alpha 2 and in the Beta. Go watch videos on Youtube and you will see that I am correct.

    I don't need to watch youtube videos - I played them, and you are incorrect. The STG in Alpha 2 spawned in with 3 mags, with a max capacity of 4 mags. The beta lowered that back down to Alpha 1 - spawning in with 2 mags, with a max capacity of 3 mags.

    Youtube videos will show this difference.



    Very beginning of the video, STG has 93 total rounds. This is Closed Alpha 2.



    6:04 STG with 93 total rounds of ammo. This is the Open Beta.

    Tell me again how wrong I am?

    Sure thing - you are without a doubt 100% wrong.

    At 1:48 in the first video, notice how he gets ammo, putting him at 124 total bullets? That's a total of 4 mags, which just isn't possible in alpha 1, or beta.

    I'm not so full of myself to admit that I was wrong. My bad. I want this game to succeed as much as the next BF fan. Sorry for doubting you Gorilla.
  • A_Cool_Gorilla
    1374 postsMember, Battlefield 3, Battlefield 4, Battlefield Hardline, Battlefield, Battlefield 1, BF1IncursionsAlpha, Battlefield V Member
    2. In regards to alpha 2, I disagree. If they add an additional mag on top of alpha 2, bringing it up to 5 mags - then maybe? It would really depend on the ammo depot placements, the quantity of ammo depot placements, and the quantity of ammo from corpse drops. I doubt they'll be generous, based on the direction of the beta.

    DICE has already stated that they have increased the amount of ammo you start with and the max amount of ammo you can carry since the Beta.

    The beta decreased the starting ammo and max ammo from alpha 2. Them increasing it says nothing at all, unless they specify the amount that they increased those by.

    No, they didn't. The STG had 93 total bullets allowed in Alpha 2 and in the Beta. Go watch videos on Youtube and you will see that I am correct.

    I don't need to watch youtube videos - I played them, and you are incorrect. The STG in Alpha 2 spawned in with 3 mags, with a max capacity of 4 mags. The beta lowered that back down to Alpha 1 - spawning in with 2 mags, with a max capacity of 3 mags.

    Youtube videos will show this difference.



    Very beginning of the video, STG has 93 total rounds. This is Closed Alpha 2.



    6:04 STG with 93 total rounds of ammo. This is the Open Beta.

    Tell me again how wrong I am?

    Sure thing - you are without a doubt 100% wrong.

    At 1:48 in the first video, notice how he gets ammo, putting him at 124 total bullets? That's a total of 4 mags, which just isn't possible in alpha 1, or beta.

    I'm not so full of myself to admit that I was wrong. My bad. I want this game to succeed as much as the next BF fan. Sorry for doubting you Gorilla.

    No problem, we all want this game to succeed. We all just have different ideas of what the ideal Battlefield game looks like.
  • CHAMMOND1992
    1243 postsMember, Battlefield 3, Battlefield 4, Battlefield, Battlefield 1, CTE, Battlefield V Member
    Attrition is trash.
  • madman001able
    611 postsMember, Battlefield 3, Battlefield 4, Battlefield, Battlefield 1, Battlefield V Member
    edited October 2018
    Attrition is trash.

    So you would rather have a game where explosives can be spammed constantly, tanks will have infinite amount of ammo/repairs, aircraft will be constantly dropping bombs or firing rockets from above, and enemy soldiers magically regenerate all of their health back after taking damage? Gtfoh.
  • SirTerrible
    1713 postsMember, Battlefield 3, Battlefield 4, Battlefield Hardline, Battlefield, Battlefield 1, CTE, Battlefield V Member
    Attrition is trash.

    So you would rather have a game where explosives can be spammed constantly, tanks will have infinite amount of ammo/repairs, aircraft will be constantly dropping bombs or firing rockets from above, and enemy soldiers magically regenerate all of their health back after taking damage? Gtfoh.

    You can still limit explosives without limiting the amount of ammunition you get for your primary weapons.
  • madman001able
    611 postsMember, Battlefield 3, Battlefield 4, Battlefield, Battlefield 1, Battlefield V Member
    Attrition is trash.

    So you would rather have a game where explosives can be spammed constantly, tanks will have infinite amount of ammo/repairs, aircraft will be constantly dropping bombs or firing rockets from above, and enemy soldiers magically regenerate all of their health back after taking damage? Gtfoh.

    You can still limit explosives without limiting the amount of ammunition you get for your primary weapons.

    How?
  • SirTerrible
    1713 postsMember, Battlefield 3, Battlefield 4, Battlefield Hardline, Battlefield, Battlefield 1, CTE, Battlefield V Member
    Attrition is trash.

    So you would rather have a game where explosives can be spammed constantly, tanks will have infinite amount of ammo/repairs, aircraft will be constantly dropping bombs or firing rockets from above, and enemy soldiers magically regenerate all of their health back after taking damage? Gtfoh.

    You can still limit explosives without limiting the amount of ammunition you get for your primary weapons.

    How?

    By having a long timer for refilling explosives, by making it so only supply stations resupply explosives, or a combo of both.
Sign In or Register to comment.