Assault can’t shoot back at distance. That’s how it is different. You’re also sitting safely behind your team.
Yes they can and they also have the at/aa rocket gun which I can attest to both using and getting killed by at a distance. Ribeyerolles has a bipod and can be used without it. Tap firing with other smgs works too @Loqtrall can use the Thompson at scary distances.
The trench carbine both irons and scoped can be used at range especially considering the scope can have up to 4x magnification. The experimental MP.12 can be used to great effect at range due to the burst
They have access to shotguns with slugs and the Gasser which is the longest ranged revolver
As a Scout I never sit behind my team I’m the one pushing with flares 
So you say the scout should stay to the kitchen and cook crispy bacon to support the morale of the other classes.
The bolt action weapons are the only weapons which have additional disadvantages to deal with when used in their ideal range in BFV (Harder to hit the target due to the drop and velocity AND doing the minimum damage in these ranges)
No, what truly matters is having a game entirely based around four classes, and not making solely ONE of those classes substantially harder to use toward the team effort than any other class. What truly matters is having a team based, objective focused shooter where one of the ONLY FOUR classes you can choose from isn’t completely balanced and focused around sitting on a hill 200+m away.
I’m not even going to respond to your whack examples of “teams being 50% snipers” and getting “pegged from 2000m away”, both of which are gross exaggerations that barely happen in these games ever, let alone in BF1 where barely anyone snipes even at 1000m and where Assault and Medic are still statistically the most played class…
Secondly, it does matter how rifles worked in other BF games. This is BF, we’re discussing a staple weapon/class of BF - you can’t just act like other iterations (and blatantly BETTER iterations) of rifles never existed, or like the absolute dog crap we have in BF5 can’t be compared to past BF games in a negative light.
That’s about as lame a train of thought as the people saying customization should be historically accurate in this game as they put thier fingers in thier ears and ignore everyone saying “but no other BF game focused on historical accuracy”.
The cold, hard fact is that compared to EVERY BF game that has existed thus far, in BFV they’ve taken more away from rifles than ever.
BF1942, bfv, BF2, bf2142 - lightning fast velocity but no OHK without headshots
BC2, BF3, bf4, bfh - slow velocity but the ability to OHK in cqb and some rifles with extremely fast rates of fire
BF1 - realistic (sort of) velocity with OHK sweet spots at varying ranges for each rifle as well as faster rifles with no sweet spot.
BF5 - slow velocity, no OHK outside of hs at all, steep damage falloff at even medium range, added slowness of velocity because of the new drag mechanic
They have among the slowest velocity of any bf game now, they have the steepest damage drop off in any bf game, they have absolutely zero OHK capability outside of a headshot, and in a game with now NO RBD or suppression they’re the only class that gets outgunned at nearly all ranges that have to do with direct objective play. No more shooting at a guy 75m away and screwing up his accuracy on top of rbd to give yourself an actual fighting chance.
So let’s see, compared to every other BF game - they took away the 12.5m OHK, they took away sweet spots, they took away fast velocity, they took away severe damage for body shots at mid and long range. They have less speed, less damage output, more drop, more drag, and all that while retaining the status as the slowest rof and most accuracy dependent infantry weapon in the game.
So tell me again, what exactly does a rifle have going for it? You can’t PTFO with it, you can’t even sit at mid range because literally even smgs can kill at that range now, at long range your bullets suffer from drag and you do so little damage that if an enemy heals even a LITTLE after your initial shot it could take THREE shots to kill them - so what is the upside of using said weapon outside of camping in a tree and hoping you get a kill, or using your sidearm as a primary to actually be useful?
Headshots? The ability to OHK people to the hardest to hit target on the enemy, on moving targets, with a gun you can barely use outside of long range and while AT long range has rounds that move through the air nearly at the same speed airsoft bbs do?
I mean, really - in a later post (posted after this one I’m responding to) of yours, you said “the further the distance, the harder it is to hit the target” as if that’s a POSITIVE attribute for a weapon that’s SUPPOSED TO BE USED AT LONGER RANGES because at every other range it’s OBJECTIVELY outgunned. Lmao, it should be overly difficult to land 250m shots while using a rifle that gets smacked down by all other weapon types even at 100m? The sheer logic!
Lastly, I could care less if you put your money on dice to know what they’re doing. DICE has made PLENTY of choices in the 16 year history of this franchise that subjectively ruined aspects of several BF games for many people. They don’t just magically get a pass from all players just for being the devs. TTK2.0 in BF1 and customization in BF5 are two topics that are clear indicators everyone isn’t just alright with every move or change DICE makes “because they know what they’re doing”. Lmao, we just had a game that, at launch, had a weapon balance where one or two weapons reigned supreme and where rifles had aim assist that was so incredible it was near universally complained about - and that was after two alphas and a beta - but you claim DICE knows what they’re doing… BF4 weapon balance says hi, as well as its laser-beam-AR-weilding medic class.
Considering your average accuracy with rifles hangs around 44% and the average players hangs around half of that - I can’t see your claim being true. I can’t picture many snipers I’ve played alongside hitting back to back 100m shots - and considering you land less than half your shots, I honestly wouldn’t picture you proving that claim true either…
You’re definitely oversimplifying sniping in BF1. There’s some strong exaggeration in the way you argue.
Secondly, as someone who has somewhat recently adopted the Assault class, as my new baby the Thompson was released, I can confirm I can DEFINITELY shoot back at a sniper a mere 100m away with the Thompson - which many around these forums claim is a dud of an smg that’s not accurate at all. I may not be able to kill him outright, but I’d at least be able to hit him enough to make him scurry away.
People here really love to treat 100m like it’s a further diarance than it actually is.
Yep, and I didn’t even mention the rocket guns! I was playing with @Ram1c in a game of Rush on River Somme and made him laugh cause he called out a sniper in a field off in the distance and as he was calling them out I direct hit them with an AT rocket and OHK them.
But you know, Assault is defenseless at range, what with its AT Rocket Guns, tap firing, trench carbine, slugs, HR Defensive, and bipod ribeyrolles optical.
Actually this is the final Nail in the coffin for the Game (at least for me).
I want a WW2 experience and Most nations used still Bolt Action rifles as main guns.
I don’t need a Assault rifle Festival Like the modern BFs.
Same here.
If they can’t get bolt action balance right before release, I probably won’t be buying it either. At least not until I can get a heavy discount on it or I hear they’ve fixed it.
Bolt Action rifles and shotguns are the Most hated guns.
Just Take a look at all the “Evil Snipers” Threads. What happened to #everyonesbattlefield? Looks more Like #spraynpraygunsonlybattlefield.
People don’t like things that kill them so quickly they don’t even realize they are in danger.
Shotguns, bolt action rifles, bombers, artillery etc… it all gets hate because people are playing a game then instantgibbed faster then they can react.
And a SMG or AR kills slow? Really?
If you miss with a Bolt Action one Shot you are dead.
Nope. Bolt-action rifles are fine. Perfectly manufactured and setup and indestructible, unmovable sniper scopes are not. 1 sniper every 4 or 3 or even 2 soldiers is not either.
That is the best news I have heard all day!
And EA’s answer to that was to make medics snipers… duh.
True. Why should dancing sniper be given an aim assist, plus a magic pistol.
Except if you penalise them for moving and standing they will just go hump a hill where they can lie down safely.
Right next to the Support and Medic.
Who have the advantage of no glint. In the first alpha I was actually killed by a support player that I didn’t notice who was lying prone in some foliage right after I killed his scout buddy who was right next to him that I only noticed because of his scope glint. Also, in the same foliage was a medic as well. Although he didn’t shoot me.
You know, because everyone wants a game where there’s no 3D spotting so you have to use your own eyes to pick out targets except when it comes to scouts.
This was the most cofusing design decision in these games. A sniper is an assasin that relies on not being seen, yet in the games he has to glow like a laser pointer as if he was a boss fight that needs to telegraph attacks.
In every story that has snipers in action, they spend a lot of time scoped in while looking for targets and or watching over their team ready to support them. A scout who does that in BFs will basically attract the fire from any who can see the glint
Am I the only person thinking.. YESSS!!! Finally!! An end to being one hit killed by a standing sniper every time I break cover!!!
I love an aggressive play style, so this is the main thing that stops me playing BF1 at the moment. I just can’t be bothered with it.
Personally, I would welcome anything to up the skill requirement of a sniper. In BF1 sniping is way too easy. I’ve tried it! I find it incredibly boring but unbelievably easy.
I’m on the fence about buying BFV, if these changes are in the final game then I’m buying it.
For the comments about BF4, I played it at a friend’s house at launch, it was a total sniper fest. The game felt broken. I didn’t buy that game until they fixed that problem (Especially since BF3 was a great game).
If BFV has the same ridiculously easy sniping as BF1 then I doubt I’ll buy it, I have absolutely no desire to play battlefield sniper edition any longer.
We all hate to be the guy who gets cheesed by a camping sniper on a hill. This is why most people including those who also play sniper welcome the loss of the mid/long range1HK sweetspot bodyshots.
What people are concerned for is that bolt action rifles will become (again) something that only Stodehs (plural) and noobs will use (the former effectively and the later just wasting space in the team).
If that is the case instead of doing such a disservice to the bolt actions, it would be better to remove them from main class weapons and have them be a powerful pickup or a limited slot like a vehicle instead.
PS: I still don’t get how people see such a difference between instant death by one headshot from a bolt action and almost instant death by a rapid firing AR/SMG that can also happen faster than one can react to and probably required less careful aiming.