Bf V requires more "skill"

Comments

  • Pelliy
    2228 postsMember, Battlefield 4, Battlefield, Battlefield 1, CTE, BF1IncursionsAlpha, Battlefield V Member
    Sixclicks wrote: »
    In terms of gunplay, it doesn't really require more skill. Except with bolt actions. Yeah, you can't hipfire everything as accurately anymore, but you can use every weapon at a much much longer distance effectively. And many weapons have very manageable recoil.

    Health attrition and the low TTK does mean you need to be more cautious with your movement though.

    There's less indirect explosive kills in the game, so that's a little less casual. You can't just sit back on a mortar spamming away for kills. Nor can you hop in a behemoth and rack up a bunch of kills until it's destroyed. There's also no elite classes.

    I disagree. An average player has a shot against someone who learned the patterns, but the person with the patterns chances are better. For example, learning the recoil on teh STG seems to be hard for people, myself including. It has an aggressive pull to it and recoils left to right in a particular fashion. So what do most people do to compensate for that? Most people Burst fire or even tapfire to be accurate with it.

    That's not necessarily the best option to do that. Lets set up the proverbial 1v1 STG44 vs STG44 player scenario. Both are out in the open with no cover, same health same rounds of ammo.

    The person who's mastered the STG44 is going to kill the burst STG44 simply because he's master the recoil pattern and can control his gun better. When you are tap firing or burst firing, you are increasing your TTK making it higher than the guy who literally mows you down. As I said to disposalist this is not something most will master in hours, few hundred hours. This is something that develop to improve for thousands of hours. There are people who make it look easy, but actually practice it and I referred to rela - https://streamable.com/ibr3g.

    So I disagree. It requires more skill than the rock, paper scissor gun fights compared to bf1 where RNG played a major role in your gunfights. How much of a "gap" in skill it is I can't say that. Sometimes a little is major.
  • Arkaelov
    102 postsMember, Battlefield 3, Battlefield 4, Battlefield Hardline, Battlefield, Battlefield 1, Battlefield V Member
    No, you've got it. It's not really 'more' skill, however much the fans of low TTK and zero spread will tell you otherwise. It's just 'different' skill. It emphasises twitch reflexes, muscle memory to remove recoil or tap firing to ignore recoil.

    I personally think BF1 was more skilled as you had to overcome a weapons innate inaccuracy by realistic tactics of moving to effective range, mitigating the chance to miss and you had to hold your aim for longer.

    This. This is one of my biggest complaints about the game and you put it into perfect words. While I love and appreciate JackFrags, Westie, and all the other streamers and so on, turning it into a twitch based reflex game is essentially turning this into large scale CoD with vehicles. And that's not something almost any of the community wants.
  • ProLegion_exor
    3541 postsMember, Battlefield 4, Battlefield Hardline, Battlefield, Battlefield 1, CTE, Battlefield V Member
    Yeah but you forgot one of the biggest stats which when looked at in addition to k/d gives you quite an accurate picture of how effective, skillful a player is and that stat is kills per minute. You can bloat k/d but you CANNOT bloat KPM. And when you look at both you get a good idea of how strong a player is.

    A player with a high k/d but a low KPM is anything from a conservative/defensive player to full blown camper, it's a sliding scale. A player with a high KPM but a low k/d is a Rambo who when he learns to slow down a little becomes quite skillful. A player with high k/d and high KPM, you don't need to look at his other stats, the two are enough to tell you that he's a very skilled player.

    K/D + KPM is problably the best way to see how usefull and skilled someone is based on few stats. Said this for many years.

    BFV is comes alot easier for me, even if I play with worse weapons then BF1 (Medic). Winning is piece of cake. If I would play Assault it would just be boring. Since they dominate every range ang engagement. IN BF1 you actually needed some player IQ and controling your engagements. Here it´s just tap and twicth, don´t care what the range or engagements are, you will win it anyway. Thats NOT skill in my World.
  • Sixclicks
    5075 postsMember, Battlefield 3, Battlefield 4, Battlefield, Battlefield 1, Battlefield V Member
    Sixclicks wrote: »
    In terms of gunplay, it doesn't really require more skill. Except with bolt actions. Yeah, you can't hipfire everything as accurately anymore, but you can use every weapon at a much much longer distance effectively. And many weapons have very manageable recoil.

    Health attrition and the low TTK does mean you need to be more cautious with your movement though.

    There's less indirect explosive kills in the game, so that's a little less casual. You can't just sit back on a mortar spamming away for kills. Nor can you hop in a behemoth and rack up a bunch of kills until it's destroyed. There's also no elite classes.

    I disagree. An average player has a shot against someone who learned the patterns, but the person with the patterns chances are better. For example, learning the recoil on teh STG seems to be hard for people, myself including. It has an aggressive pull to it and recoils left to right in a particular fashion. So what do most people do to compensate for that? Most people Burst fire or even tapfire to be accurate with it.

    That's not necessarily the best option to do that. Lets set up the proverbial 1v1 STG44 vs STG44 player scenario. Both are out in the open with no cover, same health same rounds of ammo.

    The person who's mastered the STG44 is going to kill the burst STG44 simply because he's master the recoil pattern and can control his gun better. When you are tap firing or burst firing, you are increasing your TTK making it higher than the guy who literally mows you down. As I said to disposalist this is not something most will master in hours, few hundred hours. This is something that develop to improve for thousands of hours. There are people who make it look easy, but actually practice it and I referred to rela - https://streamable.com/ibr3g.

    So I disagree. It requires more skill than the rock, paper scissor gun fights compared to bf1 where RNG played a major role in your gunfights. How much of a "gap" in skill it is I can't say that. Sometimes a little is major.

    Assault vs assault, the more skilled player will win of course. But assault vs medic or assault vs recon, not so much the case. Assault can easily compete against Medic SMGs, recon SLRs, or recon bolt actions at almost any range in this game. Support is pretty much on par with assault, specifically regarding the KE7 at least.

    With most weapons, it's easier to engage enemies across much longer ranges than before. Especially with a very low recoil weapon like the G43.

    The only things that make this game any harder are health attrition and the significantly harder to use bolt actions. Every other class's weapons are quite a lot more effective across a much wider engagement range than in BF1.
  • SirBobdk
    5133 postsMember, Battlefield 3, Battlefield 4, Battlefield, Battlefield 1, Battlefield V Member
    @Sixclicks wrote
    Every other class's weapons are quite a lot more effective across a much wider engagement range than in BF1.
    Agree. The game have a class balance issue where 2 classes dominates in more or less all distances.
    DICE need to look in to this.
  • Pelliy
    2228 postsMember, Battlefield 4, Battlefield, Battlefield 1, CTE, BF1IncursionsAlpha, Battlefield V Member
    Sixclicks wrote: »
    Sixclicks wrote: »
    In terms of gunplay, it doesn't really require more skill. Except with bolt actions. Yeah, you can't hipfire everything as accurately anymore, but you can use every weapon at a much much longer distance effectively. And many weapons have very manageable recoil.

    Health attrition and the low TTK does mean you need to be more cautious with your movement though.

    There's less indirect explosive kills in the game, so that's a little less casual. You can't just sit back on a mortar spamming away for kills. Nor can you hop in a behemoth and rack up a bunch of kills until it's destroyed. There's also no elite classes.

    I disagree. An average player has a shot against someone who learned the patterns, but the person with the patterns chances are better. For example, learning the recoil on teh STG seems to be hard for people, myself including. It has an aggressive pull to it and recoils left to right in a particular fashion. So what do most people do to compensate for that? Most people Burst fire or even tapfire to be accurate with it.

    That's not necessarily the best option to do that. Lets set up the proverbial 1v1 STG44 vs STG44 player scenario. Both are out in the open with no cover, same health same rounds of ammo.

    The person who's mastered the STG44 is going to kill the burst STG44 simply because he's master the recoil pattern and can control his gun better. When you are tap firing or burst firing, you are increasing your TTK making it higher than the guy who literally mows you down. As I said to disposalist this is not something most will master in hours, few hundred hours. This is something that develop to improve for thousands of hours. There are people who make it look easy, but actually practice it and I referred to rela - https://streamable.com/ibr3g.

    So I disagree. It requires more skill than the rock, paper scissor gun fights compared to bf1 where RNG played a major role in your gunfights. How much of a "gap" in skill it is I can't say that. Sometimes a little is major.

    Assault vs assault, the more skilled player will win of course. But assault vs medic or assault vs recon, not so much the case. Assault can easily compete against Medic SMGs, recon SLRs, or recon bolt actions at almost any range in this game. Support is pretty much on par with assault, specifically regarding the KE7 at least.

    With most weapons, it's easier to engage enemies across much longer ranges than before. Especially with a very low recoil weapon like the G43.

    The only things that make this game any harder are health attrition and the significantly harder to use bolt actions. Every other class's weapons are quite a lot more effective across a much wider engagement range than in BF1.

    I agree with some of what you said. I mentioned the particular instance of where the skill is improved. But I also believe there's still is a gap even medic vs assault for some of the reasons I stated above. If you're bursting with the stg and you're facing someone with the mp40 that can control the shot, he's going to win more consistently. Bipods might be the only class where I can say I agree with you. There's a learning curve to come with all weapons not just assault vs assault. It offers more consistency and reducing the randomness in gunfights. That goes for SLRS, ARs, BAs, etc.

    G43 was faster in the alpha than it was in the beta and retail versions. It can't be spammed like an autoloading marksman. That would be the m1a1 LOL.

    When it comes to medic, its a close quarter class, but hipfiring is no where near as good as it was in bf1. You have to aim better, in addition to the compensation and handling mechanics I talked about before when you ads now.

    off topic, its a good thing medic smgs are getting buffed, but they should have made the SLRS a medic or all kit weapon choice which would balance off the Assault rifles. I don't think that class is balanced effectively where you have short range, mid range, and long range(SLRs) to compete.

  • PirateR9Baii
    144 postsMember, Battlefield 3, Battlefield 4, Battlefield, Battlefield 1, Battlefield V Member
    BFV requires you to have more skill than BF1. There are actually posts in this thread disputing this. Yes, there is. *Mind blown* . Yes, BF1 is a skillful game. Ofcourse. Keep telling yourself that. Please.

    When you make claims like this you have to show us screenshots of your BFV kills, deaths and your time played. We need to know your k/d and kills per minute so we can compare it to you BF1 stats. Otherwise, you're talking fantasy ala Lord of the Rings. It's too fantastical!

    BFV IS far more skill-demanding than BF1. FACT.
    Depending on whether you think emphasis on twitch and tap-fire gunplay and muscle-memorising recoil patterns = 'skill' of course...

    Ofcourse I do. You give me 10 people who can't aim or tap fire or have any situational awareness and I destroy them, I'm more skilled than them. That's skill. There's no other way of defining it in a FIRST PERSON SHOOTER.
    BF1 was a FIRST PERSON SHOOTER. There was much less twitch tap firing and no repeating recoil patterns and, guess what, gunplay skill still won firefights. Situational awareness is good no matter the TTK or spread. Good players still won.

    The difference was, it wasn't so twitchy and the game was more fun and accessible to new and average players, so 'good' players actually had greater challenge.

    More twitchy doesn't mean more skill. It doesn't mean more challenge. It just means more twitchy.

    Personally I think overcoming spread and holding aim for longer required more 'skill'. Maybe it's just different skill, though? Either way, I preferred it.

    Look say whatever you like about BF1 being more fun or accessible to noobs but please:

    "More twitchy doesn't mean more skill. It doesn't mean more challenge. It just means more twitchy."

    Don't. Please just don't.

    This is skill:


    Whether you like it or not it is. Won't engage in further argument over this because I'm not sure if you're being serious or just tongue in cheek.

    BF1 was a cake walk. I won't stat bash or argue but I'm willing to put quite a few screenshots of my scoreboards from BF1 and tell you that I so far can't come close to these numbers in BFV. Talking 80-10 rounds here.

    Would you say your results show how you are more effective in BFV since as you say it requires less skill than BF1?


    Please. Good players had a field day in BF1.

    This.

    This. I could get insane stats with litte to No effort. I was on almost daily basis getting accused for cheats but that really says about what type of players were playing the game. Just alot of baddies. Game was a piece of cake :)
  • disposalist
    8851 postsMember, Battlefield 3, Battlefield 4, Battlefield, Battlefield 1, CTE, BF1IncursionsAlpha Member
    Ok I'm exclusively an infantry player so I always forget to add the asterisk. *I'm talking infantry only*. I don't know what makes a good pilot and I don't want to know I want them to go away. Tankers are cool though. Arty truck drivers should be banned and deported.
    I need to remember these things when we are discussing stuff.

    It's a bit like discussing the Martini Henry or Automatico and finding you are talking to a console player and, of course, their effect is utterly different with Aim Assist and joystick aiming.

    Some players only play infantry and some only play Domination or Deathmatch.

    I'm not saying this invalidates opinions, but it does make discussion about the game as a whole problematic sometimes.
  • BFB-LeCharybdis
    857 postsMember, Battlefield, Battlefield 1 Member
    Apples and oranges, two very different BF titles, both have parts to them that require 'Skill'.
    BFV does not have a higher skill ceiling than BF1, it just has new game mechanics that people need to adapt to.
  • Mystriall
    497 postsMember, Battlefield 4, Battlefield, Battlefield 1, BF1IncursionsAlpha, Battlefield V Member
    BFV requires you to have more skill than BF1. There are actually posts in this thread disputing this. Yes, there is. *Mind blown* . Yes, BF1 is a skillful game. Ofcourse. Keep telling yourself that. Please.

    When you make claims like this you have to show us screenshots of your BFV kills, deaths and your time played. We need to know your k/d and kills per minute so we can compare it to you BF1 stats. Otherwise, you're talking fantasy ala Lord of the Rings. It's too fantastical!

    BFV IS far more skill-demanding than BF1. FACT.
    Depending on whether you think emphasis on twitch and tap-fire gunplay and muscle-memorising recoil patterns = 'skill' of course...

    Ofcourse I do. You give me 10 people who can't aim or tap fire or have any situational awareness and I destroy them, I'm more skilled than them. That's skill. There's no other way of defining it in a FIRST PERSON SHOOTER.
    BF1 was a FIRST PERSON SHOOTER. There was much less twitch tap firing and no repeating recoil patterns and, guess what, gunplay skill still won firefights. Situational awareness is good no matter the TTK or spread. Good players still won.

    The difference was, it wasn't so twitchy and the game was more fun and accessible to new and average players, so 'good' players actually had greater challenge.

    More twitchy doesn't mean more skill. It doesn't mean more challenge. It just means more twitchy.

    Personally I think overcoming spread and holding aim for longer required more 'skill'. Maybe it's just different skill, though? Either way, I preferred it.

    Look say whatever you like about BF1 being more fun or accessible to noobs but please:

    "More twitchy doesn't mean more skill. It doesn't mean more challenge. It just means more twitchy."

    Don't. Please just don't.

    This is skill:


    Whether you like it or not it is. Won't engage in further argument over this because I'm not sure if you're being serious or just tongue in cheek.

    BF1 was a cake walk. I won't stat bash or argue but I'm willing to put quite a few screenshots of my scoreboards from BF1 and tell you that I so far can't come close to these numbers in BFV. Talking 80-10 rounds here.

    Would you say your results show how you are more effective in BFV since as you say it requires less skill than BF1?


    Please. Good players had a field day in BF1.

    This.

    This. I could get insane stats with litte to No effort. I was on almost daily basis getting accused for cheats but that really says about what type of players were playing the game. Just alot of baddies. Game was a piece of cake :)

    That panzerfaust insa-switch-fire needs a fix though! No wonder i sometimes instantly get blasted by the panzerfaust of an assault when it takes 0.05 sec to switch to panzerfaust and fire it. Should at least take a couple seconds to put that bad-boy on your shoulder.
  • SirBobdk
    5133 postsMember, Battlefield 3, Battlefield 4, Battlefield, Battlefield 1, Battlefield V Member
    Apples and oranges, two very different BF titles, both have parts to them that require 'Skill'.
    BFV does not have a higher skill ceiling than BF1, it just has new game mechanics that people need to adapt to.
    Agree, I'm 52 with bad reflexes and 30% vision on one eye. Had are hard time to begin with but now I'm doing just as good as in BF1.
    I don't think it takes more skills. It's just a different than BF1.
    Like any other game it's more about learning the map, spawn points and run patterns.
  • Pelliy
    2228 postsMember, Battlefield 4, Battlefield, Battlefield 1, CTE, BF1IncursionsAlpha, Battlefield V Member
    Apples and oranges, two very different BF titles, both have parts to them that require 'Skill'.
    BFV does not have a higher skill ceiling than BF1, it just has new game mechanics that people need to adapt to.
    Agree, I'm 52 with bad reflexes and 30% vision on one eye. Had are hard time to begin with but now I'm doing just as good as in BF1.
    I don't think it takes more skills. It's just a different than BF1.
    Like any other game it's more about learning the map, spawn points and run patterns.

    I personally think its higher skill. I think gun mechanics make for it make a gap in skill. The people that play just to play vs the people that play to get better. I think that Having no 3d spotting can lead to frustrating moments( a hell of lot) but to some degree, this raises situational awareness where BF1 had 3D spotting and heavy 2d spotting on the map.

    There's less grenade spam, which leads to more gunfights which requires consistency. There's still time for the skill gap to gorw. It won't grow overnight. Tons of new players playing and learning the game. It might get easier for a lot of players as time goes on or increasingly difficult if the community aaccepts the challenge.

    That being said, I still enjoy bf1 more currently than bfv. I think the map design and the lack of visibility as I sorted alluded to earlier allows for some frustrating moments in gameplay. I think the maps in bf1(outside of desert,galacia and some few) offer a better pace gameplay and offers fair gameplay. It's not as complex as bfv map with several buildings you can shoot angles from, but I'd say its balanced. Vertical maps are usually not liked in the battlefield series and bfv is litered with them. Tons of buildings.


    The health attrition also hurts the game and the pacing. People are afraid to participate in gunfights because of the health attrition. Some might go one step further and say the ttk is the issue . I'm not so convinced on that. BF4 had fast ttk and it seems like gunfights happen more in bf4 than bfv.

    @disposalist and I disagree on the skillful argument but it seems we are on the same page in terms of fun. I think bf1 is more fun. I can change my mind if I play bf5 more but as it currently stands, I think bf1 is more fun. It's not perfect. There's a lot of cheese in the game. But overall. I think its a much more enjoyable experience.

    I can play bf1 for 3-4 hours before my brain is scrambled. BF5 its like 2hours then I'm burned.
  • NLBartmaN
    4484 postsMember, Battlefield, Battlefield 1, CTE, Battlefield V Member

    Ok I'm exclusively an infantry player so I always forget to add the asterisk. *I'm talking infantry only*. I don't know what makes a good pilot and I don't want to know I want them to go away. Tankers are cool though. Arty truck drivers should be banned and deported.

    This basically tells all: you are talking in stats, that are irrelevant in a game like BF, that has vehicles and gamemodes were people don't focus on killing, but on getting objectives or doing assignment.

    Like stated in a different topic about stats and skill: the only time stats mean anything to me is in an infantry only DM game (so everyone has the same goal) on a ranked ladder with everyone having the same circumstances (like hardware/connection/weapons).

    BF V has less variables that make it harder to shoot or that can kill you out of nowhere/have better gear, so I think it is easier to master and requires less overall skill.

    But to be honest: I like BF for all those variables ... even with how annoying they can be sometimes.

    (for example, when you drive a tank, you can be killed by infantry from all distances, tank hunter, plane, stationary, mortars, behemoths and more, which makes it exciting and challenging, only tank vs tank can be fun, but is not my thing and "easier")

    If I wanted a simple infantry based twitch shooter, there are lots of other games that do that better.
  • Pelliy
    2228 postsMember, Battlefield 4, Battlefield, Battlefield 1, CTE, BF1IncursionsAlpha, Battlefield V Member
    VincentNZ wrote: »
    This topic really annoys me. I think BFV's gunplay is exponentially better than the one we got served in BF1 with overemphasized niches and spread, it also does what it says on the tin, but if I look at the whole picture the game is incredibly shallow in terms of the skills used. DRUNKKZ3 clearly created a game where he tailored the mechanics to work 100% for him and people of a comparable skillset.
    When I see clips from him, Rela or whoever else, I see no recoil, barely any misses, and extremely fast reaction times. I acknowledge that this is the result of a lot of hard work and training. But I feel that this game has made traditional spread irrelevant and created the ADAD meta, because it did not suit the dev himself.
    Nothing wrong with that per se, but the rest of the players will just never get close to these levels or be able to compete at all. And the rest of the game just does not allow for a lot of workarounds that BF3 and 4 had. If you were a crappy marksman you could still wreck by simply playing the minimap and flanking. Now gone. You could also use gadgets that required a bit of thinking out of the box like the XM25, the most genius thing to ever come to the franchise. Indirect fire gadgets, require another skillset than seeing and shooting, so they were removed. Defending flags or tactically holding a position? 64 players and the map design do not agree. There are thousand other small examples, but the result is the same: BFV remains shallow and a one-trick pony. The only things that count are impeccable eyesight and mouse control.

    I just read this as you basically saying bfv is more skilled. Might say too skilled for the rest of the player base to catch up.

    But it doesn't seem like you're disputing the notion that it requires skill. Just that it isn't fun and there will be a skill gap.

    Minimap reading is not a proficient skill .

    Gimmicks aren't proficient skill. They're fun. They're accessible but they're not proficient skill.

    Imo if you put bfv gun mechanics into bf1, eliminate the bomber and behemoths, it'll easily be the best shooter I ever played.
  • xSwisherSweetsx
    110 postsMember, Battlefield 3, Battlefield 4, Battlefield, Battlefield 1, CTE, BF1IncursionsAlpha, Battlefield V Member
    No, you've got it. It's not really 'more' skill, however much the fans of low TTK and zero spread will tell you otherwise. It's just 'different' skill. It emphasizes twitch reflexes, muscle memory to remove recoil or tap firing to ignore recoil.

    I personally think BF1 was more skilled as you had to overcome a weapons innate inaccuracy by realistic tactics of moving to effective range, mitigating the chance to miss and you had to hold your aim for longer.

    agree, especially on pc with my mouse, the weapons are so god damn easy to master over bf1 to me. anyone saying this game takes skill, is telling me a fairy tale story.
  • NLBartmaN
    4484 postsMember, Battlefield, Battlefield 1, CTE, Battlefield V Member

    Imo if you put bfv gun mechanics into bf1, eliminate the bomber and behemoths, it'll easily be the best shooter I ever played.

    It would be the worst game ever ...

    TTK2.0 basically killed BF1, the camping is insane since that patch.

    Bombers, behemoths and other "crutches" at least make sure there is some movement within the game and the spawntrap can be broken through.

    In BF V they added the catch up mechanic as crutch, which is much worse than certain vehicles, behemoths and elites.

    Imo, people that like the gunplay in BF V are better of playing competitive twitch shooters without vehicles.
  • disposalist
    8851 postsMember, Battlefield 3, Battlefield 4, Battlefield, Battlefield 1, CTE, BF1IncursionsAlpha Member
    NLBartmaN wrote: »

    Imo if you put bfv gun mechanics into bf1, eliminate the bomber and behemoths, it'll easily be the best shooter I ever played.

    It would be the worst game ever ...

    TTK2.0 basically killed BF1, the camping is insane since that patch.

    Bombers, behemoths and other "crutches" at least make sure there is some movement within the game and the spawntrap can be broken through.

    In BF V they added the catch up mechanic as crutch, which is much worse than certain vehicles, behemoths and elites.

    Imo, people that like the gunplay in BF V are better of playing competitive twitch shooters without vehicles.
    Didn't we used to fight all the time in BF1 forums. And now we are agreeing all over the place.

    One good thing about BF5: It has brought us together!
  • DigitalContagion
    124 postsMember, Battlefield 4, Battlefield, Battlefield 1, Battlefield V Member
    BFV requires you to have more skill than BF1. There are actually posts in this thread disputing this. Yes, there is. *Mind blown* . Yes, BF1 is a skillful game. Ofcourse. Keep telling yourself that. Please.

    When you make claims like this you have to show us screenshots of your BFV kills, deaths and your time played. We need to know your k/d and kills per minute so we can compare it to you BF1 stats. Otherwise, you're talking fantasy ala Lord of the Rings. It's too fantastical!

    BFV IS far more skill-demanding than BF1. FACT.
    Depending on whether you think emphasis on twitch and tap-fire gunplay and muscle-memorising recoil patterns = 'skill' of course...

    Ofcourse I do. You give me 10 people who can't aim or tap fire or have any situational awareness and I destroy them, I'm more skilled than them. That's skill. There's no other way of defining it in a FIRST PERSON SHOOTER.
    BF1 was a FIRST PERSON SHOOTER. There was much less twitch tap firing and no repeating recoil patterns and, guess what, gunplay skill still won firefights. Situational awareness is good no matter the TTK or spread. Good players still won.

    The difference was, it wasn't so twitchy and the game was more fun and accessible to new and average players, so 'good' players actually had greater challenge.

    More twitchy doesn't mean more skill. It doesn't mean more challenge. It just means more twitchy.

    Personally I think overcoming spread and holding aim for longer required more 'skill'. Maybe it's just different skill, though? Either way, I preferred it.

    Look say whatever you like about BF1 being more fun or accessible to noobs but please:

    "More twitchy doesn't mean more skill. It doesn't mean more challenge. It just means more twitchy."

    Don't. Please just don't.

    This is skill:


    Whether you like it or not it is. Won't engage in further argument over this because I'm not sure if you're being serious or just tongue in cheek.

    BF1 was a cake walk. I won't stat bash or argue but I'm willing to put quite a few screenshots of my scoreboards from BF1 and tell you that I so far can't come close to these numbers in BFV. Talking 80-10 rounds here.

    Would you say your results show how you are more effective in BFV since as you say it requires less skill than BF1?


    Please. Good players had a field day in BF1.

    This.

    This. I could get insane stats with litte to No effort. I was on almost daily basis getting accused for cheats but that really says about what type of players were playing the game. Just alot of baddies. Game was a piece of cake :)

    LMAO, first off, so much "snapping" going on here......look at 2:54 mark. Look how he looks at one player at the left before shooting, then his weapon "automatically" snaps to the enemy on the right (closest to him) killing him instantly, then snaps back to the first enemy on the left. Dude, your snapping onto enemies before they are even seen. That's not even flow of natural movement, it's snapping. And It's interesting how you pretty much know where everyone else is without being seen on the mini map (because when players fire their weapons, they are not displayed) despite "one week of BFV". Knows exactly where players going to be 99.99% of the time. Nice collection. Say what you want, even "high end" players like Shroud, Stodeh, Ravic and JackFrags don't "snap" onto enemies like this. This is laughable.
  • VincentNZ
    3885 postsMember, Battlefield 3, Battlefield 4, Battlefield, Battlefield 1, BF1IncursionsAlpha, Battlefield V Member
    VincentNZ wrote: »
    This topic really annoys me. I think BFV's gunplay is exponentially better than the one we got served in BF1 with overemphasized niches and spread, it also does what it says on the tin, but if I look at the whole picture the game is incredibly shallow in terms of the skills used. DRUNKKZ3 clearly created a game where he tailored the mechanics to work 100% for him and people of a comparable skillset.
    When I see clips from him, Rela or whoever else, I see no recoil, barely any misses, and extremely fast reaction times. I acknowledge that this is the result of a lot of hard work and training. But I feel that this game has made traditional spread irrelevant and created the ADAD meta, because it did not suit the dev himself.
    Nothing wrong with that per se, but the rest of the players will just never get close to these levels or be able to compete at all. And the rest of the game just does not allow for a lot of workarounds that BF3 and 4 had. If you were a crappy marksman you could still wreck by simply playing the minimap and flanking. Now gone. You could also use gadgets that required a bit of thinking out of the box like the XM25, the most genius thing to ever come to the franchise. Indirect fire gadgets, require another skillset than seeing and shooting, so they were removed. Defending flags or tactically holding a position? 64 players and the map design do not agree. There are thousand other small examples, but the result is the same: BFV remains shallow and a one-trick pony. The only things that count are impeccable eyesight and mouse control.

    I just read this as you basically saying bfv is more skilled. Might say too skilled for the rest of the player base to catch up.

    But it doesn't seem like you're disputing the notion that it requires skill. Just that it isn't fun and there will be a skill gap.

    Minimap reading is not a proficient skill .

    Gimmicks aren't proficient skill. They're fun. They're accessible but they're not proficient skill.

    Imo if you put bfv gun mechanics into bf1, eliminate the bomber and behemoths, it'll easily be the best shooter I ever played.

    No, reading the minimap and moving accordingly is a skill, it is called planning. That is also pretty tactical. If you've got a foe under cover or in a better position, there is more you should be able to do than just shoot back. Flanking, smoking, or simply using the XM25 or the Mortar to kill that guy behind cover. That is thinking indirectly or in mutliple steps instead of just one. That is what I am getting at.
    The game should be accessible, and BFV is alright, but there is only one way to master it, though and that is to directly fire at your enemy and see who has more control over their mouse. That is why I say it is shallow where BF4 allowed depth. BF1 on the other hand was stupidly complicated, where number junkies thought balance was achieved when each weapon had a niche like "best TTK, prone, moving when fired in 4-shot bursts at a target 12-17m away". So that is the other end of the spectrum.
Sign In or Register to comment.