I’m glad sweet spot is going but I’m worried about scout effectiveness

Comments

  • AlphaWraith041
    2 postsMember, Battlefield, Battlefield 1, CTE Member
    Sweet spots for the scout is 1. feels really rewarding and 2. help you engage at different ranges that you normally won't want to be at.
  • von_Campenstein
    5699 postsMember, Battlefield 3, Battlefield 4, Battlefield, Battlefield 1, CTE Member
    There already is no revives for a headshot in BF1, if I'm not mistaken, so.. yeah.

    No, Headshot kills can also be revived.

    You're thinking of the melee kills, those are the ones unable to be revived IIRC

    Only on takedowns, melee kills with no takedown animation can still be revived.
  • Hortey
    201 postsMember, Battlefield 3, Battlefield 4, Battlefield Hardline, Battlefield, Battlefield 1, CTE Member
    Loqtrall wrote: »
    I'd support a no-revive headshot mechanic solely for rifles, but I also think that the removal of the sweet spot has been counter balanced by the Scout class getting the flare (which is way better now than in BF1), the Spawn beacon, and now has the ONLY way to 3d spot enemies in the entire game.

    I have to say I would have rather gotten a 0-15m OHK range to stop non-hs OHKs at range and give Scouts a fighting chance in objective playing situations while being able to retain using their primary weapons.

    Giving scout weapons a distinct advantage in the one range they should be weak in is a terribly bad idea. I used iron sighted snipers in the bf3ish era in CQC because of the instant gibs more often than I used them for sniping.

    With suppression being toned down greatly and more people running around under 100% hp because of the loss of HP regen, I think scouts are going to be just fine. I don't want to give scouts extra close quarters power just so that people who will pick them in bad situations won't be as a detriment to the team.

    If people don't want to pick a helpful class for the situation, then they just get to be bad and get low scores and be the ones that lose the game for their team. DICE needs to stop cradling people's bad decisions and making it so everyone can succeed in any game type with any setup. If you make bad choices, you die. Working with a squad is always an option, even as a sniper.
  • vulpesveritas
    114 postsMember, Battlefield, Battlefield 1, CTE Member
    Hortey wrote: »
    Loqtrall wrote: »
    I'd support a no-revive headshot mechanic solely for rifles, but I also think that the removal of the sweet spot has been counter balanced by the Scout class getting the flare (which is way better now than in BF1), the Spawn beacon, and now has the ONLY way to 3d spot enemies in the entire game.

    I have to say I would have rather gotten a 0-15m OHK range to stop non-hs OHKs at range and give Scouts a fighting chance in objective playing situations while being able to retain using their primary weapons.

    Giving scout weapons a distinct advantage in the one range they should be weak in is a terribly bad idea. I used iron sighted snipers in the bf3ish era in CQC because of the instant gibs more often than I used them for sniping.

    With suppression being toned down greatly and more people running around under 100% hp because of the loss of HP regen, I think scouts are going to be just fine. I don't want to give scouts extra close quarters power just so that people who will pick them in bad situations won't be as a detriment to the team.

    If people don't want to pick a helpful class for the situation, then they just get to be bad and get low scores and be the ones that lose the game for their team. DICE needs to stop cradling people's bad decisions and making it so everyone can succeed in any game type with any setup. If you make bad choices, you die. Working with a squad is always an option, even as a sniper.

    However, shouldn't the scout class be as effective just as much of the time as assaults, supports, and medics? Assaults having a regular anti-tank and CQB role, supports and medics both having teamplay support options in constant need regardless of the map? By the look of things, assaults and medics will both be competent at the short to medium range depending on weapon choice. Supports and medics will hold medium-long range down, with supports being simply the best class for defense with the gunner archetype.

    With the present state of BFV's alpha, medics outperform scouts at every range, unless the scout is sufficiently skilled to regularly get headshots, while at the same time the scout is dealing with worse weapon performance than BF1 and every other class has gotten a buff to long range accuracy.

    I don't think that the game should be, "Choose assault, medic, or support, unless you -reaaaaaly- need that spawn beacon in this particular instance and be subpar to useless until you die and respawn in as one of those three instead. Or you're someone with the top 1% accuracy, so go crazy with those headshots, only pros can be true scouts."

    So I do think bolt action rifles need something to balance out their slower fire rate and greater risk, whether it be a high damage model at closer ranges, greater bullet performance and removal of scope glint for extreme ranges, or BF1's sweet spot system to give a variety of performance and the possibility of a one hit kill at reasonable ranges, - just something that gives them a purpose where they can actually outperform another class in a given instance.
  • Hawxxeye
    2051 postsMember, Battlefield 3, Battlefield 4, Battlefield Hardline, Battlefield, Battlefield 1, CTE, BF1IncursionsAlpha, Battlefield V Member
    edited July 9
    The effective scouts will be the scouts who will use the SMG archetype in BFV just like the carbine scouts in BF4
  • Hawxxeye
    2051 postsMember, Battlefield 3, Battlefield 4, Battlefield Hardline, Battlefield, Battlefield 1, CTE, BF1IncursionsAlpha, Battlefield V Member
    Nice to see Loqtrall saying exactly the things I would had said if I was as eloquent.
  • DogRoyal
    38 postsMember, Battlefield 3, Battlefield 4, Battlefield Hardline, Battlefield, Battlefield 1 Member
    edited July 9
    The sweet spot is a campers/hillhumpers wet dream as it is when you are staying in one spot and looking at the same small area/corner/flag all the time, that you can choose the perfect rifle for the given distance, but otherwise it will mostly be a coincidence if you find your enemy in the sweet spot range - you can enhance the chance some after your playstyle but unless you study ranges and rifles extensively I bet there will still be by far mostly engagements outside sweet range +/-. When rolling scout I play the objective and I often find myself engaging enemies at distances from 120 to 10 meters in the same run - so which rifle to use? I just use the ones I feel I know best (velocity, bullet drop etc.) One for when I expect long/medium and one or two where I expect most medium.

    Edit: meant to say that the sweet spot on/off isn't what make or break the Scout class. They should given the C4 back though.
  • theONEFORCE
    2705 postsMember, Battlefield 3, Battlefield 4, Battlefield Hardline, Battlefield, Battlefield 1, CTE, BF1IncursionsAlpha Member
    Health scarcity will be the new sweet spot mechanic for scouts. I'm sure most snipers will just camp the health boxes from the comfort of their favorite bush and post on the forums about how they're aggressive scouts.
  • V2Face
    2557 postsMember, Battlefield 3, Battlefield 4, Battlefield Hardline, Battlefield, Battlefield 1, CTE Member
    Honestly scout class isn’t designed for CQB. Just too many players use the class for its unintended purpose. The strength of the class is medium to long range engagements and their main purpose is objective oversight and reconnaissance. Forcing them into CQB (BF1 and BFH) either makes their kit too strong with very little weaknesses or incredibly weak and have poor team play (BF4). The scout class needs to be adjusted so that it can function in its role (increased spotting time, one shot headshot kills, intel specific perks or gadgets) instead of being the jack of all trades.
  • Hawxxeye
    2051 postsMember, Battlefield 3, Battlefield 4, Battlefield Hardline, Battlefield, Battlefield 1, CTE, BF1IncursionsAlpha, Battlefield V Member
    edited July 9
    V2Face wrote: »
    Honestly scout class isn’t designed for CQB. Just too many players use the class for its unintended purpose. The strength of the class is medium to long range engagements and their main purpose is objective oversight and reconnaissance. Forcing them into CQB (BF1 and BFH) either makes their kit too strong with very little weaknesses or incredibly weak and have poor team play (BF4). The scout class needs to be adjusted so that it can function in its role (increased spotting time, one shot headshot kills, intel specific perks or gadgets) instead of being the jack of all trades.

    You forgot about their important function as a decoy thanks to that bright light from their scope attracting the enemy fire away from other allies
  • b2tchwood
    1042 postsMember, Battlefield 3, Battlefield 4, Battlefield Hardline, Battlefield, Battlefield 1, CTE Member
    V2Face wrote: »
    Honestly scout class isn’t designed for CQB. Just too many players use the class for its unintended purpose. The strength of the class is medium to long range engagements and their main purpose is objective oversight and reconnaissance. Forcing them into CQB (BF1 and BFH) either makes their kit too strong with very little weaknesses or incredibly weak and have poor team play (BF4). The scout class needs to be adjusted so that it can function in its role (increased spotting time, one shot headshot kills, intel specific perks or gadgets) instead of being the jack of all trades.

    You can’t and shouldn’t force a class to play a certain way. If a scout/recon wants to get up close and personal so be it. That’s the beauty of battlefield, you make of it what you want and so long as you’re still trying to win it’s cool with me.
  • bran1986
    4157 postsMember, Battlefield 4, Battlefield Hardline, Battlefield, Battlefield 1, CTE, BF1IncursionsAlpha, Battlefield V Member
    b2tchwood wrote: »
    V2Face wrote: »
    Honestly scout class isn’t designed for CQB. Just too many players use the class for its unintended purpose. The strength of the class is medium to long range engagements and their main purpose is objective oversight and reconnaissance. Forcing them into CQB (BF1 and BFH) either makes their kit too strong with very little weaknesses or incredibly weak and have poor team play (BF4). The scout class needs to be adjusted so that it can function in its role (increased spotting time, one shot headshot kills, intel specific perks or gadgets) instead of being the jack of all trades.

    You can’t and shouldn’t force a class to play a certain way. If a scout/recon wants to get up close and personal so be it. That’s the beauty of battlefield, you make of it what you want and so long as you’re still trying to win it’s cool with me.

    They are doing that with the archetype system, scouts that want to get in close can use smgs if they want.
  • theONEFORCE
    2705 postsMember, Battlefield 3, Battlefield 4, Battlefield Hardline, Battlefield, Battlefield 1, CTE, BF1IncursionsAlpha Member
    b2tchwood wrote: »
    V2Face wrote: »
    Honestly scout class isn’t designed for CQB. Just too many players use the class for its unintended purpose. The strength of the class is medium to long range engagements and their main purpose is objective oversight and reconnaissance. Forcing them into CQB (BF1 and BFH) either makes their kit too strong with very little weaknesses or incredibly weak and have poor team play (BF4). The scout class needs to be adjusted so that it can function in its role (increased spotting time, one shot headshot kills, intel specific perks or gadgets) instead of being the jack of all trades.

    You can’t and shouldn’t force a class to play a certain way. If a scout/recon wants to get up close and personal so be it. That’s the beauty of battlefield, you make of it what you want and so long as you’re still trying to win it’s cool with me.

    No one is forcing them to play way but it’s stupid to balance a class based on how 2% of the people use it. It would be like giving assault CQC tank fighting gear and long range primaries.

    And I don’t buy the theory that all long range snipers are just aggressive scouts waiting for the right equipment.
  • Sixclicks
    4099 postsMember, Battlefield 3, Battlefield 4, Battlefield, Battlefield 1, Battlefield V Member
    edited July 10
    The biggest thing hurting scout effectiveness right now is how powerful the other classes, specifically medic and assault, are at long ranges.

    I do agree that a headshot should equal no revive though.

    In the alpha, scout did not feel aggressively viable whatsoever unless you're Stodeh. Despite the fact one of your main gadgets, the flare, requires you to be aggressive since it has very short range now. You'll also need to be somewhat aggressive if you don't want to run out of ammo unless you camp at one of the two houses up on the hill that had supply crates on the Narvik map.

    The scout class is honestly a mess right now. It really has no niche of its own. At long ranges it's easily defeated by STG 44 tapfiring and the Gewehr 43. At close ranges where 2 of the gadgets are most effective, your weapon is much slower to kill than any other class's weapon unless you're a quickscoping headshot god. Like Hawxxeye said:

    Hawxxeye wrote: »
    The effective scouts will be the scouts who will use the SMG archetype in BFV just like the carbine scouts in BF4
  • Hortey
    201 postsMember, Battlefield 3, Battlefield 4, Battlefield Hardline, Battlefield, Battlefield 1, CTE Member
    Loqtrall wrote: »
    *snip*

    It's even more mind-numbing when you consider the fact people complain about snipers that OHK in close range, but don't say a WORD about Slug shotguns that do the exact same thing, fire faster, and have larger mags. Or don't say a WORD about shotguns which do the same thing while firing faster, having larger ammo counts, and requiring SUBSTANTIALLY less accuracy to be effective.

    Slug shotguns aren't great outside of 30m or so, and the only time they were powerful they got nerfed HARD (sometime around bf3 era right?) to what they are now and haven't changed.

    The thing I don't like about scout class is... when people want the class buffed, it has nothing to do with giving them weapons that are useful on the front line, but instead buffing their long range weapon in cqc. The bolt action rifles are considered trash if they don't instant gib people at all ranges without too much difficulty.

    It REALLY sucks to get one shotted in battlefield games.

    Once more for those in the back, it REALLY SUCKS to get one shotted in battlefield.

    Shotguns are tolerated so much as they can be avoided by distancing yourself, bolt actions are tolerated so much as you know which direction you are being shot from when at super long range (glint) and there is an area where you don't get one shotted. I understand that people want to use the rifles, and I don't want to restrict them, but I don't think that making them gibby is a good answer. If you can't play around the weaknesses of your kit, or use your squad to protect you then you aren't going to do well but that is true for people using shotguns or mines or lmgs.

    I would rather the class got some good semi auto rifles like the garand to mix it up on smaller maps instead of buffing bolt actions. I assume not many people remember bf3 era hardcore mode? The gameplay when bolt actions are easy chest shots is really bad, and the worst part is that you see less of every other class when that heppens. No repairs, no healing, no revives, no ammo, just full squads of scouts.



  • theONEFORCE
    2705 postsMember, Battlefield 3, Battlefield 4, Battlefield Hardline, Battlefield, Battlefield 1, CTE, BF1IncursionsAlpha Member
    Loqtrall wrote: »
    Hortey wrote: »
    Loqtrall wrote: »
    I'd support a no-revive headshot mechanic solely for rifles, but I also think that the removal of the sweet spot has been counter balanced by the Scout class getting the flare (which is way better now than in BF1), the Spawn beacon, and now has the ONLY way to 3d spot enemies in the entire game.

    I have to say I would have rather gotten a 0-15m OHK range to stop non-hs OHKs at range and give Scouts a fighting chance in objective playing situations while being able to retain using their primary weapons.

    Giving scout weapons a distinct advantage in the one range they should be weak in is a terribly bad idea. I used iron sighted snipers in the bf3ish era in CQC because of the instant gibs more often than I used them for sniping.

    With suppression being toned down greatly and more people running around under 100% hp because of the loss of HP regen, I think scouts are going to be just fine. I don't want to give scouts extra close quarters power just so that people who will pick them in bad situations won't be as a detriment to the team.

    If people don't want to pick a helpful class for the situation, then they just get to be bad and get low scores and be the ones that lose the game for their team. DICE needs to stop cradling people's bad decisions and making it so everyone can succeed in any game type with any setup. If you make bad choices, you die. Working with a squad is always an option, even as a sniper.



    It's even more mind-numbing when you consider the fact people complain about snipers that OHK in close range, but don't say a WORD about Slug shotguns that do the exact same thing, fire faster, and have larger mags. Or don't say a WORD about shotguns which do the same thing while firing faster, having larger ammo counts, and requiring SUBSTANTIALLY less accuracy to be effective.

    People don't talk about slug shotguns because hardly anyone uses them and most people hate buckshot shotguns more than anything else in the game. I personally think that all shotguns should perform like slugs in close range where you have to be somewhat accurate but that is a conversation for a different thread.

  • Loqtrall
    11159 postsMember, Battlefield 3, Battlefield 4, Battlefield Hardline, Battlefield, Battlefield 1, CTE Member
    edited July 10
    Hortey wrote: »
    Slug shotguns aren't great outside of 30m or so, and the only time they were powerful they got nerfed HARD (sometime around bf3 era right?) to what they are now and haven't changed.

    The thing I don't like about scout class is... when people want the class buffed, it has nothing to do with giving them weapons that are useful on the front line, but instead buffing their long range weapon in cqc. The bolt action rifles are considered trash if they don't instant gib people at all ranges without too much difficulty.

    It REALLY sucks to get one shotted in battlefield games.

    Once more for those in the back, it REALLY SUCKS to get one shotted in battlefield.

    Shotguns are tolerated so much as they can be avoided by distancing yourself, bolt actions are tolerated so much as you know which direction you are being shot from when at super long range (glint) and there is an area where you don't get one shotted. I understand that people want to use the rifles, and I don't want to restrict them, but I don't think that making them gibby is a good answer. If you can't play around the weaknesses of your kit, or use your squad to protect you then you aren't going to do well but that is true for people using shotguns or mines or lmgs.

    I would rather the class got some good semi auto rifles like the garand to mix it up on smaller maps instead of buffing bolt actions. I assume not many people remember bf3 era hardcore mode? The gameplay when bolt actions are easy chest shots is really bad, and the worst part is that you see less of every other class when that heppens. No repairs, no healing, no revives, no ammo, just full squads of scouts.

    First off, slug shotguns ARE great outside of 30m. They can 2hk like a bolt action up to 55m, and OHK with a headshot up to 50m. From 0 to 12m~ it's an OHK to the body.

    That's compared to the close range OHK of rifles in BF games, which was also 0 to 12m.

    Also, there was a 40mm underbarrel shotgun in BC2 that could literally OHK body shot people further than any gun in the game, period - it was never nerfed and can still abused to this day - but do you know who got complained about in BC2 instead? Snipers.

    Secondly, it doesn't matter if it sucks to be OHK in BF. Rifles are DEFINITELY not the only thing it happens with. I get OHK by shotguns, rockets, grenades, tripwires, dynamite, limpets, tanks, planes, bayonet charge, melee attacks, etc, etc. All of which take substantially less skill than using a rifle from 0 to 12m.

    The mere fact shotguns, which OHK while requiring little to no actual aim at all in their effective range, are "tolerated" but bolt action rifles aren't - despite requiring substantially more accuracy and having a slower ROF - is absolutely ridiculous.

    Meanwhile, rifles are the slowest firing infantry weapons in the game, require two body shots to kill by default in BF5 at any range, are the only weapons whose optics blur out whole you're moving, and on top of that there's a spotlight that comes out of your scope every time you use it that tells anyone looking in your general direction "HEY, SHOOT ME, I'M RIGHT HERE!"

    Snipers in this franchise:


    And again, the issue I have with your argument is you insist people should "play around the weakness of their class" when other classes DON'T have that weakness in this game.

    I'm not sure if you've watched ANY BF5 gameplay, but even SMGs can tap fire at range now. SLRs still 3hk but are laser-beam accurate now, and I don't even have to get started about the ARs, as the STG44 in the Alpha proves to play just like a BF3/BF4 assault rifle that micro-bursts accurately 100s of meters away. To top that off, all those weapons will probably get Optics attachments as well, making that ability even easier.

    And again, meanwhile you have rifles that shoot slower than everything else, requires 2 shots to kill, requires more raw accuracy than any other weapon type, and has scope glint that reveals your position to ALL those other classes that can now engage you with sustained fire as you haphazardly try to 2 shot them with your slow as hell rifle, because they don't have RBD anymore and don't suffer from suppression any longer.

    That's on top of each class now getting smgs as well, making rifles now COMPLETELY MOOT when it comes to helping your team while using one.

    IMO there shouldn't be ONE sole weapon type out of EIGHT that requires substantially more skill to use in a way that helps your team, and is ineffective in the hands of the average joe unless they're camping 400m away behind a rock.

    Lastly, I couldn't give a damn about Hardcore mode. As someone who played the hell out of Hardcore from BC2 to BF4, it's always been an after thought in these games, and having a Hardcore version of the game where ARs 2 shot people but rifles still require 2 body shots to kill would make rifles even more laughable than they are now in cqb in BF5.

    I can also confirm, as an avid hardcore player in those games, that in HC there were plenty of people playing the other classes despite rifles OHKing.

    Even though I main medic now and plan to in the next game, I've aggro sniped extensively in these games, in BF4 my top 15 weapons still includes at least 500 kills with every bolt action rifle in the game (and I never used an optic more powerful than 3.4x). I would consider myself a decent shot after hours and hours of practice, and even I'll say in those games where rifles OHKd in cqb, playing that way was still SEVERELY unforgiving. Most encounters I won were those when the enemy wasn't even aware I was there. Do you know how easy it is to mow down a sniper in cqb when he misses his initial shot on you in a cqb gunfight from a mere 12m away or closer? You basically become a free kill if you miss, there's no recovering from that when the cycling of your bolt takes longer than a it takes an AR/SMG/LMG to fire 8-9 rounds.

    And that's just ASSUMING the engagement is within 12m (EXTREMELY close range), because if you're outside that range, you're going to lose the gunfight if you stay, unless the enemy is a 12 year old who just got the game yesterday.

    Hell, the only thing that made aggro sniping bearable in BF4 when people had the OHK-preventing default squad perk was having the G18 or 93R so you could pull essentially a pocket SMG out mid-gunfight and actually have a fighting chance outside of camping.
    People don't talk about slug shotguns because hardly anyone uses them and most people hate buckshot shotguns more than anything else in the game. I personally think that all shotguns should perform like slugs in close range where you have to be somewhat accurate but that is a conversation for a different thread.

    The fact people don't use them that often doesn't change the fact they function like they do. You can retain the ability to OHK HS with a slug shotgun up to 50m. That's on top of its 12m OHK body shot range, which is literally a CQB scout sweetspot on a shotgun. If you can maintain HS accuracy, slugs have more killing power than most other weapons in the game. If slugs in BF5 perform anything like they have in past games, they're going to render rifles in CQB ENTIRELY pointless, and will make the fact rifles have NO OHK range completely contradictory.
    Post edited by Loqtrall on
  • MachoFantast1c0
    1235 postsMember, Battlefield, Battlefield 1, CTE, BF1IncursionsAlpha, Battlefield V Member
    edited July 10
    @Loqtrall Slugs OHK to chest and upper arms within 12 meters in BF1. They are not the beasts you make them out to be. I have 4k kills of experience between them, just enough accuracy to use them, and still mostly die to high RPM weapons outside CQC. They might be more viable on console, but on PC you play them if you want to challenge yourself.
Sign In or Register to comment.

Howdy, Stranger!

It looks like you're new here. If you want to get involved, click one of these buttons!