Sniper hates and kids ruined bf series

[MartinBabl]

@Bertominus_Rex

@Sir-xer21

@Bertominus_Rex

@Sir-xer21

@Bertominus_Rex

@Sir-xer21

@Bertominus_Rex

@Sir-xer21

@Bertominus_Rex

Wasn’t Bad Company 2 the easiest to snipe in?

The classic titles had fog, and if I remember right… no 1HK potential outside of headshots. Bad Company 2 had a significantly larger view distance, and 1hk potential to the upper body below 30 meters. Bf3 added in bullet drop, and it reduced the 1hk range making sniping harder.

I don’t see how BC2 was the ideal example of sniping.

Classic titles had fog because of engine limitations, it was NOT a design choice.

I find it hilarious when people bring up fog like it was a “Feature”. It wasnt. huge maps were just hard on older hardware.

It WAS a design choice, AND a feature incorporated to hide the limited view distance due to the average hardware.

It’s silly to say it wasn’t a design choice… your argument is wrong, considering the size of the map had no bearing on the amount of fog used. With your argument, Operation Blue Pearl should have had the same or less fog than Dragon Valley… but that’s not the case.

Developers use whatever tools they have available, and the fog was an available tool in balancing maps. It was a feature that had multiple purposes.

the size of the map had to do with it, but you’re maing the mistake of thinking that it mattered whether it was a larger map or not. they were ALL too large for the hardware to render effectively. it was either put fog, or no one gets frames. they didnt do it to make sniping harder. it had nothing to do with balancing maps.

It had an inherit role in map balance. There was a limited view distance, therefore maps were balanced with this view distance in mind. On top of that, fog values differed from map to map as a means of balancing them. Why would a map as small as Operation Blue Pearl have such a high fog value? Why would a larger map like Kubra Dam have such a low fog value?

It’s absurd to think that it was purely due to hardware limitations, and that no other purpose was present.

yes, im sure they went out of their way to nerf the most useless class in the game with the highest skill floor.

Makes perfect sense.

When did I ever say they used fog to nerf snipers?

what other purppose would it serve as a balancing mechanism? it literally only affected them.

Except it didn’t. It affected all kits, and it affected vehicles too. You ignored my example of Operation Blue Pearl… you seriously can’t tell me they did that for performance reasons. The map would be utterly broken with decreased fog.

Take a look at the other maps too. Your argument just doesn’t work… yes, all maps had a limited view distance to cut performance costs. However, maps such as Strike at Karkand had thicker fog than Kumra Dam. Do you seriously think that was due to performance? No, it was a conscious decision by the developers to balance the maps.

It is a balance of both.

• Battlefield 2 maps were large and by using this technique the game decreased the number of things that needed to be rendered.
• There are certain maps where it does limit the distance of sight to a certain distance and it therefore limits snipers to that distance as enemies were not rendered past that distance. (If you were pro you could kill enemies beyond that distance)
• Battlefield 1 is not hardware limited in that way but will still make use of the fog as a dynamic weather aspect which serves to render snipers useless at certain distances unless you are pro and can use the fog to hide your scope glint and still workout where the enemy is relative to the 3D spotting.