Support (MMG) is now NERFED back to the stone age in BF5

13468922

Comments

  • sasqch10
    57 postsMember, Battlefield 3, Battlefield 4, Battlefield, Battlefield 1, CTE, Battlefield V Member
    You are talking about a game that makes flowers bulletproof but tanks out aluminum foil.
  • sasqch10
    57 postsMember, Battlefield 3, Battlefield 4, Battlefield, Battlefield 1, CTE, Battlefield V Member
    You are talking about a game that makes flowers bulletproof but a tanks out aluminum foil
  • Nesodos
    80 postsMember, Battlefield 4, Battlefield, Battlefield 1, Battlefield V Member
    TEKNOCODE wrote: »
    Mate, I have more time in the game than you do.

    Open your eyes then. You are either blindly running through the game or choose to ignore them.
    Its even worse when the horrible matchmaking puts me in the way better team (leading the scores most of the time, its like there are only kids and chimps playing in EU) and the enemies think its better to hide in every corner of the map racking up kills instead of playing obj
  • alienstout
    619 postsMember, Battlefield 3, Battlefield 4, Battlefield Hardline, Battlefield, Battlefield 1, Battlefield V Member
    Nesodos wrote: »
    TEKNOCODE wrote: »
    Mate, I have more time in the game than you do.

    Open your eyes then. You are either blindly running through the game or choose to ignore them.
    Its even worse when the horrible matchmaking puts me in the way better team (leading the scores most of the time, its like there are only kids and chimps playing in EU) and the enemies think its better to hide in every corner of the map racking up kills instead of playing obj

    How are you even allowed to play pretend violence in the EU at this point? I thought there was a Battlefield Pillow Fight version for you humans.
  • SirTerrible
    1357 postsMember, Battlefield 3, Battlefield 4, Battlefield Hardline, Battlefield, Battlefield 1, CTE, Battlefield V Member
    I for one am sad that camping on a piece of rubble in the middle of a road nowhere near any objective is a now .00001% less effective and braindead easy than it was before the patch. The good news is since those types of players are tactical geniuses and 400 IQ players they will adapt without issue.
  • BUBBS112
    70 postsMember, Battlefield, Battlefield 1, CTE, Battlefield V Member
    Belly camper? 😭
  • danops3
    19 postsMember, Battlefield 3, Battlefield 4, Battlefield Hardline, Battlefield, Battlefield 1, Battlefield V Member
    I play mostly support with the MG42. Yes it was nerfed quite a bit but mostly from long distances. And it was WAY to accurate from across the map! I was killing snipers like nobody’s business before the patch. From short to medium distance it’s still FN deadly!! Exactly how it should be!

  • Austacker
    430 postsMember, Battlefield 3, Battlefield 4, Battlefield, Battlefield 1, CTE, Battlefield V Member
    edited January 19
    I for one am sad that camping on a piece of rubble in the middle of a road nowhere near any objective is a now .00001% less effective and braindead easy than it was before the patch. The good news is since those types of players are tactical geniuses and 400 IQ players they will adapt without issue.

    This is one of the biggest issues with raising complaint in regards to the changes around Support - the general apathy that exists out there with the Battlefield community.


    Support certainly does have additional options in regards to weapons, but the general consensus is, if one specific weapon or class of weapons have been nerfed to a point where they are no longer effective, you don't get to raise this as an issue, instead you're encouraged to use an alternative.

    I ask you in all seriousness though, how silly is that sort of thinking?

    There's a strong consensus already out there lamenting the rise of the KE7 use being detrimental to the game and how Battlefield is slowly losing it's identity as a unique experience from other games like Call of Duty - yet any time people raise an issue around those fringe playstyles (yes, those 'belly campers' you all love to hate) instead of ackowledging those who play this style as their core, you hate on them, belittle them and try to shout them down instead.

    Don't you all realise just how counter productive your attitudes are on this issue?

    The MMG players will play a very specific - and tactical - role in Battlefield. Whilst the core of the playerbase will push to take objectives in the game, who's role is it then to resupply you guys with ammo, fortify what you've taken and actually defend it?

    Why on earth are you all complaining about the anchor to your teams here raising issue with the ability to be effective at that role?

    Because you all want to run and gun? Is that ALL this game should be for you?

    I mean, you are certainly getting your wish here and it's to the detriment of the game. People are leaving this game in droves and it's seriously impacting the retention of players and commitment of even hard core fans to buy the game.

    Instead of taking a giant crap on those who anchor your teams, playing that important (but unappreciated) role, perhaps instead you should look at the tactical viability of the role and assume those who play it as their core playstyle are not these 'noob campers' you all despise, but rather players who fill a very specific niche and help you and your team win the game.

    Battlefield is variety. It's core appeal is in it's ability to provision large and vast landscapes with a wide variety of tools at your disposal to achieve those objectives.

    What you're all fighting for is homogenization which is the direct opposite of what makes the Battlefield experience most appealing.

    When people mock this game for the COD experience it's becoming, you need to objectively appreciate that stems from this community continuing to push for that experience.


    Be very careful what you all wish for people, because eventually, if all this game offers is a poorer version of Call of Duty the slide in both sales and player retention will continue and eventually, EA will shut down this franchise. We are already in danger of that with the release of Battlefield 5.
  • nanananamimimimi
    107 postsMember, Battlefield 3, Battlefield 4, Battlefield, Battlefield 1, Battlefield V Member
    Thacyoon wrote: »
    And DICE/EA I will NEVER ever buy anything more from you - ever!

    Naaaaaahhhhh
  • Austacker
    430 postsMember, Battlefield 3, Battlefield 4, Battlefield, Battlefield 1, CTE, Battlefield V Member
    I really don't get the hate.

    On one hand, we have the core community complaining about the common use of that KE7 and how Battlefield is has lost it's identity and become just another poor man's COD.

    On the other, we have the same people belittle anyone who isn't playing run and gun and chooses instead to lock down and defend objectives with the weapons / tools that the game design offers.



    What sort of FPS game do you lot want?

    Call of Duty / Counter Strike or Battlefield?

    What makes Battlefield unique? Have you all ever stopped and asked yourself that question honestly and objectively?

    Then listen to how you collectively shout down and belittle the 'belly campers' who are the core tactical parts of your side that will lock down your taken objectives, build the fortifications and defend them.

    Taking a giant dump on those who specialize in these roles raising issues around the combat effectiveness of those roles is just counter productive.

    You're actually contributing to the logical conclusion that will follow when you take out all the roles that made Battlefield, Battlefield.
  • Astr0damus
    2646 postsMember, Battlefield 3, Battlefield 4, Battlefield, Battlefield 1, CTE, Battlefield V Member
    Foamcow wrote: »
    These EA dopes fixed footsteps .... why , who cares . It was perfect before . Now the game sounds like horses pull carts on a paved streets . The bi pods are messed up , being prone is messed up . How many times do you adjust your line of sight and your player dry humps the ground and pushes you forward out of your cover . Then you shoot and it hits the ground instead of the target in your sites . They buffed the revolver why ? and they nerfed the assault 1907 why ? Another useless untested patch . Horrible job .

    In Red Dead Redemption 2 horses poop. Now if they had horses in this game (like in BF1) and they would poop, I wonder how loud the thump would be.

    No doubt someone would complain that the poop was the wrong value on the Bristol Scale.

    I had a suggestion in BF 1 that if you camped too long in the same spot, a pack of wolves would drag you off, or a bear would attack you (or maybe a horse could poop on the person, blinding them for 45 seconds)
  • narnold700
    272 postsMember, Battlefield, Battlefield 1, Battlefield V Member
    Austacker wrote: »
    I really don't get the hate.

    On one hand, we have the core community complaining about the common use of that KE7 and how Battlefield is has lost it's identity and become just another poor man's COD.

    On the other, we have the same people belittle anyone who isn't playing run and gun and chooses instead to lock down and defend objectives with the weapons / tools that the game design offers.



    What sort of FPS game do you lot want?

    Call of Duty / Counter Strike or Battlefield?

    What makes Battlefield unique? Have you all ever stopped and asked yourself that question honestly and objectively?

    Then listen to how you collectively shout down and belittle the 'belly campers' who are the core tactical parts of your side that will lock down your taken objectives, build the fortifications and defend them.

    Taking a giant dump on those who specialize in these roles raising issues around the combat effectiveness of those roles is just counter productive.

    You're actually contributing to the logical conclusion that will follow when you take out all the roles that made Battlefield, Battlefield.

    Gotta agree with your take on this. It is lame how there seems to be more and more people drawn to this game that want to try to force their run and gun play style on everyone. It is bad enough this has happened with other titles over the years and now it looks like it has finally found its way here in force. I don't mind playing run and gun at times, but I don't want to feel like the game is punishing me for not doing this. Some kinds of camping are indeed toxic, but the changes made in the last patch are not going to fix the toxic types of camping. Toxic camping being people staying in uncap areas or sitting next to resupply stations to pad KDR. In fact the players most impacted by the patches anti-camp features are going to be those players that actually camped inside and defended the objective areas. Of course I already mentioned ways to help address the more problematic types of camping a number of times on this forum. The main one being bring back the hardcore ammo attrition. This would make camping in the far flung corners of the map less practical as a person would quickly run out of ammo. It would also make supports ability to resupply people important again. When I mention this as a solution to help address some of the camping issues there's typically only the sound of crickets in response as very few of these run and gun types want to have to use their brains for anything in the game including figuring out how to not run out of ammo. All these people want the game to do is reward is raw reflexes and nothing else.
  • Zipeh
    39 postsMember, Battlefield 3, Battlefield 4, Battlefield, Battlefield 1, Battlefield V Member
    edited January 19
    Agreed. Some people see campers .. others see people taking up a static position to cover canalizing ground. I can only assume the hate for "camping" is based on the run and gun people getting mowed down before they can snap shoot the enemy in the head. I am sure its annoying developing all the skills to be a run and gun master and then dying to some old fart like me set up in a enfilade position. The notion we should all be playing in some sort of even, or equal, play style is laughable in BF game which is much more geared to combined arms and squad play, vice the run and gun and kill and keep moving of some other FPSs.
  • Shrediron
    205 postsMember, Battlefield, Battlefield 1, Battlefield V Member
    Sixclicks wrote: »

    You guys are crazy.

    Support is still a great class for both camping and playing aggressively. The Bren and Lewis are laser beams.
    The KE7 is quick to kill and pretty easy to control as well.
    None of those guns are laser beams and the KE7 is a joke anymore. Unless you get a head shot, every popular medic or assault gun will kill you before you kill the enemy in a dueled style engagement, which many if not most of the fights in this game are.
    Then you've got shotguns for really aggressive CQB. One of the shotguns also has a rifle mode which you can one hit kill headshot with from across the map. Best of all imo, you get infinite ammo, including the bouncing betty mines which resupply with the ammo crate. Place 2 next to an ammo/health supply station or hidden in commonly traveled paths and you're pretty much guaranteed a few easy kills.
    I have yet to kill a single person with a "bouncing betty mine". For all intents and purposes, they are useless.
    MMGs might have taken a hit from the bipod recoil bug fix, but I'm fine with that. Less players camping in prone is a good thing for the game.
    Who are you to determine what is good for the game? Who are you to determine how a player should play. Let me clue you in. Playing defensively (camping) is not only a reasonable style of play, ITS EXPECTED and ENCODED INTO THE GAME DESIGN. "Defend the Objective", MMG's that ONLY work when prone, assignments that require you to killx X amount of people while prone, etc.

    Being prone is GLASS. MMG's were cannons. That playstyle is a glass cannon and you NEVER see support leading the leaderboard in points dude to the nature of the class and guns. The issue is that MMG's got nerfed but survivability while being prone did not get buffed. We still have to go prone to use them, but now we have the added bonus of them not working even in medium range as effectively as they did. The nerf was completely unnecessary as it destroyed an entire playstyle that again, is an expected part of the game.
    I've only really used the VGO, and honestly, it needed a recoil nerf. It had almost none. Clearly they intended for MMGs to be used in close/medium range engagements, not long range too.
    If you think the VGO has no recoil, you clearly have not used it. Its the most wild gun in the game. 99% useless hipfire.

  • Shrediron
    205 postsMember, Battlefield, Battlefield 1, Battlefield V Member
    M_Rat13 wrote: »
    Thacyoon wrote: »
    As a MMG user I am just a low life noob camper that should be banned for laying prone bipodded with my useless MMG.
    I am just a target for any sniper/assult/medic/airplane, especially if I empty my 1200 ROF MG-42 in their face. They can all just headshot me by aiming at the source of all the tracer rounds.

    Yes, I am pissed, VERY pissed. This is not a "Battlefield" game. And EA, 2 weeks after realease you cut the price by 50% - that is just ANOTHER middlefinger to me!

    Puhh, I better stop now....this is not my batteldield any more. You guys take care, and have fun with this game if you can. And DICE/EA I will NEVER ever buy anything more from you - ever!

    Doesn't the 1200 rpm MG42 only get access to the 50 round mag? Making it worthless...

    I think you need to learn to play MMGs properly before you complain....

    No, the 1200 RPM is pretty much necessary now to get a kill on your opponent before they kill you. Its good for maybe three kills before the 4th squad member takes you out. Previously, when the gun was more accurate the extended magazine was infinitely better, but now that accuracy is gone the speed helps make up for it to a degree.

    Regardless, the nerf was completely unnecessary due to the fact that one has to be prone to use them. Frankly weapons that require being prone SHOULD be lasers. Its glass cannon, as easy as they are to kill with, they are equally as easy to get a kill on.

    I suck at sniper, but decided to play it tonight to level it up some...the only kills I could get, were prone support players.
  • parkingbrake
    2230 postsMember, Battlefield 3, Battlefield 4, Battlefield, Battlefield 1, Battlefield V Member
    Austacker wrote: »
    Then listen to how you collectively shout down and belittle the 'belly campers' who are the core tactical parts of your side that will lock down your taken objectives, build the fortifications and defend them.
    You are completely missing the point. Nothing is stopping you from playing in exactly the same way, the only change is three weapons are now somewhat less effective at longer ranges because a bug which had reduced their recoil more than intended has been fixed. But you can still go prone and bipod a Lewis or Bren and knock down your opponents in droves. That's it, just use a different weapon if you still want that long range accuracy, that's the whole story, you do not need to change you play style one little bit. This isn't a real issue, it is manufactured and theatrical and pointless.
  • Astr0damus
    2646 postsMember, Battlefield 3, Battlefield 4, Battlefield, Battlefield 1, CTE, Battlefield V Member
    edited January 19
    Shrediron wrote: »
    I have yet to kill a single person with a "bouncing betty mine". For all intents and purposes, they are useless.


    Thank you! I checked my stats and have laid (emplaced) 200 of them and only gotten 9 kills.
    Typically you get 38% damage off of someone and they self-heal.
    I like those round discs in Call of Duty that completely decapitate the enemy (or two).
    (Nuketown -- Call of Duty Black Ops?)
  • Sixclicks
    5015 postsMember, Battlefield 3, Battlefield 4, Battlefield, Battlefield 1, Battlefield V Member
    edited January 19
    Shrediron wrote: »
    Sixclicks wrote: »

    You guys are crazy.

    Support is still a great class for both camping and playing aggressively. The Bren and Lewis are laser beams.
    The KE7 is quick to kill and pretty easy to control as well.
    None of those guns are laser beams and the KE7 is a joke anymore. Unless you get a head shot, every popular medic or assault gun will kill you before you kill the enemy in a dueled style engagement, which many if not most of the fights in this game are.
    Then you've got shotguns for really aggressive CQB. One of the shotguns also has a rifle mode which you can one hit kill headshot with from across the map. Best of all imo, you get infinite ammo, including the bouncing betty mines which resupply with the ammo crate. Place 2 next to an ammo/health supply station or hidden in commonly traveled paths and you're pretty much guaranteed a few easy kills.
    I have yet to kill a single person with a "bouncing betty mine". For all intents and purposes, they are useless.
    MMGs might have taken a hit from the bipod recoil bug fix, but I'm fine with that. Less players camping in prone is a good thing for the game.
    Who are you to determine what is good for the game? Who are you to determine how a player should play. Let me clue you in. Playing defensively (camping) is not only a reasonable style of play, ITS EXPECTED and ENCODED INTO THE GAME DESIGN. "Defend the Objective", MMG's that ONLY work when prone, assignments that require you to killx X amount of people while prone, etc.

    Being prone is GLASS. MMG's were cannons. That playstyle is a glass cannon and you NEVER see support leading the leaderboard in points dude to the nature of the class and guns. The issue is that MMG's got nerfed but survivability while being prone did not get buffed. We still have to go prone to use them, but now we have the added bonus of them not working even in medium range as effectively as they did. The nerf was completely unnecessary as it destroyed an entire playstyle that again, is an expected part of the game.
    I've only really used the VGO, and honestly, it needed a recoil nerf. It had almost none. Clearly they intended for MMGs to be used in close/medium range engagements, not long range too.
    If you think the VGO has no recoil, you clearly have not used it. Its the most wild gun in the game. 99% useless hipfire.

    You clearly have absolutely no idea what you're talking about. The Lewis and Bren have very little recoil and are easy to control. I use a 3x scope on both and rarely go prone. They're meant for longer ranges, where they absolutely can compete with assault weapons and are way better than medic weapons. Of course if I'm focusing on CQB instead I'd use a shotgun or the FG42 or KE7.

    No idea how you aren't getting kills with the bouncing Betty. You must not be stacking them or putting them in the right places. Always put two right next to each other to guarantee the kill. That's why you also want to use the ammo crate so you can resupply yourself with more.

    Defending an objective is fine. It's PTFO and definitely required. The issue is a large number of MMG users play just like useless hillhumpers nowhere near an objective. Less camping is a good thing. It makes the pace of the game more exciting. And less players leave the game out of frustration due to being killed constantly by barely visible hillhumpers and corner campers.

    The VGO was very easy to control before the update. Dont know what to tell you there. Must be a personal problem. I've got a 1.38 KPM with it. Which is pretty good for a more defensive weapon imo. Players that step in your sights at close to medium range get evaporated.
  • Astr0damus
    2646 postsMember, Battlefield 3, Battlefield 4, Battlefield, Battlefield 1, CTE, Battlefield V Member
    Sixclicks wrote: »

    No idea how you aren't getting kills with the bouncing Betty. You must not be stacking them or putting them in the right places. Always put two right next to each other to guarantee the kill.

    Whoa! This is the best idea I've heard all week. I'm going to start doing this and see if I can't get more kills.
    (I always double-stack AT Mines, I'm not sure why it never crossed my mind to do the same with AP's)
    Thanks.
  • Jezzzeh
    529 postsMember, Battlefield 3, Battlefield 4, Battlefield, Battlefield 1, Battlefield V Member
    Austacker wrote: »
    I really don't get the hate.

    On one hand, we have the core community complaining about the common use of that KE7 and how Battlefield is has lost it's identity and become just another poor man's COD.

    On the other, we have the same people belittle anyone who isn't playing run and gun and chooses instead to lock down and defend objectives with the weapons / tools that the game design offers.



    What sort of FPS game do you lot want?

    Call of Duty / Counter Strike or Battlefield?

    What makes Battlefield unique? Have you all ever stopped and asked yourself that question honestly and objectively?

    Then listen to how you collectively shout down and belittle the 'belly campers' who are the core tactical parts of your side that will lock down your taken objectives, build the fortifications and defend them.

    Taking a giant dump on those who specialize in these roles raising issues around the combat effectiveness of those roles is just counter productive.

    You're actually contributing to the logical conclusion that will follow when you take out all the roles that made Battlefield, Battlefield.

    Think that's the main problem. DICE go to the trouble of creating what can be a very tactical game that relies on people teaming up and playing their roles (All their games are like this). And people just DONT.GET.IT

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!