This is why fog mechanics in bf1 are bad

Comments

  • MarxistDictator
    5187 postsMember, Battlefield 3, Battlefield 4, Battlefield Hardline, Battlefield, Battlefield 1, CTE, Battlefield V Member
    You can play the game as close as you want as all of those classes normally...along with playing open ground as assault. If I can manage it easy in the linear game mode how is it impossible in CQ.

    Fog just removes a bunch of viable play styles. It is literally the antithesis of variety but OK. If you hate planes but like heavy bombers for some reason you enjoy fog.
  • opsis_1
    250 postsMember, Battlefield 3, Battlefield 4, Battlefield, Battlefield 1, Battlefield V Member
    Fogs fine.,stop crying...just play the fn game lol
  • WetFishDB
    2314 postsMember, Battlefield 4, Battlefield, Battlefield 1, Battlefield V Member
    Personally I dislike all planes. But I accept that everyone has their own likes and dislikes. They are in the game and ultimately I have to accept it.

    Fog doesn’t remove anything, people can still play whatever class they want etc. It makes some things more effective and other things less effective. That’s different, not less. I accept it means that effective engagement distances is narrowed, but that is in itself what varies the way that round is played.

    Personally having played thousands of games of conquest, like most of us probably have by now, the way each map play out is generally pretty predictable. Anything that breaks up that monotony is a good thing.
  • trip1ex
    5215 postsMember, Battlefield 3, Battlefield 4, Battlefield, Battlefield 1, CTE, BF1IncursionsAlpha, Battlefield V Member
    edited November 2019
    WetFishDB said:
    trip1ex wrote: »
    (Quote)
     
    I'm saying fog makes the maps feel the same as each other.    And that is what reduces variety.  And introduces monotony ...for reasons I've already listed 6x over.  


    30 maps fogged over is much more like reducing the game to 1 environment we can play games in.  It's the opposite of what you say.  

    And that argument has been refuted repeatedly too. Fog maps don’t all play the same, they play more similar for assaults who focus on close quarters anyway, but for medics, scouts, and supports it plays more differently. Of course I’m referring to Conquest, as I’ve given specific examples throughout. Each maps is different, and the routes infantry can take when there is fog is very different, meaning pinch points aren't the same, vantage points are less useful etc. You just make sweeping statements and then walk off dropping the mic, not realising you haven’t actually provided anything to substantiate your point.

    And even so, 30 maps all without fog + 30 maps with fog all acting as 1 (which I disagree with but let’s run with it) is 31. 31 is still > 30. And given how rare fog actually is, that’s is still a little variety.
    You haven't addressed my argument my yet.  You're still busy telling me any one map is different with fog.   You're still arguing against your strawman.  

    ...while  I'm saying, as you increase the frequency of fog , you increase the monotony of the map lineup because fog makes maps feel the same as each other.    I've said all along that 1 fog map in 30...ok fine.  A little change of pace.  But you start increasing that frequency and then it starts to feel like you're playing the same map over and over and over.  

    The whole nature of fog is everywhere you go you can only see ~30m in front of you.  That's why every map starts to feel very similar to one another in fog.   


  • trip1ex
    5215 postsMember, Battlefield 3, Battlefield 4, Battlefield, Battlefield 1, CTE, BF1IncursionsAlpha, Battlefield V Member
    HuwJarz said:
    But as Wetfish has already pointed out to you, the frequency of fog is not as common as you suggest, so your problem statement is not actually a problem.   Therefore it introduces variety as one tens to play mainly fog free games.  

    Pleased that I was able to settle that debate for you 👍
    I pointed out fog  isn't as rare as he claims.     I based mine on 2 years of playing BF1.  He based his on counting maps for a day and a half.  I guess I win.  

    Nevermind the argument isn't claiming a specific average  frequency of fog in the first place.  




  • MarxistDictator
    5187 postsMember, Battlefield 3, Battlefield 4, Battlefield Hardline, Battlefield, Battlefield 1, CTE, Battlefield V Member
    edited November 2019
    But its already been explained that the variety within fogged over maps is basically non existent vs the variety of play conditions in the maps themselves. I didn't think making assault more viable (when he's already the best class in the game) is 'variety' to anyone. Less than half the maps in the games have planes as it is and when fog does appear the few players flying planes other than heavy bombers start spawning them too since nothing else will have the slightest impact on the ground. You can play Scout up close with ease because he has some of the best sidearms and a gadget that tells you where people are and what direction they are facing in real time. Medic and Support both have low TTK CQB primary weapons too. Not sure how fog is required to 'change up' how you would play these classes normally. Their kit gear is already tailored for that.

    The only benefit of fog to me is that it makes melee only cavalry more viable, but the cavalry is imbalanced after they added the heal and is easy to use in all situations anyway.

    Also I don't wanna say 'there it is' but hey an omission you hate planes and then you don't really have any other reason for liking fog. Hmmmmmmm
  • WetFishDB
    2314 postsMember, Battlefield 4, Battlefield, Battlefield 1, Battlefield V Member
    trip1ex wrote: »
    (Quote)
    You haven't addressed my argument my yet.  You're still busy telling me any one map is different with fog.   You're still arguing against your strawman.  

    ...while  I'm saying, as you increase the frequency of fog , you increase the monotony of the map lineup because fog makes maps feel the same as each other.    I've said all along that 1 fog map in 30...ok fine.  A little change of pace.  But you start increasing that frequency and then it starts to feel like you're playing the same map over and over and over.  

    The whole nature of fog is everywhere you go you can only see ~30m in front of you.  That's why every map starts to feel very similar to one another in fog.   

    Your argument was that one map in fog plays the same as all others. I have directly explained why that isn’t the case. And fog is rare. Played something like 20 games in a row without fog once now. I’m not sure what you are doing to land in fog all the time, but it ain’t common for me. Maybe fog doesn’t like you as much as you don’t like it.

    I guess it seems to boil down to some people being able to observe the difference in how the game plays, and others not so able.
  • WetFishDB
    2314 postsMember, Battlefield 4, Battlefield, Battlefield 1, Battlefield V Member
    trip1ex wrote: »
    (Quote)
    I pointed out fog  isn't as rare as he claims.     I based mine on 2 years of playing BF1.  He based his on counting maps for a day and a half.  I guess I win.  

    Nevermind the argument isn't claiming a specific average  frequency of fog in the first place.  

    I’ve also played many thousands of conquest rounds over the last few years. I’ve just been tracking it specifically since this thread to try and work out exactly how rare it is. I’ve described the mode, region, and platform to try and help be more specific. But sure, your sweeping statements are far more persuasive.
  • WetFishDB
    2314 postsMember, Battlefield 4, Battlefield, Battlefield 1, Battlefield V Member
    edited November 2019
    But its already been explained that the variety within fogged over maps is basically non existent vs the variety of play conditions in the maps themselves. I didn't think making assault more viable (when he's already the best class in the game) is 'variety' to anyone. Less than half the maps in the games have planes as it is and when fog does appear the few players flying planes other than heavy bombers start spawning them too since nothing else will have the slightest impact on the ground. You can play Scout up close with ease because he has some of the best sidearms and a gadget that tells you where people are and what direction they are facing in real time. Medic and Support both have low TTK CQB primary weapons too. Not sure how fog is required to 'change up' how you would play these classes normally. Their kit gear is already tailored for that.

    The only benefit of fog to me is that it makes melee only cavalry more viable, but the cavalry is imbalanced after they added the heal and is easy to use in all situations anyway.

    Also I don't wanna say 'there it is' but hey an omission you hate planes and then you don't really have any other reason for liking fog. Hmmmmmmm

    Personally I disagree. I find each fog map plays differently to its non-fog counterpart. And I find that each fog map plays very differently to every other fog map. And in my experience fog is really quite rare (PS4, EU, Conquest, Mixed), and therefore when it comes in it’s a refreshing change. If it was as common as some people imply (10 in a row) then I’m sure I’d feel differently - but it isn’t common in the thousands of games I’ve played.

    I’d also argue that medic is by far the best (and most useful class) in that game mode. Although I’d comfortably place Assault as the second most effective and useful class (on any map with vehicles). But everyone is different, I’ve even seen people argue that Scouts are.

    I do agree though that heavy bombers having an easier time of it in fog is frustrating. You often can’t even see them from the AA-gun and they can just fly over a contested or flag being lost for easy kills. No doubt it’s one of the downsides to fog. But that’s more their imbalance.

    And you are exactly right, each class can vary it up and use closer quarter options and be effective - even Scouts. Which is variety from their typically more common ranged options. Some players will keep their same class and change the primaries they use, others may use a different class. And the result, in my personal experience, is a bit of variety from the usual gameplay.

    And you are also very much correct that I don’t like planes at all. I find that they are aren’t all that well balanced. The fact that fog causes lots of planes to have a harder time is undoubtedly a big contributor to why I like fog. I’m not going to pretend it isn’t. But it’s not the only reason. The fact it encourages hill humpers on both teams to perhaps get a bit closer to an objective is also a benefit. As is the impact it has on the way maps play.
    Post edited by WetFishDB on
  • Titan_Awaken
    1194 postsMember, Battlefield, Battlefield 1, CTE, BF1IncursionsAlpha, Battlefield V Member
    trip1ex said:
    trip1ex said:
    @WetFishDB
     
    Remember thirteen of the thirty maps in the game already have 0 airplanes.    So fogging over map and after map and making planes much less effective is not additional variety as far as not dealing with planes  goes.  

    Also one fogged over map is another fogged over map.   When all you can see is ~20m in front of you and your screen is white then the experience barely changes as the name of the map changes.  The differences in terrain and cover matter much less.  The effect of fog thus is to turn every map into the same map.   This creates a huge sameness to fogged over maps.  

    So when BF1 fogs over 10 maps in a row it doesn't introduce variety to the gameplay.  It makes it a lot more monotonous.  It stamps out the variety.  It stamps  (out) the unique differences in the terrain and layout.  It stamps away certain tactics to a great degree.  You're left feeling like you're playing the same map over and over with even fewer tactics available.  

    The only way fog introduces variety is if it appears at a much lower frequency.  

    That's because any variety introduced by fog diminishes very quickly the greater the rate at which maps are fogged over.  

    It's no different really then say removing the medic class from a map.  That would add some variety.  Right?  But then if you do it 10 maps in a row?  Does is still add variety?  No. The variety disappears.  Now you've effectively reduced variety.     And then what if 13 of the 30 maps already had no medics on them to begin with.  And what if other maps already made it very difficult for medics to operate in certain areas as it was.    Then you really see how it doesn't add any variety at all even to take out medics.  
    trip1ex said:
    @WetFishDB
     
    Remember thirteen of the thirty maps in the game already have 0 airplanes.    So fogging over map and after map and making planes much less effective is not additional variety as far as not dealing with planes  goes.  

    Also one fogged over map is another fogged over map.   When all you can see is ~20m in front of you and your screen is white then the experience barely changes as the name of the map changes.  The differences in terrain and cover matter much less.  The effect of fog thus is to turn every map into the same map.   This creates a huge sameness to fogged over maps.  

    So when BF1 fogs over 10 maps in a row it doesn't introduce variety to the gameplay.  It makes it a lot more monotonous.  It stamps out the variety.  It stamps  (out) the unique differences in the terrain and layout.  It stamps away certain tactics to a great degree.  You're left feeling like you're playing the same map over and over with even fewer tactics available.  

    The only way fog introduces variety is if it appears at a much lower frequency.  

    That's because any variety introduced by fog diminishes very quickly the greater the rate at which maps are fogged over.  

    It's no different really then say removing the medic class from a map.  That would add some variety.  Right?  But then if you do it 10 maps in a row?  Does is still add variety?  No. The variety disappears.  Now you've effectively reduced variety.     And then what if 13 of the 30 maps already had no medics on them to begin with.  And what if other maps already made it very difficult for medics to operate in certain areas as it was.    Then you really see how it doesn't add any variety at all even to take out medics.  
    Eh, not really. One map with fog plays fundamentally different to another map with fog because Battlefield maps don't use the linear (3) lane system that CoD maps are known for. 

    To say each map plays the same with fog is just plain wrong. Even if you restrict the game to only one single map with or without fog with the same 64 players, I can still guarantee that each match will be played differently.

    No two matches will the play out exactly the same way; it isn't possible to come up with a mathematical model predicting where all 64 players will be doing what and where at any given moment in time. It's utter chaos at any and every moment and the introduction of fog into a game adds yet another layer of chaos and unpredictability into an already chaotic and unpredictable game. 

    You probably don't like fog because it drastically reduces visibility and visual feedback, much like many others. But what if I told you that that's why fog is so brilliant? Because you see, without fog you feel like you're in control of the game - that is to say that you know where everything is, how it looks like, what it is and in what direction - but as soon as the fog rolls in you lose that sense of control and knowledge of who, what, when and how and it makes you improvise whether you like it or not.

    Without being in control, there is a sense of tension and suspense because you never know what is front of you, whether it be a tank, a squad of infantry or nothing at all. Fog keeps you constantly on edge because it strips away predictability in games and hence adds variation to the game. Where's the fun knowing where everything is all the time? Not much variety in constantly knowing where everything is if you ask me...

    But don't just take my word for it. The Silent Hill franchise famously uses fog to deliberately obscure the player's view distance and there's a constant looming shadow of suspense and anticipation as a result. If you removed the fog in Silent Hill, the atmosphere and the game as a whole wouldn't be half as effective. 

    As the cliche goes: "Improvise. Adapt. Overcome". If you're insistent on doing none of those when the fog rolls in, don't be surprised if you get picked off a player who can.


    The fact that the maps are more open in BF is even more of a reason why fogged over maps play the same way as each other.

    The discussion isn't about what second by second or minute by minute decisions players make on a map.   So that's neither here nor there.  

    I don't like fog because of exactly what I stated.  It takes away variety and introduces monotony.  

    The reason some of you don't get the point is because you can't see the forest for the trees.  :)  AT least that's one reason.    The other reason is some of you like that it kills the variety.   :)  YOu like that you don't have to deal with planes or tanks or snipers as much.  :)  You want all the maps to be infantry-only.  :)

    Like I said in the post above yours:  Yes fog on Giant's plays different than Giant's.  But that's not the issue.  The issue is not only does a fogged over Giant's play just like every other fogged over map but it also plays a lot like many of the other 29 maps without fog.  This introduces a monotony to the map lineup.    Remember we aren't playing Giant's in a vacuum.  WE aren't playing a sp game of Silent Hill where suddenly they can throw fog on you and change things up.  WE aren't playing a Silent HIll where the experience is ~10 hours or whatever it is and they can control the entire thing all the way through.

    No we're playing a multiplayer game over 30 maps that are already deliberately designed to provide different experiences.  As it is, if just play the maps, you're being thrown into different situations all the time.  13 of the 30 maps have no planes.  So when you switch maps, you already have to adapt to having planes or not having planes.   at least 4 of the 30 maps have no vehicles at all.  At least a few of the 30 aren't sniper friendly.  And on any given map, you are already constantly adapting to different flag zones and situations.    For example, if you are inside trying to take  on the B flag on Tsaritsyn, you probably aren't sniping.     There's lots of maps with close quarters where you probably won't be sniping.   There's maps with close quarters where tanks can't get it at very easily and are much less effective.  Nevermind that vehicles already come and go on maps, not only as they move, but as they get destroyed.  For example, on Suez, when an enemy tank gets destroyed, it's gone for a good 2 minutes at least.    Now you're playing a tank-less map.  So the need to adapt is already built into the game.  Whether it's from map to map, flag to flag or situations to situation.  

    So fog isn't doing anything more than introducing monotony to the map lineup.   




    trip1ex said:
    trip1ex said:
    @WetFishDB
     
    Remember thirteen of the thirty maps in the game already have 0 airplanes.    So fogging over map and after map and making planes much less effective is not additional variety as far as not dealing with planes  goes.  

    Also one fogged over map is another fogged over map.   When all you can see is ~20m in front of you and your screen is white then the experience barely changes as the name of the map changes.  The differences in terrain and cover matter much less.  The effect of fog thus is to turn every map into the same map.   This creates a huge sameness to fogged over maps.  

    So when BF1 fogs over 10 maps in a row it doesn't introduce variety to the gameplay.  It makes it a lot more monotonous.  It stamps out the variety.  It stamps  (out) the unique differences in the terrain and layout.  It stamps away certain tactics to a great degree.  You're left feeling like you're playing the same map over and over with even fewer tactics available.  

    The only way fog introduces variety is if it appears at a much lower frequency.  

    That's because any variety introduced by fog diminishes very quickly the greater the rate at which maps are fogged over.  

    It's no different really then say removing the medic class from a map.  That would add some variety.  Right?  But then if you do it 10 maps in a row?  Does is still add variety?  No. The variety disappears.  Now you've effectively reduced variety.     And then what if 13 of the 30 maps already had no medics on them to begin with.  And what if other maps already made it very difficult for medics to operate in certain areas as it was.    Then you really see how it doesn't add any variety at all even to take out medics.  
    trip1ex said:
    @WetFishDB
     
    Remember thirteen of the thirty maps in the game already have 0 airplanes.    So fogging over map and after map and making planes much less effective is not additional variety as far as not dealing with planes  goes.  

    Also one fogged over map is another fogged over map.   When all you can see is ~20m in front of you and your screen is white then the experience barely changes as the name of the map changes.  The differences in terrain and cover matter much less.  The effect of fog thus is to turn every map into the same map.   This creates a huge sameness to fogged over maps.  

    So when BF1 fogs over 10 maps in a row it doesn't introduce variety to the gameplay.  It makes it a lot more monotonous.  It stamps out the variety.  It stamps  (out) the unique differences in the terrain and layout.  It stamps away certain tactics to a great degree.  You're left feeling like you're playing the same map over and over with even fewer tactics available.  

    The only way fog introduces variety is if it appears at a much lower frequency.  

    That's because any variety introduced by fog diminishes very quickly the greater the rate at which maps are fogged over.  

    It's no different really then say removing the medic class from a map.  That would add some variety.  Right?  But then if you do it 10 maps in a row?  Does is still add variety?  No. The variety disappears.  Now you've effectively reduced variety.     And then what if 13 of the 30 maps already had no medics on them to begin with.  And what if other maps already made it very difficult for medics to operate in certain areas as it was.    Then you really see how it doesn't add any variety at all even to take out medics.  
    Eh, not really. One map with fog plays fundamentally different to another map with fog because Battlefield maps don't use the linear (3) lane system that CoD maps are known for. 

    To say each map plays the same with fog is just plain wrong. Even if you restrict the game to only one single map with or without fog with the same 64 players, I can still guarantee that each match will be played differently.

    No two matches will the play out exactly the same way; it isn't possible to come up with a mathematical model predicting where all 64 players will be doing what and where at any given moment in time. It's utter chaos at any and every moment and the introduction of fog into a game adds yet another layer of chaos and unpredictability into an already chaotic and unpredictable game. 

    You probably don't like fog because it drastically reduces visibility and visual feedback, much like many others. But what if I told you that that's why fog is so brilliant? Because you see, without fog you feel like you're in control of the game - that is to say that you know where everything is, how it looks like, what it is and in what direction - but as soon as the fog rolls in you lose that sense of control and knowledge of who, what, when and how and it makes you improvise whether you like it or not.

    Without being in control, there is a sense of tension and suspense because you never know what is front of you, whether it be a tank, a squad of infantry or nothing at all. Fog keeps you constantly on edge because it strips away predictability in games and hence adds variation to the game. Where's the fun knowing where everything is all the time? Not much variety in constantly knowing where everything is if you ask me...

    But don't just take my word for it. The Silent Hill franchise famously uses fog to deliberately obscure the player's view distance and there's a constant looming shadow of suspense and anticipation as a result. If you removed the fog in Silent Hill, the atmosphere and the game as a whole wouldn't be half as effective. 

    As the cliche goes: "Improvise. Adapt. Overcome". If you're insistent on doing none of those when the fog rolls in, don't be surprised if you get picked off a player who can.


    The fact that the maps are more open in BF is even more of a reason why fogged over maps play the same way as each other.

    The discussion isn't about what second by second or minute by minute decisions players make on a map.   So that's neither here nor there.  

    I don't like fog because of exactly what I stated.  It takes away variety and introduces monotony.  

    The reason some of you don't get the point is because you can't see the forest for the trees.  :)  AT least that's one reason.    The other reason is some of you like that it kills the variety.   :)  YOu like that you don't have to deal with planes or tanks or snipers as much.  :)  You want all the maps to be infantry-only.  :)

    Like I said in the post above yours:  Yes fog on Giant's plays different than Giant's.  But that's not the issue.  The issue is not only does a fogged over Giant's play just like every other fogged over map but it also plays a lot like many of the other 29 maps without fog.  This introduces a monotony to the map lineup.    Remember we aren't playing Giant's in a vacuum.  WE aren't playing a sp game of Silent Hill where suddenly they can throw fog on you and change things up.  WE aren't playing a Silent HIll where the experience is ~10 hours or whatever it is and they can control the entire thing all the way through.

    No we're playing a multiplayer game over 30 maps that are already deliberately designed to provide different experiences.  As it is, if just play the maps, you're being thrown into different situations all the time.  13 of the 30 maps have no planes.  So when you switch maps, you already have to adapt to having planes or not having planes.   at least 4 of the 30 maps have no vehicles at all.  At least a few of the 30 aren't sniper friendly.  And on any given map, you are already constantly adapting to different flag zones and situations.    For example, if you are inside trying to take  on the B flag on Tsaritsyn, you probably aren't sniping.     There's lots of maps with close quarters where you probably won't be sniping.   There's maps with close quarters where tanks can't get it at very easily and are much less effective.  Nevermind that vehicles already come and go on maps, not only as they move, but as they get destroyed.  For example, on Suez, when an enemy tank gets destroyed, it's gone for a good 2 minutes at least.    Now you're playing a tank-less map.  So the need to adapt is already built into the game.  Whether it's from map to map, flag to flag or situations to situation.  

    So fog isn't doing anything more than introducing monotony to the map lineup.   




    Where is the variety is knowing where everything is at all times? That's about as monotonous as it gets. There's no gratification in killing someone from a mile away just because they have doritos above their head. 

    The most tense moments in (shooter) games is peaking around a corner because you never know who or what is around the corner. Fog replicates this tense feeling on a much larger scale. It spices up the gameplay, so how is it monotonous?

    All people need to do is shoot a spotting flare or mash the spot button to mark your location albeit temporarily. Now there's nothing wrong with this playstyle - it's perfectly valid - but hell it ultimately boils down to who can see who first and score the kill.

    The introduction of fog deprives people of this "first come first serve" mentality. It's places less emphasis on spotting as a passive way to assist your team (spotting doesn't work as well in fog, obviously) and encourages you to improvise and come up with a plan of attack on the spot. 

    Information is literally spoon-fed to you when there's no fog; all it takes is a moment's glance to find what you're looking for. Is that what you seek? A constant uninterrupted flow of visual and audio information? Dunno, sounds kinda monotonous to me. 

  • trip1ex
    5215 postsMember, Battlefield 3, Battlefield 4, Battlefield, Battlefield 1, CTE, BF1IncursionsAlpha, Battlefield V Member
    WetFishDB said:
    trip1ex wrote: »
    (Quote)
    You haven't addressed my argument my yet.  You're still busy telling me any one map is different with fog.   You're still arguing against your strawman.  

    ...while  I'm saying, as you increase the frequency of fog , you increase the monotony of the map lineup because fog makes maps feel the same as each other.    I've said all along that 1 fog map in 30...ok fine.  A little change of pace.  But you start increasing that frequency and then it starts to feel like you're playing the same map over and over and over.  

    The whole nature of fog is everywhere you go you can only see ~30m in front of you.  That's why every map starts to feel very similar to one another in fog.   

    Your argument was that one map in fog plays the same as all others. I have directly explained why that isn’t the case. And fog is rare. Played something like 20 games in a row without fog once now. I’m not sure what you are doing to land in fog all the time, but it ain’t common for me. Maybe fog doesn’t like you as much as you don’t like it.

    I guess it seems to boil down to some people being able to observe the difference in how the game plays, and others not so able.
    No.  You haven't provided any counter argument.   Telling me fog changes any one map is  not a counter to saying one fogged map starts to play like another.    

    Fog reduces visibility so much so that every map starts to feel the same and play the same as each other.   Fog clamps down on the plane game and other aspects of the game.  Clamping down on the plane game, for example,   is not extra variety but something that is already present in half of the maps as it is aka half the maps already have no planes.  Thus fog doesn't introduce variety.  It introduces monotony.

    You've shown through your statements that you like fog because it does clamp down on planes and tanks and some of the other variety provided by BF.   

    I provided the perfect analogy from the very start:

    "It's no different really then say taking out medic class from a map.  That would add some variety.  Right?  But then if you do it 10 maps in a row?  Does is still add variety?  No. The variety disappears.  Now you've effectively reduced variety.     And then what if 13 of the 30 maps already had no medics on them to begin with.  And what if other maps made it very difficult for medics to operate in certain areas as it was.    Then you really see how it wouldn't add any variety at all even.  "





    Next, maybe you don't even remember, but somewhere down the line DICE actually reduced the frequency of fog.    They didn't reduce the frequency of fog because the high frequency of fog provided great variety.  :)  

    AS to the actual frequency currently?  I have no idea and it's besides the pt.  I want nothing more than fog to be low frequency.   So it's a win for me if it is low.   What frequency it is doesn't change the argument above.   But I highly doubt it's the 1 in 10 you claim.  A claim you made btw before your claim to have started keeping track of fog in maps.  I base this on my 2 years of playing the game.  I know fog wasn't a 1 in 10 rounds occurence.

    Also I too can make a current anecdotal claim like yours.  The first map I played this weekend was fogged over.  And I only played 2 rounds.  

    Last I wouldn't doubt if fog is a server side setting and a RSP setting at this point.  This could very well result in  different frequencies of fog on servers. 





  • trip1ex
    5215 postsMember, Battlefield 3, Battlefield 4, Battlefield, Battlefield 1, CTE, BF1IncursionsAlpha, Battlefield V Member
    trip1ex said:
    trip1ex said:
    @WetFishDB
     
    Remember thirteen of the thirty maps in the game already have 0 airplanes.    So fogging over map and after map and making planes much less effective is not additional variety as far as not dealing with planes  goes.  

    Also one fogged over map is another fogged over map.   When all you can see is ~20m in front of you and your screen is white then the experience barely changes as the name of the map changes.  The differences in terrain and cover matter much less.  The effect of fog thus is to turn every map into the same map.   This creates a huge sameness to fogged over maps.  

    So when BF1 fogs over 10 maps in a row it doesn't introduce variety to the gameplay.  It makes it a lot more monotonous.  It stamps out the variety.  It stamps  (out) the unique differences in the terrain and layout.  It stamps away certain tactics to a great degree.  You're left feeling like you're playing the same map over and over with even fewer tactics available.  

    The only way fog introduces variety is if it appears at a much lower frequency.  

    That's because any variety introduced by fog diminishes very quickly the greater the rate at which maps are fogged over.  

    It's no different really then say removing the medic class from a map.  That would add some variety.  Right?  But then if you do it 10 maps in a row?  Does is still add variety?  No. The variety disappears.  Now you've effectively reduced variety.     And then what if 13 of the 30 maps already had no medics on them to begin with.  And what if other maps already made it very difficult for medics to operate in certain areas as it was.    Then you really see how it doesn't add any variety at all even to take out medics.  
    trip1ex said:
    @WetFishDB
     
    Remember thirteen of the thirty maps in the game already have 0 airplanes.    So fogging over map and after map and making planes much less effective is not additional variety as far as not dealing with planes  goes.  

    Also one fogged over map is another fogged over map.   When all you can see is ~20m in front of you and your screen is white then the experience barely changes as the name of the map changes.  The differences in terrain and cover matter much less.  The effect of fog thus is to turn every map into the same map.   This creates a huge sameness to fogged over maps.  

    So when BF1 fogs over 10 maps in a row it doesn't introduce variety to the gameplay.  It makes it a lot more monotonous.  It stamps out the variety.  It stamps  (out) the unique differences in the terrain and layout.  It stamps away certain tactics to a great degree.  You're left feeling like you're playing the same map over and over with even fewer tactics available.  

    The only way fog introduces variety is if it appears at a much lower frequency.  

    That's because any variety introduced by fog diminishes very quickly the greater the rate at which maps are fogged over.  

    It's no different really then say removing the medic class from a map.  That would add some variety.  Right?  But then if you do it 10 maps in a row?  Does is still add variety?  No. The variety disappears.  Now you've effectively reduced variety.     And then what if 13 of the 30 maps already had no medics on them to begin with.  And what if other maps already made it very difficult for medics to operate in certain areas as it was.    Then you really see how it doesn't add any variety at all even to take out medics.  
    Eh, not really. One map with fog plays fundamentally different to another map with fog because Battlefield maps don't use the linear (3) lane system that CoD maps are known for. 

    To say each map plays the same with fog is just plain wrong. Even if you restrict the game to only one single map with or without fog with the same 64 players, I can still guarantee that each match will be played differently.

    No two matches will the play out exactly the same way; it isn't possible to come up with a mathematical model predicting where all 64 players will be doing what and where at any given moment in time. It's utter chaos at any and every moment and the introduction of fog into a game adds yet another layer of chaos and unpredictability into an already chaotic and unpredictable game. 

    You probably don't like fog because it drastically reduces visibility and visual feedback, much like many others. But what if I told you that that's why fog is so brilliant? Because you see, without fog you feel like you're in control of the game - that is to say that you know where everything is, how it looks like, what it is and in what direction - but as soon as the fog rolls in you lose that sense of control and knowledge of who, what, when and how and it makes you improvise whether you like it or not.

    Without being in control, there is a sense of tension and suspense because you never know what is front of you, whether it be a tank, a squad of infantry or nothing at all. Fog keeps you constantly on edge because it strips away predictability in games and hence adds variation to the game. Where's the fun knowing where everything is all the time? Not much variety in constantly knowing where everything is if you ask me...

    But don't just take my word for it. The Silent Hill franchise famously uses fog to deliberately obscure the player's view distance and there's a constant looming shadow of suspense and anticipation as a result. If you removed the fog in Silent Hill, the atmosphere and the game as a whole wouldn't be half as effective. 

    As the cliche goes: "Improvise. Adapt. Overcome". If you're insistent on doing none of those when the fog rolls in, don't be surprised if you get picked off a player who can.


    The fact that the maps are more open in BF is even more of a reason why fogged over maps play the same way as each other.

    The discussion isn't about what second by second or minute by minute decisions players make on a map.   So that's neither here nor there.  

    I don't like fog because of exactly what I stated.  It takes away variety and introduces monotony.  

    The reason some of you don't get the point is because you can't see the forest for the trees.  :)  AT least that's one reason.    The other reason is some of you like that it kills the variety.   :)  YOu like that you don't have to deal with planes or tanks or snipers as much.  :)  You want all the maps to be infantry-only.  :)

    Like I said in the post above yours:  Yes fog on Giant's plays different than Giant's.  But that's not the issue.  The issue is not only does a fogged over Giant's play just like every other fogged over map but it also plays a lot like many of the other 29 maps without fog.  This introduces a monotony to the map lineup.    Remember we aren't playing Giant's in a vacuum.  WE aren't playing a sp game of Silent Hill where suddenly they can throw fog on you and change things up.  WE aren't playing a Silent HIll where the experience is ~10 hours or whatever it is and they can control the entire thing all the way through.

    No we're playing a multiplayer game over 30 maps that are already deliberately designed to provide different experiences.  As it is, if just play the maps, you're being thrown into different situations all the time.  13 of the 30 maps have no planes.  So when you switch maps, you already have to adapt to having planes or not having planes.   at least 4 of the 30 maps have no vehicles at all.  At least a few of the 30 aren't sniper friendly.  And on any given map, you are already constantly adapting to different flag zones and situations.    For example, if you are inside trying to take  on the B flag on Tsaritsyn, you probably aren't sniping.     There's lots of maps with close quarters where you probably won't be sniping.   There's maps with close quarters where tanks can't get it at very easily and are much less effective.  Nevermind that vehicles already come and go on maps, not only as they move, but as they get destroyed.  For example, on Suez, when an enemy tank gets destroyed, it's gone for a good 2 minutes at least.    Now you're playing a tank-less map.  So the need to adapt is already built into the game.  Whether it's from map to map, flag to flag or situations to situation.  

    So fog isn't doing anything more than introducing monotony to the map lineup.   




    trip1ex said:
    trip1ex said:
    @WetFishDB
     
    Remember thirteen of the thirty maps in the game already have 0 airplanes.    So fogging over map and after map and making planes much less effective is not additional variety as far as not dealing with planes  goes.  

    Also one fogged over map is another fogged over map.   When all you can see is ~20m in front of you and your screen is white then the experience barely changes as the name of the map changes.  The differences in terrain and cover matter much less.  The effect of fog thus is to turn every map into the same map.   This creates a huge sameness to fogged over maps.  

    So when BF1 fogs over 10 maps in a row it doesn't introduce variety to the gameplay.  It makes it a lot more monotonous.  It stamps out the variety.  It stamps  (out) the unique differences in the terrain and layout.  It stamps away certain tactics to a great degree.  You're left feeling like you're playing the same map over and over with even fewer tactics available.  

    The only way fog introduces variety is if it appears at a much lower frequency.  

    That's because any variety introduced by fog diminishes very quickly the greater the rate at which maps are fogged over.  

    It's no different really then say removing the medic class from a map.  That would add some variety.  Right?  But then if you do it 10 maps in a row?  Does is still add variety?  No. The variety disappears.  Now you've effectively reduced variety.     And then what if 13 of the 30 maps already had no medics on them to begin with.  And what if other maps already made it very difficult for medics to operate in certain areas as it was.    Then you really see how it doesn't add any variety at all even to take out medics.  
    trip1ex said:
    @WetFishDB
     
    Remember thirteen of the thirty maps in the game already have 0 airplanes.    So fogging over map and after map and making planes much less effective is not additional variety as far as not dealing with planes  goes.  

    Also one fogged over map is another fogged over map.   When all you can see is ~20m in front of you and your screen is white then the experience barely changes as the name of the map changes.  The differences in terrain and cover matter much less.  The effect of fog thus is to turn every map into the same map.   This creates a huge sameness to fogged over maps.  

    So when BF1 fogs over 10 maps in a row it doesn't introduce variety to the gameplay.  It makes it a lot more monotonous.  It stamps out the variety.  It stamps  (out) the unique differences in the terrain and layout.  It stamps away certain tactics to a great degree.  You're left feeling like you're playing the same map over and over with even fewer tactics available.  

    The only way fog introduces variety is if it appears at a much lower frequency.  

    That's because any variety introduced by fog diminishes very quickly the greater the rate at which maps are fogged over.  

    It's no different really then say removing the medic class from a map.  That would add some variety.  Right?  But then if you do it 10 maps in a row?  Does is still add variety?  No. The variety disappears.  Now you've effectively reduced variety.     And then what if 13 of the 30 maps already had no medics on them to begin with.  And what if other maps already made it very difficult for medics to operate in certain areas as it was.    Then you really see how it doesn't add any variety at all even to take out medics.  
    Eh, not really. One map with fog plays fundamentally different to another map with fog because Battlefield maps don't use the linear (3) lane system that CoD maps are known for. 

    To say each map plays the same with fog is just plain wrong. Even if you restrict the game to only one single map with or without fog with the same 64 players, I can still guarantee that each match will be played differently.

    No two matches will the play out exactly the same way; it isn't possible to come up with a mathematical model predicting where all 64 players will be doing what and where at any given moment in time. It's utter chaos at any and every moment and the introduction of fog into a game adds yet another layer of chaos and unpredictability into an already chaotic and unpredictable game. 

    You probably don't like fog because it drastically reduces visibility and visual feedback, much like many others. But what if I told you that that's why fog is so brilliant? Because you see, without fog you feel like you're in control of the game - that is to say that you know where everything is, how it looks like, what it is and in what direction - but as soon as the fog rolls in you lose that sense of control and knowledge of who, what, when and how and it makes you improvise whether you like it or not.

    Without being in control, there is a sense of tension and suspense because you never know what is front of you, whether it be a tank, a squad of infantry or nothing at all. Fog keeps you constantly on edge because it strips away predictability in games and hence adds variation to the game. Where's the fun knowing where everything is all the time? Not much variety in constantly knowing where everything is if you ask me...

    But don't just take my word for it. The Silent Hill franchise famously uses fog to deliberately obscure the player's view distance and there's a constant looming shadow of suspense and anticipation as a result. If you removed the fog in Silent Hill, the atmosphere and the game as a whole wouldn't be half as effective. 

    As the cliche goes: "Improvise. Adapt. Overcome". If you're insistent on doing none of those when the fog rolls in, don't be surprised if you get picked off a player who can.


    The fact that the maps are more open in BF is even more of a reason why fogged over maps play the same way as each other.

    The discussion isn't about what second by second or minute by minute decisions players make on a map.   So that's neither here nor there.  

    I don't like fog because of exactly what I stated.  It takes away variety and introduces monotony.  

    The reason some of you don't get the point is because you can't see the forest for the trees.  :)  AT least that's one reason.    The other reason is some of you like that it kills the variety.   :)  YOu like that you don't have to deal with planes or tanks or snipers as much.  :)  You want all the maps to be infantry-only.  :)

    Like I said in the post above yours:  Yes fog on Giant's plays different than Giant's.  But that's not the issue.  The issue is not only does a fogged over Giant's play just like every other fogged over map but it also plays a lot like many of the other 29 maps without fog.  This introduces a monotony to the map lineup.    Remember we aren't playing Giant's in a vacuum.  WE aren't playing a sp game of Silent Hill where suddenly they can throw fog on you and change things up.  WE aren't playing a Silent HIll where the experience is ~10 hours or whatever it is and they can control the entire thing all the way through.

    No we're playing a multiplayer game over 30 maps that are already deliberately designed to provide different experiences.  As it is, if just play the maps, you're being thrown into different situations all the time.  13 of the 30 maps have no planes.  So when you switch maps, you already have to adapt to having planes or not having planes.   at least 4 of the 30 maps have no vehicles at all.  At least a few of the 30 aren't sniper friendly.  And on any given map, you are already constantly adapting to different flag zones and situations.    For example, if you are inside trying to take  on the B flag on Tsaritsyn, you probably aren't sniping.     There's lots of maps with close quarters where you probably won't be sniping.   There's maps with close quarters where tanks can't get it at very easily and are much less effective.  Nevermind that vehicles already come and go on maps, not only as they move, but as they get destroyed.  For example, on Suez, when an enemy tank gets destroyed, it's gone for a good 2 minutes at least.    Now you're playing a tank-less map.  So the need to adapt is already built into the game.  Whether it's from map to map, flag to flag or situations to situation.  

    So fog isn't doing anything more than introducing monotony to the map lineup.   




    Where is the variety is knowing where everything is at all times? That's about as monotonous as it gets. There's no gratification in killing someone from a mile away just because they have doritos above their head. 

    The most tense moments in (shooter) games is peaking around a corner because you never know who or what is around the corner. Fog replicates this tense feeling on a much larger scale. It spices up the gameplay, so how is it monotonous?

    All people need to do is shoot a spotting flare or mash the spot button to mark your location albeit temporarily. Now there's nothing wrong with this playstyle - it's perfectly valid - but hell it ultimately boils down to who can see who first and score the kill.

    The introduction of fog deprives people of this "first come first serve" mentality. It's places less emphasis on spotting as a passive way to assist your team (spotting doesn't work as well in fog, obviously) and encourages you to improvise and come up with a plan of attack on the spot. 

    Information is literally spoon-fed to you when there's no fog; all it takes is a moment's glance to find what you're looking for. Is that what you seek? A constant uninterrupted flow of visual and audio information? Dunno, sounds kinda monotonous to me. 

    You, like WetFishDB, don't understand the argument.    And at this point you guys never will.  Not for another 10 years at least.  I think you're  too young.   It's a forest vs the trees thing.  

    IT's not that fog changes any one map.  IT's that one fogged map is another fogged map.  

    IF you fogged up all 30 maps would they provide more variety than the 30 maps without fog or the same or less?   It is pretty obviously less. 
  • WetFishDB
    2314 postsMember, Battlefield 4, Battlefield, Battlefield 1, Battlefield V Member
    trip1ex wrote: »
    (Quote)
    You, like WetFishDB, don't understand the argument.    And at this point you guys never will.  Not for another 10 years at least.  I think you're  too young.   It's a forest vs the trees thing.  

    IT's not that fog changes any one map.  IT's that one fogged map is another fogged map.  

    IF you fogged up all 30 maps would they provide more variety than the 30 maps without fog or the same or less?   It is pretty obviously less. 

    Funny to make an assumption on ages. What makes you think anyone is young particularly? I’m not surprised there’s a wild assumption from someone who refuses to discuss anything in detail and makes sweeping statements without anything to back them up.

    Your argument has been repeatedly refuted, and you’ve offered nothing new to the conversation but a lame attempt to imply age has some bearing on someone’s observation ability, without really knowing the ages of anyone involved :weary:

    People definitely have different capabilities when it comes to this game, some are most definitely more able at observing and adapting to things than others. I agree it’s not being able to see the wood for the trees, just disagree about which of us is the one incapable of seeing the bigger perspective - and I don’t see us ever agreeing on which of us it is.
  • trip1ex
    5215 postsMember, Battlefield 3, Battlefield 4, Battlefield, Battlefield 1, CTE, BF1IncursionsAlpha, Battlefield V Member
    WetFishDB said:
    trip1ex wrote: »
    (Quote)
    You, like WetFishDB, don't understand the argument.    And at this point you guys never will.  Not for another 10 years at least.  I think you're  too young.   It's a forest vs the trees thing.  

    IT's not that fog changes any one map.  IT's that one fogged map is another fogged map.  

    IF you fogged up all 30 maps would they provide more variety than the 30 maps without fog or the same or less?   It is pretty obviously less. 

    Funny to make an assumption on ages. What makes you think anyone is young particularly? I’m not surprised there’s a wild assumption from someone who refuses to discuss anything in detail and makes sweeping statements without anything to back them up.

    Your argument has been repeatedly refuted, and you’ve offered nothing new to the conversation but a lame attempt to imply age has some bearing on someone’s observation ability, without really knowing the ages of anyone involved :weary:

    People definitely have different capabilities when it comes to this game, some are most definitely more able at observing and adapting to things than others. I agree it’s not being able to see the wood for the trees, just disagree about which of us is the one incapable of seeing the bigger perspective - and I don’t see us ever agreeing on which of us it is.
     lmao.   It's the opposite.  You don't understand the argument.   YOu can't see the big picture.    

    If you understood the argument and had  any counter argument  you would have replied to me with it  considering I gave yet another example of my argument in the post you quoted.  











  • Titan_Awaken
    1194 postsMember, Battlefield, Battlefield 1, CTE, BF1IncursionsAlpha, Battlefield V Member
    Nope. I'm pretty sure it is you who doesn't understand the argument. 

    Your argument is that one map with fog plays the same as any other map with fog, with the exception of Giant's Shadow.

    This claim is objectively false.

    For your argument to be even remotely considered 'true', fog would have to change the geographic landscape of the map itself. That means certain land features such as hills, buildings, rocks, waterbodies, trenches and so on would have to disappear when the fog rolls over for each map to play the same. This is not what happens. 

    If I were to grossly oversimplify what fog is, I would say it is essentially a semi-transparent white filter placed over a map. The geographic landscape and layout of the map does not change whatsoever with the introduction of fog so your argument has been effectively debunked.

    Argonne Forest without fog is exactly the same as Argonne Forest geographically with fog with the exception of a semi-transparent white filter.

    Amiens without fog is exactly the same as Amiens geographically with fog with the exception of a semi-transparent white filter.

    Sinai Desert without a sandstorm is exactly the same as Sinai Desert geographically with a sandstorm with the exception of a semi-transparent orange-brown filter.

    You get the point; the fundamental layout of the map with or without fog remains exactly the same so either:
    A. Your argument is invalid. 
    B. You think every map in the game is the same as each other which is bollocks.

    So how on Earth did you arrive at the conclusion that each map plays the same solely because of fog? Are you really trying to tell me that Achi Baba, a dryland desert is the same as Argonne Forest, a dense green forest? 

    Lmao. Okay.
  • MarxistDictator
    5187 postsMember, Battlefield 3, Battlefield 4, Battlefield Hardline, Battlefield, Battlefield 1, CTE, Battlefield V Member
    Ok obviously one map does not literally change into another but the fog gameplay of one map differs little from the next. No where near the variety of the actual maps between themselves.

    Doubly so when fog seems to be biased towards the already limited air maps. And 1/10 would not even be worth discussing but it's not anywhere near that uncommon. It's like 2 times more likely than that at least.

    And really we haven't seen any excuses for what it does besides 'mix up' the gameplay in ways that are totally possible to play normally without issue and that it nerfs vehicles which you already profess to not like. Pretty obvious you would enjoy things that nerf vehicles even if they don't really add to the gameplay variety. Since by all qualifies nerfing the vehicle play doesn't really make the game more varied.
  • Forkbeard84
    1838 postsMember, Battlefield, Battlefield 1, CTE, Battlefield V Member
    WetFishDB wrote: »
    trip1ex wrote: »
    (Quote)
    You, like WetFishDB, don't understand the argument.    And at this point you guys never will.  Not for another 10 years at least.  I think you're  too young.   It's a forest vs the trees thing.  

    IT's not that fog changes any one map.  IT's that one fogged map is another fogged map.  

    IF you fogged up all 30 maps would they provide more variety than the 30 maps without fog or the same or less?   It is pretty obviously less. 

    Funny to make an assumption on ages. What makes you think anyone is young particularly? I’m not surprised there’s a wild assumption from someone who refuses to discuss anything in detail and makes sweeping statements without anything to back them up.

    Your argument has been repeatedly refuted, and you’ve offered nothing new to the conversation but a lame attempt to imply age has some bearing on someone’s observation ability, without really knowing the ages of anyone involved :weary:

    People definitely have different capabilities when it comes to this game, some are most definitely more able at observing and adapting to things than others. I agree it’s not being able to see the wood for the trees, just disagree about which of us is the one incapable of seeing the bigger perspective - and I don’t see us ever agreeing on which of us it is.

    I’m guessing he’s the young one. Youngster calling others young.

    Kind of like the most racist person is usually the first one to accuse someone else of being racist.
  • WetFishDB
    2314 postsMember, Battlefield 4, Battlefield, Battlefield 1, Battlefield V Member
    edited November 2019
    Ok obviously one map does not literally change into another but the fog gameplay of one map differs little from the next. No where near the variety of the actual maps between themselves.

    Doubly so when fog seems to be biased towards the already limited air maps. And 1/10 would not even be worth discussing but it's not anywhere near that uncommon. It's like 2 times more likely than that at least.

    And really we haven't seen any excuses for what it does besides 'mix up' the gameplay in ways that are totally possible to play normally without issue and that it nerfs vehicles which you already profess to not like. Pretty obvious you would enjoy things that nerf vehicles even if they don't really add to the gameplay variety. Since by all qualifies nerfing the vehicle play doesn't really make the game more varied.

    I believe you mostly play Ops, and given that most of the times there are just two flags in play then there isn’t a whole lot of diversity in how the game plays. It’s far more linear in nature, and so I can see why fog would make that even more monotonous. On Conquest each fog map really does play very differently, or can do.

    And fog likelihood may well be different in Ops, or have different triggers for its inclusion on those rounds, or perhaps the triggers are performance based in some way - no idea. I’ve had fog twice since this getting involved in this thread, and not more than once per session (once Conquest and once Ops).

    And I do see how it limits pilots and vehicles, and with you having something like 40% in vehicles I can see why you don’t like it. Personally, as someone who prefers to play mostly as infantry and take others on an equal footing, I don’t mind it when a little fog rolls in - but that’s just preferences rather than the objectivity of variety.

    From the perspective of a Conquest player, the variety it introduces is that it encourages players to use other classes or other weapons in their chosen class and thus alters the team mix or weapons in play. For example, Galicia Conquest in fog makes Assault weapons more common and more effective across a wider area of the map. It encourages Scouts to get closer to the objectives and contribute more (mini map spotting really key).

    It introduces new routes around each map for each of those classes, meaning the maps play out differently. Using Galicia Conquest as an example, Scouts camping in the houses have a much harder time which makes movement more free across the map for all classes.

    It encourages players to get closer to objectives (meaning player density is varied). PTFO Scouts are rewarded more than the campy kind for example.

    And it means a map dominated by planes or vehicles is perhaps less so for a period. Artillery trucks are more exposed and at greater risk of being flanked etc. But I do accept that pilots have a much harder time of things. That is variety for them and everyone else. The attack plane on Galicia no longer has as much free reign (no one can sit on AA’s for long without being Sniped). That’s probably welcome variety for the other 60 non-pilots in the server.
  • disposalist
    8927 postsMember, Battlefield 3, Battlefield 4, Battlefield, Battlefield 1, CTE, BF1IncursionsAlpha Member
    Man, is this still going on?
    Ok obviously one map does not literally change into another but the fog gameplay of one map differs little from the next. No where near the variety of the actual maps between themselves.
    Except the fog isn't there all the time, so it literally adds to the variety by allowing for two different experiences in one match.
    Doubly so when fog seems to be biased towards the already limited air maps. And 1/10 would not even be worth discussing but it's not anywhere near that uncommon. It's like 2 times more likely than that at least.

    And really we haven't seen any excuses for what it does besides 'mix up' the gameplay in ways that are totally possible to play normally without issue and that it nerfs vehicles which you already profess to not like. Pretty obvious you would enjoy things that nerf vehicles even if they don't really add to the gameplay variety. Since by all qualifies nerfing the vehicle play doesn't really make the game more varied.
    "Excuses for what is does beside 'mix up' the gameplay"? Why does that need excusing? That is exactly what it does and why it adds variety.

    "nerfs vehicles"? By allowing them to get closer to objectives without being seen and destroyed? By allowing them to cross open areas with less risk thus opening up new paths of attack?

    "don't really add to the gameplay variety"? But they do as described.

    Yes, it makes some gameplay more difficult and others easier. The same could be said of buildings, trees and mountains. Let's just play on a flat open plain?

    Or is it just dynamic effects that somehow reduce variety? (even though that is, of course, and oxymoron)

    Or is what you really mean: It hinders my favourite playstyles, so it reduces my personal variety?

Sign In or Register to comment.