The new Mercury map is god awful terrible, here’s why...

«13
CAMO117
5 postsMember, Battlefield 3, Battlefield 4, Battlefield Hardline, Battlefield, Battlefield 1, CTE, Battlefield V Member
This map is god awful terrible, and here simply why. It’s a non stop sniper fiasco, I’ve played 3 straight hours of this map on breakthrough and time and time again it was just hiding in there bases sniping at one another, really ruins the game, I’ve never really been too fussed with snipers in Battlefield, but now In Battlefield 5 it is like the meta class, simply because it so easy to use and so over powered. I honestly can’t believe I’m saying this but if they don’t fix this up I’m straight up quitting Battlefield once and for all, and Ive been playing BF since 1942, so I’ve been more then a loyal gamer to them, just so disappointing how this franchise is turning out, literally turning into COD...

But I’d also like to note that snipers have been broken since day one In this game, as there so easy to use, so accurate, quick bullet time, little to no recoil, little to no bullet drop, and a one hit kill. It’s literally so broken you can go on YouTube and see people quick scoping with Snipers in Battlefield V like a breeze. Please fix the snipers...

Comments

  • ProAssassin2003
    3314 postsMember, Battlefield 3, Battlefield 4, Battlefield Hardline, Battlefield, Battlefield 1, Battlefield V Member
    It's not very good. I seen 6 Snipers laying on there stomach on the side of the mountain by C with at least 3 of them with AT Rifle.
  • SirBobdk
    4014 postsMember, Battlefield 3, Battlefield 4, Battlefield, Battlefield 1, Battlefield V Member
    Breakthrough on mercury is one big camping joke. The map have a terrible design for this mode. Even cq is bad with the lack of navel war fare and Islands with flags. Placing a town on one end of the map instead of in the center is also a fail imo. Bring back the map designer from BF2/3. The current ones dont have a clue about what they are doing.
  • xXHamatoYoshiXx
    198 postsMember, Battlefield 3, Battlefield 4, Battlefield Hardline, Battlefield, Battlefield 1, Battlefield V Member
    TTZ_Dipsy said:
    If you're that worried about campers just equip the Zh-29 with a 3x scope and go super aggressive on them, that gun is an absolute beast at all ranges and for all play styles...

    Mercury is one of the best Battlefield maps made; if you can't counter snipers on this map especially, you're not flanking right. Plenty of space to cut in and around imo
    Exactly, though I don't think Mercury is one of the best BF maps ever made, but it has some nice scenery in some parts, but the sniping can easily be countered by flanking from A to E and your team proceeds to continue the flank by moving uphill and catch them at their backs towards you while the rest of the team is pushing the frontline. And for those complaining that the AT sniper is OP have no idea what they're talking about with the weapons low bullet cycle and reload times on top of having to go prone or mount it on an object. The ZH-29 is far superior and is the best sniper in the game. The biggest problem I see and have seen countless times and in previous BF games are players not playing their class, not giving out ammo or health, not spotting enemies with flare or spotting scope for all teammates to see, not playing tactically and are just constantly run and gunning and trying to push the objective through zerging. Every winning team im on people are playing the game as it should be played with using their classes and tactics, and almost every time I'm on the losing end it is just the opposite. Attrition has some good things about it, but the cons I believe far outweigh the pros due to how the game is made so that people play as a team, not as some Master Chief messiah.
  • bigiain
    264 postsMember, Battlefield 3, Battlefield 4, Battlefield Hardline, Battlefield, Battlefield 1, Battlefield V Member
    I use smoke - lots of it on mercury, it ruins a snipers day, I don't have a problem with them, by the way the map is brilliant.

    Literally turning into cod (this comment makes me want to pull hair) - if you knew anything, that after the slower, more tactical pace of BF2, then bf3 you could claim was when the series went more over the top like cod.
    Early Battlefield and any fps game that's had prone ability has always had campers, its a part of the game. It amazes me after all this time, certain players expects/demands in a full scale war game that everybody should be running upright with a machine gun toward a flag, nope sorry but smart play is to have some if your team sniping, camping and covering your team mates behind of the said runners to the objective, Not all charging to your doom.

    If players have a problem with campers - which means the players lay in the same fixed position for period of time without budging, then why haven't you figured out where they are and taken them out?

    Maybe they're on his team?
  • mitchpic
    64 postsMember, Battlefield 3, Battlefield 4, Battlefield, Battlefield 1, Battlefield V Member
    Although snipers are an issue with just how many there can be at times, at times breakthrough can be quite good on that map, I've had a few food games where we have managed to capture all 4 locations despite the number of snipers.

    As for the map, its decent and far better than a lot of the base maps.

    But they really need to fix the performance issues asap.
  • NLBartmaN
    3173 postsMember, Battlefield, Battlefield 1, CTE, Battlefield V Member
    It is indeed a terrible map, looks great, but it shows every bad game/gunplay/technical decision in this game at its worst.

    They need to stop making such open maps or remove the 3x scopes without glint/raise the TTK so you can actually move without instant 1 frame death and PTFO.
  • Marine_IraHayes2
    234 postsMember, Battlefield 3, Battlefield Member
    mitchpic wrote: »
    Although snipers are an issue with just how many there can be at times, at times breakthrough can be quite good on that map, I've had a few food games where we have managed to capture all 4 locations despite the number of snipers.

    As for the map, its decent and far better than a lot of the base maps.

    But they really need to fix the performance issues asap.

    Yes! Fix the performance issues. How in the world can a game this far along be getting worse and almost unplayable?
    I swear it’s like when you have a nightmare dream where you are trying to run but you just can’t go anywhere no matter how hard you try.
  • BFB-LeCharybdis
    790 postsMember, Battlefield, Battlefield 1 Member
    I use smoke - lots of it on mercury, it ruins a snipers day, I don't have a problem with them, by the way the map is brilliant.

    Literally turning into cod (this comment makes me want to pull hair) - if you knew anything, that after the slower, more tactical pace of BF2, then bf3 you could claim was when the series went more over the top like cod.
    Early Battlefield and any fps game that's had prone ability has always had campers, its a part of the game. It amazes me after all this time, certain players expects/demands in a full scale war game that everybody should be running upright with a machine gun toward a flag, nope sorry but smart play is to have some if your team sniping, camping and covering your team mates behind of the said runners to the objective, Not all charging to your doom.

    If players have a problem with campers - which means the players lay in the same fixed position for period of time without budging, then why haven't you figured out where they are and taken them out?

    I think the biggest misconception about maps that play to camping is that it's all about getting killed by snipers. It's not, you can be killed in an instant by any gun in this game.

    Mercury's layout favours snipers (not Recon) so naturally many choose that class. I've played against sides with up to 14 snipers and your right with smoke their easily countered, their not going to PTO so victory was easy. Completely boring.

    Likewise when I've had a ton of snipers on my team, majority don't PTO so again boring. Just by it's design V plays very defensively, Mercury furthers this through its poor design. People don't need more of a reason to camp in Pronefield. 

    It's not about K/D, it's about close, competitive games.

    I will say though Mercury looks stunning, and some parts of it that you get to play on in Breakthrough like the town area or the ruins are criminally underused in Conquest. It has a lot of potential, but without expansion it's left unfulfilled. 
  • echo-smoker93
    81 postsMember, Battlefield 3, Battlefield 4, Battlefield, Battlefield 1 Member
    If is so easy and op.. anyone could do it, right? Have you tried playing recon to put you theory to the test? 
  • mrtwotimes
    733 postsMember, Battlefield 3, Battlefield, Battlefield 1, Battlefield V Member
    Smoke grenade rifle, smoke grenades....repeat
  • Agent_Talon
    439 postsMember, Battlefield 3, Battlefield 4, Battlefield, Battlefield 1, Battlefield V Member
    If is so easy and op.. anyone could do it, right? Have you tried playing recon to put you theory to the test? 
    To be fair, if you are decent with the Boys you really can rack up a decent K/D on this map or any of them.  Doesn't translate to wins but having a 1HK sniper rifle makes things much simpler for recon.  

    As for Mercury it's a decent map.  Needs something else at C and as everyone has said it should have some kind of island Cap. 
  • Zviko0
    1620 postsMember, Battlefield 4, Battlefield, Battlefield 1, Battlefield V Member
    Only COD kids will disagree with this. In a game where capturing objectives is the main goal, there's no such thing as camping. There's either defending (from defending team's point of view) or covering the area, allowing your teammates to push (from attacking team's point of view).

    In other words, why the hell would players on defending team attack or push out of their objective towards the attacking team? Maybe a bit at the start to form a line and then slowly fall back if needed and then stand their ground in an objective. But there's no need to run out on the open for them and unnecessarily dying. That's not camping. It's defending.
  • Zviko0
    1620 postsMember, Battlefield 4, Battlefield, Battlefield 1, Battlefield V Member
    You can call it "camping" if you play DM or TDM. But not on Breakthrough or Conquest.
  • xKusagamix
    933 postsMember, Battlefield 3, Battlefield 4, Battlefield, Battlefield 1, CTE, Battlefield V Member
    echo-smoker93 said:
    If is so easy and op.. anyone could do it, right? Have you tried playing recon to put you theory to the test? 

    To be fair, if you are decent with the Boys you really can rack up a decent K/D on this map or any of them.  Doesn't translate to wins but having a 1HK sniper rifle makes things much simpler for recon.  

    As for Mercury it's a decent map.  Needs something else at C and as everyone has said it should have some kind of island Cap. 
    I got far more better K/D with SLRs in this map, like srsly i never thought SLRs are even that good in the first place. A prone Sniper is a dead sniper - to me - in BFV, with the uber fast TTK, it's easy and fun to lay back and get some easy kills, but the BOYS itself is not even that good in the first place. In the mean time that the guy with the BOYS could get 2 easy kills back to back with the BOYS, a lot of guns can get 2 times more kills.

    If you not having good skill to begin with, the BOYS may help to get easy kills, but if you're a good or even an average player, there are plenty of guns are far more better to use, even BARs are better if you can actually aim and lead your shot in the first place.
  • Kattegat_Twin
    760 postsMember, Battlefield 3, Battlefield 4, Battlefield, Battlefield 1, CTE, Battlefield V Member
    Zviko0 said:
    Only COD kids will disagree with this. In a game where capturing objectives is the main goal, there's no such thing as camping. There's either defending (from defending team's point of view) or covering the area, allowing your teammates to push (from attacking team's point of view).

    In other words, why the hell would players on defending team attack or push out of their objective towards the attacking team? Maybe a bit at the start to form a line and then slowly fall back if needed and then stand their ground in an objective. But there's no need to run out on the open for them and unnecessarily dying. That's not camping. It's defending.
    The battle for Winterfell in GoT is a perfect example of this. I won't give spoilers, in case people still haven't watched it, but people went nuts over how stupid that tactic was, yet they want that very thing is this game for some reason.
  • Fish7O2
    190 postsMember, Battlefield 3, Battlefield 4, Battlefield Hardline, Battlefield, Battlefield 1, Battlefield V Member
    edited June 6
    Zviko0 said:
    Only COD kids will disagree with this. In a game where capturing objectives is the main goal, there's no such thing as camping. There's either defending (from defending team's point of view) or covering the area, allowing your teammates to push (from attacking team's point of view).

    In other words, why the hell would players on defending team attack or push out of their objective towards the attacking team? Maybe a bit at the start to form a line and then slowly fall back if needed and then stand their ground in an objective. But there's no need to run out on the open for them and unnecessarily dying. That's not camping. It's defending.
    While that is true. It would help if these Prone People,  "defending" , were not 100 meters behind what they are, "defending." I say Prone People, because I place a high percentage of supports with the recon crew. There are always 6 or 7 of them with a bipod somewhere way behind the points, and spamming bullets. So now with the 10 recon and 7 supports, placing their willies in the dirt, defenders are now down 17 people. Your only hope is that their cousins on the attacking team are doing the same.
  • VVaxDaddy
    130 postsMember, Battlefield, Battlefield 1, Battlefield V Member
    Winds up being one of the best maps in a game full of mediocre maps... Which is to say it's still a pretty meh map in itself. Anyone claiming it's one of the best BF maps is way off-base.

    Breathrough is truly awful on this map. I get the use smoke comment, but at best you have 5 smokes and if you're choosing medic for the smokes your gimping yourself with weapons that are terrible for many of the engagement ranges. A on the first sector is just awful as medic without a good team, shot from every which angle it seems like. The sightlines are just too big, it's the same ole song and dance as the other maps.

    Conquest is much better, but there are several areas that are clumsy to push because of decent sightlines between objectives, while the objectives or areas very near to them have plenty of hiding spots. Also clearing out some buildings can be a nightmare, the way the stairs are setup allow you to be shot from anywhere in the upper room. They're terribly designed.
Sign In or Register to comment.