Weekly BF

#MakeSnipersGreatAgain - How to fix BF 5 scoped Air guns

Comments

  • mf_shro0m
    1768 postsMember, Battlefield 4, Battlefield Hardline, Battlefield, Battlefield 1, Battlefield V Member
    edited April 21
    Sixclicks wrote: »
    y_j_es_i said:
    Ultimately, what would you like to encourage, recons operating within 20m of hostiles I.e. right at the front with medics and assaults, or recons sticking with their squads but not clearing houses I.e. like 20m to 60m from the hostiles with the supports?



    I would definitely opt for the second option. The first one sounds ridiculous

    I just want aggressive recon to be viable like it was in BF1 (with non-one hit kill weapons). I don't think it would make all recon players start playing that way, but it should at least be an option for those who do want to be more helpful to their team and don't mind that they'll still have a harder time than other classes more specifically designed for that range. BFV makes most non super highly skilled recon players feel like they have to sit back and be a useless hillhumper to be effective at all.

    That's how it was in both BF1 and BF4. Recon wasn't better than assault, support, or medic in CQB, but they were still reasonably able to compete with fast reflexes, accuracy, and good positioning. It's something that takes more skill than just holding down the trigger. And sure, your KDR wouldn't be as great as some scout laying on a hill a mile away, but that's not really super important to a lot of us that prefer that playstyle. That's not to say you can't still have good stats playing that way. I think I started BF1 around a 1.5 and ended up at a 3.2 before I stopped playing.

    I personally loved the scout class in BF1. It was actually really fun to play aggressively. It's what made me stick with the game so long. I also enjoyed it a lot in BF4. However, I mostly played hardcore in BF4. Still, bolt actions were able to one hit kill up to 12.5 meters in BF4 in non hardcore. I feel like recon got better and better, for the most part, since BF2 (the first BF game I played). BFV however is a massive step backwards. And sorry, but I don't get a lot of enjoyment out of using spammable weapons. I get bored of that pretty quickly. That's not to say I don't use them. Clearly I do if you've seen my weapon stats. They just don't keep me interested for long periods of time like scout in BF1 with the M.95 Infantry, Martini-Henry Infantry, Vetterli Carbine, Arisaka Patrol, and the SMLE Carbine backed up by a Frommer Stop, Bodeo, or MARS.

    Think of my proposition as introducing a sweet spot for bolt actions that’s at 10-30m for some BAs and 10-60m for others.
    The benefit of this over the BFI system is that no-one gets a sweet spot if they camp far from their targets and so... it’ll reward ptfo and not camping

    And if you miss the OHK zone, then it’d be time to draw your pistol 🤷🏼‍♂️
  • mf_shro0m
    1768 postsMember, Battlefield 4, Battlefield Hardline, Battlefield, Battlefield 1, Battlefield V Member
    I bet that if they introduced it then after the first two weeks we’d see a net decrease in the number of hill humping snipers alongside a modest increase in the number of people ptfo with BAs, with only a small increase (2 or 3 people per 32 man team on average) in the total number of people playing as a recon which is exactly what we’re after.

    And who are the most likely to start ptfo with BAs? Hill humpers and assaults, meaning their numbers will decrease
  • -L-M3rc3n4ry
    523 postsMember, Battlefield 3, Battlefield 4, Battlefield Hardline, Battlefield, Battlefield 1 Member
    Sixclicks said:
    y_j_es_i said:
    Ultimately, what would you like to encourage, recons operating within 20m of hostiles I.e. right at the front with medics and assaults, or recons sticking with their squads but not clearing houses I.e. like 20m to 60m from the hostiles with the supports?

    I would definitely opt for the second option. The first one sounds ridiculous
    I just want aggressive recon to be viable like it was in BF1 (with non-one hit kill weapons). I don't think it would make all recon players start playing that way, but it should at least be an option for those who do want to be more helpful to their team and don't mind that they'll still have a harder time than other classes more specifically designed for that range. BFV makes most non super highly skilled recon players feel like they have to sit back and be a useless hillhumper to be effective at all.

    That's how it was in both BF1 and BF4. Recon wasn't better than assault, support, or medic in CQB, but they were still reasonably able to compete with fast reflexes, accuracy, and good positioning. It's something that takes more skill than just holding down the trigger. And sure, your KDR wouldn't be as great as some scout laying on a hill a mile away, but that's not really super important to a lot of us that prefer that playstyle. That's not to say you can't still have good stats playing that way. I think I started BF1 around a 1.5 and ended up at a 3.2 before I stopped playing.

    I personally loved the scout class in BF1. It was actually really fun to play aggressively. It's what made me stick with the game so long. I also enjoyed it a lot in BF4. However, I mostly played hardcore in BF4. Still, bolt actions were able to one hit kill up to 12.5 meters in BF4 in non hardcore. I feel like recon got better and better, for the most part, since BF2 (the first BF game I played). BFV however is a massive step backwards. And sorry, but I don't get a lot of enjoyment out of using spammable weapons. I get bored of that pretty quickly. That's not to say I don't use them. Clearly I do if you've seen my weapon stats. They just don't keep me interested for long periods of time like scout in BF1 with the M.95 Infantry, Martini-Henry Infantry, Vetterli Carbine, Arisaka Patrol, and the SMLE Carbine backed up by a Frommer Stop, Bodeo, or MARS.
    Well said. About BF 1, even on BF 1 i found much easier to just use Mondragon rifle, close range, they are easier and forgive much more mistakes than Martini and for Medium-Long range, they are easier to use against moving targets than any BA rifle. I never understood. Why people complain about bolt action/lever action/single action/etc rifles on BF1? The game is not WW1? Even a WW1 should be an run & gun with SMG's? About "assult rifles", they was mostly used in short bursts or semi auto fire IRL The most common weapon on WW1 is bolt action rifle and WW2 is semi auto rifle.

    I really don't get. For some people every medieval game should be about fast swinging swords that ignore armor like a lightsaber(despite polearms being much more common weapons IRL) and every FPS should be about spray and pray with pistol cartridge weapons...
  • mf_shro0m
    1768 postsMember, Battlefield 4, Battlefield Hardline, Battlefield, Battlefield 1, Battlefield V Member
    Sixclicks said:

    y_j_es_i said:
    Ultimately, what would you like to encourage, recons operating within 20m of hostiles I.e. right at the front with medics and assaults, or recons sticking with their squads but not clearing houses I.e. like 20m to 60m from the hostiles with the supports?



    I would definitely opt for the second option. The first one sounds ridiculous

    I just want aggressive recon to be viable like it was in BF1 (with non-one hit kill weapons). I don't think it would make all recon players start playing that way, but it should at least be an option for those who do want to be more helpful to their team and don't mind that they'll still have a harder time than other classes more specifically designed for that range. BFV makes most non super highly skilled recon players feel like they have to sit back and be a useless hillhumper to be effective at all.

    That's how it was in both BF1 and BF4. Recon wasn't better than assault, support, or medic in CQB, but they were still reasonably able to compete with fast reflexes, accuracy, and good positioning. It's something that takes more skill than just holding down the trigger. And sure, your KDR wouldn't be as great as some scout laying on a hill a mile away, but that's not really super important to a lot of us that prefer that playstyle. That's not to say you can't still have good stats playing that way. I think I started BF1 around a 1.5 and ended up at a 3.2 before I stopped playing.

    I personally loved the scout class in BF1. It was actually really fun to play aggressively. It's what made me stick with the game so long. I also enjoyed it a lot in BF4. However, I mostly played hardcore in BF4. Still, bolt actions were able to one hit kill up to 12.5 meters in BF4 in non hardcore. I feel like recon got better and better, for the most part, since BF2 (the first BF game I played). BFV however is a massive step backwards. And sorry, but I don't get a lot of enjoyment out of using spammable weapons. I get bored of that pretty quickly. That's not to say I don't use them. Clearly I do if you've seen my weapon stats. They just don't keep me interested for long periods of time like scout in BF1 with the M.95 Infantry, Martini-Henry Infantry, Vetterli Carbine, Arisaka Patrol, and the SMLE Carbine backed up by a Frommer Stop, Bodeo, or MARS.

    Well said. About BF 1, even on BF 1 i found much easier to just use Mondragon rifle, close range, they are easier and forgive much more mistakes than Martini and for Medium-Long range, they are easier to use against moving targets than any BA rifle. I never understood. Why people complain about bolt action/lever action/single action/etc rifles on BF1? The game is not WW1? Even a WW1 should be an run & gun with SMG's? About "assult rifles", they was mostly used in short bursts or semi auto fire IRL The most common weapon on WW1 is bolt action rifle and WW2 is semi auto rifle.

    I really don't get. For some people every medieval game should be about fast swinging swords that ignore armor like a lightsaber(despite polearms being much more common weapons IRL) and every FPS should be about spray and pray with pistol cartridge weapons...

    Some people just don’t understand that sadly
  • mf_shro0m
    1768 postsMember, Battlefield 4, Battlefield Hardline, Battlefield, Battlefield 1, Battlefield V Member
    Sixclicks said:

    y_j_es_i said:
    Ultimately, what would you like to encourage, recons operating within 20m of hostiles I.e. right at the front with medics and assaults, or recons sticking with their squads but not clearing houses I.e. like 20m to 60m from the hostiles with the supports?



    I would definitely opt for the second option. The first one sounds ridiculous

    I just want aggressive recon to be viable like it was in BF1 (with non-one hit kill weapons). I don't think it would make all recon players start playing that way, but it should at least be an option for those who do want to be more helpful to their team and don't mind that they'll still have a harder time than other classes more specifically designed for that range. BFV makes most non super highly skilled recon players feel like they have to sit back and be a useless hillhumper to be effective at all.

    That's how it was in both BF1 and BF4. Recon wasn't better than assault, support, or medic in CQB, but they were still reasonably able to compete with fast reflexes, accuracy, and good positioning. It's something that takes more skill than just holding down the trigger. And sure, your KDR wouldn't be as great as some scout laying on a hill a mile away, but that's not really super important to a lot of us that prefer that playstyle. That's not to say you can't still have good stats playing that way. I think I started BF1 around a 1.5 and ended up at a 3.2 before I stopped playing.

    I personally loved the scout class in BF1. It was actually really fun to play aggressively. It's what made me stick with the game so long. I also enjoyed it a lot in BF4. However, I mostly played hardcore in BF4. Still, bolt actions were able to one hit kill up to 12.5 meters in BF4 in non hardcore. I feel like recon got better and better, for the most part, since BF2 (the first BF game I played). BFV however is a massive step backwards. And sorry, but I don't get a lot of enjoyment out of using spammable weapons. I get bored of that pretty quickly. That's not to say I don't use them. Clearly I do if you've seen my weapon stats. They just don't keep me interested for long periods of time like scout in BF1 with the M.95 Infantry, Martini-Henry Infantry, Vetterli Carbine, Arisaka Patrol, and the SMLE Carbine backed up by a Frommer Stop, Bodeo, or MARS.

    Well said. About BF 1, even on BF 1 i found much easier to just use Mondragon rifle, close range, they are easier and forgive much more mistakes than Martini and for Medium-Long range, they are easier to use against moving targets than any BA rifle.

    I’m guessing the mondragon’s a semi-automatic?

    What you said is in line with what I’ve seen. The fact is that the vast majority of players perform better with semi-autos than with BAs even if the BAs can OHK because they’re more forgiving and perform better on average

    A lot of the haters claim that OHK to the chest BAs would be OP but clearly they’ve never actually tried them
  • GP-Caliber
    650 postsMember, Battlefield 3, Battlefield 4, Battlefield Hardline, Battlefield, Battlefield 1, CTE Member
    y_j_es_i wrote: »
    Sixclicks wrote: »
    y_j_es_i said:
    Ultimately, what would you like to encourage, recons operating within 20m of hostiles I.e. right at the front with medics and assaults, or recons sticking with their squads but not clearing houses I.e. like 20m to 60m from the hostiles with the supports?



    I would definitely opt for the second option. The first one sounds ridiculous

    I just want aggressive recon to be viable like it was in BF1 (with non-one hit kill weapons). I don't think it would make all recon players start playing that way, but it should at least be an option for those who do want to be more helpful to their team and don't mind that they'll still have a harder time than other classes more specifically designed for that range. BFV makes most non super highly skilled recon players feel like they have to sit back and be a useless hillhumper to be effective at all.

    That's how it was in both BF1 and BF4. Recon wasn't better than assault, support, or medic in CQB, but they were still reasonably able to compete with fast reflexes, accuracy, and good positioning. It's something that takes more skill than just holding down the trigger. And sure, your KDR wouldn't be as great as some scout laying on a hill a mile away, but that's not really super important to a lot of us that prefer that playstyle. That's not to say you can't still have good stats playing that way. I think I started BF1 around a 1.5 and ended up at a 3.2 before I stopped playing.

    I personally loved the scout class in BF1. It was actually really fun to play aggressively. It's what made me stick with the game so long. I also enjoyed it a lot in BF4. However, I mostly played hardcore in BF4. Still, bolt actions were able to one hit kill up to 12.5 meters in BF4 in non hardcore. I feel like recon got better and better, for the most part, since BF2 (the first BF game I played). BFV however is a massive step backwards. And sorry, but I don't get a lot of enjoyment out of using spammable weapons. I get bored of that pretty quickly. That's not to say I don't use them. Clearly I do if you've seen my weapon stats. They just don't keep me interested for long periods of time like scout in BF1 with the M.95 Infantry, Martini-Henry Infantry, Vetterli Carbine, Arisaka Patrol, and the SMLE Carbine backed up by a Frommer Stop, Bodeo, or MARS.

    Think of my proposition as introducing a sweet spot for bolt actions that’s at 10-30m for some BAs and 10-60m for others.
    The benefit of this over the BFI system is that no-one gets a sweet spot if they camp far from their targets and so... it’ll reward ptfo and not camping

    And if you miss the OHK zone, then it’d be time to draw your pistol 🤷🏼‍♂️

    if you intoduce this I will become a god in this game. trust me you dont want this.
  • mf_shro0m
    1768 postsMember, Battlefield 4, Battlefield Hardline, Battlefield, Battlefield 1, Battlefield V Member
    GP-Caliber wrote: »
    y_j_es_i wrote: »
    Sixclicks wrote: »
    y_j_es_i said:
    Ultimately, what would you like to encourage, recons operating within 20m of hostiles I.e. right at the front with medics and assaults, or recons sticking with their squads but not clearing houses I.e. like 20m to 60m from the hostiles with the supports?



    I would definitely opt for the second option. The first one sounds ridiculous

    I just want aggressive recon to be viable like it was in BF1 (with non-one hit kill weapons). I don't think it would make all recon players start playing that way, but it should at least be an option for those who do want to be more helpful to their team and don't mind that they'll still have a harder time than other classes more specifically designed for that range. BFV makes most non super highly skilled recon players feel like they have to sit back and be a useless hillhumper to be effective at all.

    That's how it was in both BF1 and BF4. Recon wasn't better than assault, support, or medic in CQB, but they were still reasonably able to compete with fast reflexes, accuracy, and good positioning. It's something that takes more skill than just holding down the trigger. And sure, your KDR wouldn't be as great as some scout laying on a hill a mile away, but that's not really super important to a lot of us that prefer that playstyle. That's not to say you can't still have good stats playing that way. I think I started BF1 around a 1.5 and ended up at a 3.2 before I stopped playing.

    I personally loved the scout class in BF1. It was actually really fun to play aggressively. It's what made me stick with the game so long. I also enjoyed it a lot in BF4. However, I mostly played hardcore in BF4. Still, bolt actions were able to one hit kill up to 12.5 meters in BF4 in non hardcore. I feel like recon got better and better, for the most part, since BF2 (the first BF game I played). BFV however is a massive step backwards. And sorry, but I don't get a lot of enjoyment out of using spammable weapons. I get bored of that pretty quickly. That's not to say I don't use them. Clearly I do if you've seen my weapon stats. They just don't keep me interested for long periods of time like scout in BF1 with the M.95 Infantry, Martini-Henry Infantry, Vetterli Carbine, Arisaka Patrol, and the SMLE Carbine backed up by a Frommer Stop, Bodeo, or MARS.

    Think of my proposition as introducing a sweet spot for bolt actions that’s at 10-30m for some BAs and 10-60m for others.
    The benefit of this over the BFI system is that no-one gets a sweet spot if they camp far from their targets and so... it’ll reward ptfo and not camping

    And if you miss the OHK zone, then it’d be time to draw your pistol 🤷🏼‍♂️

    if you intoduce this I will become a god in this game. trust me you dont want this.

    Lol so there’ll be one more Stoedeh? I fancy my odds of never bumping into you haha
  • mf_shro0m
    1768 postsMember, Battlefield 4, Battlefield Hardline, Battlefield, Battlefield 1, Battlefield V Member
    In BF4 how often did you come across a dude with a Barrett 50.cal who was sticking with his squad?
  • -L-M3rc3n4ry
    523 postsMember, Battlefield 3, Battlefield 4, Battlefield Hardline, Battlefield, Battlefield 1 Member
    y_j_es_i said:
    Sixclicks said:

    y_j_es_i said:
    Ultimately, what would you like to encourage, recons operating within 20m of hostiles I.e. right at the front with medics and assaults, or recons sticking with their squads but not clearing houses I.e. like 20m to 60m from the hostiles with the supports?



    I would definitely opt for the second option. The first one sounds ridiculous

    I just want aggressive recon to be viable like it was in BF1 (with non-one hit kill weapons). I don't think it would make all recon players start playing that way, but it should at least be an option for those who do want to be more helpful to their team and don't mind that they'll still have a harder time than other classes more specifically designed for that range. BFV makes most non super highly skilled recon players feel like they have to sit back and be a useless hillhumper to be effective at all.

    That's how it was in both BF1 and BF4. Recon wasn't better than assault, support, or medic in CQB, but they were still reasonably able to compete with fast reflexes, accuracy, and good positioning. It's something that takes more skill than just holding down the trigger. And sure, your KDR wouldn't be as great as some scout laying on a hill a mile away, but that's not really super important to a lot of us that prefer that playstyle. That's not to say you can't still have good stats playing that way. I think I started BF1 around a 1.5 and ended up at a 3.2 before I stopped playing.

    I personally loved the scout class in BF1. It was actually really fun to play aggressively. It's what made me stick with the game so long. I also enjoyed it a lot in BF4. However, I mostly played hardcore in BF4. Still, bolt actions were able to one hit kill up to 12.5 meters in BF4 in non hardcore. I feel like recon got better and better, for the most part, since BF2 (the first BF game I played). BFV however is a massive step backwards. And sorry, but I don't get a lot of enjoyment out of using spammable weapons. I get bored of that pretty quickly. That's not to say I don't use them. Clearly I do if you've seen my weapon stats. They just don't keep me interested for long periods of time like scout in BF1 with the M.95 Infantry, Martini-Henry Infantry, Vetterli Carbine, Arisaka Patrol, and the SMLE Carbine backed up by a Frommer Stop, Bodeo, or MARS.

    Well said. About BF 1, even on BF 1 i found much easier to just use Mondragon rifle, close range, they are easier and forgive much more mistakes than Martini and for Medium-Long range, they are easier to use against moving targets than any BA rifle.

    I’m guessing the mondragon’s a semi-automatic?

    What you said is in line with what I’ve seen. The fact is that the vast majority of players perform better with semi-autos than with BAs even if the BAs can OHK because they’re more forgiving and perform better on average

    A lot of the haters claim that OHK to the chest BAs would be OP but clearly they’ve never actually tried them
    Mainly with high ping. If the lag makes me miss one shot in a moving target, with Martini Henry, i an dead. Sure, i can try shot agains in 5 seconds, but with Mondragon, an semi auto sniper, i can spray shots soo quickly that even if the hitreg ignores shots, i still can kill the target. Considering that servers on my region are dead, is the main reason that i really miss bolt action rifles of BF 1. Even on BF 1 i can't use then...
  • the_lone_ran9er
    61 postsMember, Battlefield 3, Battlefield 4, Battlefield, Battlefield 1, Battlefield V Member
    Here is how I would do it.

    A small separate hit box in the upper center chest.  Must be hit from a certain & or without passing through another hit box first. Will receive enough multiplier for 100dmg within minimum range and only if the shooter is fully ADS.

    Would help remove the immersion killing factor when you fully ADS center chest shot the enemy at point blank range with a high powered rifle and it results in you being subsequently mowed down by him.

    On a side note and I know this will impress almost no one. But I would remove the scope beacon from Snipers, or at least require it to be pointed at your body before being visible, and then bring back weapon sway style suppression to be applied against snipers.
  • StealthAria
    337 postsMember, Battlefield 3, Battlefield 4, Battlefield Hardline, Battlefield, Battlefield 1, CTE, Battlefield V Member
    y_j_es_i said:
    y_j_es_i said:
    1. Even if you could kill with a single follow up shot with any pistol at distances up to 20m, ptfo with BAs would still be most unfeasible due to the average distance of engagement in BFV. Coupled with much faster switching times, it would greatly increase the odds of recons who pump into hostiles in houses but is that our greatest concern?
    The vast majority of the time whilst ptfo engagement distances are greater than 20m and they’re more like 20m-60m. In such situation what are recons meant to do?
    At 20-60, they will get assist = kill if they can't switch to pistol, also, the "combo" bolt action shot + Mars automatica on BF 1 worked pretty well on this distances. Looks like you din't played previous BF games.

    y_j_es_i said:
    2. If most recons got a kill every time they assist from within like 50m that’d be ridiculous and people would not be happy. If you get an assist but you’re dead having made an effort to ptfo, that’s inadequate consolation and ultimately won’t be sufficient for the vast majority of players to keep doing it.

    Yes, only those who play with shotgun + underbarrel rifle should get assists at this distance /sarcasm

    PS : If sniper receive an underbarrel shotgun, i can bet. People will complain "it is op" due an anti sniper bias.

    I didn’t play any older BFs except hardline because I didn’t have a console for a long time before hardline and the TTKs in BFI just ruined the firefights for me.

    All in all I’m against the idea of finishing people off with your pistol being th standard past like 20m coz it just looks ridiculous

    Shotguns in BFV can’t get assist=kill last 20m unless you get a headshot with a slug and even then you probably can’t past 30m
    My Drilling would like a word.  I still OHK with buckshot out to 20m, and hitting >75 out to nearly 30m.  Even the rifle is still getting ACK out to 40m or so.
    Heck, the Drilling actually performs better as a sniper than any of the proper snipers.  Not only is it a shotgun, making it an excellent cqc weapon, but the rifle barrel has higher velocity and less drag than any of the BAs and can even OHK with a bodyshot at short range.
  • Hawxxeye
    6072 postsMember, Battlefield 3, Battlefield 4, Battlefield Hardline, Battlefield, Battlefield 1, CTE, BF1IncursionsAlpha, Battlefield V Member
    edited April 22
    y_j_es_i said:
    y_j_es_i said:
    1. Even if you could kill with a single follow up shot with any pistol at distances up to 20m, ptfo with BAs would still be most unfeasible due to the average distance of engagement in BFV. Coupled with much faster switching times, it would greatly increase the odds of recons who pump into hostiles in houses but is that our greatest concern?
    The vast majority of the time whilst ptfo engagement distances are greater than 20m and they’re more like 20m-60m. In such situation what are recons meant to do?
    At 20-60, they will get assist = kill if they can't switch to pistol, also, the "combo" bolt action shot + Mars automatica on BF 1 worked pretty well on this distances. Looks like you din't played previous BF games.

    y_j_es_i said:
    2. If most recons got a kill every time they assist from within like 50m that’d be ridiculous and people would not be happy. If you get an assist but you’re dead having made an effort to ptfo, that’s inadequate consolation and ultimately won’t be sufficient for the vast majority of players to keep doing it.

    Yes, only those who play with shotgun + underbarrel rifle should get assists at this distance /sarcasm

    PS : If sniper receive an underbarrel shotgun, i can bet. People will complain "it is op" due an anti sniper bias.

    I didn’t play any older BFs except hardline because I didn’t have a console for a long time before hardline and the TTKs in BFI just ruined the firefights for me.

    All in all I’m against the idea of finishing people off with your pistol being th standard past like 20m coz it just looks ridiculous

    Shotguns in BFV can’t get assist=kill last 20m unless you get a headshot with a slug and even then you probably can’t past 30m
    My Drilling would like a word.  I still OHK with buckshot out to 20m, and hitting >75 out to nearly 30m.  Even the rifle is still getting ACK out to 40m or so.
    Heck, the Drilling actually performs better as a sniper than any of the proper snipers.  Not only is it a shotgun, making it an excellent cqc weapon, but the rifle barrel has higher velocity and less drag than any of the BAs and can even OHK with a bodyshot at short range.
    Where can you find the stats for the underbarrel rifle of the drilling? @StealthAria
    The link that I have only has the buckshot
    Post edited by Hawxxeye on
  • mf_shro0m
    1768 postsMember, Battlefield 4, Battlefield Hardline, Battlefield, Battlefield 1, Battlefield V Member
    y_j_es_i said:


    -L-M3rc3n4ry wrote: »
    Sixclicks said:



    y_j_es_i said:

    Ultimately, what would you like to encourage, recons operating within 20m of hostiles I.e. right at the front with medics and assaults, or recons sticking with their squads but not clearing houses I.e. like 20m to 60m from the hostiles with the supports?







    I would definitely opt for the second option. The first one sounds ridiculous



    I just want aggressive recon to be viable like it was in BF1 (with non-one hit kill weapons). I don't think it would make all recon players start playing that way, but it should at least be an option for those who do want to be more helpful to their team and don't mind that they'll still have a harder time than other classes more specifically designed for that range. BFV makes most non super highly skilled recon players feel like they have to sit back and be a useless hillhumper to be effective at all.



    That's how it was in both BF1 and BF4. Recon wasn't better than assault, support, or medic in CQB, but they were still reasonably able to compete with fast reflexes, accuracy, and good positioning. It's something that takes more skill than just holding down the trigger. And sure, your KDR wouldn't be as great as some scout laying on a hill a mile away, but that's not really super important to a lot of us that prefer that playstyle. That's not to say you can't still have good stats playing that way. I think I started BF1 around a 1.5 and ended up at a 3.2 before I stopped playing.



    I personally loved the scout class in BF1. It was actually really fun to play aggressively. It's what made me stick with the game so long. I also enjoyed it a lot in BF4. However, I mostly played hardcore in BF4. Still, bolt actions were able to one hit kill up to 12.5 meters in BF4 in non hardcore. I feel like recon got better and better, for the most part, since BF2 (the first BF game I played). BFV however is a massive step backwards. And sorry, but I don't get a lot of enjoyment out of using spammable weapons. I get bored of that pretty quickly. That's not to say I don't use them. Clearly I do if you've seen my weapon stats. They just don't keep me interested for long periods of time like scout in BF1 with the M.95 Infantry, Martini-Henry Infantry, Vetterli Carbine, Arisaka Patrol, and the SMLE Carbine backed up by a Frommer Stop, Bodeo, or MARS.



    Well said. About BF 1, even on BF 1 i found much easier to just use Mondragon rifle, close range, they are easier and forgive much more mistakes than Martini and for Medium-Long range, they are easier to use against moving targets than any BA rifle.



    I’m guessing the mondragon’s a semi-automatic?



    What you said is in line with what I’ve seen. The fact is that the vast majority of players perform better with semi-autos than with BAs even if the BAs can OHK because they’re more forgiving and perform better on average



    A lot of the haters claim that OHK to the chest BAs would be OP but clearly they’ve never actually tried them

    Mainly with high ping. If the lag makes me miss one shot in a moving target, with Martini Henry, i an dead. Sure, i can try shot agains in 5 seconds, but with Mondragon, an semi auto sniper, i can spray shots soo quickly that even if the hitreg ignores shots, i still can kill the target. Considering that servers on my region are dead, is the main reason that i really miss bolt action rifles of BF 1. Even on BF 1 i can't use then...

    Exactly man, that’s how it is with most people who’d like to play as recon but of course the assaults SARS are just better than the SLRs and so most pick assault over recon and snipe with the SARs

    If however the penalty for not landing a headshot were reduced at short-medium range then some players will move from playing as assault to using BAs for ptfo
  • mf_shro0m
    1768 postsMember, Battlefield 4, Battlefield Hardline, Battlefield, Battlefield 1, Battlefield V Member
    y_j_es_i said:


    -L-M3rc3n4ry wrote: »
    y_j_es_i said:

    1. Even if you could kill with a single follow up shot with any pistol at distances up to 20m, ptfo with BAs would still be most unfeasible due to the average distance of engagement in BFV. Coupled with much faster switching times, it would greatly increase the odds of recons who pump into hostiles in houses but is that our greatest concern?

    The vast majority of the time whilst ptfo engagement distances are greater than 20m and they’re more like 20m-60m. In such situation what are recons meant to do?

    At 20-60, they will get assist = kill if they can't switch to pistol, also, the "combo" bolt action shot + Mars automatica on BF 1 worked pretty well on this distances. Looks like you din't played previous BF games.



    y_j_es_i said:

    2. If most recons got a kill every time they assist from within like 50m that’d be ridiculous and people would not be happy. If you get an assist but you’re dead having made an effort to ptfo, that’s inadequate consolation and ultimately won’t be sufficient for the vast majority of players to keep doing it.



    Yes, only those who play with shotgun + underbarrel rifle should get assists at this distance /sarcasm



    PS : If sniper receive an underbarrel shotgun, i can bet. People will complain "it is op" due an anti sniper bias.



    I didn’t play any older BFs except hardline because I didn’t have a console for a long time before hardline and the TTKs in BFI just ruined the firefights for me.



    All in all I’m against the idea of finishing people off with your pistol being th standard past like 20m coz it just looks ridiculous



    Shotguns in BFV can’t get assist=kill last 20m unless you get a headshot with a slug and even then you probably can’t past 30m

    My Drilling would like a word.  I still OHK with buckshot out to 20m, and hitting >75 out to nearly 30m.  Even the rifle is still getting ACK out to 40m or so.
    Heck, the Drilling actually performs better as a sniper than any of the proper snipers.  Not only is it a shotgun, making it an excellent cqc weapon, but the rifle barrel has higher velocity and less drag than any of the BAs and can even OHK with a bodyshot at short range.

    Ok, so now there’s even less reason to think that making BAs OHK to the chest at short-medium range would be OP
  • StealthAria
    337 postsMember, Battlefield 3, Battlefield 4, Battlefield Hardline, Battlefield, Battlefield 1, CTE, Battlefield V Member
    @Hawxxeye ; No idea, I used to use Symthic for stats but last I checked they didn't have bfv stats.  I've just been going off practical testing and observations.
  • GP-Caliber
    650 postsMember, Battlefield 3, Battlefield 4, Battlefield Hardline, Battlefield, Battlefield 1, CTE Member
    y_j_es_i wrote: »
    GP-Caliber wrote: »
    y_j_es_i wrote: »
    Sixclicks wrote: »
    y_j_es_i said:
    Ultimately, what would you like to encourage, recons operating within 20m of hostiles I.e. right at the front with medics and assaults, or recons sticking with their squads but not clearing houses I.e. like 20m to 60m from the hostiles with the supports?



    I would definitely opt for the second option. The first one sounds ridiculous

    I just want aggressive recon to be viable like it was in BF1 (with non-one hit kill weapons). I don't think it would make all recon players start playing that way, but it should at least be an option for those who do want to be more helpful to their team and don't mind that they'll still have a harder time than other classes more specifically designed for that range. BFV makes most non super highly skilled recon players feel like they have to sit back and be a useless hillhumper to be effective at all.

    That's how it was in both BF1 and BF4. Recon wasn't better than assault, support, or medic in CQB, but they were still reasonably able to compete with fast reflexes, accuracy, and good positioning. It's something that takes more skill than just holding down the trigger. And sure, your KDR wouldn't be as great as some scout laying on a hill a mile away, but that's not really super important to a lot of us that prefer that playstyle. That's not to say you can't still have good stats playing that way. I think I started BF1 around a 1.5 and ended up at a 3.2 before I stopped playing.

    I personally loved the scout class in BF1. It was actually really fun to play aggressively. It's what made me stick with the game so long. I also enjoyed it a lot in BF4. However, I mostly played hardcore in BF4. Still, bolt actions were able to one hit kill up to 12.5 meters in BF4 in non hardcore. I feel like recon got better and better, for the most part, since BF2 (the first BF game I played). BFV however is a massive step backwards. And sorry, but I don't get a lot of enjoyment out of using spammable weapons. I get bored of that pretty quickly. That's not to say I don't use them. Clearly I do if you've seen my weapon stats. They just don't keep me interested for long periods of time like scout in BF1 with the M.95 Infantry, Martini-Henry Infantry, Vetterli Carbine, Arisaka Patrol, and the SMLE Carbine backed up by a Frommer Stop, Bodeo, or MARS.

    Think of my proposition as introducing a sweet spot for bolt actions that’s at 10-30m for some BAs and 10-60m for others.
    The benefit of this over the BFI system is that no-one gets a sweet spot if they camp far from their targets and so... it’ll reward ptfo and not camping

    And if you miss the OHK zone, then it’d be time to draw your pistol 🤷🏼‍♂️

    if you intoduce this I will become a god in this game. trust me you dont want this.

    Lol so there’ll be one more Stoedeh? I fancy my odds of never bumping into you haha

    im stodeh on ps4 rn.
  • One_Called_Kane
    191 postsMember, Battlefield 3, Battlefield 4, Battlefield Hardline, Battlefield, Battlefield 1, Battlefield V Member
    y_j_es_i said:
    So the G95 does 80 damage up to 25m, meaning that you can kill hostiles up to like 20-30m with one G95 round and a follow up shot with your pistol. So this the same scenario as if BAs did 95 damage up to 12m right?

    But, how many people with G95s have you seen stick with their squads?

    Literally the only person I’ve seen do that is Stoedeh and the G95 has other characteristics such as being clip loaded and having a decent ROF and 600m/s muzzle velocity that make it relatively well suited to sticking with your squad.

    This tells us that even if most/all BAs did 95 damage up close, no-one who isn’t in the elite 0.0001% would stick with their squads whilst using a BA because it’s not viable

    Making it so that most BAs did 95 damage up close wouldn’t encourage players to stick with their squads. It’s biggest impact would be that recons who get snuck up on stand a better chance.

    You're still operating under the impression that the changes being suggested are somehow going to make Recons PTFO. They aren't. Most of us here have been around long enough to know better. The changes being suggested are to make those of us who do play the objective more competetive and work better with our squads. Personally I couldn't care less if other Recons stick with their squads or not.

    A 95 damage model to someone like me who is usually with one or two squadmates in communication means that when I am providing overwatch I stand a much higher chance of dropping enemies that are engaging my squadmates because my bodyshot to that running assault is now doing 75 damage at 100m instead of 60 which conveniently enough was the right amount to finish him off after my buddy tagged him with his FG42. It's also enough that I can push into a close quarters scenario with my squad and know that even if I go down as long as I tag the guy my squadmates will have that much of an easier time cleaning them up at 5hp instead of 25 and revive me.
    y_j_es_i said:
    Lol so there’ll be one more Stoedeh? I fancy my odds of never bumping into you haha

    He's not wrong. If you made snipers OHK to the chest at 60m I could be Stodeh too. So could anyone with >40% accuracy with a bolt action. I can promise you that you would not like the gameplay experience that would come from such a feature.
  • mf_shro0m
    1768 postsMember, Battlefield 4, Battlefield Hardline, Battlefield, Battlefield 1, Battlefield V Member
    y_j_es_i said:
    So the G95 does 80 damage up to 25m, meaning that you can kill hostiles up to like 20-30m with one G95 round and a follow up shot with your pistol. So this the same scenario as if BAs did 95 damage up to 12m right?

    But, how many people with G95s have you seen stick with their squads?

    Literally the only person I’ve seen do that is Stoedeh and the G95 has other characteristics such as being clip loaded and having a decent ROF and 600m/s muzzle velocity that make it relatively well suited to sticking with your squad.

    This tells us that even if most/all BAs did 95 damage up close, no-one who isn’t in the elite 0.0001% would stick with their squads whilst using a BA because it’s not viable
    Making it so that most BAs did 95 damage up close wouldn’t encourage players to stick with their squads. It’s biggest impact would be that recons who get snuck up on stand a better chance.
    You're still operating under the impression that the changes being suggested are somehow going to make Recons PTFO. They aren't. Most of us here have been around long enough to know better. The changes being suggested are to make those of us who do play the objective more competetive and work better with our squads. Personally I couldn't care less if other Recons stick with their squads or not.
    A 95 damage model to someone like me who is usually with one or two squadmates in communication means that when I am providing overwatch I stand a much higher chance of dropping enemies that are engaging my squadmates because my bodyshot to that running assault is now doing 75 damage at 100m instead of 60 which conveniently enough was the right amount to finish him off after my buddy tagged him with his FG42. It's also enough that I can push into a close quarters scenario with my squad and know that even if I go down as long as I tag the guy my squadmates will have that much of an easier time cleaning them up at 5hp instead of 25 and revive me.



    y_j_es_i said:

    Lol so there’ll be one more Stoedeh? I fancy my odds of never bumping into you haha



    He's not wrong. If you made snipers OHK to the chest at 60m I could be Stodeh too. So could anyone with >40% accuracy with a bolt action. I can promise you that you would not like the gameplay experience that would come from such a feature.

    Let’s revisit the fact that the G95 does 80 damage up to 25m and the Kar does 75 damage up to 25m. This means that within 25m, following up a shot from any of the assault guns or LMGs and MMGs with a G95 or Kar round would result in a kill. Is this any different to if G95s did 95 damage? In 99% of engagements, no

    How often do you see recons with G95s or Kars sticking with their squads to make the most of this?
    I have literally never seen it.
    What does this mean?
    It means that increasing their damage to 95 at close range won’t actually make a noticeable difference.
    It’d be like giving the medic guns at launch an extra 1m of range to silence the chatter about how EA f***ed up the balancing. It’s like trying to close a deep gash in your leg with a plaster

    I think it’s funny how confident you seem to be seeing as only 2% of players stuck with their squads on the larger maps in CoD whilst holding BAs, and some of those BAs are OHK to everything but the enemy’s hands and feet.
    Can’t you figure out why players doing that are so few and far between?
    It’s because the vast majority can still do better with ARs, LMGs and SARs

    So what if there’s a few more recons in this world who can roll around wrecking havoc, there are some assaults and supports doing that every round. I saw a game where this dude who wasn’t camping went 200+:2 in a game of GO with a G43

    Whilst you may not care about getting more recons to ptfo as opposed to hill humping or about making using BAs feasible for ptfo in the hands of good players, a lot of people do
  • Hawxxeye
    6072 postsMember, Battlefield 3, Battlefield 4, Battlefield Hardline, Battlefield, Battlefield 1, CTE, BF1IncursionsAlpha, Battlefield V Member
    y_j_es_i said:
    So the G95 does 80 damage up to 25m, meaning that you can kill hostiles up to like 20-30m with one G95 round and a follow up shot with your pistol. So this the same scenario as if BAs did 95 damage up to 12m right?

    But, how many people with G95s have you seen stick with their squads?

    Literally the only person I’ve seen do that is Stoedeh and the G95 has other characteristics such as being clip loaded and having a decent ROF and 600m/s muzzle velocity that make it relatively well suited to sticking with your squad.

    This tells us that even if most/all BAs did 95 damage up close, no-one who isn’t in the elite 0.0001% would stick with their squads whilst using a BA because it’s not viable

    Making it so that most BAs did 95 damage up close wouldn’t encourage players to stick with their squads. It’s biggest impact would be that recons who get snuck up on stand a better chance.

    You're still operating under the impression that the changes being suggested are somehow going to make Recons PTFO. They aren't. Most of us here have been around long enough to know better. The changes being suggested are to make those of us who do play the objective more competetive and work better with our squads. Personally I couldn't care less if other Recons stick with their squads or not.

    A 95 damage model to someone like me who is usually with one or two squadmates in communication means that when I am providing overwatch I stand a much higher chance of dropping enemies that are engaging my squadmates because my bodyshot to that running assault is now doing 75 damage at 100m instead of 60 which conveniently enough was the right amount to finish him off after my buddy tagged him with his FG42. It's also enough that I can push into a close quarters scenario with my squad and know that even if I go down as long as I tag the guy my squadmates will have that much of an easier time cleaning them up at 5hp instead of 25 and revive me.
    y_j_es_i said:
    Lol so there’ll be one more Stoedeh? I fancy my odds of never bumping into you haha

    He's not wrong. If you made snipers OHK to the chest at 60m I could be Stodeh too. So could anyone with >40% accuracy with a bolt action. I can promise you that you would not like the gameplay experience that would come from such a feature.
    Yeah OHK up to 60m on bodyshots would get stupid fast.
    That said the damage does need to go somewhere much closer to 100 without reaching 100.
  • MacTurdy
    134 postsMember, Battlefield 4, Battlefield, Battlefield 1, Battlefield V Member
    edited April 22
    I already contemplated about the damage model of Battlefield 4 for this game. I mean up to 12 meters all the bolt-action rifles were one-hits back then. Beyond that range damage would drop off until a minimum value is reached. I mean something definitely has to be done about the damage model. In my opinion this model would not be bad at all, especially if you like to play agressievely. 
    It could definitely be the same within 12 meters in Battlefield 5 and then make the damage drop off to a minimum of 70 for example. The minimum damage should vary however depending on the rifle used. Faster firing ones should have a lower one while slow-firing ones have a higher minimum damage value.
Sign In or Register to comment.