I got a round with two guys laying in the back with the mg 34 and farming kills. Great balance. In BF1 the medi got different weapons for different distance. In BF V the medi is just useless.
LMGs have plenty of recoil, you need to use the bipod if you want to engage long range. You’re also a huge target while the bipod is deployed. Recons are the perfect counters to LMGs. Some LMGs can’t even be used without the bipod… 2-3 hits? Maybe if you headshot.
FYI non medic players can only revive players within their own squad and it takes much longer than medic revives. Since medic revives are much quicker and safer, it’s always best to let the medics revive if their nearby.
Saying that, I’ll always go for a squad revive IF it’s safe. Not going to run in the middle of a fire fight to revive, that usually ends badly. People need to realise this before having a whinge about not being revived.
Well, you do know that people play the game? The ke7 as an example completely own say the stg, it is silly good and just get more op on bipod, sniper rifles kill in 2, some semis kill in 3.
Does that mean it is not great now? So I guess it got plenty of recoil and is inaccurate because it might get nerfed? Havent made it down the list so far to get to the last support guns so cant compare to them.
Medic weapons are indeed trash and the smgs are getting buffed soon thankfully and DICE has been debating making carbines all kit weapons according to Flakfire.
The problem Battlefield V has is a power and versatility problem and it hurts medic and it especially the scout class.Support lmgs kept their 4 hit kill range, which means they can beat out smgs in cqb but then they have versatility and damage output to stay extremely powerful at all ranges.
Assault is similar but they lost the 4btk range but they still have the fire rate to compete against smgs at cqb without losing their strength at range.
The problem with smgs is you are screwed and at a disadvantage no matter what smg you choose. You either choose a fast firing smg like the Suomi or Thompson to get the most out of the 9 meters smgs 4 hit kill range at the cost of insane recoil that makes it hard to hit anything past 15 meters.
Or you choose the slow firing smgs like the mp34( @MachoFantast1c0 favorite gun ) or Sten and you basically trade what little advantage you have in close quarters for a tickle gun that gets destroyed by assault and supports whose guns are far more powerful.
The slower firing smgs need to have their damage dropoff extended to give them a bit more punch in the 35-50 meter range since assault and support are still crazy strong at these ranges. The faster firing smgs need their recoil reduced a bit to give them a little more range. DICE also needs to give medics the ability to use carbines as well.
It’s pretty good now, but I’ve moved onto the FG42 as that was my favorite during beta. I’m yet to try the final unlockable LMG, but i didn’t like any of the others.
The KE7 is definitely getting tweaked next balance patch.
I agree medic weapons need a short range buff but giving them the recons and assaults weapons would hurt the balance of the game drastically. In BF4 every class could have DMR’s and in my opinion that really hurt the class system (among other things such as gadgets). If you want a game where medics are OP and have all the best guns just play BF1, Dice changes the weapons for each classes more often than people would think. Take bad company two where medics had mother trucking LMG’s. Dice made the change to Smg’s for a reason and i think its for the best, just not their balancing choices.
“Dice hates medics”–this sort of hyperbole doesn’t make your argument more convincing, it actually weakens it because when we read something so silly we naturally wonder what else you’re wrong about.
And no, I don’t remember how both sides in WWII taught their troops to shoot medics first. Depending on the armies involved and the location of the battles medics were sometimes respected and not fired on, in other situations wounded men were used to bait medics into exposing themselves so they could be shot–but there was certainly no universal policy about training troops to shoot medics.
As for how the game is meant to be played, none of us are in a position to say how the game is supposed to be played, even those of us who didn’t start the BF series as recently as BF1. If you don’t like bipod Support players that is your right, but that doesn’t mean they’re doing something contrary to the spirit of the game just because you don’t like it. Good thing you didn’t play Metro in BF3, then you’d really hate prone Support players.
Healing yourself is pointless if you get killed 500m away
Saw a medic goin 92-11 in conquest two hours ago. He magically disappeared from the server 2 mins before the end of the match. A prodigy of gaming? Without mentioning some games later, a fantastic dude ( not medic ) in Yellow Fields, who managed not only to kill me one shot with a P08, but also at the same time to threw me 2 meters away backwards like i was hit by a shockwave. There were just him and me there at the time. Or another magical dude, this time medic, who managed to kill me with a Sten two flags away from my position in Hamada.
Not saying all super performances out there by medics are fruit of weird stuff goin on. Perhaps you’re legit. But some are not. Saw too many strange things and too many magic bullets and mysterious spotting in last two days that made me wonder.
Of course i dont have video or screenshots evidence, so dont ask. Just in case.
Thats a pretty good idea. Why a WW2 game should just have LMGs and SMG’s, when it was fought primarily with rifles? But dont worry, Dice will give carbines and rifles to Scouts. As usual.
Still, adapt is very difficult when they can kill you from the other side of the map and you’re heavily out of reach.
Fun fact: i was playing one of the many servers tonight, maybe conquest i think was. A dude that i dont know mentioned me in chat. Asked me why Legatus you are playing medic? I replied why shouldnt i? He said because it is crap. Get the KE7 so you can get easy kills. [at that moment I was heavily outplayed, constantly killed a millisec after respawning] And i was like, sure i could. But then who do you think is goin to save you when you die in no mans land? See, this is why i think BF5 is kinda garbage and turning into casual COD style of game but with bigger maps. IF anyone playing the game always gets the most broken weapon out there just to win easy, whats the purpose of Battlefield then? What makes it different from a Call of Duty?
Now last question. Does a Gewehr 95 one shot kills one at full health? Im curious.
I’ve only played with a few of them so far, but they aren’t bad.
I have the Suomi set up for hipfire and it melts people pretty good in close quarters. Unfortunately, you can’t take the increased fire rate AND the extended magazine so you usually get a kill, then die right away reloading it as there aren’t many engagements I’ve had where there’s only 1 guy around.
The MP40 I was playing with tonight was pretty good with the 1.25x scope on it. A bit faster fire rate would be nice, but it felt pretty accurate and I won a few 1 on 1 fights where we saw each other at the same time (I don’t have all 4 boxes with it yet).
The Suomi is better than the Sten. First off all you have 18 bullets more in the mag and a much higher ROF. With the SMGs using the same spread mechanic as in previous BF titles the Suomi also plays similar to a P90 of BF4. You are forced to tapfire it. The Sten however has miniscule recoil and poor accuracy leading to very unintuitive and unrewarding TTK. You should be bursting this weapon as well, but since your crosshair is on target this is unintuitive. So, for the average user, a Suomi is better than the Sten in almost all regards.
) or Sten and you basically trade what little advantage you have in close quarters for a tickle gun that gets destroyed by assault and supports whose guns are far more powerful.