Stepping on some toes now. (Talking about players of BFV)

Comments

  • Hawxxeye
    8039 postsMember, Battlefield 3, Battlefield 4, Battlefield Hardline, Battlefield, Battlefield 1, CTE, BF1IncursionsAlpha, Battlefield V Member
    edited February 21
    SirBobdk said:
    CSO7777 said:
    SirBobdk said:
    There has been more or less the same discussion since BF42.
    BF is a casual pub game with many different types of players in terms of age, skills, time to play, how seriously they play and how much they bother to learn the game. 
    In addition to many people's desire to just play solo for a few maps and have some fun.
    That is the level of public servers and has always been imo. You cannot take 64 anonymous players and put them on the same server and expect an optimal result. It's usually just beautiful chaos
    If you want something more imo, it requires private servers and a clan structure as in the past, where like-minded people joined their favorit server and used teamspeak/discord.
    The game does not provide it, you need a medic or a hp-station to heal yourself. You need a support to get ammo or an ammo-station for it. 
    Which is a design failure if try to please the players you just described. 
    I am all for always self healing back to 100% and instead of support giving me ammo, ammo-station or picking up downed enemy weapon. Even if a am not a lonewolf but these days you really cant rely on your teammates. 

    I rather have a medic or a hp station etc like it is now + you get ammo by taking up ammo from those you killed and running from one site to another you should be fine with ammo and dont panic press C as fast as you get hit, many times your HP will go back to full depending on how many times you have been hit, just use your 1 bandange when you really need it.
    For me, making health a "sparse resource" is just distracting players from having fun. Full regen (and no health pack) worked fine and gave a better flow in the game, win a gun-fight, move on and you get full health for the next encounter.

    Now you go in a gun-fight, heal, go in another gun-fight and then have to search for healing somewhere (often travelling some distance back and forth). This breaks up the game play and makes players "waste time" on getting health, instead of PTFOing and shooting at enemies.

    The "limited health" also makes people play more defensively, they know that getting hit will have a high cost.

    And giving medics the most limited guns, doesn't really improve the situation. Medics are vital for the attrition-system and on larger maps you see very few medics, because their guns are "useless" at anything but close range.

    I don't see attrition doing anything good for the game.

    Its called teamplay, find someone to play with that play medic or play medic yourself for your squad, making everyone getting full health becuse they are unable to do whats need to be done is just a poor excuse imo, someone who have more skills and/or are better on manageing their only bandage they have and not panic using when taking one hit should be "rewarded" to be able to go longer and most of the time you only need 1 banadage to get from one site to another and if you get low, you try to push anyway and sometimes it works sometimes it dosent. BF series have been too casual friendly and even if I dont want it to go into a game like squad or hell let loose the balancing is better this way imo.

    When you play medic or bigger maps you need to plan accordently, play with your squad, make sure to put down smokes and give bandages/reviving while pushing an objective. Its not a solo game, then ppl can play single player.
    Well, you are in a tiny majority of people that like atttition.  The vast majority want to see it gone.  I’d b very surprised to see it back.  
    Dice tried with attrition to improve team play and limit the Lone Wolf . In theory it was a good idea, but imo it didnt really work. The number of players who want to take the needed rolle in a squard and team play is just to low if they even know how. And those who want to pto just find them self running low on almost everything. It just put limit to the pto imo. But I do think it was a good idea for planes.
    For normal players it is lousy even for planes.
    You get scratched by something and you feel compelled to go repair less you get attacked by a serious threat while being at less than 100%.
    In Al Sudan Conquest both of the available plane resupply stations are deeeeeeep within the side controlled by the GER faction so the US planes have venture into enemy territory to resupply.
    .
    The vehicle attrition would had made some sense if it had the benefit of giving much stronger weapons to the vehicles. Right now they are as weak as in other BF titles so it only feels like if they had things taken away from them in BFV.
    The BFF colonel type players still destroy everyone just like in other titles, especially the pilots.
    .
    So for me the BFV attrition was a complete failure that only added more chores to our gameplay loop
  • SirBobdk
    5379 postsMember, Battlefield 3, Battlefield 4, Battlefield, Battlefield 1, Battlefield V Member
    Hawxxeye said:
    SirBobdk said:
    CSO7777 said:
    SirBobdk said:
    There has been more or less the same discussion since BF42.
    BF is a casual pub game with many different types of players in terms of age, skills, time to play, how seriously they play and how much they bother to learn the game. 
    In addition to many people's desire to just play solo for a few maps and have some fun.
    That is the level of public servers and has always been imo. You cannot take 64 anonymous players and put them on the same server and expect an optimal result. It's usually just beautiful chaos
    If you want something more imo, it requires private servers and a clan structure as in the past, where like-minded people joined their favorit server and used teamspeak/discord.
    The game does not provide it, you need a medic or a hp-station to heal yourself. You need a support to get ammo or an ammo-station for it. 
    Which is a design failure if try to please the players you just described. 
    I am all for always self healing back to 100% and instead of support giving me ammo, ammo-station or picking up downed enemy weapon. Even if a am not a lonewolf but these days you really cant rely on your teammates. 

    I rather have a medic or a hp station etc like it is now + you get ammo by taking up ammo from those you killed and running from one site to another you should be fine with ammo and dont panic press C as fast as you get hit, many times your HP will go back to full depending on how many times you have been hit, just use your 1 bandange when you really need it.
    For me, making health a "sparse resource" is just distracting players from having fun. Full regen (and no health pack) worked fine and gave a better flow in the game, win a gun-fight, move on and you get full health for the next encounter.

    Now you go in a gun-fight, heal, go in another gun-fight and then have to search for healing somewhere (often travelling some distance back and forth). This breaks up the game play and makes players "waste time" on getting health, instead of PTFOing and shooting at enemies.

    The "limited health" also makes people play more defensively, they know that getting hit will have a high cost.

    And giving medics the most limited guns, doesn't really improve the situation. Medics are vital for the attrition-system and on larger maps you see very few medics, because their guns are "useless" at anything but close range.

    I don't see attrition doing anything good for the game.

    Its called teamplay, find someone to play with that play medic or play medic yourself for your squad, making everyone getting full health becuse they are unable to do whats need to be done is just a poor excuse imo, someone who have more skills and/or are better on manageing their only bandage they have and not panic using when taking one hit should be "rewarded" to be able to go longer and most of the time you only need 1 banadage to get from one site to another and if you get low, you try to push anyway and sometimes it works sometimes it dosent. BF series have been too casual friendly and even if I dont want it to go into a game like squad or hell let loose the balancing is better this way imo.

    When you play medic or bigger maps you need to plan accordently, play with your squad, make sure to put down smokes and give bandages/reviving while pushing an objective. Its not a solo game, then ppl can play single player.
    Well, you are in a tiny majority of people that like atttition.  The vast majority want to see it gone.  I’d b very surprised to see it back.  
    Dice tried with attrition to improve team play and limit the Lone Wolf . In theory it was a good idea, but imo it didnt really work. The number of players who want to take the needed rolle in a squard and team play is just to low if they even know how. And those who want to pto just find them self running low on almost everything. It just put limit to the pto imo. But I do think it was a good idea for planes.

    .
    So for me the BFV attrition was a complete failure that only added more chores to our gameplay loop
    I feel the same. The more complex you make a casual pub game the higher impact it has on the gameplay.
    The series had a good concept from BF42 up until BF2 and even BC2. It began to change with BF3/4 even if they were good games. I have mixed feelings about BF1, but imo BFV is is so far away from what I found to be fun in a BF game. To many stupied changes just for the sake of making changes. I hope they will return to the concept that worked in the past and especialy the mapdesign. 
  • Hawxxeye
    8039 postsMember, Battlefield 3, Battlefield 4, Battlefield Hardline, Battlefield, Battlefield 1, CTE, BF1IncursionsAlpha, Battlefield V Member
    SirBobdk said:
    Hawxxeye said:
    SirBobdk said:
    CSO7777 said:
    SirBobdk said:
    There has been more or less the same discussion since BF42.
    BF is a casual pub game with many different types of players in terms of age, skills, time to play, how seriously they play and how much they bother to learn the game. 
    In addition to many people's desire to just play solo for a few maps and have some fun.
    That is the level of public servers and has always been imo. You cannot take 64 anonymous players and put them on the same server and expect an optimal result. It's usually just beautiful chaos
    If you want something more imo, it requires private servers and a clan structure as in the past, where like-minded people joined their favorit server and used teamspeak/discord.
    The game does not provide it, you need a medic or a hp-station to heal yourself. You need a support to get ammo or an ammo-station for it. 
    Which is a design failure if try to please the players you just described. 
    I am all for always self healing back to 100% and instead of support giving me ammo, ammo-station or picking up downed enemy weapon. Even if a am not a lonewolf but these days you really cant rely on your teammates. 

    I rather have a medic or a hp station etc like it is now + you get ammo by taking up ammo from those you killed and running from one site to another you should be fine with ammo and dont panic press C as fast as you get hit, many times your HP will go back to full depending on how many times you have been hit, just use your 1 bandange when you really need it.
    For me, making health a "sparse resource" is just distracting players from having fun. Full regen (and no health pack) worked fine and gave a better flow in the game, win a gun-fight, move on and you get full health for the next encounter.

    Now you go in a gun-fight, heal, go in another gun-fight and then have to search for healing somewhere (often travelling some distance back and forth). This breaks up the game play and makes players "waste time" on getting health, instead of PTFOing and shooting at enemies.

    The "limited health" also makes people play more defensively, they know that getting hit will have a high cost.

    And giving medics the most limited guns, doesn't really improve the situation. Medics are vital for the attrition-system and on larger maps you see very few medics, because their guns are "useless" at anything but close range.

    I don't see attrition doing anything good for the game.

    Its called teamplay, find someone to play with that play medic or play medic yourself for your squad, making everyone getting full health becuse they are unable to do whats need to be done is just a poor excuse imo, someone who have more skills and/or are better on manageing their only bandage they have and not panic using when taking one hit should be "rewarded" to be able to go longer and most of the time you only need 1 banadage to get from one site to another and if you get low, you try to push anyway and sometimes it works sometimes it dosent. BF series have been too casual friendly and even if I dont want it to go into a game like squad or hell let loose the balancing is better this way imo.

    When you play medic or bigger maps you need to plan accordently, play with your squad, make sure to put down smokes and give bandages/reviving while pushing an objective. Its not a solo game, then ppl can play single player.
    Well, you are in a tiny majority of people that like atttition.  The vast majority want to see it gone.  I’d b very surprised to see it back.  
    Dice tried with attrition to improve team play and limit the Lone Wolf . In theory it was a good idea, but imo it didnt really work. The number of players who want to take the needed rolle in a squard and team play is just to low if they even know how. And those who want to pto just find them self running low on almost everything. It just put limit to the pto imo. But I do think it was a good idea for planes.

    .
    So for me the BFV attrition was a complete failure that only added more chores to our gameplay loop
    I feel the same. The more complex you make a casual pub game the higher impact it has on the gameplay.
    The series had a good concept from BF42 up until BF2 and even BC2. It began to change with BF3/4 even if they were good games. I have mixed feelings about BF1, but imo BFV is is so far away from what I found to be fun in a BF game. To many stupied changes just for the sake of making changes. I hope they will return to the concept that worked in the past and especialy the mapdesign. 
    I think I have seen enough of BFV to believe it was made out of just the need to fulfill a contractual obligation and not a desire to make a WW2 game. BF1 was a mix of removed BF elements and resused Battlefront concepts but there was at least some passion behind it as one can feel in the better maps and the Operations Mode
  • sonnov7
    68 postsMember, Battlefield 4, Battlefield, Battlefield 1, Battlefield V Member
    edited February 21
    Bf is a team based game shouldn’t their be an emphasis towards ‘lone wolfs to join a platoon’ this option should be easy as choosing a load out’ perhaps players could be suggested to apply or request to join a certain platoon based on the players skill level/rank and the platoons rank perhaps it could be a comparative system so platoons and lone wolfs are matched together I.e a new player could be matched or recommended to a new platoon and a veteran player could be matched with a competitive platoon.
  • sonnov7
    68 postsMember, Battlefield 4, Battlefield, Battlefield 1, Battlefield V Member
    edited February 21
    So many times when I play with randoms as, squad leader they tend to do their own thing but I have learned even though you see a better objective to be played I tend to follow my subjects in my squad and hope 1 other random in the squad catches on if that happens I tend to find the 4th player eventually realises to “lead from behind”.
  • therealstorey
    11 postsMember, Battlefield 3, Battlefield 4, Battlefield, Battlefield 1, BF1IncursionsAlpha, Battlefield V Member
    I agree with the team misdirection and players not playing their class. They removed the commander who provides an overview and calls in support for teammates, maybe to bring it back? They could also allow squad leaders to communicate with other squad leaders to improve cohesion. But I agree, some guys get it and run through half a team with coordination and other-guys don't. Maybe shuffle these pylons that don't play cohesively to a lesser squad automatically. I often come in mid-round and not be able to find a decent squad and just leave adding to the problem, but getting trashed for 4 rounds straight is not efficient use of my time so I easily move on or just don't play when it's like that. 
    The other thing that gets me with this game is same ping, on two different days and one it's handing me head-shots and the other I can't hit a thing. The gameplay is sloppily inconsistent, again I just choose not to play sometimes and I imagine this is the general experience.
  • sonnov7
    68 postsMember, Battlefield 4, Battlefield, Battlefield 1, Battlefield V Member
    @therealstorey agree I think complex match fixing based on analysis of team play ‘squad score’ etc
  • Shy_pipo_ape
    292 postsMember, Battlefield 3, Battlefield 4, Battlefield Hardline, Battlefield, Battlefield 1, Battlefield V Member
    The potential positive from skill based matchmaking could be finding and playing with like-minded players even though matches would be more competitive higher one's skill goes.
  • iamwiener
    436 postsMember, Battlefield 3, Battlefield 4, Battlefield, Battlefield 1, CTE, Battlefield V Member
    edited February 22
    IMO attrition fails on bad map design. There are some maps where I am forced to use knife and pistol just because the resupply station is too far away. This is really backing off any aggressive pto'ing. Not to mention some sector based game modes that have utterly stupid placed tank resupply stations or even none in a sector at all!?

    About clan stacking: I would rather have the steamrolling e-sports platoons in a server (it's hard against them and no fun with them) from time to time than losing the chance to play with my mates due to team balancing.
    A side note about the e-sport BF5 players: it comforts me to know that only those who are "not that good" in their e-sport actually waste their time in public games :p
    Post edited by iamwiener on
  • Hawxxeye
    8039 postsMember, Battlefield 3, Battlefield 4, Battlefield Hardline, Battlefield, Battlefield 1, CTE, BF1IncursionsAlpha, Battlefield V Member
    iamwiener said:
    IMO attrition fails on bad map design. There are some maps where I am forced to use knife and pistol just because the resupply station is too far away. This is really backing of any aggressive pto'ing. Not to mention some sector based game modes that have utterly stupid placed tank resupply stations or even none in a sector at all!?

    About clan stacking: I would rather have the steamrolling e-sports platoons in a server (it's hard against them and no fun with them) from time to time than losing the chance to play with my mates due to team balancing.
    A side note about the e-sport BF5 players: it comforts me to know that only those who are "not that good" in their e-sport actually waste their time in public games :p
    They are the high schoolers in the elementary schools tournament

  • trip1ex
    5331 postsMember, Battlefield 3, Battlefield 4, Battlefield, Battlefield 1, CTE, BF1IncursionsAlpha, Battlefield V Member
    edited February 22
    iamwiener said:
    IMO attrition fails on bad map design. There are some maps where I am forced to use knife and pistol just because the resupply station is too far away. This is really backing off any aggressive pto'ing. Not to mention some sector based game modes that have utterly stupid placed tank resupply stations or even none in a sector at all!?

    About clan stacking: I would rather have the steamrolling e-sports platoons in a server (it's hard against them and no fun with them) from time to time than losing the chance to play with my mates due to team balancing.
    A side note about the e-sport BF5 players: it comforts me to know that only those who are "not that good" in their e-sport actually waste their time in public games :p
    you're supposed to run over the  dead bodies to pick up bullets.    IN past BF games, you picked up kits if you were low on ammo. 

    Also there has always been some level of 'attrition' in BF games.  I ran out of ammo all the time in BF1.  

    Oh and I'd rather have both a solo join and pre-made environment to choose from.  
  • iamwiener
    436 postsMember, Battlefield 3, Battlefield 4, Battlefield, Battlefield 1, CTE, Battlefield V Member
    trip1ex said:
    iamwiener said:
    IMO attrition fails on bad map design. There are some maps where I am forced to use knife and pistol just because the resupply station is too far away. This is really backing off any aggressive pto'ing. Not to mention some sector based game modes that have utterly stupid placed tank resupply stations or even none in a sector at all!?

    About clan stacking: I would rather have the steamrolling e-sports platoons in a server (it's hard against them and no fun with them) from time to time than losing the chance to play with my mates due to team balancing.
    A side note about the e-sport BF5 players: it comforts me to know that only those who are "not that good" in their e-sport actually waste their time in public games :p
    you're supposed to run over the  dead bodies to pick up bullets.   

    they're mostly almost "empty" or belong to guns with small clips.... at least for me. Not sure if a dropped clip really just contains the remaining bullets in it. I often get around 10'ish from picking up.

  • losthunter340
    207 postsMember, Battlefield 3, Battlefield 4, Battlefield, Battlefield 1, Battlefield V Member
    iamwiener said:
    trip1ex said:
    iamwiener said:
    IMO attrition fails on bad map design. There are some maps where I am forced to use knife and pistol just because the resupply station is too far away. This is really backing off any aggressive pto'ing. Not to mention some sector based game modes that have utterly stupid placed tank resupply stations or even none in a sector at all!?

    About clan stacking: I would rather have the steamrolling e-sports platoons in a server (it's hard against them and no fun with them) from time to time than losing the chance to play with my mates due to team balancing.
    A side note about the e-sport BF5 players: it comforts me to know that only those who are "not that good" in their e-sport actually waste their time in public games :p
    you're supposed to run over the  dead bodies to pick up bullets.   

    they're mostly almost "empty" or belong to guns with small clips.... at least for me. Not sure if a dropped clip really just contains the remaining bullets in it. I often get around 10'ish from picking up.


    I think its the same amount all the time, but still you should not have that much problem with ammo tbf if you are not camping...
  • iamwiener
    436 postsMember, Battlefield 3, Battlefield 4, Battlefield, Battlefield 1, CTE, Battlefield V Member
    iamwiener said:
    trip1ex said:
    iamwiener said:
    IMO attrition fails on bad map design. There are some maps where I am forced to use knife and pistol just because the resupply station is too far away. This is really backing off any aggressive pto'ing. Not to mention some sector based game modes that have utterly stupid placed tank resupply stations or even none in a sector at all!?

    About clan stacking: I would rather have the steamrolling e-sports platoons in a server (it's hard against them and no fun with them) from time to time than losing the chance to play with my mates due to team balancing.
    A side note about the e-sport BF5 players: it comforts me to know that only those who are "not that good" in their e-sport actually waste their time in public games :p
    you're supposed to run over the  dead bodies to pick up bullets.   

    they're mostly almost "empty" or belong to guns with small clips.... at least for me. Not sure if a dropped clip really just contains the remaining bullets in it. I often get around 10'ish from picking up.


    I think its the same amount all the time, but still you should not have that much problem with ammo tbf if you are not camping...

    One example from the other day: Marita CQ British

    Axis held first of their 2 flags (A+B) and had stronghold on our second flag (E). They just took central flag (C) and I was alone on D stopping multiple attacking D from the artillery plateau and the cutting passages. My smg was quickly low on bullets. Half enemies I killed were on that plateau outside flag burn and 10 bullets pick up aint much for an smg.

    Ammo stations around:
    C-flag which was held by enemy and is placed in favour to Axis anyway
    B-flag which was held by enemy and can be used to shoot into C while British counterpart E-Flag station doesn't
    E-flag not just under attack but also way to far off

    Marita is one of the newer maps and could have been a good one but "eye candy" defined the map layout and not gameplay balance

  • fragnstein
    867 postsMember, Battlefield 3, Battlefield 4, Battlefield, Battlefield 1, Battlefield V Member
    You got ammo stations all around you and yet its the games fault you choose not to go for any of them
  • iamwiener
    436 postsMember, Battlefield 3, Battlefield 4, Battlefield, Battlefield 1, CTE, Battlefield V Member
    edited February 23
    You got ammo stations all around you and yet its the games fault you choose not to go for any of them

    Sorry, but did you read my post? I tried to explain that on certain map layouts (Marita CQ in that particular case) the station locations are in favour to one side. I am one of the very few players who has no problem with attrition system in general.
    I put it a bit different: Marita has 6 flags. A+B are "home flags" for axis while E+F are "home flags" for British. Here is the first flaw in map design. While Axis spawn is wide with access to A and B, the British side is linear with spawn-F-E in a row.  C-flag, which is the natural 3rd one to capture for Axis, has its own ammo station (located towards Axis) while D-flag has none. Running from D-flag to E-flag ammo station and back to D takes almost a minute. Within that minute, I would have lost D or most likely get shot in the back from the plateau.
    .
    Another example? Rush wake island. When fighting over the hangar sector (4th I believe), the tank resupply station is far on defenders side behind the m-coms of that sector. Keep in mind that ANYTHING that shoots a tank interrupts the resupply cycle making it almost impossible to use that station during a half decent match.
    .
    Maybe you play different maps and modes but there are many without "ammo stations all around you".

  • losthunter340
    207 postsMember, Battlefield 3, Battlefield 4, Battlefield, Battlefield 1, Battlefield V Member
    iamwiener said:
    iamwiener said:
    trip1ex said:
    iamwiener said:
    IMO attrition fails on bad map design. There are some maps where I am forced to use knife and pistol just because the resupply station is too far away. This is really backing off any aggressive pto'ing. Not to mention some sector based game modes that have utterly stupid placed tank resupply stations or even none in a sector at all!?

    About clan stacking: I would rather have the steamrolling e-sports platoons in a server (it's hard against them and no fun with them) from time to time than losing the chance to play with my mates due to team balancing.
    A side note about the e-sport BF5 players: it comforts me to know that only those who are "not that good" in their e-sport actually waste their time in public games :p
    you're supposed to run over the  dead bodies to pick up bullets.   

    they're mostly almost "empty" or belong to guns with small clips.... at least for me. Not sure if a dropped clip really just contains the remaining bullets in it. I often get around 10'ish from picking up.


    I think its the same amount all the time, but still you should not have that much problem with ammo tbf if you are not camping...

    One example from the other day: Marita CQ British

    Axis held first of their 2 flags (A+B) and had stronghold on our second flag (E). They just took central flag (C) and I was alone on D stopping multiple attacking D from the artillery plateau and the cutting passages. My smg was quickly low on bullets. Half enemies I killed were on that plateau outside flag burn and 10 bullets pick up aint much for an smg.

    Ammo stations around:
    C-flag which was held by enemy and is placed in favour to Axis anyway
    B-flag which was held by enemy and can be used to shoot into C while British counterpart E-Flag station doesn't
    E-flag not just under attack but also way to far off

    Marita is one of the newer maps and could have been a good one but "eye candy" defined the map layout and not gameplay balance


    Push the enemy then and pick up ammo from those you killed. Stuff happen sometimes and you will go out of ammo sometimes, I would not want 31/1000 "becuse otherwise its not a fun gameplay" or some ppl want your HP to regen to full, maybe we should just make ammo refill it self too...

    Here is where the teamplay comes in, good support players knows about the no ammo station on D, they use to put down boxes with ammo and you should have had teammates around you too, everyone cant push to win but if you where alone on one site its not your fault that you cant hold it, its better to fallback and get some ammo back and then try to get back D or tell your squad/team that you need help D.

    It cant be ammo/HP station after every few meters, I dont saying you apply that but it feels like that when some are complaining about it, better they just make ammo and HP regen out of combat to full to keep "everyone" happy and make the game "fun"
  • Greeny_Huwjarz
    4808 postsMember, Battlefield 4, Battlefield, Battlefield 1, CTE, Battlefield V Member
    No-one asked for attrition. I don't remember seeing many in favour before or after. The broke something that wasn't broken. There are many many threads complaining about it. I give it a 0.01% chance of returning in the next game. 
  • Hawxxeye
    8039 postsMember, Battlefield 3, Battlefield 4, Battlefield Hardline, Battlefield, Battlefield 1, CTE, BF1IncursionsAlpha, Battlefield V Member
    edited February 23
    No-one asked for attrition. I don't remember seeing many in favour before or after. The broke something that wasn't broken. There are many many threads complaining about it. I give it a 0.01% chance of returning in the next game. 
    There were people who asked for the return of airfields and airfields resupply etc.
    But for these things imho require the game to have a very different pace from what we got in BFV. Fast paced gameplay + dull resupply timesinks = too much time spent on preparing for each and every encounter lest you start the fight at a disadvantage.
  • tempo_rarity
    1471 postsMember, Battlefield 4, Battlefield, Battlefield 1, Battlefield V Member
    ^ The timely Tower Of Babel reference on Page 13 was nicely fitting , and can perhaps be safely retrofitted into stating this : 
    We have a War (BF5) to build our Wins or Losses in , but the workers (Players) are partially from different worlds (Games) .

    "'yapbe'law' chenmoHmeH yapbe' ghotpu''e'!!!"
    The suddenly screaming and freshly-insane bunch of Klingon soldiers shouting this out abruptly begins running off as one onto the Battlefield .
    All the dumbstruck Allied Romulan soldiers that are in the defense lines with them quickly whip out their translators :
    "A Thousand Throats Can Be Slit In A Single Night By A Running Warrior"??
    "What?" the Romulans mutter under their breath while remaining in full defensive preparations ;
    "but those are TANKS coming! . . . . what 'throats' ??"

    So-o . . .
    Two Wars In One?

    In the heat of a good old BFV Battle nowadays , aren't we BFers also fighting with and against othergameworldly 'aliens' as well as with our more-familiar BF 'brothers'?
    If BF4 has a (guessed at) +-10% influx of CoD Players , is it safe to predict that BF5 might have up to a 30-40%+ influx of these same type of Players?
    and . . .
    If there IS this long-ago-suggested-by-others 'evolutionary process' underway , surely it's still in the stages where we're just not really able to fully see what it will become yet .
    It's not like this is a decade old Game like BF4 , or even half that as is BF1 ; Five is only two and so it could be argued that it's still in a sort of state of 'ungrown' immaturity .

    To me it seems like I see PTO occurring much more frequently in these older , matured Games - where it can be more reliably counted on to occur when needed .
    Yet still , there is already way more PTO in the current BFV than there was way back in the beginnings of it .
    Its infrequency and unreliability of occurring has fallen , which perhaps implies that this 'maturing' is well underway .

    But , with 'workers' arriving from 'elsewhere' to help 'build' our Wins/Losses , we must add the final ingredient : Chance Math .
    If it randomly inserts a higher ratio of supposed 'BFers' in a round do we get more PTO (?)
    If it randomly inserts a higher ratio of supposed 'CoDers' in a round do we get more R-n-G (?)
    (both unanswerable questions really , as Chance Math will also play around with its insertion ratios of 'Stat chasers'-vs-'Win-chasers')

    If BFV is a bag of Lemons , some pucker and flinch and make weird faces , and some make Lemonade .
    Still too , some can eat a Lemon like it were an apple , and others too have no clue whatsoever on how to make drinkable Lemonade .
    We work with what we got (so far) .

    . . . 

    No ammo?
    In the game of Ice Hockey if you happen to somehow drop or lose your precious stick (your 'main') you're still a Hockey Player .
    You're less effective to be sure , but you can still bump and crash and block the Enemy and generally be a hindrance to them .
    This is usually when such a Player is forced to rely on their smarts and knowledge of the Game as they begin reading plays and deciding what to do next .
    For me , it is this sort of eventual 'mindful Play' that endears me to the trials of BFV . 
    It's never easy , and that's just fine and dandy with me .
    It's actually sort of what I want anyway - a hard go of it .
Sign In or Register to comment.