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

VincentNZ

Holy War? No Thanks.

(2,088)

Posts: 2,584

Date of registration
: Jul 25th 2013

Platform: PC

Battlelog:

Reputation modifier: 14

  • Send private message

181

Tuesday, April 18th 2017, 4:29pm

I do see a difference in defintion here of what team and squadplay means. It does seem that the encouraged way of teamplay is to charge head-on onto the objective with everyone available and die heroically until you overcome the enemy by sheer number.

Tactical thinking, flanking, choice of pathing or use of assets is mostly discouraged as shooting mechanics, gameplay mechanics, map design etc. are posing a great risk for anyone not following the brute-force approach. Doing stuff that is beyond "hit the enemy at the strognest point to show 'em we mean business" is is detrimental to the team actually as you and your squad is missing on the front. Capping flags that are not on the immediate frontline, which is a tactical decision, is not really worthwhile, but at the same time is very unrewarding to take back as a squad or player, as an example.
I do not see how a squad of friends playing together is any help in this either, or creates more fun or teamplay beyond the social advantage. The founding mechanics remain the same, you are better off pressing onwards to the contested frontline to die. It does not really matter if you are revived, resupplied, or valiantly died there with a squadmate or blueberry in proximity. It is the numbers of people that define victory here, not the kind of people playing.
Then again, where would you gather friends anyway? There are no social features available in this game, everything has been scrapped. Has anyone of you made a friend in BF1? If you are playing in a squad, you very likely met either before BF1 was released, or somewhere else, another game or site.
Even I that has never played alone can say that my squad ever made a difference, we are hitting the same obstacles as everyone else. Guns are still designed around 1vs1, but the player count doubled, same with the engagement density. MY squad was made up by two guys that are not very accurate in the first place, and two guys that were above average in gun skill. Two make tactical movement choices and two are playing solely for fun. We also usually sport a class mix. But that does not help when the highly specialised niche weaponry is applied. Flanking does not net an advantage anymore compared to gun skill, at the same time you are forced into engagements that are not in your range. So how is a guy with a 1.0 K/D supposed to take an objective with an engagement density of three or so per minute with a weapon not suited for this range? Where is the fun? Where is the teamplay? And even if you and your mates manage to have a decent round where you feel that you made a difference and actively pursued your team's goals, you will end up somewhere in the low or middle of the scoreboard, especially if you are not a good shot. The only actions that count are the ones on the sole spot the map has that is fought around.

On the other hand though, they gave you great lone-wolfing tools, that are used as either crutches to offset your own frustration with the game, or that are used to farm infantry. You do not need a gunner anylonger, you do not need a competent driver, you do not need a repairman either. You only need a little tool that will boost your stats and points. Everyone can get into a tank or behemoth and get 5-10 kills before he eventually blows up. But some can get into these assets and go up to 30-100 kills per round.
Funnily enough this is not a sign of team value either. I've seen to many rounds where tanks netted 50-1 but the round was lost after the first minute already. This holds especially true with the trench fighter, yeah they go 30-1 all the time, but thirty tickets in a 1000 ticket round mean little to nothing in BF1 conquest. The frustration level caused by them is by far higher though. It is one guy in a freely spawned vehicle, that has one purpose only, farm infantry with little chance of retaliation. And that is also why you do not see anything else on the battlefield.

Oh yeah, theoretically you can chip away at 500m with your Madsen, and put an end to the non-existing team value of that asset. But he will be back later at full health, while you have done nothing of value either. You might have cleared airspace for a minute, but as he is only interested in kills he does not care if he ends the round with 27 or 30-1.

Tankmayvin is definitely right though, when he says it is more than the mechanics that make this game frustrating and unfun to play. The assets are annoying und slightly unbalanced, but these are just the symptoms that the players can point to. The profounding issue or sickness is the game itself. The mechanics of vehicle spawning, the poor map design, the conquest system and the unrewarding teamplay. Complaining about the A7 or the fighter is just the tip of the iceberg.

Posts: 205

Date of registration
: Jun 9th 2012

Platform: PC

Battlelog:

Reputation modifier: 9

  • Send private message

182

Tuesday, April 18th 2017, 9:40pm

I kind of agree with VincentNZ here. Despite how many imbalanced aspects there are in BF3 and BF4, there was so much more fun while playing that. I would not be surprised that even if EVERYTHING is made to be balanced in BF1 it is still less fun than BF3/4.

On the side note, I totally did not expect the decrease in TTK across everything would have such a noticeable impact on gameplay.

Posts: 226

Date of registration
: Sep 20th 2016

Platform: PC

Battlelog:

Reputation modifier: 3

  • Send private message

183

Tuesday, April 18th 2017, 10:44pm

I have made a few friends in BF1. I add anyone who's not a potato - which isn't many... I've added maybe 20-30 people so far. Maybe 10-15 of them still play. Maybe 2-5 of them are into actual teamwork as opposed to being a group of lone wolves farming kills as though CQ is TDM.

I agree also, that even if everything were balanced perfectly, it still wouldn't be as 'fun' as BF3 was. Everything that's been said about TTK, making individuals unable to turn the tide regardless of their skill and efforts, it really rings a bell with me.

Man, the more on-point the observations and analyses around here.... The less hope I have that this game will ever be much fun. This thread has become depressing.

Perhaps I'd carry more optimism if the CTE approach was to buff for balance, as dice have said in the past that they prefer .... but instead they seem to be about the nerf train. It's just making the TTK/powerless individual situation, worse.

Posts: 1,879

Date of registration
: Jan 12th 2014

Platform: PC

Battlelog:

Reputation modifier: 13

  • Send private message

184

Tuesday, April 18th 2017, 11:12pm

I do see a difference in defintion here of what team and squadplay means. It does seem that the encouraged way of teamplay is to charge head-on onto the objective with everyone available and die heroically until you overcome the enemy by sheer number.

Tactical thinking, flanking, choice of pathing or use of assets is mostly discouraged as shooting mechanics, gameplay mechanics, map design etc. are posing a great risk for anyone not following the brute-force approach. Doing stuff that is beyond "hit the enemy at the strognest point to show 'em we mean business" is is detrimental to the team actually as you and your squad is missing on the front. Capping flags that are not on the immediate frontline, which is a tactical decision, is not really worthwhile, but at the same time is very unrewarding to take back as a squad or player, as an example.
I do not see how a squad of friends playing together is any help in this either, or creates more fun or teamplay beyond the social advantage. The founding mechanics remain the same, you are better off pressing onwards to the contested frontline to die. It does not really matter if you are revived, resupplied, or valiantly died there with a squadmate or blueberry in proximity. It is the numbers of people that define victory here, not the kind of people playing.
Then again, where would you gather friends anyway? There are no social features available in this game, everything has been scrapped. Has anyone of you made a friend in BF1? If you are playing in a squad, you very likely met either before BF1 was released, or somewhere else, another game or site.
Even I that has never played alone can say that my squad ever made a difference, we are hitting the same obstacles as everyone else. Guns are still designed around 1vs1, but the player count doubled, same with the engagement density. MY squad was made up by two guys that are not very accurate in the first place, and two guys that were above average in gun skill. Two make tactical movement choices and two are playing solely for fun. We also usually sport a class mix. But that does not help when the highly specialised niche weaponry is applied. Flanking does not net an advantage anymore compared to gun skill, at the same time you are forced into engagements that are not in your range. So how is a guy with a 1.0 K/D supposed to take an objective with an engagement density of three or so per minute with a weapon not suited for this range? Where is the fun? Where is the teamplay? And even if you and your mates manage to have a decent round where you feel that you made a difference and actively pursued your team's goals, you will end up somewhere in the low or middle of the scoreboard, especially if you are not a good shot. The only actions that count are the ones on the sole spot the map has that is fought around.

On the other hand though, they gave you great lone-wolfing tools, that are used as either crutches to offset your own frustration with the game, or that are used to farm infantry. You do not need a gunner anylonger, you do not need a competent driver, you do not need a repairman either. You only need a little tool that will boost your stats and points. Everyone can get into a tank or behemoth and get 5-10 kills before he eventually blows up. But some can get into these assets and go up to 30-100 kills per round.
Funnily enough this is not a sign of team value either. I've seen to many rounds where tanks netted 50-1 but the round was lost after the first minute already. This holds especially true with the trench fighter, yeah they go 30-1 all the time, but thirty tickets in a 1000 ticket round mean little to nothing in BF1 conquest. The frustration level caused by them is by far higher though. It is one guy in a freely spawned vehicle, that has one purpose only, farm infantry with little chance of retaliation. And that is also why you do not see anything else on the battlefield.

Oh yeah, theoretically you can chip away at 500m with your Madsen, and put an end to the non-existing team value of that asset. But he will be back later at full health, while you have done nothing of value either. You might have cleared airspace for a minute, but as he is only interested in kills he does not care if he ends the round with 27 or 30-1.

Tankmayvin is definitely right though, when he says it is more than the mechanics that make this game frustrating and unfun to play. The assets are annoying und slightly unbalanced, but these are just the symptoms that the players can point to. The profounding issue or sickness is the game itself. The mechanics of vehicle spawning, the poor map design, the conquest system and the unrewarding teamplay. Complaining about the A7 or the fighter is just the tip of the iceberg.
It's very tough to dictate the outcome of a map with a single vehicle unless you are also locking down a significant portion of the map with the vehicle as well. IMO, that's actually really good design. You don't want a single shitbucket in 1 vehicle slot dictating the outcome against an entire team. Older models of air balance tended to devolve into planes shutting down the other team - such that the team with the best air usually won. That's not good balance.

There really isn't anything wrong with kill farming. Clearing flags is part of taking objectives. So is destroying assets that are hard to destroy otherwise (like tanks). That's what air is basically for. That has plenty of value. It's not the most valuable asset in the game, but neither are the packs of snipers loitering around the uncap.

People used to lone-wolf the attack helos (seat switch for missile). The planes have always been effective for lone wolfing, etc. Really BF1 has introduced no new elements that haven't been present in on of the other titles. Mig-17 from BFV played very much like the trenchie does now, only it was also a clearly superior gunfighter.

All of the various BF titles have made various balancing mistakes, often repeating similar mistakes. What makes BF1 less fun is simply the way everything has been put together.

I've added about 10 people as friends, 2-5 people play regularly and I can usually count on 1-2 friends from previous titles to hop on.

  • "JSLICE20" started this thread

Posts: 3,252

Date of registration
: Apr 26th 2013

Platform: PS4

Location: Arizona, USA

Reputation modifier: 15

  • Send private message

185

Tuesday, April 18th 2017, 11:24pm

Long story short:

Map design enables vehicle dominance that, most of the time, just serves to create an annoyance for infantry rather than meaningfully impact the round. This same map design facilitates and encourages 'zerging' because a single soldier does not retain the same power that they did in previous titles. With higher TTK across the board on every single asset available to infantry they absolutely must traverse the map in a squad in order to defeat their opposition; everything requires tight knit squad play now whereas players could get by on their own, relatively speaking, in BF3/4.

Battlefield is trying to incorporate Counter Strike/ Rainbow Six Siege style coordination into a sandbox with 64 total players whose playerbase is predominantly casual in nature. Fundamentally, the game is broken. 64 players is too much considering the redesigned game mechanics. 32-48 would probably be more manageable. In conclusion, Conquest is basically unplayable for a consistent experience if you do not play with a regular squad of friends whom you are communicating and coordinating with.
To Aim Assist or not to Aim Assist, that is the question.

Nope. Aim Assist or bust; here's why:

Default Aim Assist Data

Source code

1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
12
13
14
15
16
17
18
19
20
21
22
23
24
25
26
27
28
29
30
31
32
33
34
35
36
37
38
AccelerationInputThreshold 0.98
    AccelerationMultiplier 5.0
    AccelerationDamping 4.0
    AccelerationTimeThreshold 0.15
    SquaredAcceleration 0.0
    MaxAcceleration::Vec2
        x 2.0
        y 2.0
    YawSpeedStrength 1.0
    PitchSpeedStrength 1.0
    AttractDistanceFallOffs::Vec2
        x 1.0
        y 1.2
    AttractSoftZone 0.75
    AttractUserInputMultiplier 0.45
    AttractUserInputMultiplier_NoZoom 0.5
    AttractOwnSpeedInfluence 0.0
    AttractTargetSpeedInfluence 0.85
    AttractOwnRequiredMovementForMaximumAttract 0.0
    AttractStartInputThreshold 0.1
    AttractMoveInputCap 0.0
    AttractYawStrength 1.0
    AttractPitchStrength 0.34
    MaxToTargetAngle 45.0
    MaxToTargetXZAngle 45.0
    ViewObstructedKeepTime 0.0
    SnapZoomLateralSpeedLimit 1000.0
    SnapZoomTime 0.2
    SnapZoomPostTimeNoInput 0.2
    SnapZoomPostTime 0.2
    SnapZoomReticlePointPriority 999
    SnapZoomAutoEngageTime 0.0
    SnapZoomBreakTimeAtMaxInput 0.2
    SnapZoomBreakMaxInput 0.2
    SnapZoomBreakMinAngle 90.0
    SnapZoomSpamGuardTime 1.2
    SoldierBackupSkeletonCollisionData *nullGuid*
    CheckBoneCenterOnlyDistance 40.0

No Slowdown Data

Source code

1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
12
13
14
15
16
17
18
19
20
21
22
23
24
25
26
27
28
29
30
31
32
33
34
35
36
37
38
39
AccelerationInputThreshold 0.98
    AccelerationMultiplier 5.0
    AccelerationDamping 4.0
    AccelerationTimeThreshold 0.15
    SquaredAcceleration 0.0
    MaxAcceleration::Vec2
        x 2.0
        y 2.0
    YawSpeedStrength 1.0
    PitchSpeedStrength 1.0
    AttractDistanceFallOffs::Vec2
        x 1.0
        y 1.2
    AttractSoftZone 0.0
    AttractUserInputMultiplier 1.0
    AttractUserInputMultiplier_NoZoom -1.0
    AttractOwnSpeedInfluence 0.0
    AttractTargetSpeedInfluence 0.0
    AttractOwnRequiredMovementForMaximumAttract 0.0
    AttractStartInputThreshold 0.0
    AttractMoveInputCap 0.0
    AttractYawStrength 0.0
    AttractPitchStrength 0.0
    MaxToTargetAngle 45.0
    MaxToTargetXZAngle 45.0
    ViewObstructedKeepTime 0.0
    SnapZoomLateralSpeedLimit 1000.0
    SnapZoomTime 0.2
    SnapZoomPostTimeNoInput 0.0
    SnapZoomPostTime 0.0
    SnapZoomReticlePointPriority 999
    SnapZoomAutoEngageTime 0.0
    SnapZoomBreakTimeAtMaxInput -1.0
    SnapZoomBreakMaxInput 0.2
    SnapZoomBreakMinAngle 90.0
    SnapZoomSpamGuardTime 0.5
    SoldierBackupSkeletonCollisionData *nullGuid*
    CheckBoneCenterOnlyDistance 40.0
    DisableForcedTargetRecalcDistance 7.0


No Auto Rotation Data

Source code

1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
12
13
14
15
16
17
18
19
20
21
22
23
24
25
26
27
28
29
30
31
32
33
34
35
36
37
38
39
 AccelerationInputThreshold 0.98
    AccelerationMultiplier 5.0
    AccelerationDamping 4.0
    AccelerationTimeThreshold 0.15
    SquaredAcceleration 0.0
    MaxAcceleration::Vec2
        x 2.0
        y 2.0
    YawSpeedStrength 1.0
    PitchSpeedStrength 1.0
    AttractDistanceFallOffs::Vec2
        x 1.0
        y 1.2
    AttractSoftZone 0.75
    AttractUserInputMultiplier 0.45
    AttractUserInputMultiplier_NoZoom 0.5
    AttractOwnSpeedInfluence 0.0
    AttractTargetSpeedInfluence 0.85
    AttractOwnRequiredMovementForMaximumAttract 0.0
    AttractStartInputThreshold 0.1
    AttractMoveInputCap 0.0
    AttractYawStrength 1.0
    AttractPitchStrength 0.34
    MaxToTargetAngle 45.0
    MaxToTargetXZAngle 45.0
    ViewObstructedKeepTime 0.0
    SnapZoomLateralSpeedLimit 1000.0
    SnapZoomTime 0.2
    SnapZoomPostTimeNoInput 0.0
    SnapZoomPostTime 0.0
    SnapZoomReticlePointPriority 999
    SnapZoomAutoEngageTime 0.0
    SnapZoomBreakTimeAtMaxInput -1.0
    SnapZoomBreakMaxInput 0.2
    SnapZoomBreakMinAngle 90.0
    SnapZoomSpamGuardTime 0.5
    SoldierBackupSkeletonCollisionData *nullGuid*
    CheckBoneCenterOnlyDistance 40.0
    DisableForcedTargetRecalcDistance 7.0

Prepare your laughbox

the Sebstalder is quiet good since it can 3hit kill at any distanc ,but In my opinion i actually thikn the sweeper is better, its got a really really fast firerate that can beat alll those Noobmaticos, Helregall adn shitguns in close quarters , and its also really accurate out to like l;ong range,. overall great allround gun, jsut my 2$ tho


Posts: 248

Date of registration
: Jun 5th 2015

Platform: Xbox One

Location: Land of the Midnight Sun

Battlelog:

Reputation modifier: 7

  • Send private message

186

Tuesday, April 18th 2017, 11:54pm

@JSLICE20

I don't think they intentionally tried to make the game more about squadwork. Had they designed the game with that in mind, I'd also expect more features that aid coordination.

Anti-vehicle weapons being weaker probably stems from vehicles in general being slower, and having weaker countermeasures, as to not make them useless.

The gameplay effect on larger gamemodes of slower infantry TTK was probably unforeseen, because it sounds good for 1v1s, and it is too, but in many modes Bf has a constant amount of players too high for sequential 1v1s to have an impact (due to playercount and spawning). However, the gunplay really shines in smaller gamemodes, I've found, even though there are issues with weapon balance, like Uranium and SomeRandomGuy have talked more about. In fact, Domination is where I've had the most fun, a mode I barely touched in Bf4. I bet I'd like frontlines too.

Zerging is probably also caused by how spotting (doesn't) work, massive score rewards for throwing bodies at flags, less transport vehicles, a large influx of new players in addition to less effective weapons (and map design)*.


*my playtime is too low, really, to comment with much confidence on the map design

signature 2.1

Things I support
ammo regen pls

Quoted from "NoctyrneSAGA"

_____

When I play with it [Autoloading 8] I feel like I am batman taking out 1 after 1 baddie while they feel helpless and don't know who is talking out their mates.
Remove 3D spotting. It’s a mechanic that rewards bad eyesight.
Wanna help your team by sneaking through enemy territory to provide spawns? THIS IS NOT TEAMWORK FGT I HOPE YOU RUN OUT OF MOTION BALLS TOO EARLY TO BE SUCCESSFUL
Wanna be Javelin squad but only have two guys? BETTER NOT GET YOUR SOFLAM KILLED FGT THIS IS NOT TEAMWORK WITHOUT A SUPPORT DUDE DROPPING AMMO ON YOU EVERY 2 MINUTES
Please post your best M1916 clips Magazines *fixed*.

Cool/Useful Links

What Makes the Best Player?
David Sirlin on Intuition
Archive - Wait But Why - I recommend the posts on AI, and Neuralink, in that order. They are long, but very interesting. Just skim parts of them.

Symthic Databrowser
Battlefield 1 DeployTimes

This post has been edited 3 times, last edit by "potetr" (Apr 19th 2017, 12:02am)


Posts: 1,879

Date of registration
: Jan 12th 2014

Platform: PC

Battlelog:

Reputation modifier: 13

  • Send private message

187

Wednesday, April 19th 2017, 12:00am

Long story short:

Map design enables vehicle dominance that, most of the time, just serves to create an annoyance for infantry rather than meaningfully impact the round. This same map design facilitates and encourages 'zerging' because a single soldier does not retain the same power that they did in previous titles. With higher TTK across the board on every single asset available to infantry they absolutely must traverse the map in a squad in order to defeat their opposition; everything requires tight knit squad play now whereas players could get by on their own, relatively speaking, in BF3/4.

Battlefield is trying to incorporate Counter Strike/ Rainbow Six Siege style coordination into a sandbox with 64 total players whose playerbase is predominantly casual in nature. Fundamentally, the game is broken. 64 players is too much considering the redesigned game mechanics. 32-48 would probably be more manageable. In conclusion, Conquest is basically unplayable for a consistent experience if you do not play with a regular squad of friends whom you are communicating and coordinating with.
It's far from umplayable. People just didn't get the some lone-wolf experience they expected and refuse to commit the bandwidth to squad play for whatever reason - probably because casual.

DICE seems to have consistently made teamplay as hard as possible too. No inter-squad voip. No platoons, a really awful party system. No custom servers to build community. No real competitive meta (platoon scoring, etc) to make more casual people have something to team up for, etc, etc, etc.

To me the two biggest issues with conquest are the map design and the auto balance system. I would wager you could guess the outcome of any given round with well better than 50% accuracy by simply looking at the spawn status, ranks and player counts within the first 60 seconds of a round starting. Because of the way the maps are designed the first few flag caps can often set the pace of the rest of the round.

Posts: 1,879

Date of registration
: Jan 12th 2014

Platform: PC

Battlelog:

Reputation modifier: 13

  • Send private message

188

Wednesday, April 19th 2017, 12:10am

@JSLICE20

I don't think they intentionally tried to make the game more about squadwork. Had they designed the game with that in mind, I'd also expect more features that aid coordination.

Anti-vehicle weapons being weaker probably stems from vehicles in general being slower, and having weaker countermeasures, as to not make them useless.

The gameplay effect on larger gamemodes of slower infantry TTK was probably unforeseen, because it sounds good for 1v1s, and it is too, but in many modes Bf has a constant amount of players too high for sequential 1v1s to have an impact (due to playercount and spawning). However, the gunplay really shines in smaller gamemodes, I've found, even though there are issues with weapon balance, like Uranium and SomeRandomGuy have talked more about. In fact, Domination is where I've had the most fun, a mode I barely touched in Bf4. I bet I'd like frontlines too.

Zerging is probably also caused by how spotting (doesn't) work, massive score rewards for throwing bodies at flags, less transport vehicles, a large influx of new players in addition to less effective weapons (and map design)*.


*my playtime is too low, really, to comment with much confidence on the map design
Why do people keep saying anti-vehicle weapons are weaker? They most definitely aren't. People are just sloppy about facings and they tend to go prone in the middle of open terrain where it's easy to counter-fire them.

Triple burst of heavy AT + light AT is the most powerful close combat anti-vehicle system implemented in a battlefield game. And this in the game where tanks are clumsier and slower than they have ever been.

And unlike other BF games, every class except medic gets a great anti-vehicle gadget.

People couldn't really solo all but the dumbest of enemy tanks in prior titles. I'm not sure why being able to easily kill dump people is so important for good balance. A flanked tank in BF1 is guaranteed to die anyway.

This post has been edited 1 times, last edit by "tankmayvin" (Apr 19th 2017, 12:44am)


VincentNZ

Holy War? No Thanks.

(2,088)

Posts: 2,584

Date of registration
: Jul 25th 2013

Platform: PC

Battlelog:

Reputation modifier: 14

  • Send private message

189

Wednesday, April 19th 2017, 12:34am

I mean I am really ranting, but since release I feel more and more appalled by this game. Not because of me, but because I am basically the only one playing from my rather large friendlist and everyone I ask is deeply frustrated by this game and therefore quit. Yes, maybe it was wrong to expect another iteration in this franchise that is social and fun, giving the game a fresh direction is after all also a kind of creative progress. However I have no idea what the Devs had in mind for this game, what they are aiming at, what it should be at release and what it is supposed to become.

Some features are casual to a point that they are trivial, battlefrontesque at best, or totally irrelevant, which includes ALL social features, while others are so complex or complicated that the average player will never fully grasp them. We got a very blank slate of a game, neither fish nor meat, but not some fancy tofu either. The biggest issue I see though is the inconsistency, where every mode, round, weapon plays differently each time to a point it appears random. At the same time, the game is calculated to the last digit. Basically BF1 is a paradox.

Actually I got rather furious about BF1 in the last couple of days when the Battlefront news started to trickle in. Basically I feel they are throwing out another game, a successor to the most irrelevant DICE title ever created, with nothing going for it at release bar the license. With their main franchise people are rather fed up at the moment, yet they announce the next money sink. And I still have no idea where they want Battlefield to be in a year.

NoctyrneSAGA

PvF 2017 Champion

(9,529)

Posts: 6,957

Date of registration
: Apr 3rd 2012

Platform: PC

Battlelog:

Reputation modifier: 19

  • Send private message

190

Wednesday, April 19th 2017, 12:37am

Maybe such things happen because there are multiple factions and teams within DICE that work on different things with different ideologies for their games?
Data Browser

Passive Spotting is the future!

With this, I'll rid MGO3 of infestation. Sans bad gameplay MGO3 will be torn asunder. And then it shall be free. People will suffer, of course - a phantom pain.

Reddit and Konami will rewrite the records... And I will be demonized in human memory. But... The thirst for good gameplay that I have planted will infest MGO3. No one can stop it now. The Rebalance Mod will unleash that thirst unto the future.


Are you a scrub?

If it flies, it dies™.