What agenda are you talking about?!
I only said that I never found a situation in BF1 where people would say " these enemy snipers are destroying us we cannot capture this objective". On the other hand I saw a lot of “These allied snipers are a liability cause not enough of us push on the objective”.
.
For that reason I am in support of any changes that make the people playing the class more comfortable with getting closer together with the rest of the team instead of them trying to outrange all the other weapons for safety (such as more weapon options that are not just rifles)
Let me bridge the gap for you guys. Joker plays Ops, the defending team on which is rife with prone snipers (and supports, I’d imagine). He also plays on console, which suffered for a long time from over-aggressive auto-rotation on irons, carbines and low-zoom marksman scopes. Combined with sweet spot bodyshot kills, it is easy to understand how that could make for a less than ideal playground.
On the other hand, you (and I) play mostly other than Ops, on PC. So not only are competent, accurate and lethal scouts few and far between, they are also easier to counter. So for the most part I can agree that enemy snipers are rarely a real threat, and the frustration mostly concerns passive team mates.
Joker please correct me if I was badly off.
Actually I play Mostly Ops and shock ops over conquest in BF1 (more than twice my conquest rounds), I do not know why the Ops do not show in my profile. There were no times where I found defending snipers to be more dangerous than defending LMG “snipers”.
.
I stand that at least from PC point of view any cases where it seems that a sniper is strong is due to map design and aim assist related mechanics. Also in all but the longest of ranges there are better alternatives on other classes, especially post medic and support accuracy buffs in BF1.
The aim assist with auto rotation on console does make infantry style bolt actions trivial to use. Especially ones with short ranged sweetspots. The same applies to shotguns though. Regardless, that has little to do with scope glint since scoped rifles don’t benefit from auto rotation. It also has little to do with BFV since auto-rotation will either be completely gone or significantly less effective based on dev comments on the matter.
That is a pretty accurate assessment.
You can already remedy scope glint. By not taking a scope.
But remember, their goal is play aggressive scout on flags so they need scopes…
Scopes help a lot with headshots. Especially in BFV where you pretty much have to be landing headshots or you’re dead 99% of the time. I PTFO with scoped weapons in BF1 all the time. If iron sight bolt actions actually did a reasonable amount of damage on body shots with the ability to quickly follow up with your pistol, I wouldn’t really care about the scopes.
Regardless, I’m just going to end up using the iron sight SLRs instead. Bolt actions suck in BFV.
Bolt action snipers are meant to be comedy relief in BFV anyway. Did you saw what happened to that sniper on the church in the map reveal video earlier
You wouldn’t be hard scoping up close so why would glare be an issue?
Also, I’m not sure what you are getting at about the iron site vs scope weapon damage thing. They do the same damage in most cases, ie G98 scoped vs G98 infantry have the same damage model.
Yeah, and that damage is too low. That’s the point. They’re not really worth using in CQB with iron sights as a result unless you’re always getting headshots. Scopes make it easier to do that. I know it does the same damage regardless of sights/optics.
Like I said, I’ll mostly be using the SLRs with iron sights on Recon because I don’t feel that the bolt actions are worth it unless you’re sitting way back trying to cherry pick some headshots.
