Buff bolt-action rifles. They are toy BB guns.

Battlefield V General Discussion
21

Bolt-action rifles are weaker than in any other previous title of this franchise even tho they got buffed in terms of their bullet velocities in the latest patch. However despite of this it is much easier going on huge kill streaks with any other class in the game to be honest. I think that those guns were initally balanced in a way where health attrition was really a thing and people often ran around without full health. However since almost everyone is on full health most of the time and there is an additional healing pouch in the inventory nowadys players can often tank one body-hit from a bolt-action rifles easily.

I would already be glad if my work as scout would be appreciated more by giving me more often an “assists counts as kill”. It just feels unrewarding dealing the major part of the damage to an enemy and not even get an assist counts as kill. I mean a lot of rifles do not even deal enough damage with a body hit in order to make an “assist counts as kill” possible. But even with the heavy-hitters like the M.95, Kar98 or the Type 99 most of the time you will not receive an assist counts as kill because as soon as someone uses their healing pouch (even if only healing only 3 health points) it does not count any more. An “assist counts as kill” is one of the rarest things I see in this game and I honestly think that it has to be reworked. How often have I dealt 80+ damage to someone that was then snacked by a friendly without any credits given to me who did most of the work tho.

I mean I do not expect much any more at this point but it would definitely be a wonderful thing if the game would reward me for weakening enemies more, especially if they get eliminated by friendlies then.

22

Rifles are perfectly fine in this game if you can actually aim and were just recently buffed to muzzle velocities that actually seem acceptable for a high powered rifle.

Lol, no, they’re not. With the recent muzzle velocity buff, rifles just reached a point where they’re ALMOST as effective as rifles were in BF1942-BF2. That’s, rifles with nearly 1000m/s velocity and only capable of an OHK if it’s to the head. I say “almost as effective” because rifles in those other games did upward of 90~ damage per body shot, which BF5 doesn’t even come close to.

We’ve had WAY more powerful iterations of rifles in BF games. In BC2 you could OHK with body shots from 0m to 15m (even on limbs), and they had the M95 that could literally shoot drivers out of armored cars and blow up helicopters.

In BF3 and BF4, rifles could OHK with chest shots from 0 to 12.5m, and had things like 14x, 20x, and 40x scopes, lasers to increase hip fire stats, target finders that tell you how far away an enemy is, and the most extensive and easy to use distance zeroing system in any BF game to date. It also had two pickup sniper rifles, one of which was a semi auto 50 cal that OHKd everything, and another of which was a literal Rail Gun that could OHK infantry with splash damage and destroy vehicles.

BF Hardline rifles OHK from 0 to 12m and they had the .300 Knockout that could OHK with chest shots up to 30-40m.

BF1 had probably the most powerful rifles in the entire franchise, wherein they were all set up with a “sweet spot” mechanic that allowed OHKs at a myriad of ranges, and all rifles had decent muzzle velocity (sort of similar to BF5s rifles right now).

In saying all that - before the muzzle velocity buff, BF5 had objectively some of the weakest rifles in the franchise, and all the buff did was make some rifles more worthwhile, they still don’t even do as much damage per shot as other non-OHK-capable rifles in older BF titles.

23

Supression is an awful mechanic and should have never been in any bf game. That’s a fact.

24

I just don’t think that’s very fair if you land first your hits on a sniper, you even hit him 3 times already, but the sniper still has the time to jerk off and gives you a headshot.

I can’t even count that anymore how often that happens and how much I did this to other people. That body shots don’t OHK at full health is at least something good about them. But then there’re ZH-29 and Selbstlader 1906.

25

Sounds like an opinion, not a fact

26

Its not a fact, its your opinion. Bf3 was one of the most succesful bf game yet had the insane amount of supression effect.

27

And by that you mean go for headshots I take it?
If only this was required for all weapon classes and not just bolt action rifles, then there would probably be no balance problem at all.

28

No, by that I mean you land the majority of your shots and can generally hit enemies when you need to. Because by design of bolt action rifles alone, missing a shot is significantly more punishing than it is with other weapon types, which is why rifles do significantly more damage per shot and are the only weapons capable of OHK headshots at all ranges and are undeniably the most accurate weapons in the entire arsenal.

The issue here lies in the fact that any given average BF player throughout the past 5 titles in the franchise have barely maintained 25-30% accuracy with rifles and couldn’t hit a follow up shot to save their lives (literally).

Most people sucking with rifles doesn’t constitute a buff or dictate that rifles are worthless. There are tons of players who make rifles work in this game, including myself.

29

Here is another fact for you: bf3 was successful not because supression is in there. But keep brining funny arguments. I enjoy reading those.

30

An another fact for you: I dont care what you enjoy.

Also supression heavily affected gun fights of Bf3. It wouldnt be succesful if supression is really a garbage mechanic.

31

But it is. It awards player for being inaccurate and not being able to land his shots. Which is dumb and makes 0 sense.
Yet somehow it’s great and pure bf experience.
But in reality it always goes this way: if I don’t like something it’s bad. If I like something it’s great. And overall my opinion > your opinion just because.

32

Suppression was a heavily criticized mechanic in BF3 during its time as the active, current BF title. One could easily search and find a myriad of threads criticizing suppression in the BF3 Battlelog forums of olde.

It’s like claiming that BF4 having 2d minimap spotting that marked you on the map every time you fired your gun couldn’t have been a bad or heavily criticized mechanic because BF4 was a successful game. There’s no logic in that.

Suppression has been criticized and argued over in every iteration of BF its been featured in, including its effects in BF5.

33

It was popular, because the CoD kids hat Metro and Noshar TDM. :duck:

34

This is the first Battlefield game where I have actually enjoyed playing as Recon/sniping.
Enjoyable as is, in my opinion.

35

Well supression effect is mostly exist because of the real life reasons. In real life there is a thing called supressive fire. That effect did a good job at representing it.

36

They also didn’t use bolt-action rifles as infantry. They used the M1 Garand and rifles like that, then around the time of D-Day, the Thompson was used, the Browning Automatic Rifle was used for the Automatic Rifleman in the squad, etc. The British used the Lee Enfield at first, but then switched over to a semi-automatic weapon early-on, delegating the Lee Enfield .303 to a sniper role.

That’s why I assumed you’re talking snipers.

37

supression was not one of the thing people remember BF3
It was a terrible mechanic
There’s a reason the m16a3 was one the most used weapons
It because it was bugged for most of the lifetime of the game and didn’t get suppressed

38

M16 brokenness has nothing to do with supression. It was bugged just Usas 12 frag.

39

They’re fine now after the velocity buff the pistol carbines are in a far worse place.

40

the bug of the m16 was that it wasn’t affected by suppresion
The value in the game file was left at 0 for no reason