XFactor mentioned that the submachine guns have an incredible level of bullet deviation, to the point that tap-firing does not even work. This is a much greater level of deviation than in past games, and as he described it, turns the gunplay into rock-paper-scissors. In the past, you at least had a chance against better guns so long as you could aim and tapfire.
This was a big problem in BF4 and Hardline, and it sounds like they are making it worse. Supporting guns should be supporting guns, not completely superior in certain situations. All gunfights should come down to the player being better. Subtle disadvantages are fine, such as snipers vs. AN-94s in BF3. But clear disadvantages to the point of being ridiculous are a big problem. An assault rifle should not clearly lose to an SMG or machine-pistol in close range, just as an SMG should not clearly lose to a semi-automatic rifle at medium range.
This was a big problem in Hardline. And the flipside here, for those who think the rock-paper-scissors gameplay is ‘strategic’, is that your guns become completely useless in close range. The random bullet deviation of LMGs up close seemed to be the case for Semi-autos in the BF1 reveal.
Do you think it should be right that a LMG tap fire can out shoot a sniper at long distances? Or that a SMG can out tap fire a semi-auto rifle at medium distance. Each weapon has its distance of specialty. Learn to adapt to it and yes it will require you to make better decisions such as trying to close the distance.
We do not what a game that is dominated by tap firing LMG and SMG
Yes, I think that if an LMG or assault rifle should be able to outgun you if the person aiming it has the ability to put in three shots before you put in one. It is already much harder to do, given that it takes three shots as opposed to one, and due to the fact that in scope you are a much smaller target than he is.
So put this way, ‘I have to hit a smaller target three times as opposed to hitting a large target once’ it is not about ‘outgunning’. It is about still being able to overcome advantages if I am a superior player, and being playable due to the mechanics. When you introduce randomness mechanics like rock-paper-scissors guns then there are individual metas, or subgames which make certain situations unplayable.
Or in other words, you want to be able to outgun me through game mechanics, and you refuse to adapt to the way the game should be.
In other words you want to have laser accurate rifles just like they had in the first great war. Or you could just be clever and make your way closer to the sniper using cover and then kill him. Or you can go play SWBF where there are laser blasters.
Exactly, Rocket. Perhaps the snipers and LMG spammers should adapt, focus on your job of supporting the team, choosing your targets, and aiming better, rather than lobbying DICE to introduce single-player elements into multiplayer.
Having full squads of LMG and sniper stars is just terrible for overall gameplay. Perhaps an AI mode would solve this while limiting the slots for support roles.
The game looks pretty polished in terms of vehicle and gun mechanics. And given the history of BF4 and Hardline there is a push to lower the skill-ceiling.
What traditional and skilled gamers are looking for is clarification on this, and not to have to deal with it in a post-release testing environment.
Finding that sweet spot of where it is worse but not useless will be the challenge for the Beta. I see what you mean and I back it. As long as the maps cater for all weapons equally. As in they are designed so that there are areas that are close distance combat and areas that are medium distance combat and then there are areas that are long distance engagements.
I noticed them both saying that. I also noticed directly afterwards that they both got plenty of ranged kills with each weapon so it was hard to sympathize with their sentiments.
LMGs should be inaccurate when not using the bipod. They’re heavy and unwieldy.
SMGs should be sort of ineffective at longer ranges. They’re designed for CQB, which is why you don’t see soldiers using them outside of close quarters situations.
I don’t want ‘ultra realism’, but I do want the guns to fit their niches, as they should.
I think SMGs should be ineffective at long range. Make the damage so minimal that the player wouldn’t even bother.
My issue is that the targets aren’t that far away. The guy was maybe 40 yards away? I think the deviation should be there, but it should be subtle and not that much.
As I said, if you watch their footage they both got long range kills with SMGs and non bipod operated MGs. They got out shot a few times as well, which I doubt was always the fault of spread mechanics. Basically, BF youtubers can be whiners. Xfactor is the guy that came up with the term ‘micro-bursting’ from experimenting with BF3’s AS-VAL (which was horrible at range without micro-bursting or single fire mode) so I can see why he’d have an issue with it. Levelcap is a whiny overgrown baby in general (realised that pretty quick after a few vids.. phew.)
Don’t worry. Whatever balance the game has or hasn’t at this point will all change once the YouTubers start complaining as it did for BF3 and BF4. Good or bad.
