And here we find the one-half of the regular forumfield sniper conundrum - one half saying that sniping is too easy and the enemy team having too many snipers makes playing hard, and the other half saying that snipers can’t kill anything and having too many on THEIR team causes them to lose.
Why make a fourth class if you’re just going to limit it? It may as well not even be a fully playable class at that point, and would be more along the lines of cavalry. And then you have the huge possibility of all the sniper slots on your team being taken up by people that couldn’t hit the broad side of a barn if they were inside the barn. It also increases the possibility of quitters because people will join wanting to snipe and won’t be able to (that happens in games like Insurgency and Red Orchestra ALL the time).
Anybody care to explain where sniping in BF1 is inherently “easier” than in past games outside of a specific rifle’s OHK range?
Because in CQB it’s ultimately harder than in BC2, BF3, and BF4 - you have no OHK range in CQB with any rifle, whereas past games have had OHK ranges from 12m to 20m(BC2). Past around 300m, sniping gets inherently harder in BF1 than it was in BF4, because of the added mechanic of bullet drag, which slows your round down the further it flies through the air, which steeply increases it’s drop while simultaneously causing the need for even more adjustment for leading your target than in past games.
Whereas in past games, bolt-action rifle rounds traveled the same velocity and had the same basic drop arc no matter where you were shooting from or how far your bullet had to travel.
People who think this game has “less” bullet drop are ignorant of the actual statistics of the rifles. BF1 has the exact same bullet drop stats per rifle as BF3 and BF4 (they use the actual force of gravity in every game) - what you think is “less drop” is actually “more velocity”.
That change was due in part to the fact that in BC2, BF3, and BF4, bolt-action rifle rounds traveled so comically slowly, that at a certain range, you could literally SIDE STEP a sniper’s round. You could see it coming and have enough hang time to be able to dodge a bullet shot from a high powered rifle only a few hundred meters away.
The bottom line is: despite the fact that rifles have increased velocity and their OHK ranges were pushed out to medium-long range, the majority of people who play Scout in this game still can’t hit targets for anything. I’ve looked at a myriad of player’s stats that have posted on this forum (specifically on topics of bolt-action rifles) and the majority of them can’t even maintain above and average 25% accuracy with rifles as a whole.
I can post a video of me avoiding being killed by a sniper in the open desert between G and A on Sinai with zero cover around me, simply by running in circles.
Like I said, there’s an entire chunk of this community that complain snipers are worthless because they just camp and never kill anything so having too many on your team will cause you to lose - and then they do a complete 180 and start posting about how enemy teams full of snipers just tear them to shreds because sniping is so easy.
No matter the iteration of Battlefield, snipers have been complain about in BF communities (not just Battlelog or this forum) since earlier games in the franchise. I know for a fact that snipers were complained about extensively on Battlelog during the BF3 and BF4 days for the exact same reason snipers are complained about in this game. In this game people complain the OHK sweet spot makes sniping too easy - in BF4 people called sniper rifles “ghetto shotguns” because their 0-12.5m OHK range made them “too easy” to use in CQB.
This community has shown time and time again that no matter how you implement bolt-action rifles into these games, people will always find a reason to complain about them being “too good” or “too easy” in some way until bolt-action rifles have zero OHK capability beyond headshots, do 25% damage on limb shots, and are completely and utterly noncompetitive at anything aside from sitting 500m away from the action/objective.
I mean, really - there are people on this forum who are perfectly fine with machine guns that fire 500RPM with dozens of rounds killing people in 4 shots, while it simultaneously takes two rounds to the same section of a player’s body to kill them with a bolt-action rifle that shoots 10x slower and has 10x less rounds per mag.
There are people okay with the RSC being able to two-shot people up to 70m with the new balance pass in the CTE, while many rifles in this game require the same bullets to kill within the RSC’s normal effective range and fire 2x slower with the same magazine size.
How anyone can think that’s balanced is beyond me. There are people in this community that are obviously biased against Scouts and will argue any negative point about them, no matter how illogical it may be.
