Can we finally admit attrition was a terrible addition to battlefield?

Comments

  • Astr0damus
    2901 postsMember, Battlefield 3, Battlefield 4, Battlefield, Battlefield 1, CTE, Battlefield V Member
    edited February 20
    DingoKillr wrote: »
    I think it is there at a low level, as it seems different times to start regen. I think that has to do with the rate at which suppression is reduced maybe it could be slower. They could increase delay/slow the health restore off health pouches.

    Tanks problem are not the lack of ammo or repair stations it is
    - Not able to build stations while in tanks. This is a team v solo, unfortunately team is not going to happen in BF. I.e. ammo station.
    - Not able to 100% repair from inside a tanks while in the field (was not the issue with tanks in BF1 as you could never out repair assaults DPS this complaint was only be guys that used assault weapons on Infantry first)
    - Are slow traveling to get ammo/repair can be really long. The longest I drove felt like 5 minutes(over a minute) in Panzer IV from the Airfield to B flag on frontlines before even seeing combat..
    - The modular system adds to this making it harder. Infantry can out run a damage tank.

    If those are tweeked even a Tank with ZERO offensive ammo could survive a few hits to reach a station, currently it seems many tank drivers are retreating out of combat if they get hit even once. So most battles are tanks are at full health or near and the currents system does make camping at range easier, so adding more station will enforce this practice not change it. We need tanks to force combat on a flag not disappear for 2 minutes because they got hit. Low Ammo should be the only reason to fully retreat.

    Planes are different as they have a much easier time to escape most combat even with a small scale modular system. You can still maneuver while repairing which tanks don't have.

    ===
    First you were given ability to repair while INSIDE the tank (which I think was already over the top) and now you want the moon too! You want to be able to build an ammo station without getting out of the tank to do so... are we talking about the International Space Station? Oh wait, even they have to get out and do "space walks" to make repairs. This is WW II not 2026.
    ==
    There is an easier/better solution, and that is to incentivize the building of stations by granting the builder of said station residual points as long as it remains and is being used. Once it is destroyed and/or rebuilt by someone else, you stop getting points. And I don't mean ridiculous points.. just something to make it worth a person's while. If I never drive tanks, and I get no points for building tank depots, and I may get sniped in the process--why on earth would anyone build one?
  • Kayback
    367 postsMember, Battlefield 3, Battlefield 4, Battlefield Hardline, Battlefield, Battlefield 1, CTE, BF1IncursionsAlpha, Battlefield V Member
    Pelliy wrote: »
    XxmOss72xX wrote: »
    I disagree. It's a challenge to be sure, but I think it adds another level to the game. Don't get me wrong, I see and understand your perspective completely, I just think attrition makes battlefield more like a battlefield which is why I like the game.
    I disagree. It makes battlefield, fear field. No one really moves. It's also really frustrating when you get BS deaths door to low ticks of hp left.

    It's not making people work as a team. Instead it's doing the opposite. People hiding not doing anything.
    Funny, there’s another thread complaining about the Zerg so I guess people are moving? Also in my own experience I see plenty of movement, you just have to be more careful.
    That's one of the amusing things about this place, you can see posters passionately arguing opposite positions, e.g. snipers are OP/sniper rifles are absolutely useless! The question I keep asking is which guy is right, which one are we supposed to believe?

    In my experience most players are still running around like they always did, this "camping" some folks complain about is largely in their heads.
    Both can be true. The problem with attrition and the low TTK and the cluttered graphics etc etc is they all have the tendency to make you *either* camp *or* run around with herd.

    The issue is that you are only 'safe' if you are hiding or sticking to your friends like glue. There's no in-between where you might actually apply more varied thought and tactics because the first two options are so very relatively successful.

    The reason people complain about both camping and the zerg is they are both very annoying and very profitable in BF5.

    They happen in BF1, but BF5 has pushed and polarized people even more that way.

    They can both be true. I camp because of Zerg rush. I Zerg because of campers. There is very little use for lone wolves in this game. True of many BFs but you could open up a gap as a line wolf, even if it meant your squad spawning in on you as you captured a back flag.

    I can agree why snipers hate sniper rifles. I hate them because of how they can out damage any other weapon in the game at range. Even if you flank snipers and start shooting them and get hit markers they can calmly turn around and single click you. It does take skill but it is still cheap in terms of the skill for a single click supercedes the skill to manouver, position and start shooting and getting hits first.
  • Pelliy
    2087 postsMember, Battlefield 4, Battlefield, Battlefield 1, CTE, BF1IncursionsAlpha, Battlefield V Member
    https://clips.twitch.tv/AdorableCuriousEggnogImGlitch

    Pretty relevant. Players are afraid to play the objective. If there was no surprise I bet he'd be less scared.
  • Jesus4000
    153 postsMember, Battlefield 3, Battlefield 4, Battlefield, Battlefield 1, BF1IncursionsAlpha, Battlefield V Member
    DingoKillr wrote: »
    Then you add the stupid ammo levels and pickups Assault SAR has max 55 for a 3 BTK but Recon SLR has the same 3 BTK but has a smaller level and less pickup yet they are meant to be off the flag.

    I think it is there at a low level, as it seems different times to start regen. I think that has to do with the rate at which suppression is reduced maybe it could be slower. They could increase delay/slow the health restore off health pouches.
    For most classes, ammo attrition works pretty well.
    My only gripe is that recons don't carry enough ammo and don't pick up enough ammo (for SLRs, bolt actions are fine on that department).
    Self healing could be made a bit slower and/or dependant on suppression, giving some actual meaning to the suppression mechanic.
    DingoKillr wrote: »
    Tanks problem are not the lack of ammo or repair stations it is
    - Not able to build stations while in tanks. This is a team v solo, unfortunately team is not going to happen in BF. I.e. ammo station.
    - Not able to 100% repair from inside a tanks while in the field (was not the issue with tanks in BF1 as you could never out repair assaults DPS this complaint was only be guys that used assault weapons on Infantry first)
    - Are slow traveling to get ammo/repair can be really long. The longest I drove felt like 5 minutes(over a minute) in Panzer IV from the Airfield to B flag on frontlines before even seeing combat..
    - The modular system adds to this making it harder. Infantry can out run a damage tank.
    - Being able to build stations from inside the tank doesn't sound good. But the driver seat should be blocked for a couple of seconds after dismounting, to prevent teammates stealing the tank.
    - That does actually make sense to me, otherwise tanks would be able to simply power through everything.
    - Tanks in general seem very slow, so a bit of a speed buff would be nice. I also think that tank spawns in general should be seperate from infantry spawns, like get them in from the side and not all the way back. Add to that, that certain game modes need more repair stations.
    - I like the modular system in general, but the damage seems to be very inconsistent. Sometimes you aim and hit at an enemy tank turret and instead of "turret disabled", you get "engine disabled". This is especially weird on planes with the random wing damage.
    DingoKillr wrote: »
    If those are tweeked even a Tank with ZERO offensive ammo could survive a few hits to reach a station, currently it seems many tank drivers are retreating out of combat if they get hit even once. So most battles are tanks are at full health or near and the currents system does make camping at range easier, so adding more station will enforce this practice not change it. We need tanks to force combat on a flag not disappear for 2 minutes because they got hit. Low Ammo should be the only reason to fully retreat.
    Ammo counts on some tanks are just a bit too low to encourage proper PTFO.
    Looking at the current tank meta, it's mostly people camping outside objectives and/or next to repair stations.
    Add a functionality to support players, so they can restock ammo on tanks and tank players would go more on a "combined arms" approach, instead of the current "lone wolf" approach.
    Encouraging teamplay should be the way to go here.
    DingoKillr wrote: »
    Planes are different as they have a much easier time to escape most combat even with a small scale modular system. You can still maneuver while repairing which tanks don't have.
    Plane attrition is basically not there at the moment.
    There needs to be a cooldown on the supply points and/or seperate repair points that are further away than the supply stations.
    Currently there is a weird meta with planes where people will fly circles through the supply point in order to restock their instant repairs.
  • ninjapenquinuk
    1719 postsMember, Battlefield 4, Battlefield, Battlefield 1, CTE, Battlefield V Member
    Pelliy wrote: »
    Pelliy wrote: »
    Pelliy wrote: »
    @parkingbrake

    I still have to disagree. There's nothing really challenging about this. It's just more than a nuisance than it is a challenge. It doesn't bring teams together. It makes them passive especially in gamemodes not name conquest. Very rarely do people ever move anymore. BF1 had more teamplay and squad play than this game and that game had issues in its own right but it still did a better job of getting the concept of squad play down. BF5 does exactly the opposite.

    If you think players are more passive then a quicker TTK will be more a factor than health attrition. With a quicker TTK, whether you are at 50% or 100% health you can be melted in an instant. Attrition is only really a problem for people who play totally lone wolf. If you are around team mates and around flags you will get plenty of health and ammo during the majority of rounds. Unless you are some amazing player who dies only a few times a round - of which there are some, then you really shouldn't run out of (primary) ammo 80- 90% of the time, unless you are a sniper on your own.

    Disagree because bf4 had just as quick if not quicker ttk . Players are less passive in bf4 than they are here.

    I'm sure those are rose tinted specs you have on there. Maybe people were, in your opinion, less passive is because in BF4 nearly everyone was equipped with a fully auto weapon that allowed you to run and gun everywhere. In BFV lots of weapons now require you to be stationary to be most effective. This is nothing to do with health attrition.

    By "most" you mean bipods, but Okay man. Carry on.

    Your reply makes no sense! Unless you misread of course. Are bipoded weapons - so all LMGs and MMGs most effective when used stationary? The answer is 100% yes.
  • X_Sunslayer_X
    556 postsMember, Battlefield 3, Battlefield, Battlefield 1, BF1IncursionsAlpha Member
    bran1986 wrote: »
    What was attrition originally supposed to do again? Increase teamwork? That has unquestionably failed, few people could argue against this with a straight face. Instead it's just made class balance difficult, created issues with healing mid-combat, made it less fun to play solo, and made camping or zerging the default strat for a lot of players. GG

    It was to facilitate teamwork and I get what they were trying to do but they then tried to balance weapons and classes around the system they created. All it has done is create horrible weapon and class balance.

    part of the problem i think is they balanced most weapons for an Attrition-system like we had in the alpha. i.E no healing unless you seek out a medic and no resupply unless you found a support. no ammo-pick-ups no med/ammo-stations whatsoever. but since they watered it down so much it creates all these problems and more. but DICE will most likely not go back on it anytime soon i.E it is probably going to be in the next game too.
  • Pelliy
    2087 postsMember, Battlefield 4, Battlefield, Battlefield 1, CTE, BF1IncursionsAlpha, Battlefield V Member
    Pelliy wrote: »
    Pelliy wrote: »
    Pelliy wrote: »
    @parkingbrake

    I still have to disagree. There's nothing really challenging about this. It's just more than a nuisance than it is a challenge. It doesn't bring teams together. It makes them passive especially in gamemodes not name conquest. Very rarely do people ever move anymore. BF1 had more teamplay and squad play than this game and that game had issues in its own right but it still did a better job of getting the concept of squad play down. BF5 does exactly the opposite.

    If you think players are more passive then a quicker TTK will be more a factor than health attrition. With a quicker TTK, whether you are at 50% or 100% health you can be melted in an instant. Attrition is only really a problem for people who play totally lone wolf. If you are around team mates and around flags you will get plenty of health and ammo during the majority of rounds. Unless you are some amazing player who dies only a few times a round - of which there are some, then you really shouldn't run out of (primary) ammo 80- 90% of the time, unless you are a sniper on your own.

    Disagree because bf4 had just as quick if not quicker ttk . Players are less passive in bf4 than they are here.

    I'm sure those are rose tinted specs you have on there. Maybe people were, in your opinion, less passive is because in BF4 nearly everyone was equipped with a fully auto weapon that allowed you to run and gun everywhere. In BFV lots of weapons now require you to be stationary to be most effective. This is nothing to do with health attrition.

    By "most" you mean bipods, but Okay man. Carry on.

    Your reply makes no sense! Unless you misread of course. Are bipoded weapons - so all LMGs and MMGs most effective when used stationary? The answer is 100% yes.

    It's convenient for you to one class and try to represent it for the whole game. Like I said, okay man. Do you dude.
  • ninjapenquinuk
    1719 postsMember, Battlefield 4, Battlefield, Battlefield 1, CTE, Battlefield V Member
    Pelliy wrote: »
    Pelliy wrote: »
    Pelliy wrote: »
    Pelliy wrote: »
    @parkingbrake

    I still have to disagree. There's nothing really challenging about this. It's just more than a nuisance than it is a challenge. It doesn't bring teams together. It makes them passive especially in gamemodes not name conquest. Very rarely do people ever move anymore. BF1 had more teamplay and squad play than this game and that game had issues in its own right but it still did a better job of getting the concept of squad play down. BF5 does exactly the opposite.

    If you think players are more passive then a quicker TTK will be more a factor than health attrition. With a quicker TTK, whether you are at 50% or 100% health you can be melted in an instant. Attrition is only really a problem for people who play totally lone wolf. If you are around team mates and around flags you will get plenty of health and ammo during the majority of rounds. Unless you are some amazing player who dies only a few times a round - of which there are some, then you really shouldn't run out of (primary) ammo 80- 90% of the time, unless you are a sniper on your own.

    Disagree because bf4 had just as quick if not quicker ttk . Players are less passive in bf4 than they are here.

    I'm sure those are rose tinted specs you have on there. Maybe people were, in your opinion, less passive is because in BF4 nearly everyone was equipped with a fully auto weapon that allowed you to run and gun everywhere. In BFV lots of weapons now require you to be stationary to be most effective. This is nothing to do with health attrition.

    By "most" you mean bipods, but Okay man. Carry on.

    Your reply makes no sense! Unless you misread of course. Are bipoded weapons - so all LMGs and MMGs most effective when used stationary? The answer is 100% yes.

    It's convenient for you to one class and try to represent it for the whole game. Like I said, okay man. Do you dude.

    One class which represents 25% of the weapons and on any given round Supports will probably be 20-25% of the players, so yeah it is pretty relevant. Plus you add in the snipers then that could be up to half the players in a round using weapons that require you to be stationary and probably even prone to used at their most effective. Compare that to BF4, which if i can remember (seeing as its been 4 yrs since last played) it was really only the few snipers per side that 'needed' to be stationary to be effective.
  • VforVengxance
    27 postsMember, Battlefield, Battlefield 1, Battlefield V Member
    WetFishDB wrote: »
    the gap between a well organised party and random individuals thrown into a squad is bigger than ever before - and that, I suspect, means people who prefer playing on their own are enjoying the game much less.
    Very good point made here. A lot of my friends switched over to playing Apex and I've been doing mostly solo rounds the past couple of weeks.

    When the enemy team is comprised of at least one or two platoons, the other team gets stomped. Not that matchmaking was ever a strongsuit for DICE, but like you say, because of the attrition system a team of only random players stands no chance against organized/coordinated squads.
    WetFishDB wrote: »
    The game feels too ‘chore’ like and I feel like it ruins game pacing. First thing I do in a new game, go visit an ammo station.
    Maybe they should've limited the attrition system only to the Battle Royale mode, cause let's be honest, it's a popular BR mechanic...to have limited ammo and health. Or the ability to build defenses.

    At the very least, make Frontlines or Domination or just let us have ONE mode WITHOUT attrition. I'm sick of shooting at my fellow supports or medics to try to get their attention for ammo/healthpacks. Or when I'm on Aerodrome and found myself in a squad with 3 snipers...how about that for attrition.
  • VforVengxance
    27 postsMember, Battlefield, Battlefield 1, Battlefield V Member
    And vehicles, that slow crawl (heavy tanks) back to a supply point only to find it needs to be built is just... ugh. Then if you get out to build it, whoops, Johnny Random just teleported into your tank and is making off with it.

    If you're a lone wolf player then you can expect this sort of thing. If you're playing in a squad that works together this isn't an issue. BFV is supposed to be about teamwork, more players should try that.
    In case you haven't noticed until now, there's a massive gap between what it's supposed to be (concept) and what it actually is (reality).

    90% of randoms/casuals don't even gasp the notion of squad teamplay. They each run off on their own after spawning.
    This game is close to impossible to enjoy without friends on whom you can actually count on.
  • OrionPherrit
    428 postsMember, Battlefield 4, Battlefield, Battlefield 1, Battlefield V Member
    Trokey66 wrote: »
    I guess not enough players used the Afflictions in the last game, so EA/Dice gifted us all with Scavenger, and we constantly have to scrounge around for ammo. BF1 was hard enough without taking on a handicap, so I would never accept it unless forced. 🙄

    I would rather be a team player and am not a lone wolf by choice — just that my schedule doesn’t work out for most clans & few of my friends play this type of game. That puts me at a disadvantage against teams with well-coordinated Medics & Support. 😐

    If EA/Dice insist on going this route, they should at least make us consistent with what we see on our avatars (some of those skins are packing a dozen mags) or give us the actual historical soldier loadouts. For example, I believe a German trooper would be issued 6 mags for his MP40 or Stg44, which works out to 192 or 180 rounds, respectively.

    Since that’s about double our topped-off ammo load, maybe they could make it so you have to run back to your forward operating base for a refill.

    And how do you propose applying your principle to Medics and revives?

    If I were CEO of EA, I might adopt an approach along similar lines as my Support suggestions. As with ammo loadouts, I might double the present size of our health bars but disable or greatly curtail auto-healing. It will be necessary to reach a control point or Medic for a top-off.

    We need auto-healing in other games because most don’t offer a medical class. We have Medics here out of tradition & historical precedent (even if they look more like SMG commandos), so may as well make them earn their keep.

    In theory, this change will promote more aggressive pushing of objectives, as long as players think they just have to win the flag, surviving with 1%, to be rewarded with magickal rejuvenation like in fantasy RPGs.

    However, I may be in the minority, and it’s doubtful Dice will consider my recommendations anyway, unless I start my own Youtube channel gathering least a thousand followers, so it’s all a moot intellectual exercise. 🧐

    Just be thankful we don’t lose all our gear & cc upon death, like in Ready Player 1, or the game would be totally unplayable.
  • BFB-LeCharybdis
    705 postsMember, Battlefield, Battlefield 1 Member
    hawkseye17 wrote: »
    I've been saying it since day 1. There's a reason past BF titles have a separate core and hardcore modes

    @Hawxxeye exactly and attrition would be an excellent hard core mechanic. I think they should just add the traditional core and hard core modes to BF5 and then do what they did when they removed BF4's full mag dump and make a "classic mode" for those that like the current hardcore lite BF5 mode.

    Have you heard any rumours that they might do this anytime soon?
  • gibonez
    296 postsMember, Battlefield 3, Battlefield 4, Battlefield, Battlefield 1, Battlefield V Member
    Attrition along with removal of 3d spotting are the two single best new additions in the game.
  • DingoKillr
    3436 postsMember, Battlefield 3, Battlefield 4, Battlefield, Battlefield 1, CTE, BF1IncursionsAlpha, Battlefield V Member
    edited February 20
    Astr0damus wrote: »
    DingoKillr wrote: »
    I think it is there at a low level, as it seems different times to start regen. I think that has to do with the rate at which suppression is reduced maybe it could be slower. They could increase delay/slow the health restore off health pouches.

    Tanks problem are not the lack of ammo or repair stations it is
    - Not able to build stations while in tanks. This is a team v solo, unfortunately team is not going to happen in BF. I.e. ammo station.
    - Not able to 100% repair from inside a tanks while in the field (was not the issue with tanks in BF1 as you could never out repair assaults DPS this complaint was only be guys that used assault weapons on Infantry first)
    - Are slow traveling to get ammo/repair can be really long. The longest I drove felt like 5 minutes(over a minute) in Panzer IV from the Airfield to B flag on frontlines before even seeing combat..
    - The modular system adds to this making it harder. Infantry can out run a damage tank.

    If those are tweeked even a Tank with ZERO offensive ammo could survive a few hits to reach a station, currently it seems many tank drivers are retreating out of combat if they get hit even once. So most battles are tanks are at full health or near and the currents system does make camping at range easier, so adding more station will enforce this practice not change it. We need tanks to force combat on a flag not disappear for 2 minutes because they got hit. Low Ammo should be the only reason to fully retreat.

    Planes are different as they have a much easier time to escape most combat even with a small scale modular system. You can still maneuver while repairing which tanks don't have.

    ===
    First you were given ability to repair while INSIDE the tank (which I think was already over the top) and now you want the moon too! You want to be able to build an ammo station without getting out of the tank to do so... are we talking about the International Space Station? Oh wait, even they have to get out and do "space walks" to make repairs. This is WW II not 2026.
    ==
    There is an easier/better solution, and that is to incentivize the building of stations by granting the builder of said station residual points as long as it remains and is being used. Once it is destroyed and/or rebuilt by someone else, you stop getting points. And I don't mean ridiculous points.. just something to make it worth a person's while. If I never drive tanks, and I get no points for building tank depots, and I may get sniped in the process--why on earth would anyone build one?
    From inside a tank you can not repair to 100%, even going outside to repair you don't fix module damage. How are changing these issues over the top. When you run around with bandages that bring you back to 100% automatically. Should a tanker not be able to do only 1 manually to bring back to full health.

    Outside or building from within tank is gameplay v realism, arguing for realism while you can revive the dead, pull ammo crates from thin air that has exactly the right ammo for any weapons seem to be missing the understanding game functions.

    In both case it allows the player that has the tank not have it stolen, secondly if repair station where more common then it is less of an issue.
    Jesus4000 wrote: »
    DingoKillr wrote: »
    Then you add the stupid ammo levels and pickups Assault SAR has max 55 for a 3 BTK but Recon SLR has the same 3 BTK but has a smaller level and less pickup yet they are meant to be off the flag.

    I think it is there at a low level, as it seems different times to start regen. I think that has to do with the rate at which suppression is reduced maybe it could be slower. They could increase delay/slow the health restore off health pouches.
    For most classes, ammo attrition works pretty well.
    My only gripe is that recons don't carry enough ammo and don't pick up enough ammo (for SLRs, bolt actions are fine on that department).
    Self healing could be made a bit slower and/or dependant on suppression, giving some actual meaning to the suppression mechanic.
    No it does not, it works on Medic and Support, but is to strong against Recon and far to weak for Assault. The current step up allows Assault to run around picking up ammo and barely running out compared to the others.
    Jesus4000 wrote: »
    DingoKillr wrote: »
    Tanks problem are not the lack of ammo or repair stations it is
    - Not able to build stations while in tanks. This is a team v solo, unfortunately team is not going to happen in BF. I.e. ammo station.
    - Not able to 100% repair from inside a tanks while in the field (was not the issue with tanks in BF1 as you could never out repair assaults DPS this complaint was only be guys that used assault weapons on Infantry first)
    - Are slow traveling to get ammo/repair can be really long. The longest I drove felt like 5 minutes(over a minute) in Panzer IV from the Airfield to B flag on frontlines before even seeing combat..
    - The modular system adds to this making it harder. Infantry can out run a damage tank.
    - Being able to build stations from inside the tank doesn't sound good. But the driver seat should be blocked for a couple of seconds after dismounting, to prevent teammates stealing the tank.
    - That does actually make sense to me, otherwise tanks would be able to simply power through everything.
    - Tanks in general seem very slow, so a bit of a speed buff would be nice. I also think that tank spawns in general should be seperate from infantry spawns, like get them in from the side and not all the way back. Add to that, that certain game modes need more repair stations.
    - I like the modular system in general, but the damage seems to be very inconsistent. Sometimes you aim and hit at an enemy tank turret and instead of "turret disabled", you get "engine disabled". This is especially weird on planes with the random wing damage.
    Locking a seat creates its own problems.
    Ammo count is an issue, if you have only a few repair stations and long travel times a tank could still be out of combat for awhile.
    The combining of repair rates, frequency of repair station, modular and the amount of Assault creates the issue of camping tanks, if we want tanks to assist with flag capture and not hiding then we need to think of ways of making tanks more survivable.
    Jesus4000 wrote: »
    DingoKillr wrote: »
    If those are tweeked even a Tank with ZERO offensive ammo could survive a few hits to reach a station, currently it seems many tank drivers are retreating out of combat if they get hit even once. So most battles are tanks are at full health or near and the currents system does make camping at range easier, so adding more station will enforce this practice not change it. We need tanks to force combat on a flag not disappear for 2 minutes because they got hit. Low Ammo should be the only reason to fully retreat.
    Ammo counts on some tanks are just a bit too low to encourage proper PTFO.
    Looking at the current tank meta, it's mostly people camping outside objectives and/or next to repair stations.
    Add a functionality to support players, so they can restock ammo on tanks and tank players would go more on a "combined arms" approach, instead of the current "lone wolf" approach.
    Encouraging teamplay should be the way to go here.
    Ammo counts become irrelevant if tank survivable is only effective at camping range. Adding infantry supplying ability for vehicles allow tanks to never stop firing from any range never giving infantry a break. Strong survivability and powerful with limited ammo creates meta where vehicles make an impact but can not maintain forever. How long of a break, how powerful or how long of an impact are the keys question for vehicles attrition.

    Unfortunely I believe DICE has made survivability of tanks weak and annoying, Medic don't have to seek out other players to heal, Support don't have to seek other players to get ammo and driver/pilot don't have to get out to repair transport/plane, yet a tanker is required to exit his vehicle to repair to 100% or travel slowly to the infrequent repair stations.
    Jesus4000 wrote: »
    DingoKillr wrote: »
    Planes are different as they have a much easier time to escape most combat even with a small scale modular system. You can still maneuver while repairing which tanks don't have.
    Plane attrition is basically not there at the moment.
    There needs to be a cooldown on the supply points and/or seperate repair points that are further away than the supply stations.
    Currently there is a weird meta with planes where people will fly circles through the supply point in order to restock their instant repairs.
    That is the point the meta is design to stop planes from consistly being over targets and make flight path more predictive as you are able to fly back to your repair station. AA is meant to prevent End to End bombing runs with emergency repair and repair current function that is still possible.
    Post edited by DingoKillr on
  • Redstripe101
    2546 postsMember, Battlefield 3, Battlefield 4, Battlefield Hardline, Battlefield, Battlefield 1, Battlefield V Member
    So basically half like it and half hate it. Sounds like DICE got it just right. Me, I-like it never had a problem with it.

    based on a post? or did you survey the other 60% of players who just havent returned to.this game?
  • TuxedoBanana279
    345 postsMember, Battlefield 3, Battlefield 4, Battlefield Hardline, Battlefield, Battlefield 1, Battlefield V Member
    Pelliy wrote: »
    It made more players passive, the game is not fun. You heal up and a random explosion or a random spray bullet tagged you, taking away your heal.

    This would make sense in a 5v5 game. Attrition in a chaotic game is absurd. I really hope it does not return in the series.

    Same with ammo attrition. I was convinced that this was okay. It's not. It's bad too. You can keep the grenade timers the same but also needs to get rid of that Attrition also.

    I'm used to it already. I would rather dice keep it than go back to the original at this point. It makes support roles like medic and support more fun to play for me.
  • bran1986
    5494 postsMember, Battlefield 4, Battlefield Hardline, Battlefield, Battlefield 1, CTE, BF1IncursionsAlpha, Battlefield V Member
    bran1986 wrote: »
    What was attrition originally supposed to do again? Increase teamwork? That has unquestionably failed, few people could argue against this with a straight face. Instead it's just made class balance difficult, created issues with healing mid-combat, made it less fun to play solo, and made camping or zerging the default strat for a lot of players. GG

    It was to facilitate teamwork and I get what they were trying to do but they then tried to balance weapons and classes around the system they created. All it has done is create horrible weapon and class balance.

    part of the problem i think is they balanced most weapons for an Attrition-system like we had in the alpha. i.E no healing unless you seek out a medic and no resupply unless you found a support. no ammo-pick-ups no med/ammo-stations whatsoever. but since they watered it down so much it creates all these problems and more. but DICE will most likely not go back on it anytime soon i.E it is probably going to be in the next game too.

    You are exactly right. The problem is they buffed all the healing from the Alpha to release and left the smgs as they were, and worse in some areas(12 meter 4 btk range, and assault rifles being a 5 btk) despite the buffs.
  • xKusagamix
    880 postsMember, Battlefield 3, Battlefield 4, Battlefield, Battlefield 1, CTE, Battlefield V Member
    edited February 20
    Alpha (Beta version maybe?) version have no health pouch when you respawn, it a little bit suck but that's how they balanced the guns, even the Bolt Action Rifle poor damage model somehow work. All of a sudden they changed that, health pouch for everyone and they didn't do anything to balanced the guns.

    Recon suffer the most, unless you're really really good or the enemies just suck so bad at shooting back, then most of the time you just make it easier for everyone else to finish your target with the auto spot when you hit someone.

    Well, at least they buffed the flare now, sound great right?
  • DarkestHour138
    992 postsMember, Battlefield 3, Battlefield 4, Battlefield Hardline, Battlefield, Battlefield 1, CTE, Battlefield V Member
    Like medic attrition - I don't think players should get to regen 100% health all the time like in past titles. You should have to pay attention to your health and if you have a pack.

    Impartial to ammo attrition - I either play as support or I'm hitting supply stations often anyway to resupply my gadgets

    Dislike vehicle attrition - Yes, vehicle attrition prevents tanks from sitting back and farming kills but that's not an issue with this game since they only last a couple minutes with all the assault players running around. If they buff the tanks like they should then vehicle attrition makes sense.
Sign In or Register to comment.