Can we finally admit attrition was a terrible addition to battlefield?

Comments

  • parkingbrake
    3202 postsMember, Battlefield 3, Battlefield 4, Battlefield, Battlefield 1, Battlefield V Member
    Pelliy wrote: »
    Pelliy wrote: »
    It made more players passive, the game is not fun. You heal up and a random explosion or a random spray bullet tagged you, taking away your heal.

    This would make sense in a 5v5 game. Attrition in a chaotic game is absurd. I really hope it does not return in the series.

    Same with ammo attrition. I was convinced that this was okay. It's not. It's bad too. You can keep the grenade timers the same but also needs to get rid of that Attrition also.

    I'm glad some of the EZ Mode crutches from previous games were removed, and full auto-heal is one of them. BF is supposed to be a game about teamwork, so play in a squad with a Medic, stick together, work together--problem solved.

    Mate if you want a hardcore mode, that's fine. Adding more hardcore elements to the base game is a turn off. This isn't csgo or armA. It's an arcade shooter often taking up with random people with millions of ways to die .

    I like a challenging game--I might not be very good at it, but I like something that isn't a pushover in a few days. So I'll stick with what I posted, I don't mind that they did away with some of the EZ Mode crutches (although it still isn't Hardcore). I also don't think an easy game is necessarily what the public wants. PUBG has a ferocious learning curve with no spotting, more difficult shooting mechanics, uncertain weapons and ammo, and if a squad mate doesn't get to you in time, that's it, you're dead for the entire round (and each time you're revived you die faster the next time you're hit). Last I heard they had sold over 50 million copies, so it looks like there are plenty of gamers who don't want their hand held.
  • DingoKillr
    3507 postsMember, Battlefield 3, Battlefield 4, Battlefield, Battlefield 1, CTE, BF1IncursionsAlpha, Battlefield V Member
    bran1986 wrote: »
    I think it created more problems than it solved, especially when it comes to class and weapon balance.

    If you build a system and balance weapons on that system and then change the system of cause you have problems.

    A 5 BTK and a tighter health system looked to be the original plan. No instead yappers demand a 4 BTK which meant we get a free health pouch and higher regen levels. Good example is recoil patterns that kick hard after only after some weapons BTK.

    Then you add the stupid ammo levels and pickups Assault SAR has max 55 for a 3 BTK but Recon SLR has the same 3 BTK but has a smaller level and less pickup yet they are meant to be off the flag.
    It makes sense to add it. But I do wish they would have actually thought about the addition and implementation of this attrition system. With elements of old suppression still being active (you can't regenerate any HP while suppressed), it's hard to justify attrition in it's current state in it's entirety. It makes sense, but I feel like they did it wrong.
    I think it is there at a low level, as it seems different times to start regen. I think that has to do with the rate at which suppression is reduced maybe it could be slower. They could increase delay/slow the health restore off health pouches.

    Tanks problem are not the lack of ammo or repair stations it is
    - Not able to build stations while in tanks. This is a team v solo, unfortunately team is not going to happen in BF. I.e. ammo station.
    - Not able to 100% repair from inside a tanks while in the field (was not the issue with tanks in BF1 as you could never out repair assaults DPS this complaint was only be guys that used assault weapons on Infantry first)
    - Are slow traveling to get ammo/repair can be really long. The longest I drove felt like 5 minutes(over a minute) in Panzer IV from the Airfield to B flag on frontlines before even seeing combat..
    - The modular system adds to this making it harder. Infantry can out run a damage tank.

    If those are tweeked even a Tank with ZERO offensive ammo could survive a few hits to reach a station, currently it seems many tank drivers are retreating out of combat if they get hit even once. So most battles are tanks are at full health or near and the currents system does make camping at range easier, so adding more station will enforce this practice not change it. We need tanks to force combat on a flag not disappear for 2 minutes because they got hit. Low Ammo should be the only reason to fully retreat.

    Planes are different as they have a much easier time to escape most combat even with a small scale modular system. You can still maneuver while repairing which tanks don't have.
  • CosmicStriker
    698 postsMember, Battlefield 3, Battlefield 4, Battlefield Hardline, Battlefield, Battlefield 1, Battlefield V Member
    this topic seems like it's written by someone who never played that much battlefield .
  • ninjapenquinuk
    1798 postsMember, Battlefield 4, Battlefield, Battlefield 1, CTE, Battlefield V Member

    As Dingo said above

    "If you build a system and balance weapons on that system and then change the system of cause you have problems.
    .
    A 5 BTK and a tighter health system looked to be the original plan. No instead yappers demand a 4 BTK which meant we get a free health pouch and higher regen levels. Good example is recoil patterns that kick hard after only after some weapons BTK"

    I too believe this is the route cause of many of the balancing issues in BFV. Wasnt the reason they reduced BA rifle max damage to 60 because they said there would be so many players running around at lower health any higher max damage would effectively be 1HK. However they changed up the Health attrition but didnt increase the BA rifle damage to compensate. Health attrition just doesnt work properly with a low TTK, as most of the time you get hit you are dead, and the times you are not you can just insta heal because you are nearly always carrying a med pack.
  • Halcyon_Creed_N7
    1318 postsMember, Battlefield 3, Battlefield 4, Battlefield Hardline, Battlefield, Battlefield 1, CTE, Battlefield V Member
    Ammo attrition is livable, but extremely obnoxious. The least they could do is have everyone spawn with full ammo and gadgets.

    I hate health attrition though. Health attrition has ruined some aspects of the game. Battlefield is really too chaotic to have no full auto health regen. You take a random bullet, you're now at a massive disadvantage in your next firefight if you don't have a pouch and since there's 32 enemies there's always going to be a next firefight. You get suppressed, or an explosion goes off near you while you're healing and you stop healing and you lose the pouch. You start shooting someone with a bolt-action rifle and they manage to self heal before you can get off the 2nd shot, so it now takes 3 body shots to kill, making an already weak class weaker. Same goes with semi-auto snipers and even Assault semi-autos. Real fun to have to go for a 4-5 hit kill with a weapon that has 5 only shots...
  • xKusagamix
    933 postsMember, Battlefield 3, Battlefield 4, Battlefield, Battlefield 1, CTE, Battlefield V Member
    Bring back old damage model for BARs (without sweetspot) and remove auto spot when you hit enemy while using SLRs and BARs or at least make those kill assist should be kill assist count as kill. Instant heal with Health pouch in a fire fight should only doable for Medic class, with low effective range they are little to no threat even at close range 'cause Assault has better DPS guns and Support has Shotguns.

    Health crate should regen health with slower rate (they're pointless right now tbh, at least the Ammo crate resupply gadgets)
  • Kayback
    367 postsMember, Battlefield 3, Battlefield 4, Battlefield Hardline, Battlefield, Battlefield 1, CTE, BF1IncursionsAlpha, Battlefield V Member
    GrizzGolf wrote: »
    ]

    Its not that bad. I got use to it after awhile

    I got used to it by maining support.
  • LordVader666
    249 postsMember, Battlefield 3, Battlefield 4, Battlefield Hardline, Battlefield, Battlefield 1, CTE, Battlefield V Member
    Pelliy wrote: »
    XxmOss72xX wrote: »
    I disagree. It's a challenge to be sure, but I think it adds another level to the game. Don't get me wrong, I see and understand your perspective completely, I just think attrition makes battlefield more like a battlefield which is why I like the game.

    I disagree. It makes battlefield, fear field. No one really moves. It's also really frustrating when you get BS deaths door to low ticks of hp left.

    It's not making people work as a team. Instead it's doing the opposite. People hiding not doing anything.

    Funny, there’s another thread complaining about the Zerg so I guess people are moving? Also in my own experience I see plenty of movement, you just have to be more careful.
  • Dr_X2345
    774 postsMember, Battlefield, Battlefield 1, Battlefield V Member
    I'm fine with ammo attrition for the most part (although some weapons should spawn with more ammo and have a higher ammo carry capacity, such as the Recon SLRs). However, I do agree that health attrition can be annoying - especially as there aren't actually all that many health supply stations and they're almost all on objectives, meaning that you have to go back to an objective to heal up. Combine this with the fact that not a huge amount of people play medic because of the range limit, and you're often stuck below max health putting you at a disadvantage in firefights.
    I think there are a few potential solutions:
    Either make health packs easier to come by (either add more health stations around the map, or the option of these two I would prefer, make enemies have a chance of dropping them when killed so long as they're carrying one), or make it so you do heal to full naturally, but it takes a little longer (perhaps 10 seconds without taking damage, or even more) and med packs heal you to full quickly (potentially quicker than they do currently). Medics would do the same as they do now - when they throw a health pack, it restocks the player and applies the health kit effect if they're not full health.
    Personally I think the second option of full natural health regen is better, but it would need to be properly balanced so that med kits and medics remain useful, meaning that the regen time would have to be the quick enough for it to not take frustratingly long to regen, but also slow enough that you would want to use a med kit if you were in the heat of the battle. Additionally some other things would have to be changed, like the Light Infantry combat role for Assault which allows you to heal more health - perhaps just change it so either the regen rate or the regen delay is faster.
    This could potentially open up some new routes for adding to gameplay mechanics - for example, if you were being suppressed, natural health regen could be cancelled, so that it actually has an effect on the suppressed player.
  • Pelliy
    2228 postsMember, Battlefield 4, Battlefield, Battlefield 1, CTE, BF1IncursionsAlpha, Battlefield V Member
    Pelliy wrote: »
    XxmOss72xX wrote: »
    I disagree. It's a challenge to be sure, but I think it adds another level to the game. Don't get me wrong, I see and understand your perspective completely, I just think attrition makes battlefield more like a battlefield which is why I like the game.

    I disagree. It makes battlefield, fear field. No one really moves. It's also really frustrating when you get BS deaths door to low ticks of hp left.

    It's not making people work as a team. Instead it's doing the opposite. People hiding not doing anything.

    Funny, there’s another thread complaining about the Zerg so I guess people are moving? Also in my own experience I see plenty of movement, you just have to be more careful.

    zerg would probably be more conquest then.
    this topic seems like it's written by someone who never played that much battlefield .

    I only played after Bad company 1.
    Pelliy wrote: »
    Pelliy wrote: »
    It made more players passive, the game is not fun. You heal up and a random explosion or a random spray bullet tagged you, taking away your heal.

    This would make sense in a 5v5 game. Attrition in a chaotic game is absurd. I really hope it does not return in the series.

    Same with ammo attrition. I was convinced that this was okay. It's not. It's bad too. You can keep the grenade timers the same but also needs to get rid of that Attrition also.

    I'm glad some of the EZ Mode crutches from previous games were removed, and full auto-heal is one of them. BF is supposed to be a game about teamwork, so play in a squad with a Medic, stick together, work together--problem solved.

    Mate if you want a hardcore mode, that's fine. Adding more hardcore elements to the base game is a turn off. This isn't csgo or armA. It's an arcade shooter often taking up with random people with millions of ways to die .

    I like a challenging game--I might not be very good at it, but I like something that isn't a pushover in a few days. So I'll stick with what I posted, I don't mind that they did away with some of the EZ Mode crutches (although it still isn't Hardcore). I also don't think an easy game is necessarily what the public wants. PUBG has a ferocious learning curve with no spotting, more difficult shooting mechanics, uncertain weapons and ammo, and if a squad mate doesn't get to you in time, that's it, you're dead for the entire round (and each time you're revived you die faster the next time you're hit). Last I heard they had sold over 50 million copies, so it looks like there are plenty of gamers who don't want their hand held.

    I don't really think you could compare BR to this game. It's not chaotic like BF is. and it's not hardcore as you make it out to sound. There's a revive mechanic in the game in squads and solos.
  • Pelliy
    2228 postsMember, Battlefield 4, Battlefield, Battlefield 1, CTE, BF1IncursionsAlpha, Battlefield V Member
    @parkingbrake

    I still have to disagree. There's nothing really challenging about this. It's just more than a nuisance than it is a challenge. It doesn't bring teams together. It makes them passive especially in gamemodes not name conquest. Very rarely do people ever move anymore. BF1 had more teamplay and squad play than this game and that game had issues in its own right but it still did a better job of getting the concept of squad play down. BF5 does exactly the opposite.
  • Kompura
    249 postsMember, Battlefield 3, Battlefield 4, Battlefield, Battlefield 1, CTE, BF1IncursionsAlpha, Battlefield V Member
    While annoying now and then, I think attrition is good. It punishes those playing stupidly and running and gunning. Also preventing tanks to set a camp somewhere and just keep shooting with endless ammo and full regenerating health. Of course it pisses when those stations are blown off and you need to drive to your base to reload a tank but hey, your team might have a support who could repair those stations...
  • Pelliy
    2228 postsMember, Battlefield 4, Battlefield, Battlefield 1, CTE, BF1IncursionsAlpha, Battlefield V Member
    Kompura wrote: »
    While annoying now and then, I think attrition is good. It punishes those playing stupidly and running and gunning. Also preventing tanks to set a camp somewhere and just keep shooting with endless ammo and full regenerating health. Of course it pisses when those stations are blown off and you need to drive to your base to reload a tank but hey, your team might have a support who could repair those stations...

    I guess you haven't played aerodome breakthough LOL.
  • VincentNZ
    2679 postsMember, Battlefield 3, Battlefield 4, Battlefield, Battlefield 1, BF1IncursionsAlpha, Battlefield V Member
    Attrition for ammo is a non-issue. Gadget attrition however is a huge issue and creates the current balance issues between ground vehicles and infantry. And that goes both ways.
    Health attrition is the biggest issue, because it has a direct impact on weapon balance. This is the reason why SMGs are underpowered as a weapon class and why low ROF weapons in general are useless. Every second you spend in fighting longer means more exposure, means more damage dealt to you, means a faster death on the next engagement.
    Yeah I would rather see it gone as it creates inconsistency and that is bad.
  • ninjapenquinuk
    1798 postsMember, Battlefield 4, Battlefield, Battlefield 1, CTE, Battlefield V Member
    Pelliy wrote: »
    @parkingbrake

    I still have to disagree. There's nothing really challenging about this. It's just more than a nuisance than it is a challenge. It doesn't bring teams together. It makes them passive especially in gamemodes not name conquest. Very rarely do people ever move anymore. BF1 had more teamplay and squad play than this game and that game had issues in its own right but it still did a better job of getting the concept of squad play down. BF5 does exactly the opposite.

    If you think players are more passive then a quicker TTK will be more a factor than health attrition. With a quicker TTK, whether you are at 50% or 100% health you can be melted in an instant. Attrition is only really a problem for people who play totally lone wolf. If you are around team mates and around flags you will get plenty of health and ammo during the majority of rounds. Unless you are some amazing player who dies only a few times a round - of which there are some, then you really shouldn't run out of (primary) ammo 80- 90% of the time, unless you are a sniper on your own.
  • CaptainHardware
    302 postsMember, Battlefield 3, Battlefield 4, Battlefield, Battlefield 1, CTE, Battlefield V Member
    Kompura wrote: »
    While annoying now and then, I think attrition is good. It punishes those playing stupidly and running and gunning.

    Actually it just rewards them because they mindlessly respawn and have full health and a decent amount of ammo again, and get to kill players who don't have full health. The only people actually punished by attrition are decent players who would actually like to stay alive, kill a lot of enemies and attack and defend flags rather then camping in arbitrary points.
    Also preventing tanks to set a camp somewhere and just keep shooting with endless ammo and full regenerating health. Of course it pisses when those stations are blown off and you need to drive to your base to reload a tank but hey, your team might have a support who could repair those stations...

    Tanks spend more time camping on hills then ever before in BFV, because they've been designed in a way that makes pushing impossible. Attrition is not entirely to blame for this, it's secondary to how bad the tanks are in general, but as a design goal it is a complete failure.
  • OrionPherrit
    444 postsMember, Battlefield 4, Battlefield, Battlefield 1, Battlefield V Member
    I guess not enough players used the Afflictions in the last game, so EA/Dice gifted us all with Scavenger, and we constantly have to scrounge around for ammo. BF1 was hard enough without taking on a handicap, so I would never accept it unless forced. 🙄

    I would rather be a team player and am not a lone wolf by choice — just that my schedule doesn’t work out for most clans & few of my friends play this type of game. That puts me at a disadvantage against teams with well-coordinated Medics & Support. 😐

    If EA/Dice insist on going this route, they should at least make us consistent with what we see on our avatars (some of those skins are packing a dozen mags) or give us the actual historical soldier loadouts. For example, I believe a German trooper would be issued 6 mags for his MP40 or Stg44, which works out to 192 or 180 rounds, respectively.

    Since that’s about double our topped-off ammo load, maybe they could make it so you have to run back to your forward operating base for a refill.
  • Trokey66
    8247 postsMember, Battlefield 3, Battlefield 4, Battlefield Hardline, Battlefield, Battlefield 1, CTE, Battlefield V Member
    I guess not enough players used the Afflictions in the last game, so EA/Dice gifted us all with Scavenger, and we constantly have to scrounge around for ammo. BF1 was hard enough without taking on a handicap, so I would never accept it unless forced. 🙄

    I would rather be a team player and am not a lone wolf by choice — just that my schedule doesn’t work out for most clans & few of my friends play this type of game. That puts me at a disadvantage against teams with well-coordinated Medics & Support. 😐

    If EA/Dice insist on going this route, they should at least make us consistent with what we see on our avatars (some of those skins are packing a dozen mags) or give us the actual historical soldier loadouts. For example, I believe a German trooper would be issued 6 mags for his MP40 or Stg44, which works out to 192 or 180 rounds, respectively.

    Since that’s about double our topped-off ammo load, maybe they could make it so you have to run back to your forward operating base for a refill.

    And how do you propose applying your principle to Medics and revives?
  • ragnarok013
    3037 postsMember, Moderator, Battlefield 3, Battlefield 4, Battlefield Hardline, Battlefield, Battlefield 1, CTE, BF1IncursionsAlpha, Battlefield V Moderator
    I personally dislike attrition for infantry however I've been a big proponent for vehicles needing to resupply their ammo for years so we don't have tankers and pilots going on nonstop rampages like we used to get when they had unlimited ammunition supplies. Frankly I also think that planes should have to land to rearm not just fly around a pole.

    Regarding infantry, even if we have infantry attrition there's zero logical reason that they'd cross the line of departure into enemy territory with less than a full combat load. To my knowledge vehicles don't start off with a partial ammo count so why is infantry doing so?
Sign In or Register to comment.