Give back suppression for support

Comments

  • raptorjesus36
    80 postsMember, Battlefield 3, Battlefield 4, Battlefield Hardline, Battlefield, Battlefield 1, Battlefield V Member
    JUJAMAKILL wrote: »
    mph199 wrote: »
    Pmuecke wrote: »
    I mean c'mon , the amount of times i gave covering fire with an mmg for my team from a bunch of snipers (since it's pretty much sniper and assaultfield at the point) , just to be simply getting headshot by a sniper i'm shooting at makes no sense , atleast make it so it get's harder for the other classes to shoot when getting peppered with bullets from the supportguns , atleast that will make him a bit usefull

    co-signed

    what are you talking about? It makes perfect sense. You missed, the sniper didn't. I mean, its not like he has the opportunity to put 50 odd rounds into you like you do. they have a split second window to use 1 round, maybe 2 at the most while you are raining fire down on them. And if he don't headshot you it may as well count for nothing.

    I can tell you what doesn't make sense. That is some arbitrary mechanic the skews someone's ability to accurately shoot back.

    Ffs yall anti-suppression supporters are dumb

    "In military science, suppressive fire (commonly called covering fire) is "fire that degrades the performance of an enemy force below the level needed to fulfill its mission".
  • JUJAMAKILL
    331 postsMember, Battlefield 3, Battlefield Hardline, Battlefield, Battlefield 1, Battlefield V Member
    TheSacar wrote: »
    y_j_es_i wrote: »
    [

    I think all classes should be able to suppress but the rate of suppression is dependent on their rounds’ size and their ROF

    So LMGs would suppress faster than bolt-actions, semi-autos, ARs and SMGs

    And then it becomes an unfair advantage. People with many bullets don't need to aim that much, cause more suppression and are suppressed less by those who have fewer bullets? And when they are suppressed and miss a couple of shot they still have plenty to kill their target whereas the sniper only has one bullet before he needs to rechamber a round.... Sounds fair.

    No it doesn't. There are other people in the game besides your camping a**. I can't just camp and suppress you the entire time because your teammates are going to see my tracers and start shooting at me. That's the entire point of the battlefield franchise: team work. Your arguing from the point of a lone wolf. Yes, I'll shut down your sniping for a brief period, but it's not an "unfair advantage".

    And here it is again.. Proof of the anti sniper campaign that is 'suppression'.The assumption that old mate is a camper... Because he plays recon? Like all the time, or part time? or has he just picked up a sniper rifle after running out of ammo? Gee.. I dunno, maybe he just doesn't like the idea of unfair advantages and aim limiting gimmicks too make things better for sore losers?

    Its funny how it doesn't work both ways though. I mean by the same token if he is camping, aren't your team mates going to see him and start shooting at him? No? Or maybe they just gotta aim at the big white dot that instantly alerts anyone in the area to his position? Is that not gimmicky enough for you? We still need to affect their actual accuracy.
  • JUJAMAKILL
    331 postsMember, Battlefield 3, Battlefield Hardline, Battlefield, Battlefield 1, Battlefield V Member
    JUJAMAKILL wrote: »
    TheSacar wrote: »
    TheSacar wrote: »

    ah I see, you must be a CoD player, get out of my battlefield, loser. I loved BF3 with those mechanics. It was fun and made one play tactically. You just want a run and gun game. Those mechanics need to be brought back.

    Oh wow. Way to have a mature discussion. But what am I thinking this is the internet, right?
    If I told you all the things I think about people who mostly/only play support, you'd probably cry a river, but I won't. It's just plain rude.
    .
    That being said I totally disagree that suppressionas a mechanic was fun in any BF game. I get shot at and stick my head out I risk dying. That means I risk my KDR if I care for such things or in the least I risk having to wait 10 seconds to respawn and having to run to my objective again. That is suppression enough.

    Oh, me being spoken to in a condescending way isn't immature? But me responding to a condescending post is? K.

    The suppression mechanic is not enough as it is. It deters no one. You people just want the game made easier for you. And before you comeback with saying that *I* just want the game easier for me, not at all. I can get suppressed just as easily as you guys, and I even said I would be fine with taking away ADS from ALL LMG weapons unless they're propped up on something with the bipod, thus making the support class have to be a non moving target to be an effective suppression unit.

    I didn't insult anyone, you did.
    .
    I say its enough suppression. And no, I do not want it easier for me. I'm the kind of sniper who storms objectives with a bolt action rifle, a revolver and throwing knifes. I know I'm not a majority and if suppression makes a comeback, snipers like me will entirely vanish and hill humpers will be all that's left. Do you not get that having suppression will just move snipers further out? Honestly they are the class affected the most. What does a medic care if only half of his 30 shots find the target? Or the assault with his StG44? And a supporter with a whole bag full of bullets? But a sniper with only one bullet?
    .
    No I think you just want to be able to own snipers without effort and without sniping yourself.

    Nope. I just want suppression to actually be a deterrent. Suppression is a two-way road. That won't give me an edge on snipers at all.

    This sums it up right here.

    Why should you have an edge on snipers anyway? The suppression argument really hasn't got anything to do with making suppression useful, its about handicapping snipers. Because no one is capable of 'dealing' with those pesky 'camping' snipers...

    Lol being forced to take cover and relocate = handicapping.

    That's not what you are asking for though is it? Take your own advice and maybe you won't get so upset over those evil accurate snipers..
  • raptorjesus36
    80 postsMember, Battlefield 3, Battlefield 4, Battlefield Hardline, Battlefield, Battlefield 1, Battlefield V Member
    JUJAMAKILL wrote: »
    TheSacar wrote: »
    y_j_es_i wrote: »
    [

    I think all classes should be able to suppress but the rate of suppression is dependent on their rounds’ size and their ROF

    So LMGs would suppress faster than bolt-actions, semi-autos, ARs and SMGs

    And then it becomes an unfair advantage. People with many bullets don't need to aim that much, cause more suppression and are suppressed less by those who have fewer bullets? And when they are suppressed and miss a couple of shot they still have plenty to kill their target whereas the sniper only has one bullet before he needs to rechamber a round.... Sounds fair.

    No it doesn't. There are other people in the game besides your camping a**. I can't just camp and suppress you the entire time because your teammates are going to see my tracers and start shooting at me. That's the entire point of the battlefield franchise: team work. Your arguing from the point of a lone wolf. Yes, I'll shut down your sniping for a brief period, but it's not an "unfair advantage".

    And here it is again.. Proof of the anti sniper campaign that is 'suppression'.The assumption that old mate is a camper... Because he plays recon? Like all the time, or part time? or has he just picked up a sniper rifle after running out of ammo? Gee.. I dunno, maybe he just doesn't like the idea of unfair advantages and aim limiting gimmicks too make things better for sore losers?

    Its funny how it doesn't work both ways though. I mean by the same token if he is camping, aren't your team mates going to see him and start shooting at him? No? Or maybe they just gotta aim at the big white dot that instantly alerts anyone in the area to his position? Is that not gimmicky enough for you? We still need to affect their actual accuracy.

    It's not just about snipers. They're just the current target for the topic as snipers are a bit overblown in the game with roughly 1/3 of each team's players sniping the entire time. But continue cherry picking the argument.
  • BATTL3FI3LDBULLY
    336 postsMember, Battlefield 3, Battlefield 4, Battlefield Hardline, Battlefield, Battlefield 1 Member
    TheSacar wrote: »
    lol these guys straight up suck! Hahahahaha looking for an excuse for losing.

    “I coulda got that kill if his screen was shaky and blurred. The whole point of support is suppression, it useless now!!!”

    Hahahahaha!

    It’s too funny the old suppression is gone and never should have been invented. My goodness this get funnier by the minute. I’m hoping this is a troll. If so it’s 10/10 Hahahahaha!

    no, moron. If I'm pinging a sniper, or any one for that matter, with some LMG fire, he should not pull off a HS on me.

    Lol. "I am shooting at the other guy, he should not be able to shoot back. I don't like fair fights..."

    I didn't say he can't shoot back. I said he shouldn't be able to shoot back *accurately*

    **Stairs Willy Wonkaly**

    Are you aware that soldiers get aim punched each time you land a shot? For that moment it’s almost impossible to land accurate OHKs until you’re readjusted? That means you’re missing your shots enough for them to readjust and blow your happy head off 🤯.

    Considering that you’re likely to be prone with a bipod, you’re going to be in the exact same position they last saw you and your head will be out front making it the easiest thing to hit. So if you cannot pop those first few rounds and get out of dodge, you’re asking to be killed because you’re not choosing a wise battle. It has absolutely NOTHING to do with an artificial suppression mechanism. It has everything to do with your non-tactical play style. Yes suppression is a tactic but since it’s not working, couldn’t you at least try to make adjustments? Instead of expecting the entire game to recoded to fit what you personally want to do?

    **offers an everlasting gobstopper to make you feel better about getting owned for making bad decisions**

    No they don't. I've pegged snipers 3 or 4 times only for them to eat those shots and line up a perfect HS on me. And still, the bullets that I DID miss, which isn't much considering I use controlled bursts, should still be suppressing them. And no I don't sit still in one spot for very long. I lay down fire and move. You're choosing to ignore that the purpose of the weapon is to SUPPRESS the enemy. Even if I did stay in one spot laying down bursts of machine gun fire on one guy, and even if they did try taking cover and popping out to take another shot, they should still be suppressed because I'm still lobbing bullets at them.
    Lol you didn't own anybody, you're just choosing to ignore what the gun was designed to do. Sit down, son.

    Lmaoooooo! This guy brings an LMG to a sniper fight and wonders why he’s not winning. And the most creative counter action you can come up with is: Give us greater suppression effects. LOL A video game mastermind! Maybe you should design the next game 😎👍

    While you’re working on it, how about you load up BF3 with it’s ridiculous suppression mechanics? By right, the high caliber / high velocity sniper rounds should be just as suppressive. Then we can go back to the days of everyone being blinded firing inaccurately and being pissed by blurred screens. I loved that game but, it was the single most contentious issue of it’s time. Yet genius guy proposes we add it back as a fix lol! 👨‍🎓

    Let it go and die slow homie. Suppression can’t save you

    **Pats on head grinchingly, when he sent Cindy Lou Who to bed 🛌 ***

    ah I see, you must be a CoD player. People like you have ruined battlefield. I loved BF3 with those mechanics. It was fun and made one play tactically. You just want a run and gun game. Those mechanics need to be brought back.


    Lmaoooooo Now I’m a COD Player when my title has just as many BF games as you. I own and have played countless hours of battlefield games but, that’s the best argument you can make? When the fact is: Suppression is not an automated mechanic it’s the threat of being shot. If you are “laying down fire” but not landing shots, it’s not very threatening. Therefore you think, the game should dictate to me how afraid I should be or what effect (psychologically) that fire should have on me. Why? Because you aren’t dealing enough damage to enemies before they deal it to you and therefore you die. Now you’re rationalizing why you died: because they game failed you.

    The truth is you’re failing to play within the parameters of the game in a way that wins. Kamikaze play styles are like suicide bombers, they willingly risk death for the opportunity to kill. There is no psychological impact on people to fear death when they have trained themselves to die while attempting to kill. So there is no point in trying to force some psychological affect on players through a “suppression mechanic.” Those who want to live will take cover when being shot at. Those who don’t mind dying will not. You are just salty because they are completing their mission before you can kill them. The developers shouldn’t bend to your will of players becoming inaccurate due to fear of death simply because you want them to. The fact that you aren’t killing them is proof positive that they SHOULDN’T fear you.

    Suppression isn't MEANT for killing ffs. Get that through your skull.

    If suppression isn’t the threat of being killed ? WTF is it?!??

  • JUJAMAKILL
    331 postsMember, Battlefield 3, Battlefield Hardline, Battlefield, Battlefield 1, Battlefield V Member
    JUJAMAKILL wrote: »
    mph199 wrote: »
    Pmuecke wrote: »
    I mean c'mon , the amount of times i gave covering fire with an mmg for my team from a bunch of snipers (since it's pretty much sniper and assaultfield at the point) , just to be simply getting headshot by a sniper i'm shooting at makes no sense , atleast make it so it get's harder for the other classes to shoot when getting peppered with bullets from the supportguns , atleast that will make him a bit usefull

    co-signed

    what are you talking about? It makes perfect sense. You missed, the sniper didn't. I mean, its not like he has the opportunity to put 50 odd rounds into you like you do. they have a split second window to use 1 round, maybe 2 at the most while you are raining fire down on them. And if he don't headshot you it may as well count for nothing.

    I can tell you what doesn't make sense. That is some arbitrary mechanic the skews someone's ability to accurately shoot back.

    Ffs yall anti-suppression supporters are dumb

    "In military science, suppressive fire (commonly called covering fire) is "fire that degrades the performance of an enemy force below the level needed to fulfill its mission".

    Show me the bit where that says the enemy is unable to point a gun in your direction? Oh that's right... It doesn't. Hmm... Now tell me again who's dumb?
  • raptorjesus36
    80 postsMember, Battlefield 3, Battlefield 4, Battlefield Hardline, Battlefield, Battlefield 1, Battlefield V Member
    edited December 2018
    Seriously, you say that support being able to suppress snipers gives an unfair advantage, but ignore the fact that the support unit has to go prone or find some cover to unfold their bipod and mount theirweapon, take aim, and fire at the target. 90% of the time, the support unit is going to get picked off before they even get to take aim. All of that is perfectly fine. It's fair and balanced. However if the support gunner is already in position, spots a soldier, and starts shooting at them, THE SOLDIER (especially snipers, considering they are typically at range) SHOULDN'T BE ABLE TO ACCURATELY RETURN FIRE. THAT IS NOT FAIR AND BALANCED. THAT IS DUMB. YOU ARE DUMB IF YOU THINK IT SHOULD BE THAT WAY.

    Edited to say soldier instead of sniper since people wanna cherry pick arguments
  • JUJAMAKILL
    331 postsMember, Battlefield 3, Battlefield Hardline, Battlefield, Battlefield 1, Battlefield V Member
    Lol Tantrum much?
  • raptorjesus36
    80 postsMember, Battlefield 3, Battlefield 4, Battlefield Hardline, Battlefield, Battlefield 1, Battlefield V Member
    edited December 2018
    JUJAMAKILL wrote: »
    Lol Tantrum much?


    Well looks like I won this argument.
  • JUJAMAKILL
    331 postsMember, Battlefield 3, Battlefield Hardline, Battlefield, Battlefield 1, Battlefield V Member
    edited December 2018
    You can think what ever you like. I'm not here to 'argue' with anyone. I am just here to post my thoughts on why i am against lame gimmicky game mechanics being added to this game for the sake of propping up poor players.

    But by all means, continue to rant, type in all caps and call people dumb if that is what denotes 'winning' for you.

    FWIW i chose to leave the thread alone as i didn't want you to think i am targeting you specifically. At the time you were the only one active in the thread. But I'm still here if you want me to continue?
  • raptorjesus36
    80 postsMember, Battlefield 3, Battlefield 4, Battlefield Hardline, Battlefield, Battlefield 1, Battlefield V Member
    JUJAMAKILL wrote: »
    You can think what ever you like. I'm not here to 'argue' with anyone. I am just here to post my thoughts on why i am against lame gimmicky game mechanics being added to this game for the sake of poor players.

    But by all means, continue to rant, type in all caps and call people dumb if that is what denotes 'winning' for you.

    FWIW i chose to leave the thread alone as i didn't want you to think i am targeting you specifically. At the time you were the only one active in the thread. But I'm still here if you want me to continue?

    How is implementing a realistic tactic a "lame gimmicky game mechanic"?
  • Louisthorpe1
    35 postsMember, Battlefield 4, Battlefield, Battlefield 1, Battlefield V Member
    Pmuecke wrote: »
    I mean c'mon , the amount of times i gave covering fire with an mmg for my team from a bunch of snipers (since it's pretty much sniper and assaultfield at the point) , just to be simply getting headshot by a sniper i'm shooting at makes no sense , atleast make it so it get's harder for the other classes to shoot when getting peppered with bullets from the supportguns , atleast that will make him a bit usefull

    The points to kill, suppression either kills or forces the opponent into cover, any gun can do this.
  • raptorjesus36
    80 postsMember, Battlefield 3, Battlefield 4, Battlefield Hardline, Battlefield, Battlefield 1, Battlefield V Member
    TheSacar wrote: »
    lol these guys straight up suck! Hahahahaha looking for an excuse for losing.

    “I coulda got that kill if his screen was shaky and blurred. The whole point of support is suppression, it useless now!!!”

    Hahahahaha!

    It’s too funny the old suppression is gone and never should have been invented. My goodness this get funnier by the minute. I’m hoping this is a troll. If so it’s 10/10 Hahahahaha!

    no, moron. If I'm pinging a sniper, or any one for that matter, with some LMG fire, he should not pull off a HS on me.

    Lol. "I am shooting at the other guy, he should not be able to shoot back. I don't like fair fights..."

    I didn't say he can't shoot back. I said he shouldn't be able to shoot back *accurately*

    **Stairs Willy Wonkaly**

    Are you aware that soldiers get aim punched each time you land a shot? For that moment it’s almost impossible to land accurate OHKs until you’re readjusted? That means you’re missing your shots enough for them to readjust and blow your happy head off 🤯.

    Considering that you’re likely to be prone with a bipod, you’re going to be in the exact same position they last saw you and your head will be out front making it the easiest thing to hit. So if you cannot pop those first few rounds and get out of dodge, you’re asking to be killed because you’re not choosing a wise battle. It has absolutely NOTHING to do with an artificial suppression mechanism. It has everything to do with your non-tactical play style. Yes suppression is a tactic but since it’s not working, couldn’t you at least try to make adjustments? Instead of expecting the entire game to recoded to fit what you personally want to do?

    **offers an everlasting gobstopper to make you feel better about getting owned for making bad decisions**

    No they don't. I've pegged snipers 3 or 4 times only for them to eat those shots and line up a perfect HS on me. And still, the bullets that I DID miss, which isn't much considering I use controlled bursts, should still be suppressing them. And no I don't sit still in one spot for very long. I lay down fire and move. You're choosing to ignore that the purpose of the weapon is to SUPPRESS the enemy. Even if I did stay in one spot laying down bursts of machine gun fire on one guy, and even if they did try taking cover and popping out to take another shot, they should still be suppressed because I'm still lobbing bullets at them.
    Lol you didn't own anybody, you're just choosing to ignore what the gun was designed to do. Sit down, son.

    Lmaoooooo! This guy brings an LMG to a sniper fight and wonders why he’s not winning. And the most creative counter action you can come up with is: Give us greater suppression effects. LOL A video game mastermind! Maybe you should design the next game 😎👍

    While you’re working on it, how about you load up BF3 with it’s ridiculous suppression mechanics? By right, the high caliber / high velocity sniper rounds should be just as suppressive. Then we can go back to the days of everyone being blinded firing inaccurately and being pissed by blurred screens. I loved that game but, it was the single most contentious issue of it’s time. Yet genius guy proposes we add it back as a fix lol! 👨‍🎓

    Let it go and die slow homie. Suppression can’t save you

    **Pats on head grinchingly, when he sent Cindy Lou Who to bed 🛌 ***

    ah I see, you must be a CoD player. People like you have ruined battlefield. I loved BF3 with those mechanics. It was fun and made one play tactically. You just want a run and gun game. Those mechanics need to be brought back.


    Lmaoooooo Now I’m a COD Player when my title has just as many BF games as you. I own and have played countless hours of battlefield games but, that’s the best argument you can make? When the fact is: Suppression is not an automated mechanic it’s the threat of being shot. If you are “laying down fire” but not landing shots, it’s not very threatening. Therefore you think, the game should dictate to me how afraid I should be or what effect (psychologically) that fire should have on me. Why? Because you aren’t dealing enough damage to enemies before they deal it to you and therefore you die. Now you’re rationalizing why you died: because they game failed you.

    The truth is you’re failing to play within the parameters of the game in a way that wins. Kamikaze play styles are like suicide bombers, they willingly risk death for the opportunity to kill. There is no psychological impact on people to fear death when they have trained themselves to die while attempting to kill. So there is no point in trying to force some psychological affect on players through a “suppression mechanic.” Those who want to live will take cover when being shot at. Those who don’t mind dying will not. You are just salty because they are completing their mission before you can kill them. The developers shouldn’t bend to your will of players becoming inaccurate due to fear of death simply because you want them to. The fact that you aren’t killing them is proof positive that they SHOULDN’T fear you.

    Suppression isn't MEANT for killing ffs. Get that through your skull.

    If suppression isn’t the threat of being killed ? WTF is it?!??

    "Fire that degrades the performance of an enemy force below the level needed to fulfill its mission"
  • JUJAMAKILL
    331 postsMember, Battlefield 3, Battlefield Hardline, Battlefield, Battlefield 1, Battlefield V Member
    edited December 2018
    Because people are asking for something that makes aiming erratic and untrue when they fire on enemies. I don't think it is fair to have to fight against some type of aim pulling mechanic to return fire, when the attacker doesn't. If you are already firing at me, then you have the advantage. Making my aim wobble all over the place in the process isn't realistic or fair..

    I think people are downplaying how devastating being hit by 1 or 2 rounds really is in this game. With how fast the TTK (and yes i am a fan of it) is, you can bet that if i get hit once i am praying i make it as i duck for the nearest cover. Most of the time i know i'm already dead due to the TTD bug, but i still dive. If i am able to poke my head out in between suppressive fire from MMG/LMG's i only need to get hit once to lose a chunk of my health. That is the trade off. The ROF on those weapons coupled with the near laser accuracy of them when fired in burst mode makes it unlikely that only 1 round will hit me, so as soon as i feel that first hit, i'm pulling my head back in. Sure you may have emptied 50 rounds in my direction, but it still only takes 3-4 hits to end me.

    What i am saying here is for any suppressive fire to actually be effective it only needs to be somewhat accurate. I mean, if we are making the argument in regards to realism, is that not what actually makes people keep their head down? If a soldier fires directly into the air above them is that going to keep the enemy from popping their head out? no? Its the threat of bullets whizzing directly over their head that does it. If someone is able to peek out during aggressive fire and take no damage then it is because the suppression is not accurate. I don't believe players should be given an advantage against enemy players for being inaccurate, especially with the speed of this game and the quick TTK. I also don't think holding down the trigger and firing off 50 rounds with the recoil bouncing all over the place should arbitrarily limit anyone's accuracy.
  • raptorjesus36
    80 postsMember, Battlefield 3, Battlefield 4, Battlefield Hardline, Battlefield, Battlefield 1, Battlefield V Member
    JUJAMAKILL wrote: »
    Because people are asking for something that makes aiming erratic and untrue when they fire on enemies. I don't think it is fair to have to fight against some type of aim pulling mechanic to return fire, when the attacker doesn't. If you are already firing at me, then you have the advantage. Making my aim wobble all over the place in the process isn't realistic or fair..

    I think people are downplaying how devastating being hit by 1 or 2 rounds really is in this game. With how fast the TTK (and yes i am a fan of it) is, you can bet that if i get hit once i am praying i make it as i duck for the nearest cover. Most of the time i know i'm already dead due to the TTD bug, but i still dive. If i am able to poke my head out in between suppressive fire from MMG/LMG's i only need to get hit once to lose a chunk of my health. That is the trade off. The ROF on those weapons coupled with the near laser accuracy of them when fired in burst mode makes it unlikely that only 1 round will hit me, so as soon as i feel that first hit, i'm pulling my head back in. Sure you may have emptied 50 rounds in my direction, but it still only takes 3-4 hits to end me.

    What i am saying here is for any suppressive fire to actually be effective it only needs to be somewhat accurate. I mean, if we are making the argument in regards to realism, is that not what actually makes people keep their head down? If a soldier fires directly into the air above them is that going to keep the enemy from popping their head out? no? Its the threat of bullets whizzing directly over their head that does it. If someone is able to peek out during aggressive fire and take no damage then it is because the suppression is not accurate. I don't believe players should be given an advantage against enemy players for being inaccurate, especially with the speed of this game and the quick TTK. I also don't think holding down the trigger and firing off 50 rounds with the recoil bouncing all over the place should arbitrarily limit anyone's accuracy.

    It absolutely is realistic. You're high
  • raptorjesus36
    80 postsMember, Battlefield 3, Battlefield 4, Battlefield Hardline, Battlefield, Battlefield 1, Battlefield V Member
    JUJAMAKILL wrote: »
    Because people are asking for something that makes aiming erratic and untrue when they fire on enemies. I don't think it is fair to have to fight against some type of aim pulling mechanic to return fire, when the attacker doesn't. If you are already firing at me, then you have the advantage. Making my aim wobble all over the place in the process isn't realistic or fair..

    I think people are downplaying how devastating being hit by 1 or 2 rounds really is in this game. With how fast the TTK (and yes i am a fan of it) is, you can bet that if i get hit once i am praying i make it as i duck for the nearest cover. Most of the time i know i'm already dead due to the TTD bug, but i still dive. If i am able to poke my head out in between suppressive fire from MMG/LMG's i only need to get hit once to lose a chunk of my health. That is the trade off. The ROF on those weapons coupled with the near laser accuracy of them when fired in burst mode makes it unlikely that only 1 round will hit me, so as soon as i feel that first hit, i'm pulling my head back in. Sure you may have emptied 50 rounds in my direction, but it still only takes 3-4 hits to end me.

    What i am saying here is for any suppressive fire to actually be effective it only needs to be somewhat accurate. I mean, if we are making the argument in regards to realism, is that not what actually makes people keep their head down? If a soldier fires directly into the air above them is that going to keep the enemy from popping their head out? no? Its the threat of bullets whizzing directly over their head that does it. If someone is able to peek out during aggressive fire and take no damage then it is because the suppression is not accurate. I don't believe players should be given an advantage against enemy players for being inaccurate, especially with the speed of this game and the quick TTK. I also don't think holding down the trigger and

    Sorry. first response to this post was a knee jerk reaction. And I never said suppression don't have to be ON target, but they don't necessarily have to be accurate to the point of hitting and killing the target either to achieve suppression. You're also putting words in my mouth with your comment about "firing off 50 rounds with the recoil bouncing all over the place should arbitrarily limit anyone's accuracy". I clearly stated in prior posts to use an MMG/LMG in short controlled bursts for effective suppressive fire.

    To reiterate; suppressive fire is the use of fire (direct fire when talking about machine guns, indirect when talking about things like artillery) to suppress - or pin - your enemy. It's not about accuracy or inaccuracy, it's about placing the target in a position where they either keep their head down or they die.

    In video games this is hard to simulate since it's not real life, with adrenaline, fight or flight responses, etc kicking in. The knowledge that you can just respawn if you play impetuously means players don't respect suppressive fire. The aim penalties in BF3/4 was an attempt to legitimize the use of suppressive fire as an in-game tactic.
  • raptorjesus36
    80 postsMember, Battlefield 3, Battlefield 4, Battlefield Hardline, Battlefield, Battlefield 1, Battlefield V Member
    JUJAMAKILL wrote: »
    Because people are asking for something that makes aiming erratic and untrue when they fire on enemies. I don't think it is fair to have to fight against some type of aim pulling mechanic to return fire, when the attacker doesn't. If you are already firing at me, then you have the advantage. Making my aim wobble all over the place in the process isn't realistic or fair..

    I think people are downplaying how devastating being hit by 1 or 2 rounds really is in this game. With how fast the TTK (and yes i am a fan of it) is, you can bet that if i get hit once i am praying i make it as i duck for the nearest cover. Most of the time i know i'm already dead due to the TTD bug, but i still dive. If i am able to poke my head out in between suppressive fire from MMG/LMG's i only need to get hit once to lose a chunk of my health. That is the trade off. The ROF on those weapons coupled with the near laser accuracy of them when fired in burst mode makes it unlikely that only 1 round will hit me, so as soon as i feel that first hit, i'm pulling my head back in. Sure you may have emptied 50 rounds in my direction, but it still only takes 3-4 hits to end me.

    What i am saying here is for any suppressive fire to actually be effective it only needs to be somewhat accurate. I mean, if we are making the argument in regards to realism, is that not what actually makes people keep their head down? If a soldier fires directly into the air above them is that going to keep the enemy from popping their head out? no? Its the threat of bullets whizzing directly over their head that does it. If someone is able to peek out during aggressive fire and take no damage then it is because the suppression is not accurate. I don't believe players should be given an advantage against enemy players for being inaccurate, especially with the speed of this game and the quick TTK. I also don't think holding down the trigger and

    Sorry. first response to this post was a knee jerk reaction. And I never said suppression don't have to be ON target, but they don't necessarily have to be accurate to the point of hitting and killing the target either to achieve suppression. You're also putting words in my mouth with your comment about "firing off 50 rounds with the recoil bouncing all over the place should arbitrarily limit anyone's accuracy". I clearly stated in prior posts to use an MMG/LMG in short controlled bursts for effective suppressive fire.

    To reiterate; suppressive fire is the use of fire (direct fire when talking about machine guns, indirect when talking about things like artillery) to suppress - or pin - your enemy. It's not about accuracy or inaccuracy, it's about placing the target in a position where they either keep their head down or they die.

    In video games this is hard to simulate since it's not real life, with adrenaline, fight or flight responses, etc kicking in. The knowledge that you can just respawn if you play impetuously means players don't respect suppressive fire. The aim penalties in BF3/4 was an well placed mechanic to legitimize the use of suppressive fire as an in-game tactic.

  • TheSacar
    1005 postsMember, Battlefield 3, Battlefield 4, Battlefield Hardline, Battlefield, Battlefield 1, BF1IncursionsAlpha, Battlefield V Member
    No it doesn't. There are other people in the game besides your camping a**. I can't just camp and suppress you the entire time because your teammates are going to see my tracers and start shooting at me. That's the entire point of the battlefield franchise: team work. Your arguing from the point of a lone wolf. Yes, I'll shut down your sniping for a brief period, but it's not an "unfair advantage".

    Oh way to bolster your argument. Calling me a "camping a**" without having any knowledge whatsoever of the way I play the game makes total sense...
    .
    I may play sniper a lot, but that does not mean that I don't play the objectives. According to battlefield tracker I am among the highest 0.6% when it comes to objective score. And that number could be higher if I didn't also fly a lot, since it is quite hard to take flags in a plane.
    Ffs yall anti-suppression supporters are dumb

    "In military science, suppressive fire (commonly called covering fire) is "fire that degrades the performance of an enemy force below the level needed to fulfill its mission".

    Oh, now your calling everyone who has a different opinion dumb? Good job.
    .
    Want me to quote the effects of a 9mm pistol bullet lodged in someones cranium from a medical book? No? This isn't reality. If you want a game that tries to depict WW2 warfare more realistically try Hell Let Lose when its out.
    .
    This is battlefield, a game, so stop trying to beat every argument down with "but mah realism..."
    Seriously, you say that support being able to suppress snipers gives an unfair advantage, but ignore the fact that the support unit has to go prone or find some cover to unfold their bipod and mount theirweapon, take aim, and fire at the target. 90% of the time, the support unit is going to get picked off before they even get to take aim. All of that is perfectly fine. It's fair and balanced. However if the support gunner is already in position, spots a soldier, and starts shooting at them, THE SOLDIER (especially snipers, considering they are typically at range) SHOULDN'T BE ABLE TO ACCURATELY RETURN FIRE. THAT IS NOT FAIR AND BALANCED. THAT IS DUMB. YOU ARE DUMB IF YOU THINK IT SHOULD BE THAT WAY.

    Edited to say soldier instead of sniper since people wanna cherry pick arguments

    If you are at propper range, you should be able to hit him enough to kill the soldier before he returns fire and kills you. If not, he deserves the win. At long range the sniper should have the upper hand. Yet currently he is also announcing his presence with a miniature sun in his face while everyone else can run around with 3x scopes and not glow like a radioactive marble.
    .
    What the heck is the matter that the thought of a fair fight gives you such a scare that you loudly demand that anytime you shoot at someone his gun should become a useless banana?
    .
    Anything that gives one class the unique ability to degrade others ability to fight back should not be in the game. And in the end it feels to me like that is what you want. An additional way to win firefights as support without actually winning the firefight....
  • raptorjesus36
    80 postsMember, Battlefield 3, Battlefield 4, Battlefield Hardline, Battlefield, Battlefield 1, Battlefield V Member
    TheSacar wrote: »
    No it doesn't. There are other people in the game besides your camping a**. I can't just camp and suppress you the entire time because your teammates are going to see my tracers and start shooting at me. That's the entire point of the battlefield franchise: team work. Your arguing from the point of a lone wolf. Yes, I'll shut down your sniping for a brief period, but it's not an "unfair advantage".

    Oh way to bolster your argument. Calling me a "camping a**" without having any knowledge whatsoever of the way I play the game makes total sense...
    .
    I may play sniper a lot, but that does not mean that I don't play the objectives. According to battlefield tracker I am among the highest 0.6% when it comes to objective score. And that number could be higher if I didn't also fly a lot, since it is quite hard to take flags in a plane.
    Ffs yall anti-suppression supporters are dumb

    "In military science, suppressive fire (commonly called covering fire) is "fire that degrades the performance of an enemy force below the level needed to fulfill its mission".

    Oh, now your calling everyone who has a different opinion dumb? Good job.
    .
    Want me to quote the effects of a 9mm pistol bullet lodged in someones cranium from a medical book? No? This isn't reality. If you want a game that tries to depict WW2 warfare more realistically try Hell Let Lose when its out.
    .
    This is battlefield, a game, so stop trying to beat every argument down with "but mah realism..."
    Seriously, you say that support being able to suppress snipers gives an unfair advantage, but ignore the fact that the support unit has to go prone or find some cover to unfold their bipod and mount theirweapon, take aim, and fire at the target. 90% of the time, the support unit is going to get picked off before they even get to take aim. All of that is perfectly fine. It's fair and balanced. However if the support gunner is already in position, spots a soldier, and starts shooting at them, THE SOLDIER (especially snipers, considering they are typically at range) SHOULDN'T BE ABLE TO ACCURATELY RETURN FIRE. THAT IS NOT FAIR AND BALANCED. THAT IS DUMB. YOU ARE DUMB IF YOU THINK IT SHOULD BE THAT WAY.

    Edited to say soldier instead of sniper since people wanna cherry pick arguments

    If you are at propper range, you should be able to hit him enough to kill the soldier before he returns fire and kills you. If not, he deserves the win. At long range the sniper should have the upper hand. Yet currently he is also announcing his presence with a miniature sun in his face while everyone else can run around with 3x scopes and not glow like a radioactive marble.
    .
    What the heck is the matter that the thought of a fair fight gives you such a scare that you loudly demand that anytime you shoot at someone his gun should become a useless banana?
    .
    Anything that gives one class the unique ability to degrade others ability to fight back should not be in the game. And in the end it feels to me like that is what you want. An additional way to win firefights as support without actually winning the firefight....

    Suppression should be capable by all classes, so no it's not giving one class a unique ability. I've stated that multiple times and you keep ignoring it. I have never once advocated for an unfair fight. I'm the only one advocating for fair and balanced gameplay. As of now, the game is unfairly skewed in a sniper's favor, being able to take hits, and supposedly get "suppressed" but being able to maintain pinpoint accuracy. That's bs, and you GD well know it.
  • TheSacar
    1005 postsMember, Battlefield 3, Battlefield 4, Battlefield Hardline, Battlefield, Battlefield 1, BF1IncursionsAlpha, Battlefield V Member

    Suppression should be capable by all classes, so no it's not giving one class a unique ability. I've stated that multiple times and you keep ignoring it. I have never once advocated for an unfair fight. I'm the only one advocating for fair and balanced gameplay. As of now, the game is unfairly skewed in a sniper's favor, being able to take hits, and supposedly get "suppressed" but being able to maintain pinpoint accuracy. That's bs, and you GD well know it.

    Yes, it is giving certain classes an advantage. Because unless there is a factor balancing out different weapon rates of fire and mag sizes, the class with the highest rate of fire and mag size causes the highest suppression - and that would be support. Also certain classes are much more affected by having their accuracy messed up. A sniper with a bolt action rifle misses his first shot, the support has fired another twenty before he is ready to fire again. Whereas if even five shots of the support which otherwise would have been on target miss, there are sztill plenty the support has before he runs out.

    And there is a very real suppression in game. When I snipe and I am not being shot at, I can line up my shots carefully and take my time to make sure I hit my target. If I am getting shot at, I have to quickscope or dragshoot to have a chance of survival. And with TTD messed up as it is right now chances are I won't even get to do it before I'm dead.
Sign In or Register to comment.