This Week in Battlefield V

Did the game really need a ohk prone in a bush/on a roof sniper rifle?

2»

Comments

  • bigiain
    279 postsMember, Battlefield 3, Battlefield 4, Battlefield Hardline, Battlefield, Battlefield 1, Battlefield V Member
    They'll go away pretty quickly, just like the last one. The odd death to them isn't the problem, it's being on a team where a big chunk of players are trying to use them.
  • Amgtree
    154 postsMember, Battlefield 3, Battlefield 4, Battlefield Hardline, Battlefield, Battlefield 1, Battlefield V Member
    Woodlbrad wrote: »
    Amgtree wrote: »
    Woodlbrad wrote: »
    I honestly don’t know why ppl think the anti material rifles are so op they have so many limitations. They are the worst for one of recons most important roles counter sniping you’re at a huge disadvantage vs bolts.

    Who said they were op?

    Everyone wanting them nerfed.

    Not because they are op because they are awful to play against and require little to no skill to get a free kill.
  • StealthAria
    293 postsMember, Battlefield 3, Battlefield 4, Battlefield Hardline, Battlefield, Battlefield 1, CTE, Battlefield V Member
    Answer me this, why are the AT rifles any worse than a shotgun?  They both can one shot, but AT rifles have to rely on pure luck if moving while shotguns can easily aim and blast targets a few dozen meters away without even accurately lining up the shot.

    Heck, how are they any worse than ARs and SARs? Those let you quickly spam out back to back headshots as quickly as 450 RPM, or full-auto headshots across the map at up to 770 RPM, either way it only takes 2 shots to secure a kill.  Compare that to the measly 22 RPM of an AT rifle, that's only 1 shot every nearly 3 seconds!

    Don't go griping about them creating more campers either, with such a low fire rate you're better off using absolutely anything else, even a pistol.  At least with a pistol you have a chance against multiple enemies.
  • Woodlbrad
    644 postsMember, Battlefield 3, Battlefield 4, Battlefield Hardline, Battlefield, Battlefield 1, CTE, Battlefield V Member
    Amgtree wrote: »
    Woodlbrad wrote: »
    Amgtree wrote: »
    Woodlbrad wrote: »
    I honestly don’t know why ppl think the anti material rifles are so op they have so many limitations. They are the worst for one of recons most important roles counter sniping you’re at a huge disadvantage vs bolts.

    Who said they were op?

    Everyone wanting them nerfed.

    Not because they are op because they are awful to play against and require little to no skill to get a free kill.

    I think they require the most skill out of all the primaries they are pretty much the worst primaries in the game.
  • ProAssassin2003
    3359 postsMember, Battlefield 3, Battlefield 4, Battlefield Hardline, Battlefield, Battlefield 1, Battlefield V Member
    Not only did the game Need One apparently it needs 2.🤗
  • jroggs
    422 postsMember, Battlefield 4, Battlefield, Battlefield 1, CTE, Battlefield V Member
    Answer me this, why are the AT rifles any worse than a shotgun?  They both can one shot, but AT rifles have to rely on pure luck if moving while shotguns can easily aim and blast targets a few dozen meters away without even accurately lining up the shot.

    Heck, how are they any worse than ARs and SARs? Those let you quickly spam out back to back headshots as quickly as 450 RPM, or full-auto headshots across the map at up to 770 RPM, either way it only takes 2 shots to secure a kill.  Compare that to the measly 22 RPM of an AT rifle, that's only 1 shot every nearly 3 seconds!

    Don't go griping about them creating more campers either, with such a low fire rate you're better off using absolutely anything else, even a pistol.  At least with a pistol you have a chance against multiple enemies.
    You pretty much answered your own questions.

    Shotguns can be used in mobile and aggressive play, while AMRs require being in position on a bipod to win and fight reliably. Shotguns work consistently in terms of ADS and hipfire, while AMRs require complete luck to hit off of bipods. Weapons that rely on luck to hit are not good to have in MP FPS games.

    Because AMRs are so restricted in what they can do well, players who want to use them will tend to gravitate towards a playstyle that hurts their team and makes the game less fun for everyone else.

    By the way, lying about the game only demonstrates you lack an argument. Shotguns can't "easily aim and blast targets a few dozen meters away without even accurately lining up the shot" and ARs can't do "full-auto headshots across the map at up to 770 RPM, either way it only takes 2 shots to secure a kill." That's beyond hyperbole.
  • StealthAria
    293 postsMember, Battlefield 3, Battlefield 4, Battlefield Hardline, Battlefield, Battlefield 1, CTE, Battlefield V Member
    "Your comment will appear after it is reviewed"
    Uhh, how about you just let the post through so I can stop spamming it?  I know it'll take several hours or even days if I wait, even if I tag a moderator.

    jroggs said:
    Answer me this, why are the AT rifles any worse than a shotgun?  They both can one shot, but AT rifles have to rely on pure luck if moving while shotguns can easily aim and blast targets a few dozen meters away without even accurately lining up the shot.

    Heck, how are they any worse than ARs and SARs? Those let you quickly spam out back to back headshots as quickly as 450 RPM, or full-auto headshots across the map at up to 770 RPM, either way it only takes 2 shots to secure a kill.  Compare that to the measly 22 RPM of an AT rifle, that's only 1 shot every nearly 3 seconds!

    Don't go griping about them creating more campers either, with such a low fire rate you're better off using absolutely anything else, even a pistol.  At least with a pistol you have a chance against multiple enemies.
    You pretty much answered your own questions.

    Shotguns can be used in mobile and aggressive play, while AMRs require being in position on a bipod to win and fight reliably. Shotguns work consistently in terms of ADS and hipfire, while AMRs require complete luck to hit off of bipods. Weapons that rely on luck to hit are not good to have in MP FPS games.

    Because AMRs are so restricted in what they can do well, players who want to use them will tend to gravitate towards a playstyle that hurts their team and makes the game less fun for everyone else.

    By the way, lying about the game only demonstrates you lack an argument. Shotguns can't "easily aim and blast targets a few dozen meters away without even accurately lining up the shot" and ARs can't do "full-auto headshots across the map at up to 770 RPM, either way it only takes 2 shots to secure a kill." That's beyond hyperbole.
    Nope, those are the exact stats for the guns.  The 1907 has a fire rate of 770, a predetermined recoil pattern for the first few shots (as all ARs do), and does enough minimum damage that it can 2HK across entire maps, and waddaya know, you can even mount a 3x scope on it.  Shotguns fire dozens of projectiles but only need a fraction that number to secure a kill, even at range.

    Want to know some rather interesting stats?
    ◇The only SARs with a lower bullet velocity then the Kar98K and Krag are the M1 and 1-5, all the others have not only higher velocities but also lower drag (same numbers attached, but the engine attaches a multiplier to BAs, SLRs and AMRs)
    ◇SLRs have the lowest headshot multiplier at a mere 1.65x, preventing them from ever getting a 1HK, and even BAs have a <2 multiplier while SARs and ARs actually get a 2.1x(no idea about AMR multipliers though, have yet to be headshot by one with a known base damage, it's probably also <2 though)
    ◇All shotguns except the Drilling share the same damage profile with ~7.2 max damage per pellet, drop off starting around a dozen meters and finally hitting a minimum of 2 after 25m, the Drilling only being different by dealing a single point less max damage, they all maintain a 2x headshot multiplier and use the old pellet distribution where it isn't uncommon for all the pellets to group up in one small portion of the spread and sometimes seem to duplicate or bend their trajectory mid-flight.


    My whole problem with this discussion is that the AMRs are objectively garbage, ruined by being tied to a broken mechanic that forces people to adopt a playstyle people call "campy" (often it's just hiding for a moment to get the drop on an enemy, then moving on) yet people are here demanding they get nerfed even further into the dust.  And I can tell you right now, everyone demanding such is only doing so because they got killed by one, ending the streak they were on running about without giving a damn what was going on around them.  Everyone knows Assault is OP but won't admit it, so the moment anything other than Assault kills them they'll demand it nerfed, even if it's utter garbage and absolutely everyone knows it, they'll even seriously demand joke weapons like the Liberator and Kolibri to be nerfed if you manage to kill them with it.
  • MrCamp121
    554 postsMember, Battlefield 3, Battlefield 4, Battlefield, Battlefield 1, Battlefield V Member
    "Your comment will appear after it is reviewed"
    Uhh, how about you just let the post through so I can stop spamming it?  I know it'll take several hours or even days if I wait, even if I tag a moderator.(Quote)
    Nope, those are the exact stats for the guns.  The 1907 has a fire rate of 770, a predetermined recoil pattern for the first few shots (as all ARs do), and does enough minimum damage that it can 2HK across entire maps, and waddaya know, you can even mount a 3x scope on it.  Shotguns fire dozens of projectiles but only need a fraction that number to secure a kill, even at range.

    Want to know some rather interesting stats?
    ◇The only SARs with a lower bullet velocity then the Kar98K and Krag are the M1 and 1-5, all the others have not only higher velocities but also lower drag (same numbers attached, but the engine attaches a multiplier to BAs, SLRs and AMRs)
    ◇SLRs have the lowest headshot multiplier at a mere 1.65x, preventing them from ever getting a 1HK, and even BAs have a <2 multiplier while SARs and ARs actually get a 2.1x(no idea about AMR multipliers though, have yet to be headshot by one with a known base damage, it's probably also <2 though)
    ◇All shotguns except the Drilling share the same damage profile with ~7.2 max damage per pellet, drop off starting around a dozen meters and finally hitting a minimum of 2 after 25m, the Drilling only being different by dealing a single point less max damage, they all maintain a 2x headshot multiplier and use the old pellet distribution where it isn't uncommon for all the pellets to group up in one small portion of the spread and sometimes seem to duplicate or bend their trajectory mid-flight.


    My whole problem with this discussion is that the AMRs are objectively garbage, ruined by being tied to a broken mechanic that forces people to adopt a playstyle people call "campy" (often it's just hiding for a moment to get the drop on an enemy, then moving on) yet people are here demanding they get nerfed even further into the dust.  And I can tell you right now, everyone demanding such is only doing so because they got killed by one, ending the streak they were on running about without giving a damn what was going on around them.  Everyone knows Assault is OP but won't admit it, so the moment anything other than Assault kills them they'll demand it nerfed, even if it's utter garbage and absolutely everyone knows it, they'll even seriously demand joke weapons like the Liberator and Kolibri to be nerfed if you manage to kill them with it.

    Edit: (M)1907 does not 2 hit kill. And does not do it across maps. Dont exaggerrate. If thats the 1907 you refer to
  • GrandMG42CamPeR
    277 postsMember, Battlefield 3, Battlefield 4, Battlefield Hardline, Battlefield, Battlefield 1, BF1IncursionsAlpha, Battlefield V Member
    I only play support and only use MG42 as my name proves it ;). I unlocked it yesterday and tried it out and I liked it a lot so I went to unlock all four specializations and did it last nite. It is really fun to mow down the enemy with it from remote :D I guess Hamada is the best map to use it ;) 
    True however doing so will cause your willy to shrink.
    Mwahahahahah :D :D :D 
  • StealthAria
    293 postsMember, Battlefield 3, Battlefield 4, Battlefield Hardline, Battlefield, Battlefield 1, CTE, Battlefield V Member
    jroggs said:
    Answer me this, why are the AT rifles any worse than a shotgun?  They both can one shot, but AT rifles have to rely on pure luck if moving while shotguns can easily aim and blast targets a few dozen meters away without even accurately lining up the shot.

    Heck, how are they any worse than ARs and SARs? Those let you quickly spam out back to back headshots as quickly as 450 RPM, or full-auto headshots across the map at up to 770 RPM, either way it only takes 2 shots to secure a kill.  Compare that to the measly 22 RPM of an AT rifle, that's only 1 shot every nearly 3 seconds!

    Don't go griping about them creating more campers either, with such a low fire rate you're better off using absolutely anything else, even a pistol.  At least with a pistol you have a chance against multiple enemies.
    You pretty much answered your own questions.

    Shotguns can be used in mobile and aggressive play, while AMRs require being in position on a bipod to win and fight reliably. Shotguns work consistently in terms of ADS and hipfire, while AMRs require complete luck to hit off of bipods. Weapons that rely on luck to hit are not good to have in MP FPS games.

    Because AMRs are so restricted in what they can do well, players who want to use them will tend to gravitate towards a playstyle that hurts their team and makes the game less fun for everyone else.

    By the way, lying about the game only demonstrates you lack an argument. Shotguns can't "easily aim and blast targets a few dozen meters away without even accurately lining up the shot" and ARs can't do "full-auto headshots across the map at up to 770 RPM, either way it only takes 2 shots to secure a kill." That's beyond hyperbole.
    Nope, those are the exact stats for the guns.  The 1907 has a fire rate of 770, a predetermined recoil pattern for the first few shots (as all ARs do), and does enough minimum damage that it can 2HK across entire maps, and waddaya know, you can even mount a 3x scope on it.  Shotguns fire dozens of projectiles but only need a fraction that number to secure a kill, even at range.

    Want to know some rather interesting stats?
    ◇The only SARs with a lower bullet velocity then the Kar98K and Krag are the M1 and 1-5, all the others have not only higher velocities but also lower drag (same numbers attached, but the engine attaches a multiplier to BAs, SLRs and AMRs)
    ◇SLRs have the lowest headshot multiplier at a mere 1.65x, preventing them from ever getting a 1HK, and even BAs have a <2 multiplier while SARs and ARs actually get a 2.1x(no idea about AMR multipliers though, have yet to be headshot by one with a known base damage, it's probably also <2 though)
    ◇All shotguns except the Drilling share the same damage profile with ~7.2 max damage per pellet, drop off starting around a dozen meters and finally hitting a minimum of 2 after 25m, the Drilling only being different by dealing a single point less max damage, they all maintain a 2x headshot multiplier and use the old pellet distribution where it isn't uncommon for all the pellets to group up in one small portion of the spread and sometimes seem to duplicate or bend their trajectory mid-flight.


    My whole problem with this discussion is that the AMRs are objectively garbage, ruined by being tied to a broken mechanic that forces people to adopt a playstyle people call "campy" (often it's just hiding for a moment to get the drop on an enemy, then moving on) yet people are here demanding they get nerfed even further into the dust.  And I can tell you right now, everyone demanding such is only doing so because they got killed by one, ending the streak they were on running about without giving a damn what was going on around them.  Everyone knows Assault is OP but won't admit it, so the moment anything other than Assault kills them they'll demand it nerfed, even if it's utter garbage and absolutely everyone knows it, they'll even seriously demand joke weapons like the Liberator and Kolibri to be nerfed if you manage to kill them with it.
  • Cerben1
    265 postsMember, Battlefield 3, Battlefield 4, Battlefield Hardline, Battlefield, Battlefield 1, BF1IncursionsAlpha, Battlefield V Member
    its for more add  flavor to the back campers its more fun whit this gun i typ i think. the old medic on the back or assault or support is just not fun after 200h of back prone killing 
  • jroggs
    422 postsMember, Battlefield 4, Battlefield, Battlefield 1, CTE, Battlefield V Member
    "Your comment will appear after it is reviewed"
    Uhh, how about you just let the post through so I can stop spamming it?  I know it'll take several hours or even days if I wait, even if I tag a moderator.

    jroggs said:
    Answer me this, why are the AT rifles any worse than a shotgun?  They both can one shot, but AT rifles have to rely on pure luck if moving while shotguns can easily aim and blast targets a few dozen meters away without even accurately lining up the shot.

    Heck, how are they any worse than ARs and SARs? Those let you quickly spam out back to back headshots as quickly as 450 RPM, or full-auto headshots across the map at up to 770 RPM, either way it only takes 2 shots to secure a kill.  Compare that to the measly 22 RPM of an AT rifle, that's only 1 shot every nearly 3 seconds!

    Don't go griping about them creating more campers either, with such a low fire rate you're better off using absolutely anything else, even a pistol.  At least with a pistol you have a chance against multiple enemies.
    You pretty much answered your own questions.

    Shotguns can be used in mobile and aggressive play, while AMRs require being in position on a bipod to win and fight reliably. Shotguns work consistently in terms of ADS and hipfire, while AMRs require complete luck to hit off of bipods. Weapons that rely on luck to hit are not good to have in MP FPS games.

    Because AMRs are so restricted in what they can do well, players who want to use them will tend to gravitate towards a playstyle that hurts their team and makes the game less fun for everyone else.

    By the way, lying about the game only demonstrates you lack an argument. Shotguns can't "easily aim and blast targets a few dozen meters away without even accurately lining up the shot" and ARs can't do "full-auto headshots across the map at up to 770 RPM, either way it only takes 2 shots to secure a kill." That's beyond hyperbole.
    Nope, those are the exact stats for the guns.  The 1907 has a fire rate of 770, a predetermined recoil pattern for the first few shots (as all ARs do), and does enough minimum damage that it can 2HK across entire maps, and waddaya know, you can even mount a 3x scope on it.  Shotguns fire dozens of projectiles but only need a fraction that number to secure a kill, even at range.

    Want to know some rather interesting stats?
    ◇The only SARs with a lower bullet velocity then the Kar98K and Krag are the M1 and 1-5, all the others have not only higher velocities but also lower drag (same numbers attached, but the engine attaches a multiplier to BAs, SLRs and AMRs)
    ◇SLRs have the lowest headshot multiplier at a mere 1.65x, preventing them from ever getting a 1HK, and even BAs have a <2 multiplier while SARs and ARs actually get a 2.1x(no idea about AMR multipliers though, have yet to be headshot by one with a known base damage, it's probably also <2 though)
    ◇All shotguns except the Drilling share the same damage profile with ~7.2 max damage per pellet, drop off starting around a dozen meters and finally hitting a minimum of 2 after 25m, the Drilling only being different by dealing a single point less max damage, they all maintain a 2x headshot multiplier and use the old pellet distribution where it isn't uncommon for all the pellets to group up in one small portion of the spread and sometimes seem to duplicate or bend their trajectory mid-flight.


    My whole problem with this discussion is that the AMRs are objectively garbage, ruined by being tied to a broken mechanic that forces people to adopt a playstyle people call "campy" (often it's just hiding for a moment to get the drop on an enemy, then moving on) yet people are here demanding they get nerfed even further into the dust.  And I can tell you right now, everyone demanding such is only doing so because they got killed by one, ending the streak they were on running about without giving a damn what was going on around them.  Everyone knows Assault is OP but won't admit it, so the moment anything other than Assault kills them they'll demand it nerfed, even if it's utter garbage and absolutely everyone knows it, they'll even seriously demand joke weapons like the Liberator and Kolibri to be nerfed if you manage to kill them with it.
    M1907 minimum damage is 17. Don't know where you got the 2.1x headshot modifier, but let's use it. 17 x 2.1 = 35.7. 35.7 x 2 = 71.4. 71.4 < 100. So no. Even if you magicked out two consecutive "full-auto" headshots "across the map" with an M1907, you would not 2HK a full health enemy.

    As for shotguns... I think you already proved my point. You said shotguns could "easily aim and blast targets a few dozen meters away without even accurately lining up the shot." A "few dozen meters" is at least 36 meters. Pellets do 2 damage at 25 meters and beyond. Again, not sure what your source is on the 2x damage multiplier, but let's use it. 4 damage per pellet on a headshot. 100/4 = 25. So you'd need to hit 25 pellets out of 32 (or 48 for the Drilling) on the head, or compensate misses with double the number of upper torso hits. At 36 meters. Now, I don't have data on the pellet spread patterns, but this isn't happening, least of all on shots you're not accurately lining up. Whether you're using inner and outer circles or just an RNG cone, it's mathematically just not going to happen. Even if it was pure RNG inside a cone and you hit the jackpot and grouped all those pellets into one head-sized area at 36 or more meters, it would be such an insane fluke it's not even worth noting.

    I agree that AMRs are bad because of how poor they are for meaningful playstyles. That's why I suggest nerfing the infantry non-headshot damage as part of an overall re-balancing of the weapon, which I (and others) have laid out in other threads if not this one as well. Assault weapons are certainly generally good, but every other class can beat them just fine.
Sign In or Register to comment.