This is by far the most camper friendly Battlefield game to date.

Comments

  • Trokey66
    8169 postsMember, Battlefield 3, Battlefield 4, Battlefield Hardline, Battlefield, Battlefield 1, CTE, Battlefield V Member
    Hawxxeye wrote: »
    Trokey66 wrote: »
    Players will always 'camp' alas, no matter what mechanics are in place.

    That said, BFV's lack of spotting, poor killcam and relatively low TTK certainly makes camping more 'attractive'.

    Couple that with some of the weapon assignments (kills on objective areas while prone for LMG's fir example) and the urge to 'camp' becomes stronger.

    It should be noted however that the line between 'camping' and 'defending' is sometimes subjective.

    You forgot to mention the poor visibility of enemies who blend with the shadows or the rocks as well as the footsteps volume

    It certainly doesn't help.....
  • MrClev3r
    20 postsMember, Battlefield, Battlefield 1, Battlefield V Member
    I'm not sure if I'm the only one, but it feels as though map design doesn't really allow for creative flanking maneuvers or just maneuverability in general. Most maps seem to funnel players towards a head-to-head engagements with very limited passages that are easily defended by just a single squad or even half a squad. It seemed like BF1 forced defenders to spread themselves out more with the enemy able to flank from above, below, or on ground level. BFV maps seem to be much more... bland. With most maps having only surface level access to objectives. That compounded with the addition of MMG's that are very effective at not just suppressing an enemy, but spotting them as well makes it harder for attackers to effectively push the objective. It just seems like more often then not, the maps force the players to rely on brute force to try and break through an objective rather than give ways for the attackers to attack the enemy from different angles and force them to defend multiple points on the map.
  • LinkZeppeloyd
    770 postsMember, Battlefield 3, Battlefield 4, Battlefield, Battlefield 1, Battlefield V Member
    20200sfly wrote: »
    in my nearly 300 hours of playing i learned that if you get camped and die, you didnt stay with your TEAM. dont go solo, you'll regret it.
    just go together, get the refrag, revive and thats it, camper dead!

    I too am frustrated with the amount of camping and extra fast ttk that leaves no time for a reaction to being insta killed by campers proning it out or being shot from the back. Call me casual but I am about having enough with the game after 50-60 hrs.

    Guess semi hard-core is what dice wanted but it's not that fun for me.

    I agree with you soldier. I guess I'm a casual too because I like to play a video game to have fun, not play a "war simulator". Any attempt to run in the open is immediately met by sniper bullets and prone bipod support.

    I know, I know, u can't move in the open. I get it, but thats why everyone camps and the game is so boring. Even those who want to play aggressive have to camp to try to shoot those why camp. It's a silly cycle of boring and frustration.

    Move in cover. Stick with your squad. Use smoke nades. Use vehicles. Learn the maps a bit.

    That’s it. It’s not hardcore. It also not Metro. It’s what Battlefield was before DICE consolized it with BF3.
  • Hawxxeye
    5184 postsMember, Battlefield 3, Battlefield 4, Battlefield Hardline, Battlefield, Battlefield 1, CTE, BF1IncursionsAlpha, Battlefield V Member
    20200sfly wrote: »
    in my nearly 300 hours of playing i learned that if you get camped and die, you didnt stay with your TEAM. dont go solo, you'll regret it.
    just go together, get the refrag, revive and thats it, camper dead!

    I too am frustrated with the amount of camping and extra fast ttk that leaves no time for a reaction to being insta killed by campers proning it out or being shot from the back. Call me casual but I am about having enough with the game after 50-60 hrs.

    Guess semi hard-core is what dice wanted but it's not that fun for me.

    I agree with you soldier. I guess I'm a casual too because I like to play a video game to have fun, not play a "war simulator". Any attempt to run in the open is immediately met by sniper bullets and prone bipod support.

    I know, I know, u can't move in the open. I get it, but thats why everyone camps and the game is so boring. Even those who want to play aggressive have to camp to try to shoot those why camp. It's a silly cycle of boring and frustration.

    Move in cover. Stick with your squad. Use smoke nades. Use vehicles. Learn the maps a bit.

    That’s it. It’s not hardcore. It also not Metro. It’s what Battlefield was before DICE consolized it with BF3.

    Another problem. Not every class has the smoke nades. This is an outrage.
  • UsainskiSemperFi
    519 postsMember, Battlefield 3, Battlefield 4, Battlefield, Battlefield 1, Battlefield V Member
    edited December 2018
    when i get killed by a camper i get frustrated , but after a second or two, i feel fine cuz i did this too, A-LOT :smiley: other things frustrate me more, like one frame death, and bad bipod.
  • 20200sfly
    353 postsMember, Battlefield, Battlefield 1, Battlefield V Member
    20200sfly wrote: »
    in my nearly 300 hours of playing i learned that if you get camped and die, you didnt stay with your TEAM. dont go solo, you'll regret it.
    just go together, get the refrag, revive and thats it, camper dead!

    I too am frustrated with the amount of camping and extra fast ttk that leaves no time for a reaction to being insta killed by campers proning it out or being shot from the back. Call me casual but I am about having enough with the game after 50-60 hrs.

    Guess semi hard-core is what dice wanted but it's not that fun for me.

    I agree with you soldier. I guess I'm a casual too because I like to play a video game to have fun, not play a "war simulator". Any attempt to run in the open is immediately met by sniper bullets and prone bipod support.

    I know, I know, u can't move in the open. I get it, but thats why everyone camps and the game is so boring. Even those who want to play aggressive have to camp to try to shoot those why camp. It's a silly cycle of boring and frustration.

    Move in cover. Stick with your squad. Use smoke nades. Use vehicles. Learn the maps a bit.

    That’s it. It’s not hardcore. It also not Metro. It’s what Battlefield was before DICE consolized it with BF3.

    Thanks. I appreciate the advice.

    What happens in this situation is we just talk past each other. I understand how we are "supposed" to play. In the end, one man's boring camp fest in another man's awesome tactical shooter.

    The open market has spoken as illustrated by the sales figures.

    Good luck soldier.
  • Loqtrall
    12020 postsMember, Battlefield 3, Battlefield 4, Battlefield Hardline, Battlefield, Battlefield 1, CTE, Battlefield V Member
    MrClev3r wrote: »
    I'm not sure if I'm the only one, but it feels as though map design doesn't really allow for creative flanking maneuvers or just maneuverability in general. Most maps seem to funnel players towards a head-to-head engagements with very limited passages that are easily defended by just a single squad or even half a squad. It seemed like BF1 forced defenders to spread themselves out more with the enemy able to flank from above, below, or on ground level. BFV maps seem to be much more... bland. With most maps having only surface level access to objectives. That compounded with the addition of MMG's that are very effective at not just suppressing an enemy, but spotting them as well makes it harder for attackers to effectively push the objective. It just seems like more often then not, the maps force the players to rely on brute force to try and break through an objective rather than give ways for the attackers to attack the enemy from different angles and force them to defend multiple points on the map.

    I don't really feel the same way about flanking. My entire playstyle could be defined by flanking, I'll take HUGE diverging paths on a flank just to get up behind enemies - like flanking around the entire northwestern side of Twisted Steel from D to get up behind enemies at B while avoiding armor on the way (unless I'm Assault).

    If anything I'd say most of BF5s maps lack very effective direct flanking routes, aside from maybe Rotterdam or Devastation. For instance, there are good but situational flanking routes on Hamada, but most of them on foot take a while to pull off because of how openly the map is designed.

    One good example of a flank people rarely use is swimming in the water between B and D on Rotterdam, which can effectively let you pass by tons of enemies completely unseen. It may take a minute or two to swim from one side to the other, but I've done it countless times and the reward on that flank pays out 9 times out of 10. I can't tell you how many tanks I've destroyed on that flank at D while they try to resupply. Nobody sees it coming because nobody really utilizes it.
  • Trokey66
    8169 postsMember, Battlefield 3, Battlefield 4, Battlefield Hardline, Battlefield, Battlefield 1, CTE, Battlefield V Member
    trip1ex wrote: »
    Trokey66 wrote: »
    It should be noted however that the line between 'camping' and 'defending' is sometimes subjective.

    yeah there's nothing wrong with camping per se.

    IT's just that for some of us a game gets too boring and feels like work if it's too easy to camp. It becomes a chore to weed out the campers then. It makes you have to play more campy too because of how powerful campy play is.

    For me my eyes glaze over at the thought of trying to find the enemy on some of these maps. On the C flag on Navrik, for example, it was like ok there are 57 hiding places here. The game wants to me to act like Swat and go room to room and building to building in this flag zone and that feels like too much work given the 57 hiding spots. It just doesn't seem to fit in well with what makes BF BF to me. There's too much micro there for a game that is more macro focused.

    IF the game was only that C flag zone and there was no respawning and it was a clear out the flag zone and win game then I think their decisions would work a lot better. It wouldn't be a BF game still. It would be R6. But it would all make more sense. What becomes annoying and repetitive in BF doing that over and over for 25 minutes becomes tense and exciting in a 5 minute round where if you're dead then it's game over. At least that's the way it seems to me. Too much minutiae in BFV.

    Don't disagree but this is where the lack of spotting really hits home.

    I am getting used to no doritos so their return is not essential however, the current 'spotting' could do with a tweak.

    Currently, when you 'spot', the marker is placed on the first solid object in your line of sight. Unfortunately, this is often NOT where the enemy is.

    I would like you see the marker actually fall exactly where the enemy is. If he stays there, he is effectively spotted. If he moves, the marker stays where it is.
  • darkkterror
    33 postsMember, Battlefield 3, Battlefield 4, Battlefield Hardline, Battlefield, Battlefield 1, Battlefield V Member
    I've come across multiple instances where 2 (or more) players are camping in like exactly the same spot. I've turned a corner, killed an enemy that was cmaping there, only to get shot by another player that was in that very same spot. I'm talking to the extent that I initially couldn't even tell that there were 2 players there because they were right on top of each other.

    It's almost like Xzibit heard that we liked campers.
  • OLDSKOOL1908
    169 postsMember, Battlefield 3, Battlefield 4, Battlefield Hardline, Battlefield, Battlefield 1, Battlefield V Member
    I am a agressive fps player, in bf5 it is almost impossible to go agressive because you die to fast by campers and even players with shotguns from 100 yards away
  • 20200sfly
    353 postsMember, Battlefield, Battlefield 1, Battlefield V Member
    I am a agressive fps player, in bf5 it is almost impossible to go agressive because you die to fast by campers and even players with shotguns from 100 yards away

    Yep.

    Cue condescending guy to give u advice on how to play the game in 3...2...1...
  • Loqtrall
    12020 postsMember, Battlefield 3, Battlefield 4, Battlefield Hardline, Battlefield, Battlefield 1, CTE, Battlefield V Member
    I am a agressive fps player, in bf5 it is almost impossible to go agressive because you die to fast by campers and even players with shotguns from 100 yards away

    That's not my experience at all, really. I'm pretty aggressive, so much so that my squad mates will often remark how I never stop running around, and I do pretty well. Just went 57-9 in a round of Domination running around like Rambo with an MP28, it was awesome.
  • parkingbrake
    3202 postsMember, Battlefield 3, Battlefield 4, Battlefield, Battlefield 1, Battlefield V Member
    Loqtrall wrote: »
    I don't get the complaints about campers. I've seen just as many campers in other BF games, specifically earlier titles before the Frostbite era. I also don't get how DICE are supposed to alleviate it considering its essentially a player behavior issue, not a game design issue. All shooters, regardless of map design, player count, ttk, etc, have campers. Bf1 had the slowest ttk in recent memory and there were campers all over that game.

    I think the issue is more with people acting like solo Rambo in a game where weapons are considerably more deadly than past iterations of BF. Just my opinion.
    Good analysis. They want to run around hipfiring everyone they see and since that's a risky thing to do in BFV they're not happy that their headless-chicken tactics aren't working. Aside from which there are plenty of high-mobility players who are doing very well despite the TTK, they get kills because they move to where their opponent doesn't expect them to be so the short TTK works for them. Another solution to "campers" is having a good Medic in your squad, not just for the revives but for that smoke grenade launcher which is a force multiplier when used to cover movement. But if someone insists on popping up in the same spot over and over in the expectation of beating some guy who has an LMG on a bipod, well, there is always coming to the Forum to complain about campers--apparently that is easier than adapting to a new game.

    Your comments about the netcode are right on the mark. It is astonishing to me that BFV's network performance is actually worse than previous titles. At times I think DICE is more interested in the artistic side of game design and doesn't pay enough attention to the technical side. I remember when DICE LA and VIsceral had to be brought in to fix BF4, and some of the problems were similar, e.g. "shot around corners syndrome" which is happening again in BFV. This is the single biggest issue in BFV for me, all the other bugs and poor design decisions pale in comparison to this.
  • Chubzdoomer
    1397 postsMember, Battlefield 3, Battlefield 4, Battlefield, Battlefield 1, CTE, Battlefield V Member
    Ne0tax wrote: »
    well, maybe Dice will finally notice the game is going in the wrong direction by the player numbers/sales numbers

    They already did and tried to fix it but the forum dwellers went mental about 1 extra bullet without giving dice a chance to balance the weapons after the ttk change.

    I have never seen such a ridiculous over reaction in all my years visiting battlelog/forums.

    So damn true. DICE was on the right track.
  • Loqtrall
    12020 postsMember, Battlefield 3, Battlefield 4, Battlefield Hardline, Battlefield, Battlefield 1, CTE, Battlefield V Member
    MarkFury67 wrote: »
    Somebody does not recall the rooftop campers and hill humpers of BF4. This one doesn't even come close.

    ^^^^

    Exactly my point. The BF series has always been full of campers regardless of how the games are designed. Complaining about campers is essentially a forum tradition at this point.

    I think the actual issue is the lack of the ability to scan the horizon, spam a button, and have any enemy with his elbow sticking out of cover exposed via a red dot put over thier head - and how strongly people depended on that mechanic to make up for thier lack of situational awareness.

    It makes the same campers we've always had seem "worse", I guess.
This discussion has been closed.