Why The Spread Model Is Great (and skill based)

Comments

  • owltro
    3356 postsMember, Battlefield 4, Battlefield Hardline, Battlefield, Battlefield 1 Member
    owltro wrote: »
    Loqtrall wrote: »
    Either way - random spread like that is dumb, punishes accurate burst fire, and shouldn't be in any shooter. This thread is going in circles, has been going in circles for pages now, and is 100% bound to go nowhere. So I'm ducking out on this one. A ton of people seem to dislike this feature (including GameChangers and big YouTubers) and it will more than likely be changed (if not completely overhauled) upon release when the public gets their hands on it - that's the bottom line.

    Its why im not to concerned
    this thread basically comes down to people either thinking randomness is a skill and can somehow be compensated for
    or people that understand random aspects of the game make skill a less important thing to have
    Everyone keeps throwing the word random around like it's 100% random, when really it's only random to some degree, and it wouldn't even be noticeable if you're correctly using your SMG within its effective range. The innaccuracies from SIPS and RBD would still hit if you're aiming at your target's body.
    SIPS makes every shot following the first of a burst increasingly more inaccurate. The randomness from RBD decides the direction that this innacuracy will go in. The innaccuracy will always be the same for that number of the shot; the 2nd shot will always have the same amount of innaccuracy, only the direction of it will differ.
    -
    FSM allows the first shot of a burst to always be 100% accurate, so it will always hit if your crosshairs are on target.
    So, SIPS is the innaccuracy, RBD is the direction of the innaccuracy, and FSM is what keeps the first shot always bullseye.

    I don't care if its 1% random its still random and has no place as far as im concerned in any fps title

    Lol, so what corner someone is camping isn't "random", getting smashed by a zeppelin Cannon isn't "random", getting picked of by a 300m away sniper isn't "random"?

    I don't think the game would be fun with out perpetual randomness. It's a closed system, you can learn the factors and mechanics involved, allowing you to adjust and react accordingly.

    Battlefield games are big open and bombastic. This randomness you hate even the smallest sliver of, fuels this game.

    Just a thought.

    No the corner they are in isn't random the other player chose that
    the person using the cannon aimed and fired at you not random
    the sniper again aimed and fired at you thats also not random those were all player controlled events
    players do what they want and are therefore random. Don't throw the word around.
  • saddlebred12
    341 postsMember, Battlefield 3, Battlefield 4, Battlefield Hardline, Battlefield, Battlefield 1 Member
    owltro wrote: »
    owltro wrote: »
    Loqtrall wrote: »
    Either way - random spread like that is dumb, punishes accurate burst fire, and shouldn't be in any shooter. This thread is going in circles, has been going in circles for pages now, and is 100% bound to go nowhere. So I'm ducking out on this one. A ton of people seem to dislike this feature (including GameChangers and big YouTubers) and it will more than likely be changed (if not completely overhauled) upon release when the public gets their hands on it - that's the bottom line.

    Its why im not to concerned
    this thread basically comes down to people either thinking randomness is a skill and can somehow be compensated for
    or people that understand random aspects of the game make skill a less important thing to have
    Everyone keeps throwing the word random around like it's 100% random, when really it's only random to some degree, and it wouldn't even be noticeable if you're correctly using your SMG within its effective range. The innaccuracies from SIPS and RBD would still hit if you're aiming at your target's body.
    SIPS makes every shot following the first of a burst increasingly more inaccurate. The randomness from RBD decides the direction that this innacuracy will go in. The innaccuracy will always be the same for that number of the shot; the 2nd shot will always have the same amount of innaccuracy, only the direction of it will differ.
    -
    FSM allows the first shot of a burst to always be 100% accurate, so it will always hit if your crosshairs are on target.
    So, SIPS is the innaccuracy, RBD is the direction of the innaccuracy, and FSM is what keeps the first shot always bullseye.

    I don't care if its 1% random its still random and has no place as far as im concerned in any fps title

    Lol, so what corner someone is camping isn't "random", getting smashed by a zeppelin Cannon isn't "random", getting picked of by a 300m away sniper isn't "random"?

    I don't think the game would be fun with out perpetual randomness. It's a closed system, you can learn the factors and mechanics involved, allowing you to adjust and react accordingly.

    Battlefield games are big open and bombastic. This randomness you hate even the smallest sliver of, fuels this game.

    Just a thought.

    No the corner they are in isn't random the other player chose that
    the person using the cannon aimed and fired at you not random
    the sniper again aimed and fired at you thats also not random those were all player controlled events
    players do what they want and are therefore random. Don't throw the word around.

    its not random if a player chose to do it every conscious human action is not random
  • owltro
    3356 postsMember, Battlefield 4, Battlefield Hardline, Battlefield, Battlefield 1 Member
    owltro wrote: »
    owltro wrote: »
    Loqtrall wrote: »
    Either way - random spread like that is dumb, punishes accurate burst fire, and shouldn't be in any shooter. This thread is going in circles, has been going in circles for pages now, and is 100% bound to go nowhere. So I'm ducking out on this one. A ton of people seem to dislike this feature (including GameChangers and big YouTubers) and it will more than likely be changed (if not completely overhauled) upon release when the public gets their hands on it - that's the bottom line.

    Its why im not to concerned
    this thread basically comes down to people either thinking randomness is a skill and can somehow be compensated for
    or people that understand random aspects of the game make skill a less important thing to have
    Everyone keeps throwing the word random around like it's 100% random, when really it's only random to some degree, and it wouldn't even be noticeable if you're correctly using your SMG within its effective range. The innaccuracies from SIPS and RBD would still hit if you're aiming at your target's body.
    SIPS makes every shot following the first of a burst increasingly more inaccurate. The randomness from RBD decides the direction that this innacuracy will go in. The innaccuracy will always be the same for that number of the shot; the 2nd shot will always have the same amount of innaccuracy, only the direction of it will differ.
    -
    FSM allows the first shot of a burst to always be 100% accurate, so it will always hit if your crosshairs are on target.
    So, SIPS is the innaccuracy, RBD is the direction of the innaccuracy, and FSM is what keeps the first shot always bullseye.

    I don't care if its 1% random its still random and has no place as far as im concerned in any fps title

    Lol, so what corner someone is camping isn't "random", getting smashed by a zeppelin Cannon isn't "random", getting picked of by a 300m away sniper isn't "random"?

    I don't think the game would be fun with out perpetual randomness. It's a closed system, you can learn the factors and mechanics involved, allowing you to adjust and react accordingly.

    Battlefield games are big open and bombastic. This randomness you hate even the smallest sliver of, fuels this game.

    Just a thought.

    No the corner they are in isn't random the other player chose that
    the person using the cannon aimed and fired at you not random
    the sniper again aimed and fired at you thats also not random those were all player controlled events
    players do what they want and are therefore random. Don't throw the word around.

    its not random if a player chose to do it every conscious human action is not random
    if it's unexpected, it's random (informal)
    it's not random because it's a conscious decision (formal)
    -
    my mistake
  • KingTolapsium
    5491 postsMember, Battlefield 3, Battlefield 4, Battlefield Hardline, Battlefield, Battlefield 1, CTE, BF1IncursionsAlpha, Battlefield V Member
    owltro wrote: »
    Loqtrall wrote: »
    Either way - random spread like that is dumb, punishes accurate burst fire, and shouldn't be in any shooter. This thread is going in circles, has been going in circles for pages now, and is 100% bound to go nowhere. So I'm ducking out on this one. A ton of people seem to dislike this feature (including GameChangers and big YouTubers) and it will more than likely be changed (if not completely overhauled) upon release when the public gets their hands on it - that's the bottom line.

    Its why im not to concerned
    this thread basically comes down to people either thinking randomness is a skill and can somehow be compensated for
    or people that understand random aspects of the game make skill a less important thing to have
    Everyone keeps throwing the word random around like it's 100% random, when really it's only random to some degree, and it wouldn't even be noticeable if you're correctly using your SMG within its effective range. The innaccuracies from SIPS and RBD would still hit if you're aiming at your target's body.
    SIPS makes every shot following the first of a burst increasingly more inaccurate. The randomness from RBD decides the direction that this innacuracy will go in. The innaccuracy will always be the same for that number of the shot; the 2nd shot will always have the same amount of innaccuracy, only the direction of it will differ.
    -
    FSM allows the first shot of a burst to always be 100% accurate, so it will always hit if your crosshairs are on target.
    So, SIPS is the innaccuracy, RBD is the direction of the innaccuracy, and FSM is what keeps the first shot always bullseye.

    I don't care if its 1% random its still random and has no place as far as im concerned in any fps title

    Lol, so what corner someone is camping isn't "random", getting smashed by a zeppelin Cannon isn't "random", getting picked of by a 300m away sniper isn't "random"?

    I don't think the game would be fun with out perpetual randomness. It's a closed system, you can learn the factors and mechanics involved, allowing you to adjust and react accordingly.

    Battlefield games are big open and bombastic. This randomness you hate even the smallest sliver of, fuels this game.

    Just a thought.

    No the corner they are in isn't random the other player chose that
    the person using the cannon aimed and fired at you not random
    the sniper again aimed and fired at you thats also not random those were all player controlled events

    In your opinion.

    There is nothing more random about spread, that isn't also inherently part of the game.

    Play checkers if you want something 100% predictable.
  • ChickNFoot
    1627 postsMember, Battlefield 3, Battlefield 4, Battlefield Hardline, Battlefield, Battlefield 1 Member
    edited July 2016
    SYM-Duck wrote: »
    Sno0bs wrote: »
    I was trying to be constructive but it seems you've been triggered. Well then. Those threads were on the front page but it just so happens that this one will stay here because an argument is about to take place. When you post videos, at least give a short summary so we don't have to listen to 15 minutes of MarbleDuck's nasal voice.
    I have a transcript available for people with poor taste in voices. Click the “more” button beneath the video and click “transcript”.
    I completely disagree with that video.

    Absolutely NOTHING about random is good for a game. Whoever that guy is obviously sucks at the game if he thinks adding in random spread is good for any type of skill gap

    tfw playing for BF4’s top 10s team doesn’t make me good enough :(
    TickTak77 wrote: »
    There's nothing "skillful" about RNG bullet deviation.

    Sorry.

    One of the primarily to prevent the SMGs from acting as good medium range weapons. That can easily be achieved by simply adding more extended recoil and / or adding a significant damage drop off, like almost every other shooter does, including the previous BF titles.

    Deviation isn't needed. It doesn't add a skillful component at all. There's no skill in predicting "Random"

    Fun fact: a weapon with .225 base spread (MP18 AR) will shoot two bullets with a 100% chance of hitting on a target at 40 meters with center mass shots. That is called playing around randomness—engage in a manner such that elements of chance are either negated or insignificant.

    This. Random spread is bad. Just increase recoil and make the first shot accurate to reward good aimers. But then again this series has suppression mechanic of all things that rewards players for missing shots. Anyone remember how bad it was in bf3? Christ.

    Yes, I remember that anyone actually shooting at a target was going to win a fight against someone missing them.
    Sno0bs wrote: »
    Ok so as i understand it 4 to 6 round bursts are going to be the best way in general if the SMG user finds itself a target outside its sweet spot ranges, ( but at the same time its allways best to seek up that sweet spot ) and for LMG,s you should keep firing, the best with a bipod at a medium to long range distance. ( the semi auto abd bolt action rifles are explaining enough on their own on how to handle )
    Could anyone please confirm or denie these thoughts as i really try to become as good as i can get in BF1 ( after i am done drooling all over the awesome stuff :-) )

    Depends on the range. 4-6rb is fine for CQC, but you’ll have to reduce that to 2-3 round bursts for anything past 35m. You will need much more time between bursts to reset your spread than in prior titles.

    Loqtrall wrote: »
    lol, how do you compensate for something that's absolutely random every time it happens? If it's completely random, how can you have "knowledge" about it? It's different every time it happens.
    >when you realize that there are some ranges in which there is a 100% chance of a bullet with 0.3° deviation to hit. The first shot is 100% accurate on a center mass shot on a target at 50m

    Before you guys continue to make stupid arguments, watch the video or read the transcript. I literally address EVERY SINGLE ONE of your points.

    Marble duck to the rescue.

    I'm honored that you commented on my thread.

    But this thread has run it's course of constructiveness.
  • Loqtrall
    12091 postsMember, Battlefield 3, Battlefield 4, Battlefield Hardline, Battlefield, Battlefield 1, CTE, Battlefield V Member
    edited July 2016
    Glad I ducked out of the thread when I did. Looks like it got even worse, and the poster of the video said my argument was stupid because I said you can't compensate for something random, which you can't - and responded to that by saying that the first shot is 100% accurate, which doesn't prove you can compensate for randomness at all, and that there are ranges where the random spread is able to be held on target - when almost the entire premise of the thread is about engaging people outside of the effective range of SMGs where spread is most noticeable.
  • KingTolapsium
    5491 postsMember, Battlefield 3, Battlefield 4, Battlefield Hardline, Battlefield, Battlefield 1, CTE, BF1IncursionsAlpha, Battlefield V Member
    Loqtrall wrote: »
    Glad I ducked out of the thread when I did. Looks like it got even worse, and the poster of the video said my argument was stupid because I said you can't compensate for something random, which you can't - and responded to that by saying that the first shot is 100% accurate, which doesn't prove you can compensate for randomness at all, and that there are ranges where the random spread is able to be held on target - when almost the entire premise of the thread is about engaging people outside of the effective range of SMGs where spread is most noticeable.

    Why should you be able to compensate a mechanic that is in place to limit range? It breaks range balance.
  • Loqtrall
    12091 postsMember, Battlefield 3, Battlefield 4, Battlefield Hardline, Battlefield, Battlefield 1, CTE, Battlefield V Member
    edited July 2016
    Loqtrall wrote: »
    Glad I ducked out of the thread when I did. Looks like it got even worse, and the poster of the video said my argument was stupid because I said you can't compensate for something random, which you can't - and responded to that by saying that the first shot is 100% accurate, which doesn't prove you can compensate for randomness at all, and that there are ranges where the random spread is able to be held on target - when almost the entire premise of the thread is about engaging people outside of the effective range of SMGs where spread is most noticeable.

    Why should you be able to compensate a mechanic that is in place to limit range? It breaks range balance.

    I never said you should - I just said you couldn't when multiple people were saying you could. Either way, having a mechanic that artificially limits overall range altogether is dumb. There should be a mechanic that limits a guns effectiveness outside their intended range substantially - not a mechanic that makes all but tap firing a gun at that range completely 100% ineffective and inaccurate no matter how good your aim is.
    -
    But, that's all beside the point - because, again, this thread will get nowhere and there are enough people against this mechanic that it will more than likely be changed or tweaked before or after launch when the public gets their hands on it.
  • KingTolapsium
    5491 postsMember, Battlefield 3, Battlefield 4, Battlefield Hardline, Battlefield, Battlefield 1, CTE, BF1IncursionsAlpha, Battlefield V Member
    Loqtrall wrote: »
    Loqtrall wrote: »
    Glad I ducked out of the thread when I did. Looks like it got even worse, and the poster of the video said my argument was stupid because I said you can't compensate for something random, which you can't - and responded to that by saying that the first shot is 100% accurate, which doesn't prove you can compensate for randomness at all, and that there are ranges where the random spread is able to be held on target - when almost the entire premise of the thread is about engaging people outside of the effective range of SMGs where spread is most noticeable.

    Why should you be able to compensate a mechanic that is in place to limit range? It breaks range balance.

    I never said you should - I just said you couldn't when multiple people were saying you could. Either way, having a mechanic that artificially limits overall range altogether is dumb. There should be a mechanic that limits a guns effectiveness outside their intended range substantially - not a mechanic that makes all but tap firing a gun at that range completely 100% ineffective and inaccurate no matter how good your aim is.
    -
    But, that's all beside the point - because, again, this thread will get nowhere and there are enough people against this mechanic that it will more than likely be changed or tweaked before or after launch when the public gets their hands on it.

    It's not dumb. It makes gun fire rates make sense.

    Intended roles now means something.

    Swiss army knife battlecod-go guns are gone. What took their place is more fun.
  • Loqtrall
    12091 postsMember, Battlefield 3, Battlefield 4, Battlefield Hardline, Battlefield, Battlefield 1, CTE, Battlefield V Member
    Loqtrall wrote: »
    Loqtrall wrote: »
    Glad I ducked out of the thread when I did. Looks like it got even worse, and the poster of the video said my argument was stupid because I said you can't compensate for something random, which you can't - and responded to that by saying that the first shot is 100% accurate, which doesn't prove you can compensate for randomness at all, and that there are ranges where the random spread is able to be held on target - when almost the entire premise of the thread is about engaging people outside of the effective range of SMGs where spread is most noticeable.

    Why should you be able to compensate a mechanic that is in place to limit range? It breaks range balance.

    I never said you should - I just said you couldn't when multiple people were saying you could. Either way, having a mechanic that artificially limits overall range altogether is dumb. There should be a mechanic that limits a guns effectiveness outside their intended range substantially - not a mechanic that makes all but tap firing a gun at that range completely 100% ineffective and inaccurate no matter how good your aim is.
    -
    But, that's all beside the point - because, again, this thread will get nowhere and there are enough people against this mechanic that it will more than likely be changed or tweaked before or after launch when the public gets their hands on it.

    It's not dumb. It makes gun fire rates make sense.

    Intended roles now means something.

    Swiss army knife battlecod-go guns are gone. What took their place is more fun.

    And that's entirely subjective - I'm willing to bet there are tons of people that either do believe now or will believe when the game comes out that the system is total bull****.
  • onkruid26
    590 postsMember, Battlefield 4, Battlefield, Battlefield 1 Member
    Loqtrall wrote: »
    Loqtrall wrote: »
    Glad I ducked out of the thread when I did. Looks like it got even worse, and the poster of the video said my argument was stupid because I said you can't compensate for something random, which you can't - and responded to that by saying that the first shot is 100% accurate, which doesn't prove you can compensate for randomness at all, and that there are ranges where the random spread is able to be held on target - when almost the entire premise of the thread is about engaging people outside of the effective range of SMGs where spread is most noticeable.

    Why should you be able to compensate a mechanic that is in place to limit range? It breaks range balance.

    I never said you should - I just said you couldn't when multiple people were saying you could. Either way, having a mechanic that artificially limits overall range altogether is dumb. There should be a mechanic that limits a guns effectiveness outside their intended range substantially - not a mechanic that makes all but tap firing a gun at that range completely 100% ineffective and inaccurate no matter how good your aim is.
    -
    But, that's all beside the point - because, again, this thread will get nowhere and there are enough people against this mechanic that it will more than likely be changed or tweaked before or after launch when the public gets their hands on it.

    If they chance it i will be dissapointed.
  • KingTolapsium
    5491 postsMember, Battlefield 3, Battlefield 4, Battlefield Hardline, Battlefield, Battlefield 1, CTE, BF1IncursionsAlpha, Battlefield V Member
    Loqtrall wrote: »
    Loqtrall wrote: »
    Loqtrall wrote: »
    Glad I ducked out of the thread when I did. Looks like it got even worse, and the poster of the video said my argument was stupid because I said you can't compensate for something random, which you can't - and responded to that by saying that the first shot is 100% accurate, which doesn't prove you can compensate for randomness at all, and that there are ranges where the random spread is able to be held on target - when almost the entire premise of the thread is about engaging people outside of the effective range of SMGs where spread is most noticeable.

    Why should you be able to compensate a mechanic that is in place to limit range? It breaks range balance.

    I never said you should - I just said you couldn't when multiple people were saying you could. Either way, having a mechanic that artificially limits overall range altogether is dumb. There should be a mechanic that limits a guns effectiveness outside their intended range substantially - not a mechanic that makes all but tap firing a gun at that range completely 100% ineffective and inaccurate no matter how good your aim is.
    -
    But, that's all beside the point - because, again, this thread will get nowhere and there are enough people against this mechanic that it will more than likely be changed or tweaked before or after launch when the public gets their hands on it.

    It's not dumb. It makes gun fire rates make sense.

    Intended roles now means something.

    Swiss army knife battlecod-go guns are gone. What took their place is more fun.

    And that's entirely subjective - I'm willing to bet there are tons of people that either do believe now or will believe when the game comes out that the system is total bull****.

    I can find plenty of people who think we didn't land on the moon, or people that think the earth is flat.

    Popular opinion does not coincide with facts.
  • Loqtrall
    12091 postsMember, Battlefield 3, Battlefield 4, Battlefield Hardline, Battlefield, Battlefield 1, CTE, Battlefield V Member

    I can find plenty of people who think we didn't land on the moon, or people that think the earth is flat.

    Popular opinion does not coincide with facts.

    And saying "this system is more fun because I say so" also doesn't coincide with facts. Opinions are not facts. "Better" and "Fun" are entirely subjective terms.
    Sno0bs wrote: »
    Loqtrall wrote: »
    Loqtrall wrote: »
    Glad I ducked out of the thread when I did. Looks like it got even worse, and the poster of the video said my argument was stupid because I said you can't compensate for something random, which you can't - and responded to that by saying that the first shot is 100% accurate, which doesn't prove you can compensate for randomness at all, and that there are ranges where the random spread is able to be held on target - when almost the entire premise of the thread is about engaging people outside of the effective range of SMGs where spread is most noticeable.

    Why should you be able to compensate a mechanic that is in place to limit range? It breaks range balance.

    I never said you should - I just said you couldn't when multiple people were saying you could. Either way, having a mechanic that artificially limits overall range altogether is dumb. There should be a mechanic that limits a guns effectiveness outside their intended range substantially - not a mechanic that makes all but tap firing a gun at that range completely 100% ineffective and inaccurate no matter how good your aim is.
    -
    But, that's all beside the point - because, again, this thread will get nowhere and there are enough people against this mechanic that it will more than likely be changed or tweaked before or after launch when the public gets their hands on it.

    If they change it i will be dissapointed.

    Obviously there are already people who are disappointed if it's not changed either. DICE can't please everyone, but they can please the majority.
  • Lordmang4
    2063 postsMember, Battlefield 3, Battlefield 4, Battlefield Hardline, Battlefield, Medal of Honor Warfighter Member
    There's not much one can do to defeat ignorance, bias, or stupidity. Other than shun those who exhibit those attributes.
  • KingTolapsium
    5491 postsMember, Battlefield 3, Battlefield 4, Battlefield Hardline, Battlefield, Battlefield 1, CTE, BF1IncursionsAlpha, Battlefield V Member
    Loqtrall wrote: »

    I can find plenty of people who think we didn't land on the moon, or people that think the earth is flat.

    Popular opinion does not coincide with facts.

    And saying "this system is more fun because I say so" also doesn't coincide with facts. Opinions are not facts. "Better" and "Fun" are entirely subjective terms.
    Sno0bs wrote: »
    Loqtrall wrote: »
    Loqtrall wrote: »
    Glad I ducked out of the thread when I did. Looks like it got even worse, and the poster of the video said my argument was stupid because I said you can't compensate for something random, which you can't - and responded to that by saying that the first shot is 100% accurate, which doesn't prove you can compensate for randomness at all, and that there are ranges where the random spread is able to be held on target - when almost the entire premise of the thread is about engaging people outside of the effective range of SMGs where spread is most noticeable.

    Why should you be able to compensate a mechanic that is in place to limit range? It breaks range balance.

    I never said you should - I just said you couldn't when multiple people were saying you could. Either way, having a mechanic that artificially limits overall range altogether is dumb. There should be a mechanic that limits a guns effectiveness outside their intended range substantially - not a mechanic that makes all but tap firing a gun at that range completely 100% ineffective and inaccurate no matter how good your aim is.
    -
    But, that's all beside the point - because, again, this thread will get nowhere and there are enough people against this mechanic that it will more than likely be changed or tweaked before or after launch when the public gets their hands on it.

    If they change it i will be dissapointed.

    Obviously there are already people who are disappointed if it's not changed either. DICE can't please everyone, but they can please the majority.

    Obviously opinions aren't facts, so why try to debate what another person is thinking.

    Just bring up points to support you feedback.

    I am well aware that "better" and "fun" aren't good feedback. But insults aren't either.

    I would argue I have brought up good points with ample feedback, derived from gameplay time and my personal experience.

    We can only control ourselves, insulting others does not give credence to your points, quite the opposite frankly.
  • Magic_Pepee
    378 postsMember, Battlefield 3, Battlefield 4, Battlefield Member
    Lordmang4 wrote: »
    There's not much one can do to defeat ignorance, bias, or stupidity. Other than shun those who exhibit those attributes.

    so anyone who disagrees with you is ignorant? gotcha.

    not exactly a fan of loqtrall, but i completely agree with him on this thread, and so far he has been quite respectful
  • Loqtrall
    12091 postsMember, Battlefield 3, Battlefield 4, Battlefield Hardline, Battlefield, Battlefield 1, CTE, Battlefield V Member
    Loqtrall wrote: »

    I can find plenty of people who think we didn't land on the moon, or people that think the earth is flat.

    Popular opinion does not coincide with facts.

    And saying "this system is more fun because I say so" also doesn't coincide with facts. Opinions are not facts. "Better" and "Fun" are entirely subjective terms.
    Sno0bs wrote: »
    Loqtrall wrote: »
    Loqtrall wrote: »
    Glad I ducked out of the thread when I did. Looks like it got even worse, and the poster of the video said my argument was stupid because I said you can't compensate for something random, which you can't - and responded to that by saying that the first shot is 100% accurate, which doesn't prove you can compensate for randomness at all, and that there are ranges where the random spread is able to be held on target - when almost the entire premise of the thread is about engaging people outside of the effective range of SMGs where spread is most noticeable.

    Why should you be able to compensate a mechanic that is in place to limit range? It breaks range balance.

    I never said you should - I just said you couldn't when multiple people were saying you could. Either way, having a mechanic that artificially limits overall range altogether is dumb. There should be a mechanic that limits a guns effectiveness outside their intended range substantially - not a mechanic that makes all but tap firing a gun at that range completely 100% ineffective and inaccurate no matter how good your aim is.
    -
    But, that's all beside the point - because, again, this thread will get nowhere and there are enough people against this mechanic that it will more than likely be changed or tweaked before or after launch when the public gets their hands on it.

    If they change it i will be dissapointed.

    Obviously there are already people who are disappointed if it's not changed either. DICE can't please everyone, but they can please the majority.

    Obviously opinions aren't facts, so why try to debate what another person is thinking.

    Just bring up points to support you feedback.

    I am well aware that "better" and "fun" aren't good feedback. But insults aren't either.

    I would argue I have brought up good points with ample feedback, derived from gameplay time and my personal experience.

    We can only control ourselves, insulting others does not give credence to your points, quite the opposite frankly.

    And where did I insult anyone, in this entire thread? "I think this mechanic is dumb and needs to be changed" is feedback, not an insult to anyone or anything. I already provided LITERAL PAGES worth of why and how I think it should be changed.
    -
    On the other hand - saying "It's not dumb, it makes the game more fun" < just because you think that's true, is not hinged on any sort of fact, and is as valid an opinion as my own. The majority opinion coincides with fact just as much as the minority opinion does.
  • KingTolapsium
    5491 postsMember, Battlefield 3, Battlefield 4, Battlefield Hardline, Battlefield, Battlefield 1, CTE, BF1IncursionsAlpha, Battlefield V Member
    edited July 2016
    Loqtrall wrote: »
    Loqtrall wrote: »

    I can find plenty of people who think we didn't land on the moon, or people that think the earth is flat.

    Popular opinion does not coincide with facts.

    And saying "this system is more fun because I say so" also doesn't coincide with facts. Opinions are not facts. "Better" and "Fun" are entirely subjective terms.
    Sno0bs wrote: »
    Loqtrall wrote: »
    Loqtrall wrote: »
    Glad I ducked out of the thread when I did. Looks like it got even worse, and the poster of the video said my argument was stupid because I said you can't compensate for something random, which you can't - and responded to that by saying that the first shot is 100% accurate, which doesn't prove you can compensate for randomness at all, and that there are ranges where the random spread is able to be held on target - when almost the entire premise of the thread is about engaging people outside of the effective range of SMGs where spread is most noticeable.

    Why should you be able to compensate a mechanic that is in place to limit range? It breaks range balance.

    I never said you should - I just said you couldn't when multiple people were saying you could. Either way, having a mechanic that artificially limits overall range altogether is dumb. There should be a mechanic that limits a guns effectiveness outside their intended range substantially - not a mechanic that makes all but tap firing a gun at that range completely 100% ineffective and inaccurate no matter how good your aim is.
    -
    But, that's all beside the point - because, again, this thread will get nowhere and there are enough people against this mechanic that it will more than likely be changed or tweaked before or after launch when the public gets their hands on it.

    If they change it i will be dissapointed.

    Obviously there are already people who are disappointed if it's not changed either. DICE can't please everyone, but they can please the majority.

    Obviously opinions aren't facts, so why try to debate what another person is thinking.

    Just bring up points to support you feedback.

    I am well aware that "better" and "fun" aren't good feedback. But insults aren't either.

    I would argue I have brought up good points with ample feedback, derived from gameplay time and my personal experience.

    We can only control ourselves, insulting others does not give credence to your points, quite the opposite frankly.

    And where did I insult anyone, in this entire thread? "I think this mechanic is dumb and needs to be changed" is feedback, not an insult to anyone or anything. I already provided LITERAL PAGES worth of why and how I think it should be changed.
    -
    On the other hand - saying "It's not dumb, it makes the game more fun" < just because you think that's true, is not hinged on any sort of fact, and is as valid an opinion as my own. The majority opinion coincides with fact just as much as the minority opinion does.

    I'm sorry most people aren't good at discussing things. I didn't mean the insults bit aimed at you, but you and I both know there is plenty of that going around.

    All we can do is give good feedback and support our opinions.
  • Shadowmane01
    209 postsMember, Battlefield 3, Battlefield 4, Battlefield, Medal of Honor Warfighter Member
    Can anyone in yes I'm going to say it RL fire a SMG on full auto for a prolonged period and maintain high accuracy ?. I very much doubt it and RBD in BF1 is what's used to represent that. If they got rid of it what could it be replaced with ?. More realistic sway maybe do you really want even irons jigging about all over the place ?. If they introduced more realistic sway then there would also have to be sway multipliers. After running or taking a hit or diving to the ground you would get even greater sway do you really want that in a relatively fast paced arcade shooter ?.
  • KingTolapsium
    5491 postsMember, Battlefield 3, Battlefield 4, Battlefield Hardline, Battlefield, Battlefield 1, CTE, BF1IncursionsAlpha, Battlefield V Member
    Can anyone in yes I'm going to say it RL fire a SMG on full auto for a prolonged period and maintain high accuracy ?. I very much doubt it and RBD in BF1 is what's used to represent that. If they got rid of it what could it be replaced with ?. More realistic sway maybe do you really want even irons jigging about all over the place ?. If they introduced more realistic sway then there would also have to be sway multipliers. After running or taking a hit or diving to the ground you would get even greater sway do you really want that in a relatively fast paced arcade shooter ?.

    It's merit has nothing to do with irl. Imo.
This discussion has been closed.