MMG need telescopic sights it's historically accurate

«1
williamparkerrob
6 postsMember, Battlefield 4, Battlefield, Battlefield 1, Battlefield V Member
Is make defending a flag easier. forward assault more possible. It would force more people to dig the trenches. My argument is you already have them pinned down with a heavy gun with barely any range. Telescopic sight would give at least X3 range. Yes it would be garbage for scoping at things up close. Scope still wouldn't matter on the move. Just like the anti-material rifles. It makes suppressing snipers easier. Maybe do it because it's right.

Comments

  • A_al_K_pacino_A
    1055 postsMember, Battlefield 4, Battlefield, Battlefield 1, CTE, Battlefield V Member
    Worst mistake the game made. Camping and useless players, notice I'm not using the word bad or low-skilled here, are in every bush with mmgs doing nothing but getting kills every now and then. A better idea would be to remove them or failing that the need to use the bipod.

    Let's hope the next game has nothing like it.
  • talhaONE
    969 postsMember, Battlefield 3, Battlefield 4, Battlefield Hardline, Battlefield, Battlefield 1, Battlefield V Member
    (Quote)
    Agreed 100% 

    What most people fail to realize is that in the original design balance of the game, MMG's offered actual suppression which made the suppressed less accurate. Made their fire random. This was to balance MMG's being static, prone guns. 

    But people complained and suppression was removed/changed to just "spotting", which has little use in regards to the defense of the MMG prone player. 

    If MMG's are not going to be easy kill targets due to being prone and not have actual suppression, they need an upside and that should be range with scopes. 

    When gameplay is designed to be COD run and gun, but guns are offered to the player but must  be used prone, there must be balance decisions to ensure those who choose MMG game play have a fair chance like everyone else. 

    I have not even started on netcode, which favors the moving target 100% of the time. MMG's suck in BFV for a number of reasons. Terrible design decisions and netcode. 

    MMGs used to be a lot better when the game first released. They nerfed them into the death because of Action Man noobs.
  • Dr_Steamfur
    337 postsMember, Battlefield, Battlefield 1, Battlefield V Member
    talhaONE said:
    (Quote)
    Agreed 100% 

    What most people fail to realize is that in the original design balance of the game, MMG's offered actual suppression which made the suppressed less accurate. Made their fire random. This was to balance MMG's being static, prone guns. 

    But people complained and suppression was removed/changed to just "spotting", which has little use in regards to the defense of the MMG prone player. 

    If MMG's are not going to be easy kill targets due to being prone and not have actual suppression, they need an upside and that should be range with scopes. 

    When gameplay is designed to be COD run and gun, but guns are offered to the player but must  be used prone, there must be balance decisions to ensure those who choose MMG game play have a fair chance like everyone else. 

    I have not even started on netcode, which favors the moving target 100% of the time. MMG's suck in BFV for a number of reasons. Terrible design decisions and netcode. 

    MMGs used to be a lot better when the game first released. They nerfed them into the death because of Action Man noobs.
    Ya, they were actually usable when the game first launched, even without suppression. But action man players kept complaining about campers killing them as they ran full speed ahead down an open ally. But nerf after nerf has left them pretty useless in the current game. 
  • DingoKillr
    4301 postsMember, Battlefield 3, Battlefield 4, Battlefield, Battlefield 1, CTE, BF1IncursionsAlpha, Battlefield V Member
    Is make defending a flag easier. forward assault more possible. It would force more people to dig the trenches. My argument is you already have them pinned down with a heavy gun with barely any range. Telescopic sight would give at least X3 range. Yes it would be garbage for scoping at things up close. Scope still wouldn't matter on the move. Just like the anti-material rifles. It makes suppressing snipers easier. Maybe do it because it's right.

    Just adding 3x scope is not going to make better at range(recoil) and worse up close(bipod hip fire).

    If MMG are to be better at long ranges then the closer range needs to be offset otherwise you end up with a go to gun.
  • Hawxxeye
    7564 postsMember, Battlefield 3, Battlefield 4, Battlefield Hardline, Battlefield, Battlefield 1, CTE, BF1IncursionsAlpha, Battlefield V Member
    edited July 30
    Is make defending a flag easier. forward assault more possible. It would force more people to dig the trenches. My argument is you already have them pinned down with a heavy gun with barely any range. Telescopic sight would give at least X3 range. Yes it would be garbage for scoping at things up close. Scope still wouldn't matter on the move. Just like the anti-material rifles. It makes suppressing snipers easier. Maybe do it because it's right.

    Just adding 3x scope is not going to make better at range(recoil) and worse up close(bipod hip fire).

    If MMG are to be better at long ranges then the closer range needs to be offset otherwise you end up with a go to gun.
    I think that the need to bipod is enough of an offset already, they are free headshots, which are 2-3 shot kills for several popular guns.
  • Matty101yttam
    1441 postsMember, Battlefield 3, Battlefield 4, Battlefield, Battlefield 1, Battlefield V Member
    edited July 31
    Not that there's any point since development has stopped...
    but the lmg's should have some decent sights, and recoil per bullet should be upped so burst is required for high fire rate, at low fire rate people get a chance to dodge so imo that's fine(however the damage per bullet may need to be dropped because low firerate tend to have high bullet damage).

    MMG's are another category, imo they should be treated like a gadget and be in the same slot as ammo,they should be placed down so they can't be easily moved around and have decent damage accuracy and firerate, you can have a full load of ammo at spawn and thats it no excess for reload, then allow other support to man alongside them if they want more ammo, this would be realistic in terms of mg teams and give the ability for high risk high reward gameplay. A mg team can then suppress well with teamwork but will also be very vulnerable and 2 easy kills for those that flank them.
    I think if mmg's were treated as specialised gadgets like this then sights would be fine, as i said high risk high reward. 
  • GrizzGolf
    1392 postsMember, Battlefield 3, Battlefield 4, Battlefield Hardline, Battlefield, Battlefield 1, BF1IncursionsAlpha, Battlefield V Member
    Wait.....They really did have those on MMGs?
  • szrz
    15 postsMember, Battlefield 3, Battlefield 4, Battlefield, Battlefield 1, Battlefield V Member
    edited August 1
    Don't give them such ideas. they are trying to kill BF5 from earliest development stage and MMG 3x or 6x scope would kill it. Moreover Aimbot developers would go into bankruptcy. Last thing BF5 needs is a optics on mmg. Those MMgs are fun now - I dont remember when last time i had to reload my MG42 , probably year ago or so.
  • MrCamp121
    1099 postsMember, Battlefield 3, Battlefield 4, Battlefield, Battlefield 1, Battlefield V Member
    (Quote)
    Ya, they were actually usable when the game first launched, even without suppression. But action man players kept complaining about campers killing them as they ran full speed ahead down an open ally. But nerf after nerf has left them pretty useless in the current game. 

    Yep anyone that moves, can aim, and doesnt require 100 round magazines is an "action man" .
  • TyroneLoyd_TV
    1743 postsMember, Battlefield 3, Battlefield 4, Battlefield Hardline, Battlefield, Battlefield 1, CTE, BF1IncursionsAlpha, Battlefield V Member
    MrCamp121 wrote: »
    (Quote)
    Ya, they were actually usable when the game first launched, even without suppression. But action man players kept complaining about campers killing them as they ran full speed ahead down an open ally. But nerf after nerf has left them pretty useless in the current game. 

    Yep anyone that moves, can aim, and doesnt require 100 round magazines is an "action man" .

    Rip lol
  • CSO7777
    1791 postsMember, Battlefield 3, Battlefield 4, Battlefield, Battlefield 1, CTE, BF1IncursionsAlpha, Battlefield V Member
    Is make defending a flag easier. forward assault more possible. It would force more people to dig the trenches. My argument is you already have them pinned down with a heavy gun with barely any range. Telescopic sight would give at least X3 range. Yes it would be garbage for scoping at things up close. Scope still wouldn't matter on the move. Just like the anti-material rifles. It makes suppressing snipers easier. Maybe do it because it's right.
    Agreed 100% 

    What most people fail to realize is that in the original design balance of the game, MMG's offered actual suppression which made the suppressed less accurate. Made their fire random. This was to balance MMG's being static, prone guns. 

    But people complained and suppression was removed/changed to just "spotting", which has little use in regards to the defense of the MMG prone player. 

    If MMG's are not going to be easy kill targets due to being prone and not have actual suppression, they need an upside and that should be range with scopes. 

    When gameplay is designed to be COD run and gun, but guns are offered to the player but must  be used prone, there must be balance decisions to ensure those who choose MMG game play have a fair chance like everyone else. 

    I have not even started on netcode, which favors the moving target 100% of the time. MMG's suck in BFV for a number of reasons. Terrible design decisions and netcode. 
    I don't really get this "COD run and gun" argument, which has been around since BF3. The fundamental game-play of BF3/BF4/BF1/BFV is more or less the same. Go play BF3/BF4 they are as much COD as BFV (if not even more, especially BF4).

    BF is not a tactical shooter it's a casual game and movement around the map is a fundamental part of how the game works (at least in conquest). If your team is not constantly pushing to cap flags you will loose.

    Weapons that do not work when PTFOing, shouldn't really be in the game. MMGs should have been stationary weapons placed around the map, and not a weapon class for support-players. Dice realized they had failed with the MMGs and nerfed them, but they should have been brave and removed them from the game altogether.

    MMGs was a failed experiment and are part of why BFV is the mess it became.
  • MarxistDictator
    5231 postsMember, Battlefield 3, Battlefield 4, Battlefield Hardline, Battlefield, Battlefield 1, CTE, Battlefield V Member
    MrCamp121 wrote: »
    (Quote)
    Ya, they were actually usable when the game first launched, even without suppression. But action man players kept complaining about campers killing them as they ran full speed ahead down an open ally. But nerf after nerf has left them pretty useless in the current game. 

    Yep anyone that moves, can aim, and doesnt require 100 round magazines is an "action man" .

    You’re right it takes a lot more skill to use a gun with little recoil, no spread and over tuned DPS to the point they ransack SMGs and snipers at their supposed niche. Forgot who the real skilled players were.
  • TyroneLoyd_TV
    1743 postsMember, Battlefield 3, Battlefield 4, Battlefield Hardline, Battlefield, Battlefield 1, CTE, BF1IncursionsAlpha, Battlefield V Member
    edited August 2
    MrCamp121 wrote: »
    (Quote)
    Ya, they were actually usable when the game first launched, even without suppression. But action man players kept complaining about campers killing them as they ran full speed ahead down an open ally. But nerf after nerf has left them pretty useless in the current game. 

    Yep anyone that moves, can aim, and doesnt require 100 round magazines is an "action man" .

    You’re right it takes a lot more skill to use a gun with little recoil, no spread and over tuned DPS to the point they ransack SMGs and snipers at their supposed niche. Forgot who the real skilled players were.

    And you're saying those players can't use mmgs and play well because why?

    Just because some players like to limit themselves to one play style (mmg users) doesnt mean the rest of players are unskilled.

  • TyroneLoyd_TV
    1743 postsMember, Battlefield 3, Battlefield 4, Battlefield Hardline, Battlefield, Battlefield 1, CTE, BF1IncursionsAlpha, Battlefield V Member
    edited August 2
    Along with every other weapon in this game positioning is a aquired skill and that is honestly the most important skill you need in bf. I can only infer that you believe an mmg may require more recoil/spread control? Which on pc is entirely not the case and if you are having trouble (I can only guess this from your comment) then you may have other issues you may need to work out. All weapons in this game require very little control.

    BFV is built on niche mechanics for whatever reason but to say mmgs are harder to use once your set up is a gross overexaggeration
  • MarxistDictator
    5231 postsMember, Battlefield 3, Battlefield 4, Battlefield Hardline, Battlefield, Battlefield 1, CTE, Battlefield V Member
    MrCamp121 wrote: »
    (Quote)
    Ya, they were actually usable when the game first launched, even without suppression. But action man players kept complaining about campers killing them as they ran full speed ahead down an open ally. But nerf after nerf has left them pretty useless in the current game. 

    Yep anyone that moves, can aim, and doesnt require 100 round magazines is an "action man" .

    You’re right it takes a lot more skill to use a gun with little recoil, no spread and over tuned DPS to the point they ransack SMGs and snipers at their supposed niche. Forgot who the real skilled players were.

    And you're saying those players can't use mmgs and play well because why?

    Just because some players like to limit themselves to one play style (mmg users) doesnt mean the rest of players are unskilled.


    Because an MMG user literally does not have the choice to move and aim or do much of anything besides play on a bipod. Which makes him a scrub and unable to play according to assault mains. Also he should apparently have to deal with a ton of drawbacks even on said bipod, because it’s not a professional approved gun like a recoilless/spread-less assault rifle or semi auto which require oodles of skill to use I’ve heard.
  • MarxistDictator
    5231 postsMember, Battlefield 3, Battlefield 4, Battlefield Hardline, Battlefield, Battlefield 1, CTE, Battlefield V Member
    MrCamp121 wrote: »
    (Quote)
    Ya, they were actually usable when the game first launched, even without suppression. But action man players kept complaining about campers killing them as they ran full speed ahead down an open ally. But nerf after nerf has left them pretty useless in the current game. 

    Yep anyone that moves, can aim, and doesnt require 100 round magazines is an "action man" .

    You’re right it takes a lot more skill to use a gun with little recoil, no spread and over tuned DPS to the point they ransack SMGs and snipers at their supposed niche. Forgot who the real skilled players were.

    And you're saying those players can't use mmgs and play well because why?

    Just because some players like to limit themselves to one play style (mmg users) doesnt mean the rest of players are unskilled.

    I didn’t say they couldn’t. Only that they would have a far easier time using assault instead because not only is it not handicapped with a dozen bad mechanics it actually beats down every specialist class of weapon in the game at their own niche. IE, it is stupidly out of balance.

    But let’s keep whining about MGs being used in the only situation the developers even allowed them to be moderately effective instead. This is part of why BF V is garbage.
  • TyroneLoyd_TV
    1743 postsMember, Battlefield 3, Battlefield 4, Battlefield Hardline, Battlefield, Battlefield 1, CTE, BF1IncursionsAlpha, Battlefield V Member
    edited August 2
    MrCamp121 wrote: »
    (Quote)
    Ya, they were actually usable when the game first launched, even without suppression. But action man players kept complaining about campers killing them as they ran full speed ahead down an open ally. But nerf after nerf has left them pretty useless in the current game. 

    Yep anyone that moves, can aim, and doesnt require 100 round magazines is an "action man" .

    You’re right it takes a lot more skill to use a gun with little recoil, no spread and over tuned DPS to the point they ransack SMGs and snipers at their supposed niche. Forgot who the real skilled players were.

    And you're saying those players can't use mmgs and play well because why?

    Just because some players like to limit themselves to one play style (mmg users) doesnt mean the rest of players are unskilled.

    I didn’t say they couldn’t. Only that they would have a far easier time using assault instead because not only is it not handicapped with a dozen bad mechanics it actually beats down every specialist class of weapon in the game at their own niche. IE, it is stupidly out of balance.

    But let’s keep whining about MGs being used in the only situation the developers even allowed them to be moderately effective instead. This is part of why BF V is garbage.

    Doesn't beat medic in cqc , doesn't beat support at extreme cqc with shotguns.

    Mid range is a toss up.
  • MarxistDictator
    5231 postsMember, Battlefield 3, Battlefield 4, Battlefield Hardline, Battlefield, Battlefield 1, CTE, Battlefield V Member
    10+ replies in this thread? Are we tone deaf now too? Definitely living in denial about Assault not being the best class in the game by a large margin already and that not changing if MMGs got the slightest of scraps tossed their way.
Sign In or Register to comment.