KE7 V.S Stg - I rest my case
https://ibb.co/FVLwJSN
The nonsense above -
700ms deploy time - Revolver
280ms per kill - KE7
under 10m 10-18m - 300+ms
The amount of time it takes for a revolver deploy aim and fire is more than enough time to get 3-4 hipfire kills with the KE7.
Again quit the bs and either work on your reaction time or position yourself better. The rest of the trash you said above has no bearing on my ability or my profession.
Irrelevant… You are the one who hangs own desperately to the Ke7 example despit me making clear that it was a figure of speech (see previous post) about laxk of balance.
Furthermore, I clearly say that the pistol gets you AS you are reloading after enemy soaked up the damage strafing left/ right. The problem is not the damage of the Ke7 per se.
Why pretend that you do not understand the argument?
“Again quit the bs and either work on your reaction time or position yourself better. The rest of the trash you said above has no bearing on my ability or my profession”
I do not have to infer anything as to your abilities or profession, the content and tenure of your replies does this for me (case in point, the 6th form level goading: "Maybe postion yourself better like actual decent players do…and gems like “work on your reaction time or position yourself better”. You are making my case better with your reddit/4chan level of communication in your reply this thread and others. than I could myself. You have around 20 pages + of comments telling people how good you are and how they need to improve. The “git gud” type… Hence why I wroting a disclaimer in my original post:
“And yes, we know, you are amazingly good and big and you have no problem with any of the above because you can kill the entire team with a knife but just do us a favour and avoid replying to just let us know how great you are.”
So you either did not read it or can not help yourself. Either way, your constant commenting/ trolling people on here verges of obsession. You spend your Life on here?
My original point is about BF5 not being balanced still stands. It is everywhere on here, countless posts, countless tweaks for 2 years from DICE. You play the game, you should know. Now keep pretending that it’s a Ke7 vs pistol post if you want and not one about BF5 being very unbalanced.
We can go at it as long as you want. Try me…
So either refrain from trolling/ telling everyone how brilliant you are at this game (it is of very limited interest to people who want to discuss the game/ make suggestions) and if you must insist on doing it, argue the principle (BF5 not balanced) instead of the strawman that you built in your head (I never said a pistol was better than a ke7, I lamented the fact that weapons in games do not reflect their real life counterpart).
I hate the fact that theres no community controlled hardcore servers and i’m disgusted that they failed to give us it when they said they would in the last update and didn’t and nobody is talking about it.
Supposedly Dice were getting back to fixing the balancer and making the community games update after the summer vacations to the staff.
There’s been no update since that I’m aware of, so it could be that you can add them to the list of broken promises.
@ttth2 Sorry I’m trying to understand your point.
If your getting killed by a pistol in a straight up gun fight when you have a primary then it’s not the weapon balance, it’s the amount of lag that’s killing you quicker
i.e on your screen you started firing either first or at the same time yet you go down to the pistol like it was a Suomi. Whereas on your opponents screen you registered far sooner and he had already started hitting.
Is this what you mean?
They did not say that community games would com with the last update before summer. Last official(ish) update on this comes from twitter where someone from dice said the community games update would arrive later this year. That have not broken their promise on this (yet) and hopefully they will deliver as promised so we can have our hardcore experience.
Hardcore servers will not happen in BF5. Vote with your wallets for BF6.
Actually the getting pistolized while you’re pouring bullets into an enemy happens quite a bit. I’ve been there with an SMG on multiple occasions and it’s happened. Very frustrating butcwith this games lousy servers and crappy, spazzy netcode it’s not that surprising either.
It does:(
No, it is to do with DICE insisting on people being able to “get back at you”, have a chance so that it is not too punishing. One solution would be a matchmaking system according to level, time played, weapons unlocked or casual/ hardcore servers.
Instead they make the time to kill really long so that you can wriggle your way out of most situation. I understand why they do it and they had good intentions doing but its application ends up being unfair.
They do not want to put first time players off. If you are new to BF and get consistently killed, after a while, you will not come back to the BF franchise. Also, many people have a limited amount of time that they can dedicate to playing due to Life’s commitments and would rather play a different game if it is a frustrating experience (and I do not blame them. Getting killed all the time is tedious). So they simlified the smiping class to provide easy kills.
This also leads to simplified sniping mechanisms (little to no sway, getting hit while scoping does not hinder your aim) and many people these days just hang back sniping. But given how much harder it is to attack a control point and get a kill when being outnumbered as an assault, support or medic, DICE created a plague of campers. I am far from being a good sniper but I have never had so many kills/ headshots in any BF games before while playing recon (I played bf3, bf4, bf1). It is ridiculously overpowered and easy. Hence why you will see so many people camping with a scope (the record for me so far is 15 snipers in a team). BF5 needed custom servers with custom rules a long time ago. I doutbt that we will get them. It is all about BF6 now.
The simple fact that if a target is moving is enough to decrease damage is one of the most egregious examples of poor game design. Have you noticed how people move ledt thewn right, then left then right )without any momentum, it is a near instantaneous movement)? It does not matter if you fllow their movement and actually hits them all the time, the damage will be decreased. The added diffiuclty of someone moving ina very unatural way shoud be enough but decreasing the danage is unnecessary. tracking a moving target shouls be rewarded instead of being penalised. So you might need to put a huge aamount of bullets in a moving target (or jumping), hit the target all the time yet get beaten by the same target unloading a relatively fewer amount of bullets from a relatively weaker weapon. This is mny point and I think it is an unsatisfactory solution to game balance.
I mostly play support/ assault and try to complete some achievements and some lmg/ mmg achievements clearly show how poor those weapons are now.
BF5 is a brilliant game but they might as well have not bothered with the majority of the weapons and vehicles in it because they are not viable propositions.
This is what I was trying to illustrate in my OP.
The fact of the matter is, as much as the weapons are out of balance, I think it’s equally this useless gaming on AWS or MS Cloud services.
In the instruction I had in networking starting back in the late 1980s, early 90s - and when I’ve renewed my certifications since then, one of the few rules that has stayed completely relevant and true is “Your network is only as fast as it’s slowest point.”
I bring that up because it’s simply this: Using a third-party hosting service that isn’t designed for the speed which gaming needs is an automatic b0rk of the game, yet it’s the way EA has gone with it instead of having a handful of hosted servers and then letting the community rent from third parties.
I have gigabit internet, pulling down just under 1 gig, and up 500 megabits on my last speed test. When I play games with direct servers anywhere in the US, my ping is anywhere from single digit to low 20s. Yet - connecting to the west coast BFV servers, my ping is between 35 and 40, and there’s a ton of dropped packets. I have the same performance issues with the Titanfall 2 servers, which are hosted the same way. Yet, I get into BF4 and those servers, and I’m back to the single-digit ping times.
With the higher ping (though we’re not talking about much of a difference when it comes to ping, admittedly) and the dropped packets - that’s where the “instant kills” come in and the rubberbanding and the like. That’s how, on my side, it can look like I emptied a full magazine from my BAR into you, yet you stand there and squeeze off one shot from a revolver into my face and I’m the one who dies.
This is why I want RSP back. I loved hosting servers and building the community we had around our rented servers. The third party we used at the time was top-notch, both in customer service and server quality. It lasted from the early CS Beta days until BF3, and even now some of us still get together to game. Now this game has degenerated into a laggy mess that feels half-finished, even now after they’ve stopped support. Missing promised features and content, features taken away with no real replacement at all.
This is what happens when you have a game that’s trying to pump money out through microtransactions instead of putting out real content. You might feel like you’re getting a lot of stuff, but how much of that did you pay real-world money for? Meanwhile, the lack of modes, large maps for us to have the epic battles on that Battlefield was known for, actual balance in vehicles, aircraft, and weapons is out the window, there is absolutely no team balance to speak of, and then the Issue that Shall Not Be Named for the PC side of it, that literally nothing constructive has been done to protect against.
This 30+ year customer of EA isn’t going to spend another dime with them until they come back to where they started - being about the gamers. EA has degenerated in customer service, game quality, treatment of the fans of franchises, the lack of communication to the player base, and the way they treat the developers.
@ttth2 Are you on PC? On PS4 I’ve found the amount of people who can effectively use a BA is extremely low. That doesn’t mean that there isn’t still an entire host of potato people staying as far away from the flag as possible happily missing every shot though.
But in comparison to BF1’s sweet spot I’ve found Recon players to be fairly ineffective for either side as a whole.
I do think that different platforms require separate balancing.
To be honest I’ve found the TTK to be in a reasonable spot. If anyone has time to react, acquire your position and then take you out then it’s the net code that’s failing rather than weapon balance.
This goes for tracking also. I’ve had little difficulty leading my shots on some servers, while on others I’ve emptied entire mags from point blank range into the enemies back, only for my opponent to spin round and take me out instantly with a Ruby pistol.
Again I don’t think this is weapon balance as much as it is that V is just a poorly made game that had zero investment put into testing before it was hurriedly rolled out.
I do think LMG’s are in a difficult position. Many are largely weaker in their intended ranges compared to their counterparts in other classes. But at the same time the FG-42 and BAR are amongst the best (if not the best) guns in the game.
If you reduce movement then V would also require new gun mechanic’s and map design. Not saying this would be a bad thing, just that the entire game would have to change along with it.
Just played some breakthrough and a concurrent theme of V is that many maps have wide open lines of sight and 3x scopes on virtually every gun. If I’m PTO solo as usual then I need every ounce of movement I can get to stay alive and advance.
Lose this movement and I think game play would become even more camper friendly.
The private server issue is interesting.
Definitely think private servers should have been available sooner and at a better quality. Battlefield has built up a community that love to utilise these servers.
But at the same time this percentage of users seem very small in comparison with the wider player base. On PS4 virtually no one uses them and I don’t believe their inclusion at launch would have affected the unpopularity of V in any meaningful way, at least on PS4.
Yet another example of why PC and Console communities have different priorities and in game assets should perhaps be developed separately.
That’s just it - the “private server” thing isn’t what it was. You could actually go to a third party (at least on the PC - I don’t know if it’s ever been available for console) and lease a server with it’s own internet pipe, and depending on the agency you’re leasing form, a host of other options to increase CPU priority, or faster pipe, or plugins, etc. That way you could have third party anti-cheat, team balance, you could restrict weapons usage (e.g. - ban the 2A because it’s a ridiculous weapon), etc.
In my case - we rented several - a couple of Counter-Strike Source servers (well before CS: GO), and a couple of Battlefield servers. That way we could practice as a team, and compete on amateur ladders and whatnot while keeping public servers open. We could host matches as well, we had our own forums set up, and the whole gambit. As I said - we had it running from about 98/99- 2012, and we still have a FB group where we get together and just BS. We had a pretty good reputation with our servers as well, they were always full.
The “community servers” now are a joke compared to that. A complete joke.
It’s Battlefield: Halo for Beginners everybody yay! Everyone can be a run and gun, sliding bullet dodging, self-healing, aim-assisted super soldier of an alternate reality WW2!! Come on guys just give it a chance!
Yes, I am. I feel that after BF4, there has been a focus on consoles (where the money is for a game like BF) and from the sandbox to the Michael Bay Experience.
Seeing as MTX money is where games are at this point in time, games need to be marketed towards and players retained, that will shell out real world cash. If the data shows this age group is, I dunno, 12-18 yr olds then that is the audience EA and the like will aim for and gameplay will be designed to suit them.
Good “old” days. Miss them.
I’ve had the similar fortune of joining a group that was formed via Private Servers. From this, like you, we where able to throw fantastic tournaments, friendly matches with other groups that kept us away from pub stomping lobbies and form friendships that extended away from the game and meeting up for a few drinks in ‘real life’ also. Today I still consider some of these people amongst my best mates.
You will never find a bigger proponent of the benefits of having private servers and what they can do for a community. And we didn’t have even half of those things you mentioned.
However a friend from my old clan had the opportunity to ask a developer why the private servers weren’t carried over to the sequel and the reply was that they simply weren’t utilised enough by the player base as a whole to make the development worthwhile.
For me at the time I was enjoying the servers so much I assumed everyone must be utilising them because those where the circles I moved in.
This isn’t a dig at Private Servers, I’m just wondering how much influence they hold over the wider player base?
I know they are a huge issue here, but we are a tiny part of the player base as a whole. In game I’m always checking and at the most I’ll occasionally find a half full Squad Conquest that never seems to fill. I hope the new server upgrades change this, but as gaming evolves with the times I’m wondering if the era of valuing Private Servers as a commodity is coming to an end? On console I’m starting to think it’s quite likely.
I would agree.
A lot of the blame for V’s failure has been put on Dice trying to combine Hardcore with regular Battlefield to fit us all into the Tides of War live service.
This may be true but I also think perhaps it’s Dice trying to combine older PC values for Battlefield with the newer console expectations.
Different platforms, different communities, different expectations. Battlefield could become twice as successful if Dice developed their games (at least in part) separately with each community in mind.
you’re right at 200%
Greed and bad advice have put a tombstone on this game…
Bf6 will follow the same fate, with the same hasty and incomplete development scheme (no HC, private servers, balancing, the unmentionable), cheap and slow servers, microtransactions without a real contribution of quality’ (only useless colored skins that slow down the game).
The big managers have chosen the way to squeeze as lemons its customers, not the most difficult one to satisfy them with a better product focusing on quality and service.