Welcome to symthic forums! We would love if you'd register!
You don't have to be expert in bit baking, everyone is more than welcome to join our community.

You are not logged in.

Hey! If this is your first visit on symthic.com, also check out our weapon damage charts.
Currently we have charts for Battlefield 3, Call of Duty: Black Ops 2, Medal of Honor: Warfighter and Call of Duty: Modern Warfare 3

  • "Novan Leon" started this thread

Posts: 27

Date of registration
: Dec 19th 2011

Platform: PC

Battlelog:

Reputation modifier: 8

  • Send private message

61

Sunday, November 20th 2016, 9:37pm

Perhaps reduction to the player movement speed can come from introducing stamina for sprinting, as that would certainly make transport vehicles more important. I do not remember if that was a mechanic in any previous "Battlefield" game though.

Since one cannot fire their weapon when sprinting anyways, the moving inaccuracy for shooting while walking currently is fine in my opinion.
I don't think there's anything wrong with having unlimited sprint... the problem comes from there not being a combat penalty for coming out of sprint and firing your weapon. In a competitive game there needs to be pros and cons for every decision you make. Currently there are very few drawbacks for running everywhere in full sprint since you can stop on a dime and fire your weapon with near-perfect accuracy at a moment's notice. Let people sprint as much as they want, just penalize them on weapon accuracy for a reasonable period of time coming out of sprint.

Then again, Battlefield has always been an arcade game with arcade mechanics, so I don't honestly expect them to change anything for the small nice of people who are looking for more substantial shooting mechanics. They've already dumbed down BF1 from previous games enough as it is (sniping is super easy now, tanks are super powerful, trains/ships/behemoths are brain-dead easy, etc.). Battlefield is meant to be dumb fun; hectic combat and crazy shenanigans in a large map with all types of vehicles and gadgets. I enjoy BF1 for what it is, certainly, but I'm not deluding myself about it's prospects to be anything else.

Posts: 1,535

Date of registration
: Sep 7th 2016

Platform: PC

Location: Toronto

Battlelog:

Reputation modifier: 5

  • Send private message

62

Sunday, November 20th 2016, 10:45pm

I don't think there's anything wrong with having unlimited sprint... the problem comes from there not being a combat penalty for coming out of sprint and firing your weapon. In a competitive game there needs to be pros and cons for every decision you make. Currently there are very few drawbacks for running everywhere in full sprint since you can stop on a dime and fire your weapon with near-perfect accuracy at a moment's notice. Let people sprint as much as they want, just penalize them on weapon accuracy for a reasonable period of time coming out of sprint.

There is already a small time delay added for readying your weapon when coming out of a sprint actually. That time delay is further lengthened when you have a Bayonet attached to your gun, as there needs to be some added penalty or downside for every attachment that offers benefits.

Posts: 3,639

Date of registration
: Mar 19th 2014

Platform: Xbox One

Location: Canada

Battlelog:

Reputation modifier: 16

  • Send private message

63

Monday, November 21st 2016, 1:05am

There is already a small time delay added for readying your weapon when coming out of a sprint actually. That time delay is further lengthened when you have a Bayonet attached to your gun, as there needs to be some added penalty or downside for every attachment that offers benefits.


Indeed, and I think it's fine as-is. If you sprint around in high-combat zones, especially in HC, you're going to lose a lot of fights.
Who Enjoys, Wins

Posts: 33

Date of registration
: Apr 5th 2014

Platform: PS4

Battlelog:

Reputation modifier: 5

  • Send private message

64

Wednesday, November 23rd 2016, 7:29am

Perhaps reduction to the player movement speed can come from introducing stamina for sprinting, as that would certainly make transport vehicles more important. I do not remember if that was a mechanic in any previous "Battlefield" game though.

Since one cannot fire their weapon when sprinting anyways, the moving inaccuracy for shooting while walking currently is fine in my opinion.
I don't think there's anything wrong with having unlimited sprint... the problem comes from there not being a combat penalty for coming out of sprint and firing your weapon. In a competitive game there needs to be pros and cons for every decision you make. Currently there are very few drawbacks for running everywhere in full sprint since you can stop on a dime and fire your weapon with near-perfect accuracy at a moment's notice. Let people sprint as much as they want, just penalize them on weapon accuracy for a reasonable period of time coming out of sprint.

If you're truly playing a competitive match (not necessarily organized tournaments, matches, etc.) against equally skilled players then there are already pros and cons to simply making the choice to sprint at all. Even if there is no penalty for coming out of sprint, you have already taken your weapon out of play while sprinting. Facing skilled players, they can very well make you pay for that decision without any added penalty. Near perfect accuracy upon exiting sprint isn't going to help much if you've been spotted, called out, or they were already prepared for you to come that way.

I much prefer a limited sprint with little to no penalty. They may already have you at a disadvantage, let the better shot decide who wins. Of course, that's also one of my small pet peeves with the spread mechanics in the BF series to begin with but that's also the nature of the game they designed so it is what is. I digress though.

Posts: 1,535

Date of registration
: Sep 7th 2016

Platform: PC

Location: Toronto

Battlelog:

Reputation modifier: 5

  • Send private message

65

Wednesday, November 23rd 2016, 8:30am

Of course, that's also one of my small pet peeves with the spread mechanics in the BF series to begin with but that's also the nature of the game they designed so it is what is. I digress though.

What kind of problems do you have with the current spread mechanic in "Battlefield 1"?

Posts: 33

Date of registration
: Apr 5th 2014

Platform: PS4

Battlelog:

Reputation modifier: 5

  • Send private message

66

Thursday, November 24th 2016, 12:11am

Of course, that's also one of my small pet peeves with the spread mechanics in the BF series to begin with but that's also the nature of the game they designed so it is what is. I digress though.

What kind of problems do you have with the current spread mechanic in "Battlefield 1"?
None at all. I don't have a problem with the presence of it in any Battlefield as it's built in and you have to accept that if it's the game you choose. Like I said, it's a minor pet peeve and it doesn't affect the majority of the experience and I hope that it doesn't come across that way. It's merely my personal philosophy when it comes to FPS games, if I can explain for just a minute...

It's just a general concept I don't particularly like... or understand for that matter. In my eyes, the player with the better shot should win a head to head gun fight with all things being equal in a FPS. Luck is luck and it is going to happen, but skill should be the factor that trumps all else otherwise. This should be based on a player's understanding of the guns and how to be effective with them. Shot placement, rate of fire, damage, range, recoil are all factors within a player's control that they can use or control. Spread is not. It's not within your ability to manage on every shot as you would with something like recoil that you can learn how to adjust and keep your shot on point.


So that you may better understand where I am coming from, my earliest shooter experience was Goldeneye on the N64, but Halo: Combat Evolved (aka Halo 1) is where I really started my FPS "career" so to speak. When I reflect back on the Halo series (and I'm referring to the real Halo games, not the abominations that followed the early installments) and think about the aspects that made it competitive and made the competitive scene truly great is that there wasn't spread or reticle bloom at the time. If you didn't land shots, it was entirely your mistake and it was as simple as that (minor exceptions being excluded here, minor being the key word). The concept is what bothers because it ultimately introduces a factor that reduces accuracy, leaving a player without the avenue of developing the ability to overcome it and therefore removes a degree of control from the player.



To put it simply, it's not what I envision as an aspect of my ideal shooter game, and that's merely a preference/opinion. It doesn't mean I don't enjoy the series, because I do and the better players will still definitively separate themselves. Thus, it is only a small pet peeve, a minor annoyance which certainly doesn't ruin the experience for me.

NoctyrneSAGA

PvF 2017 Champion

(10,148)

Posts: 7,229

Date of registration
: Apr 3rd 2012

Platform: PC

Battlelog:

Reputation modifier: 19

  • Send private message

67

Thursday, November 24th 2016, 9:13am

It's just a general concept I don't particularly like... or understand for that matter. In my eyes, the player with the better shot should win a head to head gun fight with all things being equal in a FPS. Luck is luck and it is going to happen, but skill should be the factor that trumps all else otherwise. This should be based on a player's understanding of the guns and how to be effective with them. Shot placement, rate of fire, damage, range, recoil are all factors within a player's control that they can use or control. Spread is not. It's not within your ability to manage on every shot as you would with something like recoil that you can learn how to adjust and keep your shot on point.


Spread can be managed.

To believe it cannot is a popular misconception championed by aiming purists.

Yes, the winner of a gun fight should be the player with a fundamentally better understanding of their weapon, their opponent's weapon, the engagement, and how the match-up works.

The management of spread is an additional element to this that is controlled through the left hand/stick unlike aiming which Is typically controlled through the right hand/stick.



To dismiss spread as a factor counter to skill or to consider it as something impossible to manage shows a fundamental misunderstanding of its purpose and how it actually fits into the skillset DICE wants players to train.
Data Browser

Passive Spotting is the future!

"Skill" may indeed be the most magical of words. Chant it well enough and any desire can be yours.

Are you a scrub?

If it flies, it dies™.

Zer0Cod3x

Can't get a title

(1,327)

Posts: 1,531

Date of registration
: Dec 23rd 2013

Platform: Xbox One

Location: The Land of Multitudinous Kangaroos

Reputation modifier: 13

  • Send private message

68

Thursday, November 24th 2016, 9:34am

@Mr_Byddy

Whether you agree with random spread and horizontal recoil or not doesn't matter. The fact is that it works.

It does a very good job of limiting the effective range of a weapon. Which is the whole reason it's in the game.
something something Model 8 bestgun


How to ice an A-91

Next, wanna try adding a guy that you KNOW is bad, and just testing to see that? Example: PP-2000 (god I so wanna love this gun, and yet...)

Example: PP-2000 (god I so wanna love this gun, and yet...)

PP-2000 added. Y'know, it's not that bad....

Yes, it comes in last so far, but that is mostly because I'm making it shoot at 100m ADS - Not Moving as one of the criteria. Even then, between 50-100m Not Moving, when you include Useability, it is only 1.37% worse than the MTAR-21. Within 50m then it even beats the A-91.

Have a look, vs. the A-91 Carbine:




Using it with Muzzle Brake and Compensator is a wash in terms of overall performance. Comp is SLIGHTLY more accurate, while MB is SLIGHTLY more easy to use. Their overall scores are basically tied, with MB just ahead. I guess either can be recommended.

But... You can't be counting for the fact that it takes 9 bullets to kill at "long" range... Don't you dare tell me my A-91 is worse than a 9 BTK 650 RPM mediocre PDW.

Also. Just go heavy barrel. The recoil is low enough.

Well, technically...

Comparing a PP2K with HB and an A-91 with comp and stubby (as you suggested in an earlier post), at 50m not moving, the A-91 is only better by 4 damage per hitrate. While at 75m and 100m, surprisingly the PP2K does better than the A-91 (I'm pretty damn surprised as well).

And 10m and 50m moving the PP2K also does more damage per hitrate than the A-91. At 25m the A-91 is only better by about half a bullet's damage as well.

In addition, the PP2K has a much larger mag size and substantially less recoil. And it looks hella awesome. So comparing the A-91 to a PDW is of some worth after all, as the PP2K is better (technically, not practically) than the A-91.

Mind blown.

I... I...

*cries in a corner*

Zer0Cod3x explained it very well. If you look at the raw numbers right here on Symthic Comparison, you can see how that happened:

A-91 vs PP-2000 | BF4 Weapon Comparison | Symthic

A-91's "23%" RPM advantage only afforded it 1 extra round.

Reload times are wash.

Velocities are wash.

V-Recoil are wash (and this is HBar on PP2k vs. A-91 without).

Hipfire and ADS - Moving are better on the PP2k, but it's a PDW and not the surprising part.

The surprising part is that, as equipped (and we see above that PP2k HBar has almost same V-Recoil as A-91 without HBar so why not?), the PDW performs better at 50 - 100m than a bloody Carbine. Why?

H-Recoil Spread, 0.525 vs. 0.45, advantage PP2k.

SIPS, 42% better on the PP2k.

And here is the most important part. ADS - Not Moving Spread, 0.35 vs. 0.2, 43% improvement.

Without HBar then of course the PP2k loses, which is why when I add all the attachments together for an Overall Ranking, it would slot below the A-91. Run HBar on it, though, then... I'm sorry

@Veritable
@Zer0Cod3x
I... I...
But...
Wha...
I AM HAVING AN EXISTENTIAL CRISIS IN SCHOOL BECAUSE OF YOU TWO.

FUCK YOU NERDS AND YOUR FANCY NUMBERS

SEXY RUSSIAN BULLPUPS FTW.

In all seriousness, thank you both so much for giving me the numbers. I still don't want to accept them. You have led the horse to water. I still need to drink.


Posts: 33

Date of registration
: Apr 5th 2014

Platform: PS4

Battlelog:

Reputation modifier: 5

  • Send private message

69

Thursday, November 24th 2016, 11:47am

It's just a general concept I don't particularly like... or understand for that matter. In my eyes, the player with the better shot should win a head to head gun fight with all things being equal in a FPS. Luck is luck and it is going to happen, but skill should be the factor that trumps all else otherwise. This should be based on a player's understanding of the guns and how to be effective with them. Shot placement, rate of fire, damage, range, recoil are all factors within a player's control that they can use or control. Spread is not. It's not within your ability to manage on every shot as you would with something like recoil that you can learn how to adjust and keep your shot on point.


Spread can be managed.

To believe it cannot is a popular misconception championed by aiming purists.

Yes, the winner of a gun fight should be the player with a fundamentally better understanding of their weapon, their opponent's weapon, the engagement, and how the match-up works.

The management of spread is an additional element to this that is controlled through the left hand/stick unlike aiming which Is typically controlled through the right hand/stick.



To dismiss spread as a factor counter to skill or to consider it as something impossible to manage shows a fundamental misunderstanding of its purpose and how it actually fits into the skillset DICE wants players to train.
Just to reiterate, I'm not saying it breaks the game or undermines player skill and I'm not absolutely against it. What I'm saying is that it is not nearly to the degree of control a player may have over basic aiming or recoil which is far more tangible and easier for one to tell if they are managing it effectively. It works in the background on a more subtle level. I'm not oblivious to the "stop and pop" philosophy with controlling your movement they used in their design approach and it very much fits within the realm of the game. Battlefield is not Halo and it's not Call of Duty, it requires different mechanics to work, thus my expression of it only being a minor pet peeve as I acknowledge that fact and appreciate the difference in style.


@Zer0Cod3x

It's an interesting dynamic that I will certainly admit I haven't experienced to the same degree in my shooter history, and perhaps I'm biased because of that. I came into the BF franchise with BF4 (I won't count the 1942 days given how long ago that was prior to picking it back up) so it's certainly not that I haven't come to understand it's role at this point or think less of the experience because of that. As I mentioned a little bit above, they have a different set of rules they needed to play by in approaching the series. I see the merit of including spread, bullet drop, etc. and it tests players in a different manner. It's not that I don't want to see it to any degree in any game, but similarly I would hope that all FPS fans could appreciate, to some extent, the flip side of the spectrum where these elements are limited or removed and it affects your aim and movement in a different way since every bullet will be on point every time. Not to keep touching back on this, but that was the pro and the con you had to manage in Halo 1 and 2 whereas spread is incorporated into the equation for BF and it has to be changed to accommodate that.


It's a matter of style and preference, no one way is better than the other. I've enjoyed all the Battlefields I have played, but for me Hardline was the most enjoyable thus far because it felt more natural for me with the maps being smaller and engagements tighter, bringing the gunfights more in line with what I prefer. Actually, Hardline may be my favorite FPS game I've ever played because of the balance they struck in those core aspects. In that regard I actually do like the spread, I just like the balance with respect to the weapons to be shifted.

I hope that explains what I was trying to say a bit more clearly.

NoctyrneSAGA

PvF 2017 Champion

(10,148)

Posts: 7,229

Date of registration
: Apr 3rd 2012

Platform: PC

Battlelog:

Reputation modifier: 19

  • Send private message

70

Thursday, November 24th 2016, 8:27pm

I'm not oblivious to the "stop and pop" philosophy with controlling your movement they used in their design approach and it very much fits within the realm of the game.


It is not just firing while stationary, although LMGs completely ignore this rule.

It is one of the most basic rules of PvP: controlling spacing.

Whoever controls the spacing in a fight is in a very advantageous position.

Spread is an intuitive way to achieve this.
Data Browser

Passive Spotting is the future!

"Skill" may indeed be the most magical of words. Chant it well enough and any desire can be yours.

Are you a scrub?

If it flies, it dies™.