Thoughts on the K31/43

Comments

  • The_BERG_366
    2723 postsMember, Battlefield 3, Battlefield 4, Battlefield Hardline, Battlefield, Battlefield 1, CTE, Battlefield V Member
    talhaONE wrote: »
    Loqtrall wrote: »
    It's an incredibly buggy weapon.

    For one, every scope available has alignment issues. The predator scope adds a post sight, but the reticle is misaligned and is too far up on the scope. The rest of the sights have the round landing off target.

    Then there's the fact that despite ONLY using the 6x scope spec, my scope is bugged and has never had 6x magnification. I switch between 6x and 3x and both scopes are identical in terms of magnification. There are also various reports out there that insist the 6x scope randomly does and does not work.

    On top of that, it's irons are stupid thick, and using its iron sights covers up a large portion of the screen due to the large handle on the bolt and the integrated scope.

    Imo it's only redeeming quality right now is having a 7 round detachable mag, which you have to spec into.

    It's beyond disappointing to me, because I've been wanting a k31 in BF since BF1 was released and it wasn't in the base game. When I heard the k31 was data mined, I was hoping and praying that if one rifle was added in the final content update, it was the k31.

    And it's bugged to hell and back, and doesn't even function as a straight pull rifle unless using iron sights (that's two straight pull rifles in the game that are ignored in that regard). Which is a shame, because it has one of the most interesting straight pull bolt mechanisms in existence.

    As a lover of rifles in all BF games, I hope they fix this one's issues quick and it's more enjoyable to use (at least for me)

    Any new gun added to support and recon are mediocre. On the other hand Jhonson is pretty solid. Why? Because its Assault class. Only Assault class deserves good guns in Bf5.

    No because its a DMR. And for that same reason I think the m3 is pretty good too actually. Silenced m1a1 in combination with flares and Sniper archetype is pretty damn good imo. The scope generally is a minus of course but Its not nearly bad enough for me to not use the gun.
  • Hawxxeye
    7480 postsMember, Battlefield 3, Battlefield 4, Battlefield Hardline, Battlefield, Battlefield 1, CTE, BF1IncursionsAlpha, Battlefield V Member
    talhaONE wrote: »
    Loqtrall wrote: »
    It's an incredibly buggy weapon.

    For one, every scope available has alignment issues. The predator scope adds a post sight, but the reticle is misaligned and is too far up on the scope. The rest of the sights have the round landing off target.

    Then there's the fact that despite ONLY using the 6x scope spec, my scope is bugged and has never had 6x magnification. I switch between 6x and 3x and both scopes are identical in terms of magnification. There are also various reports out there that insist the 6x scope randomly does and does not work.

    On top of that, it's irons are stupid thick, and using its iron sights covers up a large portion of the screen due to the large handle on the bolt and the integrated scope.

    Imo it's only redeeming quality right now is having a 7 round detachable mag, which you have to spec into.

    It's beyond disappointing to me, because I've been wanting a k31 in BF since BF1 was released and it wasn't in the base game. When I heard the k31 was data mined, I was hoping and praying that if one rifle was added in the final content update, it was the k31.

    And it's bugged to hell and back, and doesn't even function as a straight pull rifle unless using iron sights (that's two straight pull rifles in the game that are ignored in that regard). Which is a shame, because it has one of the most interesting straight pull bolt mechanisms in existence.

    As a lover of rifles in all BF games, I hope they fix this one's issues quick and it's more enjoyable to use (at least for me)

    Any new gun added to support and recon are mediocre. On the other hand Jhonson is pretty solid. Why? Because its Assault class. Only Assault class deserves good guns in Bf5.

    No because its a DMR. And for that same reason I think the m3 is pretty good too actually. Silenced m1a1 in combination with flares and Sniper archetype is pretty damn good imo. The scope generally is a minus of course but Its not nearly bad enough for me to not use the gun.
    Because DICE wont accept making a recon gun without giving the gun a serious demerit
  • DingoKillr
    4233 postsMember, Battlefield 3, Battlefield 4, Battlefield, Battlefield 1, CTE, BF1IncursionsAlpha, Battlefield V Member
    Hawxxeye wrote: »
    (Quote)
    Because DICE wont accept making a recon gun without giving the gun a serious demerit

    I never understood why a Recon needs to be perfectly still and glint under a 100m.
    You want Recon looking thru a scope to spot(which they don't do either). But any other class can and move.
  • iron_site_sniper
    24 postsMember, Battlefield 3, Battlefield 4, Battlefield Hardline, Battlefield, Battlefield 1, Battlefield V Member
    edited June 16
    This gun is TRASH period!  I don't know why anyone would use this gun.  Also, why did they even implement the ability to switch between Scope and Iron sights in game anyway?  I don't even see the advantage of this... someone please explain, most people will use the optical scope anyway.  Give us a significant reason to use iron sights please.

    The problem is that the Iron sight mode has lower RPM because accuracy right after ADS settles is abysmal (it takes an extra 1/2 sec after the ADS settles for the gun to be accurate in iron sight mode).  The rifle has a low RPM, low damage, and  the iron sights for this rifle block so much view, its just insanely funny.

    At least make this gun unique like give it a 3X zoom iron sight capability so that its worth it to switch in game (this also makes it different from other bolt action rifles).  Man, i don't understand who keeps on making these bad decisions?
  • The_BERG_366
    2723 postsMember, Battlefield 3, Battlefield 4, Battlefield Hardline, Battlefield, Battlefield 1, CTE, Battlefield V Member
    Hawxxeye wrote: »
    (Quote)
    Because DICE wont accept making a recon gun without giving the gun a serious demerit

    Would be borderline op to have a silenced slr with no drawbacks (especially in combination with the Sniper specialization which makes it so you spot everything you hit while the enemy might not even know where he is being shot from)
  • talhaONE
    935 postsMember, Battlefield 3, Battlefield 4, Battlefield Hardline, Battlefield, Battlefield 1, Battlefield V Member
    edited June 17
    talhaONE wrote: »
    Loqtrall wrote: »
    It's an incredibly buggy weapon.

    For one, every scope available has alignment issues. The predator scope adds a post sight, but the reticle is misaligned and is too far up on the scope. The rest of the sights have the round landing off target.

    Then there's the fact that despite ONLY using the 6x scope spec, my scope is bugged and has never had 6x magnification. I switch between 6x and 3x and both scopes are identical in terms of magnification. There are also various reports out there that insist the 6x scope randomly does and does not work.

    On top of that, it's irons are stupid thick, and using its iron sights covers up a large portion of the screen due to the large handle on the bolt and the integrated scope.

    Imo it's only redeeming quality right now is having a 7 round detachable mag, which you have to spec into.

    It's beyond disappointing to me, because I've been wanting a k31 in BF since BF1 was released and it wasn't in the base game. When I heard the k31 was data mined, I was hoping and praying that if one rifle was added in the final content update, it was the k31.

    And it's bugged to hell and back, and doesn't even function as a straight pull rifle unless using iron sights (that's two straight pull rifles in the game that are ignored in that regard). Which is a shame, because it has one of the most interesting straight pull bolt mechanisms in existence.

    As a lover of rifles in all BF games, I hope they fix this one's issues quick and it's more enjoyable to use (at least for me)

    Any new gun added to support and recon are mediocre. On the other hand Jhonson is pretty solid. Why? Because its Assault class. Only Assault class deserves good guns in Bf5.

    No because its a DMR. And for that same reason I think the m3 is pretty good too actually. Silenced m1a1 in combination with flares and Sniper archetype is pretty damn good imo. The scope generally is a minus of course but Its not nearly bad enough for me to not use the gun.
    Jhonson is not a DMR. Its a SAR and its good because its in Assault class.
    Hawxxeye wrote: »
    (Quote)
    Because DICE wont accept making a recon gun without giving the gun a serious demerit

    Would be borderline op to have a silenced slr with no drawbacks (especially in combination with the Sniper specialization which makes it so you spot everything you hit while the enemy might not even know where he is being shot from)

    Silencers only remove the tracers on your screen. Its still hearable from decent distances. Regular M1a1 is better then m3.
  • Halcyon_Creed_N7
    1540 postsMember, Battlefield 3, Battlefield 4, Battlefield Hardline, Battlefield, Battlefield 1, CTE, Battlefield V Member
    Okay, this thread is a little reassuring. I thought I became magically awful at sniper headshots, but it could have been the misaligned scope.
  • Hawxxeye
    7480 postsMember, Battlefield 3, Battlefield 4, Battlefield Hardline, Battlefield, Battlefield 1, CTE, BF1IncursionsAlpha, Battlefield V Member
    edited June 17
    Hawxxeye wrote: »
    (Quote)
    Because DICE wont accept making a recon gun without giving the gun a serious demerit

    Would be borderline op to have a silenced slr with no drawbacks (especially in combination with the Sniper specialization which makes it so you spot everything you hit while the enemy might not even know where he is being shot from)
    Still weaker than an assault soldier (fully countered by armored vehicles). Still it has a smaller mag than the , m1a1 with extended mags.  Unlike M1A1, it has to sacrifice either better hipfire or faster ADS.
    .
    Spamshot spotting was already doable with the pistol carbines yet it never became a problem
    .
    I would be fine even with just iron sights instead of that IR scope
  • The_BERG_366
    2723 postsMember, Battlefield 3, Battlefield 4, Battlefield Hardline, Battlefield, Battlefield 1, CTE, Battlefield V Member
    talhaONE wrote: »
    talhaONE wrote: »
    Loqtrall wrote: »
    It's an incredibly buggy weapon.

    For one, every scope available has alignment issues. The predator scope adds a post sight, but the reticle is misaligned and is too far up on the scope. The rest of the sights have the round landing off target.

    Then there's the fact that despite ONLY using the 6x scope spec, my scope is bugged and has never had 6x magnification. I switch between 6x and 3x and both scopes are identical in terms of magnification. There are also various reports out there that insist the 6x scope randomly does and does not work.

    On top of that, it's irons are stupid thick, and using its iron sights covers up a large portion of the screen due to the large handle on the bolt and the integrated scope.

    Imo it's only redeeming quality right now is having a 7 round detachable mag, which you have to spec into.

    It's beyond disappointing to me, because I've been wanting a k31 in BF since BF1 was released and it wasn't in the base game. When I heard the k31 was data mined, I was hoping and praying that if one rifle was added in the final content update, it was the k31.

    And it's bugged to hell and back, and doesn't even function as a straight pull rifle unless using iron sights (that's two straight pull rifles in the game that are ignored in that regard). Which is a shame, because it has one of the most interesting straight pull bolt mechanisms in existence.

    As a lover of rifles in all BF games, I hope they fix this one's issues quick and it's more enjoyable to use (at least for me)

    Any new gun added to support and recon are mediocre. On the other hand Jhonson is pretty solid. Why? Because its Assault class. Only Assault class deserves good guns in Bf5.

    No because its a DMR. And for that same reason I think the m3 is pretty good too actually. Silenced m1a1 in combination with flares and Sniper archetype is pretty damn good imo. The scope generally is a minus of course but Its not nearly bad enough for me to not use the gun.
    Jhonson is not a DMR. Its a SAR and its good because its in Assault class.
    Hawxxeye wrote: »
    (Quote)
    Because DICE wont accept making a recon gun without giving the gun a serious demerit

    Would be borderline op to have a silenced slr with no drawbacks (especially in combination with the Sniper specialization which makes it so you spot everything you hit while the enemy might not even know where he is being shot from)

    Silencers only remove the tracers on your screen. Its still hearable from decent distances. Regular M1a1 is better then m3.

    All of them are good, hence the new one (in order to not be straight up worse than what's already there) has to be good as well. As I said, because its a sar (I use the terms interchangeably)

    Yes, and? Doesn't change the fact that the silencer is a straight upgrade in this game.
    I disagree with that. Let me ask you, if we leave classes out of the equation, just look at the guns themselves and assume that the m3 could use normal scopes, would the m1 still be better than the m3?
  • Hawxxeye
    7480 postsMember, Battlefield 3, Battlefield 4, Battlefield Hardline, Battlefield, Battlefield 1, CTE, BF1IncursionsAlpha, Battlefield V Member
    edited June 17
    talhaONE wrote: »
    talhaONE wrote: »
    Loqtrall wrote: »
    It's an incredibly buggy weapon.

    For one, every scope available has alignment issues. The predator scope adds a post sight, but the reticle is misaligned and is too far up on the scope. The rest of the sights have the round landing off target.

    Then there's the fact that despite ONLY using the 6x scope spec, my scope is bugged and has never had 6x magnification. I switch between 6x and 3x and both scopes are identical in terms of magnification. There are also various reports out there that insist the 6x scope randomly does and does not work.

    On top of that, it's irons are stupid thick, and using its iron sights covers up a large portion of the screen due to the large handle on the bolt and the integrated scope.

    Imo it's only redeeming quality right now is having a 7 round detachable mag, which you have to spec into.

    It's beyond disappointing to me, because I've been wanting a k31 in BF since BF1 was released and it wasn't in the base game. When I heard the k31 was data mined, I was hoping and praying that if one rifle was added in the final content update, it was the k31.

    And it's bugged to hell and back, and doesn't even function as a straight pull rifle unless using iron sights (that's two straight pull rifles in the game that are ignored in that regard). Which is a shame, because it has one of the most interesting straight pull bolt mechanisms in existence.

    As a lover of rifles in all BF games, I hope they fix this one's issues quick and it's more enjoyable to use (at least for me)

    Any new gun added to support and recon are mediocre. On the other hand Jhonson is pretty solid. Why? Because its Assault class. Only Assault class deserves good guns in Bf5.

    No because its a DMR. And for that same reason I think the m3 is pretty good too actually. Silenced m1a1 in combination with flares and Sniper archetype is pretty damn good imo. The scope generally is a minus of course but Its not nearly bad enough for me to not use the gun.
    Jhonson is not a DMR. Its a SAR and its good because its in Assault class.
    Hawxxeye wrote: »
    (Quote)
    Because DICE wont accept making a recon gun without giving the gun a serious demerit

    Would be borderline op to have a silenced slr with no drawbacks (especially in combination with the Sniper specialization which makes it so you spot everything you hit while the enemy might not even know where he is being shot from)

    Silencers only remove the tracers on your screen. Its still hearable from decent distances. Regular M1a1 is better then m3.

    All of them are good, hence the new one (in order to not be straight up worse than what's already there) has to be good as well. As I said, because its a sar (I use the terms interchangeably)

    Yes, and? Doesn't change the fact that the silencer is a straight upgrade in this game.
    I disagree with that. Let me ask you, if we leave classes out of the equation, just look at the guns themselves and assume that the m3 could use normal scopes, would the m1 still be better than the m3?
    The M1A1 still has a better spec tree with Quick aim + Enhanced grips and the option of Extended mags. The silencer only helps if the getting shot is not looking your direction already. That is why I am bargaining there to be only irons so nobody can complain they are getting shot from somewhere halfway across the map.
    Or even better I would not mind the gun losing its concealment of where someone is shot from without the IR scope.
    .
    Also the context of the class matters a lot with the whole combined arms theme which gives the Assault incredible versatility against any threat including planes.
    .
    As you more or less said above, "bad" assault weapon" is as good as a "good" weapon of the recon.
    .
    I always advocate for the recon to have a good versatile weapon that encourages them to be with the rest of the team instead of 50+ meters behind the others
    Post edited by Hawxxeye on
  • DingoKillr
    4233 postsMember, Battlefield 3, Battlefield 4, Battlefield, Battlefield 1, CTE, BF1IncursionsAlpha, Battlefield V Member
    Hawxxeye wrote: »
    (Quote)
    The M1A1 still has a better spec tree with Quick aim + Enhanced grips and the option of Extended mags. The silencer only helps if the getting shot is not looking your direction already. That is why I am bargaining there to be only irons so nobody can complain they are getting shot from somewhere halfway across the map.Or even better I would not mind the gun losing its concealment of where someone is shot from without the IR scope.
    .Also the context of the class matters a lot with the whole combined arms theme which gives the Assault incredible versatility against any threat including planes..As you more or less said above, "bad" assault weapon" is as good as a "good" weapon of the recon..I always advocate for the recon to have a good versatile weapon that encourages them to be with the rest of the team instead of 50+ meters behind the others

    It is interesting this argument that recon silenced weapon that requires a number of bullets to kill, can't have a removable IR scope.

    As it ignores the medic grease gun.

    It clears show how DICE have decided what recon role is compared to others.
  • Hawxxeye
    7480 postsMember, Battlefield 3, Battlefield 4, Battlefield Hardline, Battlefield, Battlefield 1, CTE, BF1IncursionsAlpha, Battlefield V Member
    edited June 17
    Hawxxeye wrote: »
    (Quote)
    The M1A1 still has a better spec tree with Quick aim + Enhanced grips and the option of Extended mags. The silencer only helps if the getting shot is not looking your direction already. That is why I am bargaining there to be only irons so nobody can complain they are getting shot from somewhere halfway across the map.Or even better I would not mind the gun losing its concealment of where someone is shot from without the IR scope.
    .Also the context of the class matters a lot with the whole combined arms theme which gives the Assault incredible versatility against any threat including planes..As you more or less said above, "bad" assault weapon" is as good as a "good" weapon of the recon..I always advocate for the recon to have a good versatile weapon that encourages them to be with the rest of the team instead of 50+ meters behind the others

    It is interesting this argument that recon silenced weapon that requires a number of bullets to kill, can't have a removable IR scope.

    As it ignores the medic grease gun.

    It clears show how DICE have decided what recon role is compared to others.
    I had forgotten about the Grease gun (which is a better pistol carbine stat-wise btw)
    It seems that the fate of recon and support is to get shafted by the dev team
  • Totenkopf1973
    28 postsMember, Battlefield, Battlefield 1, Battlefield V Member
    Same problem from the last update release.
    I can't play with K31/43 rifle 'cause the scope bug it's permanent.
    If I leave all the perk and I use the rifle without perk , the scope it's the same with the bug.
    I'm very sad about it , 'cause I must wait a Dice patch..... 
    This is for PS4 console...
  • DingoKillr
    4233 postsMember, Battlefield 3, Battlefield 4, Battlefield, Battlefield 1, CTE, BF1IncursionsAlpha, Battlefield V Member
    Same problem from the last update release.
    I can't play with K31/43 rifle 'cause the scope bug it's permanent.
    If I leave all the perk and I use the rifle without perk , the scope it's the same with the bug.
    I'm very sad about it , 'cause I must wait a Dice patch..... 
    This is for PS4 console...

    That is the second bug.
    The crosshairs stay seem to only change daily when starting the game.

    The main bug is the misalignment. Which is major as you can complete miss if you don't know.
  • The_BERG_366
    2723 postsMember, Battlefield 3, Battlefield 4, Battlefield Hardline, Battlefield, Battlefield 1, CTE, Battlefield V Member
    Hawxxeye wrote: »
    (Quote)
    The M1A1 still has a better spec tree with Quick aim + Enhanced grips and the option of Extended mags. The silencer only helps if the getting shot is not looking your direction already. That is why I am bargaining there to be only irons so nobody can complain they are getting shot from somewhere halfway across the map.Or even better I would not mind the gun losing its concealment of where someone is shot from without the IR scope.
    .Also the context of the class matters a lot with the whole combined arms theme which gives the Assault incredible versatility against any threat including planes..As you more or less said above, "bad" assault weapon" is as good as a "good" weapon of the recon..I always advocate for the recon to have a good versatile weapon that encourages them to be with the rest of the team instead of 50+ meters behind the others

    Not necessarily. It's still often harder to notice a guy in your fov hiding shooting a silenced gun compared to a non-silenced one, especially when hiding well. It's not hard to notice that when playing with a silenced gun yourself. People often struggle a lot trying to detect you, even if you are in their field of view.

    When removing the silencer and the scope its just an m1, which is boring.

    I know it matters a lot but I wanted to talk about the guns themselves to highlight their differences and related advantages. Anyways from a gadget perspective I think the scout is superior to the assault. The assault is simply the only class that is viable at taking out tanks (since they nerfed the mines into oblivion). However when I'm not fighting tanks I would chose scout gadgets over assault gadgets any time. So I in fact would choose a scout with an m3 over an assault with an m3 in the vast majority of my spawns. Same goes for the m1.

    Well the thing is that there isnt really a bad assault weapon. All the Sars are strong, but all about to the same extent. There's differences between them but none of them is an outlier in any direction. Same goes for the ars (although I would argue that sars are generally still a bit stronger than ars). so a "bad" assault gun still isn't much worse than a top assault gun.
    Anyways, for the recon it's different. There are outlier weapons which simply aren't very good and hence aren't very popular, like the model 8, the rsc or the Ross rifle. Also I think its hard comparing bolt action rifles to other gun classes tbh.
    So in a way yes, but that doesn't imply that the best assault guns are miles ahead of the best recon guns.
  • Hawxxeye
    7480 postsMember, Battlefield 3, Battlefield 4, Battlefield Hardline, Battlefield, Battlefield 1, CTE, BF1IncursionsAlpha, Battlefield V Member
    edited June 17
    The most common engagement distance is between 0-30m so yeah the assault guns are really miles ahead of the best recon guns for the average gunfight.
    The pistol carbines tried to level the playing field a bit but the high RoF meta for these ranges will not allow them to shine.
    .
    You seem to forget to take into account that the most important of the recons gadgets can be neutralized by a single bullet then they need to resupply again.
    .
    I am still sore over the  once promised Paratrooper recon gameplay that was abandoned pre release. The M3 was almost what was needed but they had to make that scope as bad as possible. Even if you managed to flank and start picking on enemies, thanks to the killcam they now know where you are  at and they can tell the others that or come personally after they revive. Even if the recon does a really good job they will not last long without new ammo like that.
    .
    You may consider "just an m1" to be boring but it would be a huge upgrade to the recon.
    .
    the M3 for most is the most disappointing weapon (disappointment cause the concept of the IR scope created certain expectations and instead it is exclusively a demerit with no advantages)
  • The_BERG_366
    2723 postsMember, Battlefield 3, Battlefield 4, Battlefield Hardline, Battlefield, Battlefield 1, CTE, Battlefield V Member
    Hawxxeye said:
    The most common engagement distance is between 0-30m so yeah the assault guns are really miles ahead of the best recon guns for the average gunfight.
    The pistol carbines tried to level the playing field a bit but the high RoF meta for these ranges will not allow them to shine.
    .
    You seem to forget to take into account that the most important of the recons gadgets can be neutralized by a single bullet then they need to resupply again.
    .
    I am still sore over the  once promised Paratrooper recon gameplay that was abandoned pre release. The M3 was almost what was needed but they had to make that scope as bad as possible. Even if you managed to flank and start picking on enemies, thanks to the killcam they now know where you are  at and they can tell the others that or come personally after they revive. Even if the recon does a really good job they will not last long without new ammo like that.
    .
    You may consider "just an m1" to be boring but it would be a huge upgrade to the recon.
    .
    the M3 for most is the most disappointing weapon (disappointment cause the concept of the IR scope created certain expectations)
    i said miles ahead in general, not under some circumstances. Also what importance do gunfights at "average distance" hold? By this argument any gun that excels at something extreme are to be considered worse which doesnt make any sense. Also the mean itself is dependent on the most used guns hence by this argument pickrate has some implication on strength of the gun which is logically false. One can adjust to his gun and hence take gunfights at distances that are more favourable for him. Hence the "average" gunfight isn't necessarily the average gunfight when using a certain weapon, so this argument doesnt hold much value in this regard...

    not at all. it can be neutralised, yes, but neither does that happen all the time nor does it happen immediately. The information i can gain during the time it is up is far more valuable than a rocket launcher. I can't kill people that i can't see or that i don't even know are there, no matter if i have explosives or not. This in combination with the spawnbeacon makes me prefere recon gadgets in the majority of the cases. that you deem them not THAT useful won't change that. 

    yeah the problem with the killcam is that the information spread is very unbalanced depending on whether or not someone is playing in a stack. i do see why its there, otherwise there could be people literally hiding the whole game in some obscure spot and their opponents would start throwing cheating accusations out because they simply can't find them. it would also encourage this very playstyle even more. however, it is annoying to know that when you kill one guy of a stack he will call out your position live and then you'll get swarmed by the rest of the stack acting like the seagulls in nemo. on the other hand, when killing some random guy playing alone nothing will happen for quite some time, if anything at all...

    maybe, but i consider the m3 the same. And i personally think an m3 fits the recon role better than an m1.
    i btw agree that the m3 scope could do with some improvements (so that its not harder to see enemies through it then through a normal scope). however i think the scope should remain and not be exchangeable. 

    i understand that. but i personally love what it brings to the recon class. 
  • Hawxxeye
    7480 postsMember, Battlefield 3, Battlefield 4, Battlefield Hardline, Battlefield, Battlefield 1, CTE, BF1IncursionsAlpha, Battlefield V Member
    edited June 17
    i said miles ahead in general, not under some circumstances. Also what importance do gunfights at "average distance" hold? By this argument any gun that excels at something extreme are to be considered worse which doesnt make any sense. Also the mean itself is dependent on the most used guns hence by this argument pickrate has some implication on strength of the gun which is logically false. One can adjust to his gun and hence take gunfights at distances that are more favourable for him. Hence the "average" gunfight isn't necessarily the average gunfight when using a certain weapon, so this argument doesnt hold much value in this regard...
    <
    If one adjusts their gun fights to where it is favorable for them with their gun, they will quickly find themselves outside the objecting with the recon though.

    not at all. it can be neutralised, yes, but neither does that happen all the time nor does it happen immediately. The information i can gain during the time it is up is far more valuable than a rocket launcher. I can't kill people that i can't see or that i don't even know are there, no matter if i have explosives or not. This in combination with the spawnbeacon makes me prefere recon gadgets in the majority of the cases. that you deem them not THAT useful won't change that. 
    Yeah but if you are a recon you have the opposite problem. Guys you cannot kill because their guns are better than yours.Thus the best recon in BFV is not one who kills people but the one who lets others do the killing and tries to spot as many things as possible for others to kill.
    I have recently dropped the spawn beacon in favor of the new grenade launcher. Flanking in BFV maps with a beacon is often either too hard or so easy they do not need your beacon to do it.

    yeah the problem with the killcam is that the information spread is very unbalanced depending on whether or not someone is playing in a stack. i do see why its there, otherwise there could be people literally hiding the whole game in some obscure spot and their opponents would start throwing cheating accusations out because they simply can't find them. it would also encourage this very playstyle even more. however, it is annoying to know that when you kill one guy of a stack he will call out your position live and then you'll get swarmed by the rest of the stack acting like the seagulls in nemo. on the other hand, when killing some random guy playing alone nothing will happen for quite some time, if anything at all...
    I meant to say that the killcam is fine but you should consider that advantages of the stealthy approach are diminished the moment an angry revived/respawned soldier or more start to search your location. That is fine by me but I think it should be taken into account to avoid exagerating the power of silenced guns.

    maybe, but i consider the m3 the same. And i personally think an m3 fits the recon role better than an m1.
    i btw agree that the m3 scope could do with some improvements (so that its not harder to see enemies through it then through a normal scope). however i think the scope should remain and not be exchangeable. 

    i understand that. but i personally love what it brings to the recon class. 


    Yeah at the very it should be even sightly easier to see soldiers than with the regular scope or it is a bad joke if we cannot remove it.
  • The_BERG_366
    2723 postsMember, Battlefield 3, Battlefield 4, Battlefield Hardline, Battlefield, Battlefield 1, CTE, Battlefield V Member
    Hawxxeye wrote: »
    (Quote)
    If one adjusts their gun fights to where it is favorable for them with their gun, they will quickly find themselves outside the objecting with the recon though.(Quote)

    Yeah but if you are a recon you have the opposite problem. Guys you cannot kill because their guns are better than yours.Thus the best recon in BFV is not one who kills people but the one who lets others do the killing and tries to spot as many things as possible for others to kill.I have recently dropped the spawn beacon in favor of the new grenade launcher. Flanking in BFV maps with a beacon is often either too hard or so easy they do not need your beacon to do it.
    (Quote)
    I meant to say that the killcam is fine but you should consider that advantages of the stealthy approach are diminished the moment an angry revived/respawned soldier or more start to search your location. That is fine by me but I think it should be taken into account to avoid exagerating the power of silenced guns.(Quote)


    Yeah at the very it should be even sightly easier to see soldiers than with the regular scope or it is a bad joke if we cannot remove it.

    Not necessarily, depends on the map and mode. And even if, being on the objective isn't the only way to play the objective.

    We were talking about a hypothetical scenario and compared gadgets only (or in my scenario together with m1 or m3 for BOTH classes). So this wasn't an argument about classes, but about gadgets, hence which guns are connected to what classes is irrelevant in this context.

    Yeah I know what you mean. But as I said I don't think it's completely diminished. Of course I don't want to imply that one is undetectable or something while using a silencer though.

    I still disagree with that. We would then have a scope that provides an advantage plus a free upgrade (the silencer) and just a difference in upgrade tree to balance it out (which I personally don't find that big of a deal). Also when combining it with the Sniper archetype it's a different deal than on assault.
  • Hawxxeye
    7480 postsMember, Battlefield 3, Battlefield 4, Battlefield Hardline, Battlefield, Battlefield 1, CTE, BF1IncursionsAlpha, Battlefield V Member
    edited June 17
    Aw well I guess we can agree to disagree on that. I hope that the next BF will treat the recons more like BF4.
    I find recon to be a force multiplier but  not something that can be multiplied much. In BFv they are the sidekicks of Action Man and his medic girlfriend.
    Between a full assault team, a full medic team, a full support team and a full recon team I could hazard a guess that the full recon team would fare the worst
Sign In or Register to comment.