Upcoming patch notes sneak peak

Comments

  • alienstout
    680 postsMember, Battlefield 3, Battlefield 4, Battlefield Hardline, Battlefield, Battlefield 1, Battlefield V Member
    DingoKillr wrote: »
    alienstout wrote: »
    alienstout wrote: »
    Mangrey wrote: »
    Please remove the x3 scopes from Assault and Support weapons Dice

    I agree, they should only have the close quarters 2x scope

    No, 3x was a thing in WWII.

    This is also a virtual game. Not real life.

    That's kind of silly. Stop trying to nerf things and adapt. As for snipers getting out-sniped by assault... you must be crappy snipers. I've been killed plenty of times by good snipers in 1-2 shots on the move. I've also been killed in one shot while tap-tap-tapping away in single fire with my assault gun trying to get that sniper.
    Not this again. Assault are OP with no glint 3x scope. Recon need to either be good or lucky, even you said they need to be good.

    And assault does not have to be good with a 3x scope, counter-sniping? A good sniper will own a bad/OK assault. A good assault at a distance is still at a disadvantage to a good sniper. Skill level matters more than the weapon/class.
  • Skitelz7
    925 postsMember, Battlefield 3, Battlefield 4, Battlefield Hardline, Battlefield, Battlefield 1, CTE, Battlefield V Member
    edited January 11
    VincentNZ wrote: »
    I think they are going the wrong way with the SMGs here. A buff to spread is alright, but then they are more accurate than ARs. A decrease in recoil is absolutely useless, the MP34, Sten and MP40 have little recoil and an abysmal ROF. What kind of boost are they supposed to gain through even less recoil per shot? The biggest winners are, again, the high ROF SMGs, that become more controllable, at any range.
    This does not change how average the slow SMGs are in close quarters, and only makes all SMGs more accurate. The weapon class that is already pretty easy to use.

    The only thing they should have done is buff the damage. Make SMGs take one less bullet to kill.
    That would have been perfect in my opinion.
  • DingoKillr
    3509 postsMember, Battlefield 3, Battlefield 4, Battlefield, Battlefield 1, CTE, BF1IncursionsAlpha, Battlefield V Member
    VincentNZ wrote: »
    I think they are going the wrong way with the SMGs here. A buff to spread is alright, but then they are more accurate than ARs. A decrease in recoil is absolutely useless, the MP34, Sten and MP40 have little recoil and an abysmal ROF. What kind of boost are they supposed to gain through even less recoil per shot? The biggest winners are, again, the high ROF SMGs, that become more controllable, at any range.
    This does not change how average the slow SMGs are in close quarters, and only makes all SMGs more accurate. The weapon class that is already pretty easy to use.
    I have similar concerns for different reason, if SMG become to good at medium range it will encourage more Assault to put 3x to play a sniper roll.

    A new weapons class would have allowed a few Medic at medium range instead of every Medic at medium range.
  • VincentNZ
    2709 postsMember, Battlefield 3, Battlefield 4, Battlefield, Battlefield 1, BF1IncursionsAlpha, Battlefield V Member
    Skitelz7 wrote: »
    VincentNZ wrote: »
    I think they are going the wrong way with the SMGs here. A buff to spread is alright, but then they are more accurate than ARs. A decrease in recoil is absolutely useless, the MP34, Sten and MP40 have little recoil and an abysmal ROF. What kind of boost are they supposed to gain through even less recoil per shot? The biggest winners are, again, the high ROF SMGs, that become more controllable, at any range.
    This does not change how average the slow SMGs are in close quarters, and only makes all SMGs more accurate. The weapon class that is already pretty easy to use.

    The only thing they should have done is buff the damage. Make SMGs take one less bullet to kill.
    That would have been perfect in my opinion.

    That is a way to solve it, but I am generally hesitant to increase bullet any further in BFV, which already has a rather low TTK. You could extend the 5HK or 6HK range I suppose, but a 9mm is still a 9mm and it makes no sense to have it deal mostly the same damage than the AR bullets. You need to differentiate the two weapon classes after all.
    I would have increased the ROF on the slow-firing SMGs by 20-30 to decrease their TTK in close quarters and that would leave the fast firing SMGs still in a good spot, without a buff. MP28 however does need a recoil buff in any case.
  • narnold700
    282 postsMember, Battlefield, Battlefield 1, Battlefield V Member
    Gotta say I'm a little worried about an all around SMG buff. If anything I think better hip fire accuracy and ADS speed and buffed movement speed while ADS would be the best way to help medic, and maybe a very slight damage buff. Giving medics a medium range buff seems to be a bit extreme and could result in less objective play and less healing and reviving. Such a broad buff will also cause quite a few people to play the class and tanks also being buffed will make that buff seem even stronger with fewer assault players running around. I can't say I agree with removing 3x, but I do think recon should get access to some of the semi-auto rifles so that class can more effectively play the objectives should they choose to do so.
  • Ernie_Shavers
    131 postsMember, Battlefield 3, Battlefield 4, Battlefield, Battlefield 1, Battlefield V Member
    DingoKillr wrote: »
    VincentNZ wrote: »
    I think they are going the wrong way with the SMGs here. A buff to spread is alright, but then they are more accurate than ARs. A decrease in recoil is absolutely useless, the MP34, Sten and MP40 have little recoil and an abysmal ROF. What kind of boost are they supposed to gain through even less recoil per shot? The biggest winners are, again, the high ROF SMGs, that become more controllable, at any range.
    This does not change how average the slow SMGs are in close quarters, and only makes all SMGs more accurate. The weapon class that is already pretty easy to use.
    I have similar concerns for different reason, if SMG become to good at medium range it will encourage more Assault to put 3x to play a sniper roll.

    A new weapons class would have allowed a few Medic at medium range instead of every Medic at medium range.

    Buffing, nerfing & chronically screwing around with weapon damage/specs is commons place in this genre but there is no problem with how the SMG's function. Turning SMG's into assault rifles isn't the answer.

    The commons sense "fix" is to give the Medic class a more diverse selection of weapon types allowing them to choose their play style. How does DICE not understand this?

    "Let's just turn the SMG's into assault rifles that'll make everyone happy!". What is wrong with these guys?

    The thought process at DICE seems too rigid and uninventive in their approach to solving problems. It's fascinating.
  • alienstout
    680 postsMember, Battlefield 3, Battlefield 4, Battlefield Hardline, Battlefield, Battlefield 1, Battlefield V Member
    The commons sense "fix" is to give the Medic class a more diverse selection of weapon types allowing them to choose their play style. How does DICE not understand this?

    Exactly! I don't understand the rigid "only this class can have this gun" thing. I think it should be about the specialty gadgets, not about the super-limiting of guns and gadgets.
  • Mangrey
    200 postsMember, Battlefield 3, Battlefield, Battlefield 1, Battlefield V Member
    Mangrey wrote: »
    Please remove the x3 scopes from Assault and Support weapons Dice

    I agree, they should only have the close quarters 2x scope

    ye byut only on the simi auto the assaults is x1 only
  • DingoKillr
    3509 postsMember, Battlefield 3, Battlefield 4, Battlefield, Battlefield 1, CTE, BF1IncursionsAlpha, Battlefield V Member
    alienstout wrote: »
    DingoKillr wrote: »
    alienstout wrote: »
    alienstout wrote: »
    Mangrey wrote: »
    Please remove the x3 scopes from Assault and Support weapons Dice

    I agree, they should only have the close quarters 2x scope

    No, 3x was a thing in WWII.

    This is also a virtual game. Not real life.

    That's kind of silly. Stop trying to nerf things and adapt. As for snipers getting out-sniped by assault... you must be crappy snipers. I've been killed plenty of times by good snipers in 1-2 shots on the move. I've also been killed in one shot while tap-tap-tapping away in single fire with my assault gun trying to get that sniper.
    Not this again. Assault are OP with no glint 3x scope. Recon need to either be good or lucky, even you said they need to be good.

    And assault does not have to be good with a 3x scope, counter-sniping? A good sniper will own a bad/OK assault. A good assault at a distance is still at a disadvantage to a good sniper. Skill level matters more than the weapon/class.
    No, they don't. Here is why, a BA sniper has 1 shot if they don't get the kill a SA sniper can still kill before the next round of the BA. There are many reason why beside skill why a 1HK does not occur, like sudden change in directionof the target(ADAD spam), body penetration(arms), invisible walls or even objects getting in between(like teammates).

    SLR are not that much better off than BA when compared to SA snipers as SLR have higher recoil, lower velocity and lower ROF.

    While a SA sniper can afford to have a bullet or two not reach their target. This means SA snipers weapons are unbalnced and require a lower skill than Recon.
  • smokintom214
    1794 postsMember, Battlefield 3, Battlefield 4, Battlefield Hardline, Battlefield, Battlefield 1, CTE, Battlefield V Member
    alienstout wrote: »
    DingoKillr wrote: »
    alienstout wrote: »
    alienstout wrote: »
    Mangrey wrote: »
    Please remove the x3 scopes from Assault and Support weapons Dice

    I agree, they should only have the close quarters 2x scope

    No, 3x was a thing in WWII.

    This is also a virtual game. Not real life.

    That's kind of silly. Stop trying to nerf things and adapt. As for snipers getting out-sniped by assault... you must be crappy snipers. I've been killed plenty of times by good snipers in 1-2 shots on the move. I've also been killed in one shot while tap-tap-tapping away in single fire with my assault gun trying to get that sniper.
    Not this again. Assault are OP with no glint 3x scope. Recon need to either be good or lucky, even you said they need to be good.

    And assault does not have to be good with a 3x scope, counter-sniping? A good sniper will own a bad/OK assault. A good assault at a distance is still at a disadvantage to a good sniper. Skill level matters more than the weapon/class.

    No they don't, as I said in my previous post any novice can pick up a semi auto with a 3x and start owning enemy players across the map given they have they sensitivity already adjusted for the 3x.
  • smokintom214
    1794 postsMember, Battlefield 3, Battlefield 4, Battlefield Hardline, Battlefield, Battlefield 1, CTE, Battlefield V Member
    DingoKillr wrote: »
    alienstout wrote: »
    DingoKillr wrote: »
    alienstout wrote: »
    alienstout wrote: »
    Mangrey wrote: »
    Please remove the x3 scopes from Assault and Support weapons Dice

    I agree, they should only have the close quarters 2x scope

    No, 3x was a thing in WWII.

    This is also a virtual game. Not real life.

    That's kind of silly. Stop trying to nerf things and adapt. As for snipers getting out-sniped by assault... you must be crappy snipers. I've been killed plenty of times by good snipers in 1-2 shots on the move. I've also been killed in one shot while tap-tap-tapping away in single fire with my assault gun trying to get that sniper.
    Not this again. Assault are OP with no glint 3x scope. Recon need to either be good or lucky, even you said they need to be good.

    And assault does not have to be good with a 3x scope, counter-sniping? A good sniper will own a bad/OK assault. A good assault at a distance is still at a disadvantage to a good sniper. Skill level matters more than the weapon/class.
    No, they don't. Here is why, a BA sniper has 1 shot if they don't get the kill a SA sniper can still kill before the next round of the BA. There are many reason why beside skill why a 1HK does not occur, like sudden change in directionof the target(ADAD spam), body penetration(arms), invisible walls or even objects getting in between(like teammates).

    SLR are not that much better off than BA when compared to SA snipers as SLR have higher recoil, lower velocity and lower ROF.

    While a SA sniper can afford to have a bullet or two not reach their target. This means SA snipers weapons are unbalnced and require a lower skill than Recon.

    Exactly, guns like the Turner m1a1 g1-5 all get 16+ rounds that are nearly as lethal as an SLR's round except they carry no drag or drop aswell as shoot 5x faster.. with a 3x they get long range accuracy aswell as in close and medium ranges.
  • bran1986
    5659 postsMember, Battlefield 4, Battlefield Hardline, Battlefield, Battlefield 1, CTE, BF1IncursionsAlpha, Battlefield V Member
    DingoKillr wrote: »
    VincentNZ wrote: »
    I think they are going the wrong way with the SMGs here. A buff to spread is alright, but then they are more accurate than ARs. A decrease in recoil is absolutely useless, the MP34, Sten and MP40 have little recoil and an abysmal ROF. What kind of boost are they supposed to gain through even less recoil per shot? The biggest winners are, again, the high ROF SMGs, that become more controllable, at any range.
    This does not change how average the slow SMGs are in close quarters, and only makes all SMGs more accurate. The weapon class that is already pretty easy to use.
    I have similar concerns for different reason, if SMG become to good at medium range it will encourage more Assault to put 3x to play a sniper roll.

    A new weapons class would have allowed a few Medic at medium range instead of every Medic at medium range.

    Buffing, nerfing & chronically screwing around with weapon damage/specs is commons place in this genre but there is no problem with how the SMG's function. Turning SMG's into assault rifles isn't the answer.

    The commons sense "fix" is to give the Medic class a more diverse selection of weapon types allowing them to choose their play style. How does DICE not understand this?

    "Let's just turn the SMG's into assault rifles that'll make everyone happy!". What is wrong with these guys?

    The thought process at DICE seems too rigid and uninventive in their approach to solving problems. It's fascinating.

    The smgs won't be assault rifles and won't be any better than the assault rifles. SMGs will still have a steeper damage drop off, slower bullet velocity, rate of fire, and bullet drag. I would love another weapon class but then people whine about "OP Medic snipers with infinite heals!." You had people whining about the potential for medics to get pistol carbines. There will always be a segment of players(mostly assaults) who will complain about any kind of buff medics get regardless of how it is done.
  • smokintom214
    1794 postsMember, Battlefield 3, Battlefield 4, Battlefield Hardline, Battlefield, Battlefield 1, CTE, Battlefield V Member
    DingoKillr wrote: »
    VincentNZ wrote: »
    I think they are going the wrong way with the SMGs here. A buff to spread is alright, but then they are more accurate than ARs. A decrease in recoil is absolutely useless, the MP34, Sten and MP40 have little recoil and an abysmal ROF. What kind of boost are they supposed to gain through even less recoil per shot? The biggest winners are, again, the high ROF SMGs, that become more controllable, at any range.
    This does not change how average the slow SMGs are in close quarters, and only makes all SMGs more accurate. The weapon class that is already pretty easy to use.
    I have similar concerns for different reason, if SMG become to good at medium range it will encourage more Assault to put 3x to play a sniper roll.

    A new weapons class would have allowed a few Medic at medium range instead of every Medic at medium range.

    Buffing, nerfing & chronically screwing around with weapon damage/specs is commons place in this genre but there is no problem with how the SMG's function. Turning SMG's into assault rifles isn't the answer.

    The commons sense "fix" is to give the Medic class a more diverse selection of weapon types allowing them to choose their play style. How does DICE not understand this?

    "Let's just turn the SMG's into assault rifles that'll make everyone happy!". What is wrong with these guys?

    The thought process at DICE seems too rigid and uninventive in their approach to solving problems. It's fascinating.

    It may seem like what was wrote on the Tweet made it sound like they are going to be more like assault rifles.. but, we don't know that until the changes are actually live and wrote down in the update notes.
  • VOLBANKER
    966 postsMember, Battlefield 3, Battlefield 4, Battlefield, Battlefield 1, CTE, BF1IncursionsAlpha, Battlefield V Member
    edited January 11
    It may seem like what was wrote on the Tweet made it sound like they are going to be more like assault rifles.. but, we don't know that until the changes are actually live and wrote down in the update notes.
    I agree and I'll add that we should all take this sparse info about the upcoming update with a grain of salt. For example when DICE say SMGs will be more accurate and have less recoil, we don't actually know if DICE is gonna change all the SMGs or just some of them.

    EDIT:
    What I mean is: Twitter is not exactly a way of communicating that allows for lots of elaboration and so on. It's just a short message. So when DICE says "the SMGs will be more accurate" etc., who knows if they actually mean all SMGs or just some of them.
  • BaronVonGoon
    6737 postsMember, Battlefield 3, Battlefield 4, Battlefield Hardline, Battlefield, Battlefield 1, CTE, BF1IncursionsAlpha, Battlefield V Member
    Skitelz7 wrote: »
    Hope the aim assist strength sliders arrive with this patch, if not, then the one on the 29th.

    Aim assist strength?
    It's already low enough. You might as well turn it off.

    Seriously? Try playing with a mouse and you'll see just how strong aim assist is, it's too sticky and slows you're aim too.much. it ruins aim.

    Oh and turning it off doesn't actually completely turn it off. You'd think the option to 'OFF' aim assist would completely turn off aim assist. But it doesn't lol. Just try it and you'll see.
  • ackers75
    2328 postsMember, Battlefield 3, Battlefield 4, Battlefield Hardline, Battlefield, Battlefield 1, Battlefield V Member
    Skitelz7 wrote: »
    Hope the aim assist strength sliders arrive with this patch, if not, then the one on the 29th.

    Aim assist strength?
    It's already low enough. You might as well turn it off.

    Seriously? Try playing with a mouse and you'll see just how strong aim assist is, it's too sticky and slows you're aim too.much. it ruins aim.

    Oh and turning it off doesn't actually completely turn it off. You'd think the option to 'OFF' aim assist would completely turn off aim assist. But it doesn't lol. Just try it and you'll see.

    Your using xim a completely non authorised product so you really have no grounds to complain!
  • BaronVonGoon
    6737 postsMember, Battlefield 3, Battlefield 4, Battlefield Hardline, Battlefield, Battlefield 1, CTE, BF1IncursionsAlpha, Battlefield V Member
    ackers75 wrote: »
    Skitelz7 wrote: »
    Hope the aim assist strength sliders arrive with this patch, if not, then the one on the 29th.

    Aim assist strength?
    It's already low enough. You might as well turn it off.

    Seriously? Try playing with a mouse and you'll see just how strong aim assist is, it's too sticky and slows you're aim too.much. it ruins aim.

    Oh and turning it off doesn't actually completely turn it off. You'd think the option to 'OFF' aim assist would completely turn off aim assist. But it doesn't lol. Just try it and you'll see.

    Your using xim a completely non authorised product so you really have no grounds to complain!

    Lol I don't disagree. But hasn't stopped from whinning to the devs for the last 5 years. this slider may (may) be all me. I've tweeted them about it on multiple occasions the last few years.
  • ackers75
    2328 postsMember, Battlefield 3, Battlefield 4, Battlefield Hardline, Battlefield, Battlefield 1, Battlefield V Member
    edited January 11
    ackers75 wrote: »
    Skitelz7 wrote: »
    Hope the aim assist strength sliders arrive with this patch, if not, then the one on the 29th.

    Aim assist strength?
    It's already low enough. You might as well turn it off.

    Seriously? Try playing with a mouse and you'll see just how strong aim assist is, it's too sticky and slows you're aim too.much. it ruins aim.

    Oh and turning it off doesn't actually completely turn it off. You'd think the option to 'OFF' aim assist would completely turn off aim assist. But it doesn't lol. Just try it and you'll see.

    Your using xim a completely non authorised product so you really have no grounds to complain!

    Lol I don't disagree. But hasn't stopped from whinning to the devs for the last 5 years. this slider may (may) be all me. I've tweeted them about it on multiple occasions the last few years.

    So your in essence wanting to widen an advantage you already have by taking away what little aim assistance a controller has in this game.

    You should be asking for native kb/m support if that’s what you really wanted
  • ackers75
    2328 postsMember, Battlefield 3, Battlefield 4, Battlefield Hardline, Battlefield, Battlefield 1, Battlefield V Member
    ackers75 wrote: »
    Skitelz7 wrote: »
    Hope the aim assist strength sliders arrive with this patch, if not, then the one on the 29th.

    Aim assist strength?
    It's already low enough. You might as well turn it off.

    Seriously? Try playing with a mouse and you'll see just how strong aim assist is, it's too sticky and slows you're aim too.much. it ruins aim.

    Oh and turning it off doesn't actually completely turn it off. You'd think the option to 'OFF' aim assist would completely turn off aim assist. But it doesn't lol. Just try it and you'll see.

    Your using xim a completely non authorised product so you really have no grounds to complain!

    Lol I don't disagree. But hasn't stopped from whinning to the devs for the last 5 years. this slider may (may) be all me. I've tweeted them about it on multiple occasions the last few years.

    I think people like yourself should be shouting about native kb/m support rather than aim assist then.
  • BaronVonGoon
    6737 postsMember, Battlefield 3, Battlefield 4, Battlefield Hardline, Battlefield, Battlefield 1, CTE, BF1IncursionsAlpha, Battlefield V Member
    ackers75 wrote: »
    ackers75 wrote: »
    Skitelz7 wrote: »
    Hope the aim assist strength sliders arrive with this patch, if not, then the one on the 29th.

    Aim assist strength?
    It's already low enough. You might as well turn it off.

    Seriously? Try playing with a mouse and you'll see just how strong aim assist is, it's too sticky and slows you're aim too.much. it ruins aim.

    Oh and turning it off doesn't actually completely turn it off. You'd think the option to 'OFF' aim assist would completely turn off aim assist. But it doesn't lol. Just try it and you'll see.

    Your using xim a completely non authorised product so you really have no grounds to complain!

    Lol I don't disagree. But hasn't stopped from whinning to the devs for the last 5 years. this slider may (may) be all me. I've tweeted them about it on multiple occasions the last few years.

    I think people like yourself should be shouting about native kb/m support rather than aim assist then.

    Alot of us have. It's coming. Not anytime soon but it's coming down the road.
Sign In or Register to comment.