Support (MMG) is now NERFED back to the stone age in BF5

Comments

  • Khomrad_Dredge
    51 postsMember, Battlefield 3, Battlefield 4, Battlefield, Battlefield 1, Battlefield V Member
    b2tchwood wrote: »
    I don’t see it as being broken though, just a deterrent. All battlefield players know that at some point your beloved gun is going to get a tweak. You just have to hope and pray it’s minor and for the better.

    Personally I’m seeing a large increase in LMG usage and bipodded weapons. This coincides with the much slower and duller gameplay that people are complaining about. I quite agree with @DonSharkito in his points about battlefield being an arcadey shooter, it always has been. But at the same time it does cater for those who are not able to play at the same level as those more aggressive objective players. However, it’s evident that it’s become far far too easy to play a reserved game in battlefield and profit massively. That is not battlefield at all.

    In the words of Pixel Enemy who made one of the best battlefield instructional videos to date:

    “your teammates need you to balance cowaring like a little p**sy with running out into the open and taking ground or objectives when necessary. When you need to take over a building, advance on an enemy or sacrifice yourself to blow up a high value target... DO IT! If things go well someone will revive you, if not.... they’ll see you on the other side”


    I've seen that gameplay before usually ends with a bunch a assaults and recons standing in a bottle neck shooting at each other for 30 minutes without accomplishing anything.
    Even less than a support who tries to keep you from being back capped by the few Assaults with enough brains cells to go around the meat grinder (your welcome)
  • b2tchwood
    1073 postsMember, Battlefield 3, Battlefield 4, Battlefield Hardline, Battlefield, Battlefield 1, CTE, Battlefield V Member
    b2tchwood wrote: »
    I don’t see it as being broken though, just a deterrent. All battlefield players know that at some point your beloved gun is going to get a tweak. You just have to hope and pray it’s minor and for the better.

    Personally I’m seeing a large increase in LMG usage and bipodded weapons. This coincides with the much slower and duller gameplay that people are complaining about. I quite agree with @DonSharkito in his points about battlefield being an arcadey shooter, it always has been. But at the same time it does cater for those who are not able to play at the same level as those more aggressive objective players. However, it’s evident that it’s become far far too easy to play a reserved game in battlefield and profit massively. That is not battlefield at all.

    In the words of Pixel Enemy who made one of the best battlefield instructional videos to date:

    “your teammates need you to balance cowaring like a little p**sy with running out into the open and taking ground or objectives when necessary. When you need to take over a building, advance on an enemy or sacrifice yourself to blow up a high value target... DO IT! If things go well someone will revive you, if not.... they’ll see you on the other side”


    I've seen that gameplay before usually ends with a bunch a assaults and recons standing in a bottle neck shooting at each other for 30 minutes without accomplishing anything.
    Even less than a support who tries to keep you from being back capped by the few Assaults with enough brains cells to go around the meat grinder (your welcome)
    I’m against the sheep mentality more than anyone, Im always the one breaking through. But at the same time this brings home the point, why are there meat grinders? Because people don’t want to play hide and seek on the battlefield and when too many “tactical” players are on the battlefield it makes for a dull game. Usually one of those that times out because so many players are sitting of flags afraid to push.
  • GuangFuZhongGuo
    410 postsMember, Battlefield 3, Battlefield 4, Battlefield, Battlefield 1, Battlefield V Member
    edited January 2019
    Sixclicks wrote: »
    They definitely favor snipers. The most overpowered class in the game.

    Lol. Nice joke. The recon class is weak. Especially bolt actions. In fact, they're they weakest they've been in the BF series. You haven't even played the class at all.

    In reality, they favor assault, the most overpowered class in the game, followed by support, then recon, and lastly medic.

    I agree that supports with LMG are better than recons. Almost as good as assaults without explosives.

    But I also think that supports with MMG are definitely at the bottom of the pyramid.
  • GuangFuZhongGuo
    410 postsMember, Battlefield 3, Battlefield 4, Battlefield, Battlefield 1, Battlefield V Member
    edited January 2019
    Sixclicks wrote: »
    They definitely favor snipers. The most overpowered class in the game.

    Lol. Nice joke. The recon class is weak. Especially bolt actions. In fact, they're they weakest they've been in the BF series. You haven't even played the class at all.

    In reality, they favor assault, the most overpowered class in the game, followed by support, then recon, and lastly medic.

    I agree that supports with LMG are better than recons.

    But I also think that supports with MMG are definitely at the bottom of the pyramid.

    They arent true support if not humping a MMG

    Fine then. True Supports at the bottom.
  • Sixclicks
    5075 postsMember, Battlefield 3, Battlefield 4, Battlefield, Battlefield 1, Battlefield V Member
    edited January 2019
    Austacker wrote: »
    Sixclicks wrote: »
    They definitely favor snipers. The most overpowered class in the game.

    Lol. Nice joke. The recon class is weak. Especially bolt actions. In fact, they're they weakest they've been in the BF series. You haven't even played the class at all.

    In reality, they favor assault, the most overpowered class in the game, followed by support, then recon, and lastly medic.

    I actually agree with Recon being in need of a tweak, but it's also contextual as well.

    The difficulty in playing Recon is the bullet velocity, hitting targets on the move takes skill to begin with, but often they're not one shot kill either.

    Unless you're talking Recon vs Support MMG of course.

    The MMG player is prone - keeping still - only head hitbox showing. Eaaaaaaaasy pickings for Snipers sitting 7 miles back from the action.

    That's why if you main MMGs, the Recon is your bane. One shot kill nearly every time.

    There's a little rock / paper / scissors going on here which confuses the conversation somewhat.

    If we're going to put Support in 2nd place, I'd argue that's limited to the run and gun setup. KE7 and FG-42 options, perhaps lesser LMGs.

    MMGs however should absolutely NOT be in that '2nd place' standing with DICE.

    I'd put MMGs after Recon for sure in dead LAST place.

    • MMGs need to be prone to be effective - Snipers dont
    • MMGs need a bipod deployed to be effective - Snipers dont
    • MMGs have iron based 1x sites / holos only - Snipers get super duper ranged sites
    • MMGs cannot one shot kill anyone or anything at any range - Snipers can
    • MMGs are only effective at mid range - Snipers can reach out and touch you easily from across the entire map, one shot
    • MMGs can 'spot' (when shooting) - Snipers get a gadget that does the same thing without ringing the dinner bell and letting everyone know where you are

    There's literally no other class/spec in the game with so many restrictions against it to be effective or even functional as the MMG - even Recon.

    We all know Assault is ridiculously OP and DICE are crap at balancing it. I agree Medic struggled, but has recently been buffed decently. Being able to heal and toss smoke as well as reach out at mid range now with full auto weapons has given them some decent viability.

    Recon yeah, needs love and encouragement to engage more at closer ranges. There's a reason why every open map looks like a paparazzi stake out with scope glint everywhere. If sniper was indeed THAT bad, no one would play it but alas, it's as popular (and obnoxious) as ever.

    Now Support LMGs I agree are very strong. if you 'run and gun' support with the KE7, you're heading up there with Assault in the DICE party stakes. Self ammo supply, great run and gun weapons, excellent hipfire engagement in CQC up to mid range makes them flexible and strongly viable

    BUT

    That's NOT MMG. MMGs are hamstrung in nearly every way and are almost completely useless for the role in which they're designed.

    I mean, that is the one thing recon, particularly with bolt actions, actually excels with... taking out stationary targets. It's really the only thing bolt actions are good for unless you're on a Stodeh level of skill. Even then, he still can do better with other weapon types than the class he has vastly more experience with.

    And I was referring to support LMGs. They're beastly. I don't have an issue with MMGs getting some buffs. I just do not and will not support accuracy affecting suppression.

    All that said, I am still of the opinion that the game would be better off without the whole current MMG playstyle. I would have rather had MMGs be much like LMGs with less accuracy and control in exchange for superior DPS. This means also allowing them to be aimed with while not using the bipod. Is that realistic? Of course not. Neither was running around with the larger machine guns in BF1 though which I actually found fun to play with. They didn't require the bipod to perform well, but they were certainly better when bipoded. The issue then would be finding a balance of stats so that an MMG capable of attaining 1200 rounds per minute didn't become incredibly overpowered since you could use it on the move.

    Weapons like the LMG 08/18 and the Parabellum machine gun were some of my favorites to use in BF1. The Parabellum is one such example of a weapon with very high DPS, but difficult to control recoil. It could still be used effectively on the move, but it wasn't easy. And it definitely still encouraged bipod use to maximize its effectiveness. You weren't forced to play defensively or camp in some random spot.
    narnold700 wrote: »
    Oh come on Medic is not as in bad a spot as recon since the last patch. Right now recon is hands down the weakest class in the game.

    I put Recon ahead of medic only because the SLRs on recon give you a lot more ranged viability than you can get as medic. They're still not as good as assault's semi autos or support's LMGs though.

    When it comes to bolt actions, I would say they're weaker than SMGs particularly if you're someone who likes to PTFO. Bolt actions in this game perform a very similar role to MMGs. They require a more defensive sedentary playstyle to really do well with. You need to avoid being shot at at all costs because everything else will most likely kill you before you can line up that headshot. Especially if the enemy is actively engaging you and strafing back and forth with the lack of inertia when it comes to movement in this game.
  • Sixclicks
    5075 postsMember, Battlefield 3, Battlefield 4, Battlefield, Battlefield 1, Battlefield V Member
    edited January 2019
    Austacker wrote: »
    • MMGs need to be prone to be effective - Snipers dont
    • MMGs need a bipod deployed to be effective - Snipers dont
    • MMGs have iron based 1x sites / holos only - Snipers get super duper ranged sites
    • MMGs cannot one shot kill anyone or anything at any range - Snipers can
    • MMGs are only effective at mid range - Snipers can reach out and touch you easily from across the entire map, one shot
    • MMGs can 'spot' (when shooting) - Snipers get a gadget that does the same thing without ringing the dinner bell and letting everyone know where you are

    In regards to you list, MMGs have some advantages over bolt actions or similarities too.
    • MMGs are a lot more effective against multiple targets. Due to the slow rate of fire of bolt actions, engaging more than one or two opponents is usually a death sentence.
    • You cannot be effective with body shots while using a bolt action. MMGs are effective regardless of where you're hitting your target.
    • Adding to that, the most rapid firing bolt action, with the rate of fire upgrade, takes 714 ms to fire 2 shots to land a kill. And that's assuming you instantly scope back in and fire after chambering the second round. While the slowest firing MMG on the other hand can fire 8 shots in that same time period. The fastest firing MMG, with the rate of fire upgrade, can get off 14 shots within 700 ms.
    • In regards to spotting, MMGs really aren't that different from bolt actions. The best method of spotting with bolt actions is also shooting your target while using the Sniper specialization. While you can also use the spotting scope, you leave yourself completely defenseless while doing so since you cannot shoot while using it.
    • The higher magnification optics of the recon class come with the major disadvantage of having a giant and bright glowing light on your face for everyone in the map to see and instantly find your location. It's like being permanently spotted the moment you aim your weapon.
    • Bolt actions have a lot more range than MMGs, but MMGs are a lot more effective at close and medium ranges. It is not at all easy to line up a headshot on a target in close quarters with a bolt action. Especially if they're shooting back and strafing your shots.
    • Bolt actions, much like MMGs, are most effective when used as an ambushing weapon.
  • Khomrad_Dredge
    51 postsMember, Battlefield 3, Battlefield 4, Battlefield, Battlefield 1, Battlefield V Member
    b2tchwood wrote: »
    b2tchwood wrote: »
    I don’t see it as being broken though, just a deterrent. All battlefield players know that at some point your beloved gun is going to get a tweak. You just have to hope and pray it’s minor and for the better.

    Personally I’m seeing a large increase in LMG usage and bipodded weapons. This coincides with the much slower and duller gameplay that people are complaining about. I quite agree with @DonSharkito in his points about battlefield being an arcadey shooter, it always has been. But at the same time it does cater for those who are not able to play at the same level as those more aggressive objective players. However, it’s evident that it’s become far far too easy to play a reserved game in battlefield and profit massively. That is not battlefield at all.

    In the words of Pixel Enemy who made one of the best battlefield instructional videos to date:

    “your teammates need you to balance cowaring like a little p**sy with running out into the open and taking ground or objectives when necessary. When you need to take over a building, advance on an enemy or sacrifice yourself to blow up a high value target... DO IT! If things go well someone will revive you, if not.... they’ll see you on the other side”


    I've seen that gameplay before usually ends with a bunch a assaults and recons standing in a bottle neck shooting at each other for 30 minutes without accomplishing anything.
    Even less than a support who tries to keep you from being back capped by the few Assaults with enough brains cells to go around the meat grinder (your welcome)
    I’m against the sheep mentality more than anyone, Im always the one breaking through. But at the same time this brings home the point, why are there meat grinders? Because people don’t want to play hide and seek on the battlefield and when too many “tactical” players are on the battlefield it makes for a dull game. Usually one of those that times out because so many players are sitting of flags afraid to push.

    I feel its more like its been several years and we still need to tell people to PTFO.
    I get your point, some one needs to PUSH (smartly and avoid the bullet tunnels) to push the lines.
    At the same time some one needs to DEFEND so your lines don't get pushed as well, thats what I feel supports do hold the back objectives so everyone else can (hopefully) push the fronts. Doesn't help that most of our weapons seemed tuned to that style of gameplay. Weapons that fire best when stationary, increased speed to building fortifications Maybe you see some minor success as a flanker with the shotguns (until Dice decides to take those away from us or make them useless) but it still plays better in the crowded confines of an objective area.
    In the end this nerf on the MMGs feels like supports are being punished for doing the jobs hey were corralled into, at the same time people hate on KE7 supports cause that gun could allow them the ability to be more offensive. (Even I hate that damn weapon cause it feels like the HelReigel mark 2)
  • DonCleaveOne
    71 postsMember, Battlefield, Battlefield 1, Battlefield V Member
    I dont get the hate about camping mmg users, its even rarer then cheaters these days...
  • Thacyoon
    90 postsMember, Battlefield 3, Battlefield 4, Battlefield, Battlefield 1, Battlefield V Member
    I dont get the hate about camping mmg users, its even rarer then cheaters these days...

    Me either. I think all the run-and-gun-around-and-around-in-circles-from-objective-to-objective hate MMG's. All MMG users are forced to "camp" to use the weapon...
  • Austacker
    444 postsMember, Battlefield 3, Battlefield 4, Battlefield, Battlefield 1, CTE, Battlefield V Member
    I dont get the hate about camping mmg users, its even rarer then cheaters these days...

    Because somewhere in the not too distant past, the culture of the playerbase surrounding this game changed.

    Part of it was DICE continually diluting the combat experience into a generic run and gun shooter, the other part was attracting those players to the franchise from other games that did promote this style of play as 'correct'.

    In the end, you've got a 'tactical' experience in Battlefield where everyone runs around like chickens with their heads cut off, the measure of worth/valued contribution is boiled down to KDR or SPM and the game mechanics are built to punish slow, methodical play - and reward zerg/run and gun play.

    I firmly believe this is a fundamental reason why so many of the long term players have left the game and/or refuse to buy it now the game is out there they're curious as to how it turned out.

    This experience we have today isn't Battlefield. It's COD rubbish. If you love to run and gun, life is great. If you play Support MMG / Medic / Recon - this game just isn't fun and that's the sad truth.
  • The_BERG_366
    2582 postsMember, Battlefield 3, Battlefield 4, Battlefield Hardline, Battlefield, Battlefield 1, CTE, Battlefield V Member
    Cerben1 wrote: »
    Cerben1 wrote: »
    Thacyoon wrote: »
    Sixclicks wrote: »
    Thacyoon wrote: »
    Yes, let's keep this thread civilized.

    I am the OP, and I want DICE to notice this thread and implement fixes for the support class and the MMG mechanic. The players that loves to run-and-gun must accept that not everyone want to play like them.

    Support and the MMG mechanics encourage a defensive playstyle. Right now the MMG's are way to weak for it's intended role in BF.

    The ultimate fix for all problems with Battlefield 5:

    1. Reduce the recoil when prone and bipoded with a MMG, especially the MG-42 needs some serious love.
    2. Remove the bipod from all weapons when prone and on the back.
    3. Implement a mechanic so that players that are hit with any weapon will experience a swaying sight for about 1 second (this number must be fine tuned).
    4. Implement a stronger "swaying sight" experience when hit by a MMG.

    The effects and duration must be fine tuned with testing. This change will affect all classes, and the game pace will slow down a bit. The twitchy left/right/left/right (while taking damage) headshooters will be dealt with. This will also indirectly give all weapons "suppression effect", and the MMG's will get a little stronger "suppression effect".

    1 and 2: that's fine. I don't really think they need a recoil reduction though. But I also wouldn't be against a small recoil reduction.

    3 and 4: no. With such low TTKs, there's no reason to throw off players' aim when you can just kill them in less than a third of a second. Plus, again, such a change would disproportionately negatively affect single action and semi auto weapons while more forgiving of inaccuracy rapid fire automatic weapons would benefit from it. It would only serve to throw off the balancing of the game.

    Ok, fair enough, lets adjust the "ultimate fix" list:

    1. Reduce the recoil when prone and bipoded with a MMG, especially the MG-42 needs some serious love.
    2. Remove the bipod from all weapons when prone and on the back.
    3. Implement a mechanic so that players that are hit by a MMG will experience minor swaying sight for 2 seconds. If more hits lands before the swaying effect is finished , the duration and swaying increases. (2 second is just an example, this numer must be fine tuned)

    Yes?

    The MMG's really need some love. The MMG user is locked into a fixed position unable to move.

    yes please... love to be unable to snipe a prone mmg camper at the end of the map just because he fired a few bullets at me. that system is even better than bf1's supression where your sniper rifle was more effectively used as a blunt melee weapon than as a shooting platform when some random guy somewhere decided to shoot at you.

    regarding mmgs in general: mmgs are super accurate super high dps guns with incredible killing potential. generally, the higher the rof the higher the average recoil per shot (which makes sense)...
    you use a mg42 with a firerate upgrade and then complain about recoil? if that thing didn't have a lot of recoil what would be the point of all the other mmgs in the game? if the recoil is too much for you then use a different mmg (for example a vgo without fire rate upgrade).
    you don't need the 1200rpm most of the time anyways. the part of the effective time it takes you from seeing an enemy until killing them that you actually use to shoot is minor on a gun as potent as an mmg. taking into consideration the decreased accuracy through high recoil that u experience makes it even more clear that a lower rpm mmg would be a lot more effective.

    anyways mmgs aren't too weak... they are incredibly effective at what they are supposed to do. however the problem is that mmgs mains seem to think that mmgs should be good in any situation and hence claim that snipers should be nerfed and all kinds of other nonsense. People aren't complaining that sniper rifles suck in cqb, it's just obvious.
    the same actually applies to the smg's and medic mains... they just seem to think thst their choice of class and weapon has to be effective at all ranged which is ridiculous (even though promoted by dice in recent years by the absolute superiority of assault rifles in bf4 and especially bf3 and bfh). but that shouldn't be the case. the weapons all excell in very specific situations (with the exception of ARs/dmrs... again... even though not as bad as in bf3/4). mmgs require very good positioning to be really effective with... that's the price you pay for the exceptional fire power. pay the price or switch to other gun types, but don't try to make it look like they are bad just because you don't like the way they are balanced.

    Dear mr sniper

    as im sure you play recon the problem is not so mutch the recoil on 1200 rpm its so that we are able to land all those rounds that kill the player as we do less dmg then moste atm whit mgs it feels like i kill ppl on furter range whit smgs then mmg atm and i do kill snipers as medic as well but i prefer Assault so i can kill 2 or 3 a mag. the point is that bipoded we cant use recoil gains in the spec tree as they are wort zero. after we get our glitchy bipod in the ground and can start ADS. and when we do and starts to fire the gun then is when the real fun starts. we lose bipod and ADS and we get more recoil then any other gun in game if we are on a even floor we can start to slide all over the place cose ther is some fortifications that cold be built ther or an tank died ther and then mr run and gun sniper that plays aggressiv 150m from the objective sees our tracers and manneg to aim in ther and shoots 2 times to score an headshoot as for now recons rifles are easy to hit stuff whit on the move. mmgs for now the low rpm mgs are not good at all ither just as buggy but if you shoot mr agressiv recon whit them he will turn that agression on you and some times he kills you while your shooting at him even if you are hitting his head 3 times he still is going to kill you whit one bullet and if the mg spray is werry wide that means that the bullets are going to hit not in his head just around him and eventuly in his head agen take the recon slrs 2 headshots for one kill(hilarius stuff) the mg is by far worse as we have random bipod and a bigger recoil whit an suported weapon. actuly the recoil is less on 1200 rpm then on the low rpm setting as i think we are the only class that have random bullet diviation atm (not 100% sure we have that but it feels like it as after this lone play time whit hem and the recoil paterns i cant learn. the Assault guns i know the patterns on by mussel memory and i have not even a 1/3 playing Assault ) lmg are laser rifles and mgs are some random shooting stuff after the patch. but i gess we are going to play run and gun sniperfield 5 for a while and dream that a new COD will come and the cod players will go ther and we get ppl that know what we Battlefield players want or some thing. so im going to go whit the flow and play Assault whit A,D spam strafe and run and gun and when im tierd of that im gone get my 4e recon bolt action gold as well cose in only got one left the ones they call SLRs i only use when they are on daily assignment medic well same ther only when i have daily assignment.

    see you on the sniper run and gun field

    you act like I never played with an mmg... I did and still do sometimes, no reason to write all of this. to point out the nonsense:
    - random bullet deviation: lmgs and especially mmgs are the most accurate full automatic guns in the game... you clearly don't know what you are talking about. maybe check out symthic forum for the stats so you can check this yourself.
    - most recoil in the game? clearly u never played with guns like the suomi or Thompson.
    - less damage: again trash. mmgs do more damage per shot then smgs and assault rifles and same damage as lmgs...

    clearly u don't have a clue of what you are talking about.
    also "run and gun field" lol. this game is less run and gun then bf3, bf4, bfh, and even bf1.... have u been asleep the past couple of years?

    clearly i have played medic and Suomi and Thompson i have some time whit them as they are max lvl in game i have more time whit mmg then any thing ells in game atm


    mg42 Damages: [25.1000003815, 25.0, 20.0, 18.5]
    ADSProneBaseFirstShotMul: 1
    ADSProneBaseMax: 12
    ADSProneBaseMin: 3
    ADSProneBaseSpreadDecCoef: 4.5
    ADSProneBaseSpreadDecExp: 0.75
    ADSProneBaseSpreadDecOffset: 1
    ADSProneBaseSpreadDistExp: 1
    ADSProneBaseSpreadIdleCoef: 0
    ADSProneBaseSpreadIdleExp: 0.25
    ADSProneBaseSpreadIdleOffset: 30
    ADSProneBaseSpreadIdleTime: 0.2
    ADSProneBaseSpreadInc: 0

    ADSCrouchRecoilDecExponent: 0.8
    ADSCrouchRecoilDecFactor: 10
    ADSCrouchRecoilDecFactorNorm: 0.1
    ADSCrouchRecoilDecOffset: 0.001
    ADSCrouchRecoilDuration: 0.033
    ADSCrouchRecoilFirstShotMul: 1
    ADSCrouchRecoilInitialUp: 0.7
    ADSCrouchRecoilLeft: 0.35
    ADSCrouchRecoilRight: -0.35
    ADSCrouchRecoilUp: 0

    Lewisgun Damages [25.1000003815, 25.0, 20.0, 18.5]
    ADSStandBaseFirstShotMul: 1
    ADSStandBaseMax: 5
    ADSStandBaseMin: 0.15*
    ADSStandBaseSpreadDecCoef: 4.5
    ADSStandBaseSpreadDecExp: 0.75
    ADSStandBaseSpreadDecOffset: 1
    ADSStandBaseSpreadDistExp: 1
    ADSStandBaseSpreadIdleCoef: 0
    ADSStandBaseSpreadIdleExp: 0.25
    ADSStandBaseSpreadIdleOffset: 15*
    ADSStandBaseSpreadIdleTime: 0.2
    ADSStandBaseSpreadInc: 0

    ADSProneRecoilDecExponent: 0.8
    ADSProneRecoilDecFactor: 10
    ADSProneRecoilDecFactorNorm: 0.1
    ADSProneRecoilDecOffset: 0.001
    ADSProneRecoilDuration: 0.05
    ADSProneRecoilFirstShotMul: 1
    ADSProneRecoilInitialUp: 0.62
    ADSProneRecoilLeft: 0.225*
    ADSProneRecoilRight: -0.225*
    ADSProneRecoilUp: -0.023* -0.018 (U_Spec_QuickADS,U_Spec_QuickDeploy,U_Spec_ExtendedMagazine,U_Spec_ReducedVRecoil)
    -0.018 (U_Spec_QuickADS,U_Spec_ReducedHRecoil,U_Spec_ImprovedADS_S,U_Spec_ReducedVRecoil)
    -0.018 (U_Spec_FastBullets,U_Spec_QuickDeploy,U_Spec_ExtendedMagazine,U_Spec_ReducedVRecoil)
    -0.018 (U_Spec_FastBullets,U_Spec_ReducedHRecoil,U_Spec_ImprovedADS_S,U_Spec_ReducedVRecoil)


    Thompson Damages [25.1000003815, 25.0, 20.0, 16.6700000763, 14.2899999619, 13.1999998093]

    ADSProneBaseFirstShotMul: 1
    ADSProneBaseMax: 3
    ADSProneBaseMin: 0.2
    ADSProneBaseSpreadDecCoef: 4.5
    ADSProneBaseSpreadDecExp: 0.75
    ADSProneBaseSpreadDecOffset: 0.3
    ADSProneBaseSpreadDistExp: 1
    ADSProneBaseSpreadIdleCoef: 0
    ADSProneBaseSpreadIdleExp: 0.25
    ADSProneBaseSpreadIdleOffset: 6*


    ADSProneBaseSpreadIdleTime: 0.2
    ADSProneBaseSpreadInc: 0.225
    ADSProneRecoilDecExponent: 0.8
    ADSProneRecoilDecFactor: 10
    ADSProneRecoilDecFactorNorm: 0.1
    ADSProneRecoilDecOffset: 0.001
    ADSProneRecoilDuration: 0.05
    ADSProneRecoilFirstShotMul: 1
    ADSProneRecoilInitialUp: 0.7
    ADSProneRecoilLeft: 0.45*
    ADSProneRecoilRight: -0.45*
    ADSProneRecoilUp: 0

    STG-44 Damages: Damages [25.1000003815, 25.0, 20.0, 17.0]
    ADSProneBaseFirstShotMul: 1
    ADSProneBaseMax: 4
    ADSProneBaseMin: 0.1*
    ADSProneBaseSpreadDecCoef: 4.5
    ADSProneBaseSpreadDecExp: 0.75
    ADSProneBaseSpreadDecOffset: 0.3
    ADSProneBaseSpreadDistExp: 1
    ADSProneBaseSpreadIdleCoef: 0
    ADSProneBaseSpreadIdleExp: 0.25
    ADSProneBaseSpreadIdleOffset: 10*
    ADSProneBaseSpreadIdleTime: 0.2
    ADSProneBaseSpreadInc: 0.25

    ADSProneRecoilDecExponent: 0.8
    ADSProneRecoilDecFactor: 10
    ADSProneRecoilDecFactorNorm: 0.1
    ADSProneRecoilDecOffset: 0.001
    ADSProneRecoilDuration: 0.05
    ADSProneRecoilFirstShotMul: 1
    ADSProneRecoilInitialUp: 0.67
    ADSProneRecoilLeft: 0.21*
    ADSProneRecoilRight: -0.21*
    ADSProneRecoilUp: 0

    not that you will prone as a medic and ads but hers the stats and i dont see the big dmg advanteg for MMG as you still need 6 rounds to kill whit them the smg needs 8 on max range so in short a stationary target like an mmg needs an buff comperd to some one that can run and gun strafe A.D spam and whit an bipod that is not working its no advantages just handicapped game play thats why i play Assault now days. might be a different story on console i dont know i have been playing battlefield sins 1942 on pc i dont play on console.

    youre arguing a strawman... I didn't say there is a big damage advantage. I said mmgs and lmgs do more damage per shot then ars and smgs as a reply to you saying that mmgs do "less damage then most". clearly I'm right and this can be observed right through the stats you posted. your recoil and spread argument are also contradicted by the stats you posted.
    mmgs objectively don't need a damage buff... it would in fact be the worst thing one can do.
    console vs pc has nothin to do with this issue btw...
  • S0ckenSchuss
    45 postsMember, Battlefield 3, Battlefield 4, Battlefield, Battlefield 1, Battlefield V Member
    I am also a Supporter Main, and I love my MMGs. Yeah I can hear a lot of "camping" stuff in chat against me, but hey, WHAT CAN I DO ELSE? I can hipfire to alomost everywhere with that guns, but i will never hit something. Its just not a run and gun weapon. and I am sure, all that camper cryers would be cry lots of more rivers, if an mg34 or mg42 would be able to run and gun AND aim while walking. Everyonoe would run with 250 round mag upgrade on the 42 and mow down everyone on his way. Im sure we all dont want to see that!

    My favoruite is the mg34 with 75 round upgrade. its just more precious on mid- / longrange. Mg42 is for defending a Flag in shortrange or against planes if u dont have anything else to do.

    Most important for the MMG gunner of today is, that he know what his role is. Its not to lead a group of soldiers in enemy territory. its also not to lone-wolfing around to capture flags (possible, but not the primary function of MMG soldier)

    His role is about to defend an Area/Flag/whatever. His secondary role is to support an attacking group to give covering fire and/or supression fire.

    While retreating, he also is able to drop some Anti Tank Mines ( I already got silver plate dogtag for kills with AT Mines ;) ) or Anti Person Mines. OR if he is at Frontline and his mates are retrating right towards him, he can give supportfire over their heads at the following enemys.

    Whatever the Situation is, he is "Supporter". Not only for Ammo Crates, also for Supporting Fire. And he is a good defender. He is NOT a good frontline-assault-running-in-and-take-everything-alone-guy.

    And if you know something about WW2, you also know that an MG42 was a damn feared weapon in Axis Hands. Noone would call an MG42-Nest a bunch of noobs and bipod campers in the early 1940's. Be sure about that ;)
  • Austacker
    444 postsMember, Battlefield 3, Battlefield 4, Battlefield, Battlefield 1, CTE, Battlefield V Member
    And if you know something about WW2, you also know that an MG42 was a damn feared weapon in Axis Hands. Noone would call an MG42-Nest a bunch of noobs and bipod campers in the early 1940's. Be sure about that ;)

    I wouldn't confuse 'real life' with this video game. It's anything but.

    The representation of MMGs in this game is a joke compared to real world performance. Think of it as just a really fat, high capacity assault rifle you need to stay still to use.

    Yep - it's that crap.

  • Rattoner
    330 postsMember, Battlefield, Battlefield 1, Battlefield V Member
    The thing I find interesting is how assault are more hardy with solid dps. They are an amalgamation of tanks and DPS in the mmo world.
    If anything support/MMG should be the more hardy class.

    Due to being prone and having zero ability to dodge as an MMG player we should be more hardy, if anything this game gets head shots wrong. Prone should be a harder head shot that someone standing. The idea of being prone is to be under cover.

    Soldiers in the real word would lay down to avoid a head shot, not stand up. But this game has it backwards. Headshots are easier against prone players.

    I don't know what the creative solution is, be that giving support MMG more health, or more durability against head shots (make a normal head shot require two rounds of bullets, not one).

    What I do know is that supports only defense right now comes from their offense, its the only class/spec that plays this way. MMG's need to be much more robust than they are now. They should have unmatched accuracy, and range, and rate of fire. If a player stands in front of an MMG, they should be mowed down before they other player gets a chance to shoot...currently this is not the case.

    ultimately though the fundamental problem is trying to educate the community into understanding that an OP MMG does not mean OP in and of itself when you consider the 100% immobile state to use that gun. Because most people wont look at the topic objectively and instead just run to the forums to complain, balancing MMG's is going to be tough.

    Dice just needs to simply come out and tell the community in a patch note or something that the reason the guns are so strong is to counter the fact that they can not be used while being mobile.

  • Thacyoon
    90 postsMember, Battlefield 3, Battlefield 4, Battlefield, Battlefield 1, Battlefield V Member
    edited January 2019
    ShredIron wrote: »
    The thing I find interesting is how assault are more hardy with solid dps. They are an amalgamation of tanks and DPS in the mmo world.
    If anything support/MMG should be the more hardy class.

    Due to being prone and having zero ability to dodge as an MMG player we should be more hardy, if anything this game gets head shots wrong. Prone should be a harder head shot that someone standing. The idea of being prone is to be under cover.

    Soldiers in the real word would lay down to avoid a head shot, not stand up. But this game has it backwards. Headshots are easier against prone players.

    I don't know what the creative solution is, be that giving support MMG more health, or more durability against head shots (make a normal head shot require two rounds of bullets, not one).

    What I do know is that supports only defense right now comes from their offense, its the only class/spec that plays this way. MMG's need to be much more robust than they are now. They should have unmatched accuracy, and range, and rate of fire. If a player stands in front of an MMG, they should be mowed down before they other player gets a chance to shoot...currently this is not the case.

    ultimately though the fundamental problem is trying to educate the community into understanding that an OP MMG does not mean OP in and of itself when you consider the 100% immobile state to use that gun. Because most people wont look at the topic objectively and instead just run to the forums to complain, balancing MMG's is going to be tough.

    Dice just needs to simply come out and tell the community in a patch note or something that the reason the guns are so strong is to counter the fact that they can not be used while being mobile.

    I don't understand why DICE is nerfing Support more and more in each battlefield release. In BF3/4/1 the support class was very fun to play, and I felt it was properly balanced for the role....but in BF5 - and I am talking about the MMG's - not LMG:

    1. No suppression (this is a mega nerf compared to BF3/4/1)
    2. No zoom optics (this is an irritating nerf. The huge recoil will be amplified with zoom optics. If the "core community" deny us 3X - what about 2X Mr. "core community"? I want to shoot at a soldiers, not pixels).
    3. Insane recoil (BF3/4 was laser guns in comparison...played BF1 very little - did not like the old guns...so I don't know about recoil in BF1)
    4. Forced bipod to ADS
    5. I even read that prone players (all the MMG users) takes more spash/explosive damage than a crunched or standing player...man, is this true? That is just...well, not logical - and a MMG nerf!

    The most irritating point is number 2 actually. Why? Why can't the MMG's have at least 2X scope? We should have 3X like all the other guns. 3X is not OP, the sight image will jump all over the place with the current recoil.

    Why all these nerfs to the MMG class? Why even include the MMG - either fix the MMG, og just delete them all and be done with it.
  • Sixclicks
    5075 postsMember, Battlefield 3, Battlefield 4, Battlefield, Battlefield 1, Battlefield V Member
    edited January 2019
    Thacyoon wrote: »
    ShredIron wrote: »
    The thing I find interesting is how assault are more hardy with solid dps. They are an amalgamation of tanks and DPS in the mmo world.
    If anything support/MMG should be the more hardy class.

    Due to being prone and having zero ability to dodge as an MMG player we should be more hardy, if anything this game gets head shots wrong. Prone should be a harder head shot that someone standing. The idea of being prone is to be under cover.

    Soldiers in the real word would lay down to avoid a head shot, not stand up. But this game has it backwards. Headshots are easier against prone players.

    I don't know what the creative solution is, be that giving support MMG more health, or more durability against head shots (make a normal head shot require two rounds of bullets, not one).

    What I do know is that supports only defense right now comes from their offense, its the only class/spec that plays this way. MMG's need to be much more robust than they are now. They should have unmatched accuracy, and range, and rate of fire. If a player stands in front of an MMG, they should be mowed down before they other player gets a chance to shoot...currently this is not the case.

    ultimately though the fundamental problem is trying to educate the community into understanding that an OP MMG does not mean OP in and of itself when you consider the 100% immobile state to use that gun. Because most people wont look at the topic objectively and instead just run to the forums to complain, balancing MMG's is going to be tough.

    Dice just needs to simply come out and tell the community in a patch note or something that the reason the guns are so strong is to counter the fact that they can not be used while being mobile.

    I don't understand why DICE is nerfing Support more and more in each battlefield release. In BF3/4/1 the support class was very fun to play, and I felt it was properly balanced for the role....but in BF5 - and I am talking about the MMG's - not LMG:

    1. No suppression (this is a mega nerf compared to BF3/4/1)
    2. No zoom optics (this is an irritating nerf. The huge recoil will be amplified with zoom optics. If the "core community" deny us 3X - what about 2X Mr. "core community"? I want to shoot at a soldiers, not pixels).
    3. Insane recoil (BF3/4 was laser guns in comparison...played BF1 very little - did not like the old guns...so I don't know about recoil in BF1)
    4. Forced bipod to ADS
    5. I even read that prone players (all the MMG users) takes more spash/explosive damage than a crunched or standing player...man, is this true? That is just...well, not logical - and a MMG nerf!

    The most irritating point is number 2 actually. Why? Why can't the MMG's have at least 2X scope? We should have 3X like all the other guns. 3X is not OP, the sight image will jump all over the place with the current recoil.

    Why all these nerfs to the MMG class? Why even include the MMG - either fix the MMG, og just delete them all and be done with it.

    Tbh, only the recon class should have 3x scopes. Assault and support shouldn't on any of their weapons. It would help make this game less of a Campfield game.
  • BlindChance
    541 postsMember, Battlefield 3, Battlefield 4, Battlefield, Battlefield 1, Battlefield V Member
    edited January 2019
    I don't get this complaint, every time I pick up a MMG in appropiate circumstance I end up doing far better kills wise than doing run&gun gameplay as assault or even medic. Am I doing something wrong? ;)
  • Sixclicks
    5075 postsMember, Battlefield 3, Battlefield 4, Battlefield, Battlefield 1, Battlefield V Member
    edited January 2019
    I don't get this complaint, every time I pick up a MMG in appropiate circumstance I end up doing far better kills wise than doing run&gun gameplay as assault or even medic. Am I doing something wrong? ;)

    That's how I felt each time I used the VGO. Like I said earlier in this thread, my very first game with the VGO was 44 kills and only 4 deaths.

    Granted I'm not getting as large of a volume of kills as I get when running around as assault or support with an LMG, and there's definitely plenty of engagements I need to completely avoid since I cannot gain an advantageous position over my enemy which I wouldn't need to avoid with other weapon types. As soon as I do have a good position though, any enemy who walks in my sights is absolutely melted. I especially love when they think their fortifications or those thin walls of a building are going to keep them safe.

    I didn't feel weak at all using the VGO. I did think it was kind of boring pretty quickly though. And you do need to avoid engagements with enemy snipers at long ranges, but that's just self explanatory. If you try to hold your position against a sniper at range, you're just asking to die. It's no different from avoiding CQB engagements while playing the Recon class since you're at a disadvantage.
Sign In or Register to comment.