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

  • "sid_tai" started this thread

Posts: 142

Date of registration
: Jun 9th 2012

Platform: PC

Battlelog:

Reputation modifier: 8

  • Send private message

21

Thursday, April 27th 2017, 3:12am

@JSLICE20 @Atum675
I do have some proposed changes to SLRs that do not involve reducing BTK but decreasing TTK, ie higher ROF and longer damage dropoff range. The BTK-1 example applies to MP18, Ribeye and Hellriegel specifically. For example of course we do not want a -1 BTK for automatico because it already has BF4 TTK. My intention of starting this thread is more to discuss on concepts and pros and cons, but if we can largely agree on the need to reduce TTK to make BF1 great (not again, it was never great to start with), then we can move on to specific numbers.

Posts: 72

Date of registration
: Sep 17th 2013

Platform: Xbox One

Location: Richmond, VA

Battlelog:

Reputation modifier: 6

  • Send private message

22

Thursday, April 27th 2017, 4:41am

Even then it's just make smgs and lmgs better at range, which means they start to push slrs's out further, and if you increase slr range it pushes scouts out further which for some rifles means there sweet spot needs a redo or they become shit. It also reduces the capability of high skill guns like the A8.35 and M10 Slug.

  • "sid_tai" started this thread

Posts: 142

Date of registration
: Jun 9th 2012

Platform: PC

Battlelog:

Reputation modifier: 8

  • Send private message

23

Thursday, April 27th 2017, 5:01am

Even then it's just make smgs and lmgs better at range, which means they start to push slrs's out further, and if you increase slr range it pushes scouts out further which for some rifles means there sweet spot needs a redo or they become shit. It also reduces the capability of high skill guns like the A8.35 and M10 Slug.

The goal is to make all non-shotgun, non-BA TTK drop across all relevant ranges. Say if we reduce the MP18, ribeye and the Hellriegel BTK by 1, then we could bump up the Cei Rigotti to 3BTK to the body at all ranges, 4BTK with limb shots out to far, a la SKS in BF4, with ROF increased to say 330. M1906 would also get the ROF bump with the current 4BTK range becoming 3BTK, 5BTK range becoming 4BTK, and 5BTK range becoming current CR 4BTK range. These are the adjustments that we can make to make sure they stay relevant w.r.t. automatic weapons.

Posts: 3,185

Date of registration
: Mar 19th 2014

Platform: Xbox One

Location: Canada

Battlelog:

Reputation modifier: 14

  • Send private message

24

Thursday, April 27th 2017, 5:32am

Bad TTK at range has been a problem for the past few games, especially for autos, and it's just made worse in BF1. CQB guns are far more effective and easier to use in their role than ranged guns are at their own. Sniper Rifles have seen improvements in this regard, and so the real loser in BF1 is ranged MGs. Ranged MGs simply are not good enough at their role compared to other ranged options.

Posts: 51

Date of registration
: Mar 2nd 2017

Platform: PS4

Reputation modifier: 1

  • Send private message

25

Thursday, April 27th 2017, 5:44am

Then unless the LMGs are given some sort of sweet spot mechanic where they do more damage at a distance, they'll just end up outperforming SMGs in CQB. Just imagine a 4HK BAR up close.

With the new bipod and negative spread mechanics, there's an argument that LMGs are better at range than they were in BF4.

Posts: 72

Date of registration
: Sep 17th 2013

Platform: Xbox One

Location: Richmond, VA

Battlelog:

Reputation modifier: 6

  • Send private message

26

Thursday, April 27th 2017, 5:50am

So you essentially want BF4 but for a whole different game. Sorry to say that BF4 boiled down to every class but recon has the same gun with slightly different stats, that's boring, BF1 tried to change that, and so far has done well imo.

Posts: 3,185

Date of registration
: Mar 19th 2014

Platform: Xbox One

Location: Canada

Battlelog:

Reputation modifier: 14

  • Send private message

27

Thursday, April 27th 2017, 6:10am

Then unless the LMGs are given some sort of sweet spot mechanic where they do more damage at a distance, they'll just end up outperforming SMGs in CQB. Just imagine a 4HK BAR up close.

With the new bipod and negative spread mechanics, there's an argument that LMGs are better at range than they were in BF4.


I didn't say up close range damage, just up ranged damage, meaning 5HK at all ranges for the BAR. Damage dropoff is very often excessive considering recoil, spread, velocity, smaller targets, more agile targets, easier ability to find/be in cover, and more all make longer ranged combat naturally harder, before damage dropoff is included. Sufficient spread, recoil, and velocity values would make damage drop unnecessary for nearly every gun, or at the very least far less significantly than it it's used now.

I just finished setting up my classes for the patch tomorrow, putting the Rank 10 guns in and such, and wow, that Hellriegel. I have all of 10 kills with it so I'd forgotten how it really feels to use, and I'm impressed (in a bad way) with just how little recoil it has (read: almost none). If the Hellriegel is really supposed to be an example of a "high recoil" gun in BF1... BF1 needs more recoil. The same can be said for the Automatico (all of them) and BAR (both non-scoped ones).


I certainly do not want BF4, seeing as everything in this post here applies to BF4 as well.

VincentNZ

Holy War? No Thanks.

(1,795)

Posts: 2,489

Date of registration
: Jul 25th 2013

Platform: PC

Battlelog:

Reputation modifier: 13

  • Send private message

28

Thursday, April 27th 2017, 8:38am

So you essentially want BF4 but for a whole different game. Sorry to say that BF4 boiled down to every class but recon has the same gun with slightly different stats, that's boring, BF1 tried to change that, and so far has done well imo.


Well that argument is a bit shallow, don't you think? People are referring to BF4 as examples something to illustrate how mechanics could be changed. Well, considering we had an U-100 on one end of the Spectrum and a FAMAS on the other end, with bullpups and high calibre weapons in between, plus attachment combos, I do not think that each gun was the same. Each gun was relevant enough to work thanks to an intuitive shooting mechanic that lead to the gun feeling like an extenstion of my hand. In my case at least.

It is not like super-specialized niches of BF1 weaponry does good in telling you where, how and which one you should use to accomodate your playstyle. Take the RSC. It is a 2HK for quite a range, but has a very low ROF, it also has one round more as the .35. So what is this gun? A CQB oriented SLR? A mid-range laser beam? Or simply designed with HC in mind? Personally I think I am less accurate as with the Selbstlader 1916 and have an awful time using it.
Same with the MP18 optical, my increased accuracy of 1-2% over the Automatico does not offset that my exposure time to kill someone slightly out of my engagement range is so damn high, and I am still forced into point blank engagements, that I would be better off with the Trench variant (which also does not sport the horrible visual animation nonsense), or even better, any Automatico.
You can add niches all you want, but you either make engagement ranges viable so you can play towards your weapon (which is not optimal as suddenly a weapon dictates how I want to play) or you make weapons relevant at the most-used ranges like BF4 did.

  • "sid_tai" started this thread

Posts: 142

Date of registration
: Jun 9th 2012

Platform: PC

Battlelog:

Reputation modifier: 8

  • Send private message

29

Thursday, April 27th 2017, 9:38am

Currently both the BAR and the MP18 has 5BTK up close, so I don't think buffing both to 4BTK up close changes anything. The thing that makes LMG so powerful up close is the huge hip fire buff. Remember in BF4 we have 3.5 base stand hip spread for the RPK? 4.5 for the LSAT? The huge buff in hip spread shrinks the advantage of better hip spread that the SMGs have in CQB. The only saving grace is ROF. Now we are back to the automatico again.

Also while buffing the MG's to 4BTK up close, 5BTK long range (40m or so, slightly less than BF4 AR 6BTK range), we can tweak the base spread values to reflect the weapons' intended role. Giving the BAR 0.24 spread would risk making it another AEK, adjusting the min spread of LMGs according to its ROF would solve this problem, eg giving the BAR min spread of ~0.3 and more side to side recoil. Instead of the current 0.18, 0.21, 0.24 base min spread. We already had spread decrease scale inversely with ROF in BF4 after the big patch, and IMO it worked marvelously.

Or another solution would be to make LMGs 4-6BTK, with 6BTK out to ~50m like BF4 LMG.

@VincentNZ
My most used SMG is the MP18 optical, because I like challenge. Killing a medic or a support with it in medium range gives me satisfaction.
Edit: After thinking about it a bit more, I believe the ability and opportunity to overcome stacked odds is what keeps me playing BF4. Whether it is a weapon deficit or scoreboard deficit. This is exactly the agency problem that BF1 has.

This post has been edited 1 times, last edit by "sid_tai" (Apr 27th 2017, 9:45am)


Posts: 243

Date of registration
: Dec 2nd 2013

Platform: PC

Location: Nepped On

Battlelog:

Reputation modifier: 9

  • Send private message

30

Thursday, April 27th 2017, 1:21pm

I also think keeping LMGs in the 5-BTK at CQC is entirely unnecessary. The vast LMGs already have a ROF disadvantage to SMGs, and the way you can make that CQC disadvantage even more obvious is giving them horrible hipfire spread.

Remember, we want player agency to matter here by reducing the BTK of ALL non-shotguns/bolt actions. You won't accomplish this for Supports if they are still stuck on the same BTK model up close, it'll only feel arbitrarily harsh to players who are on the receiving end of this balancing. I don't know how to articulate this concept well, so I'll just put in an example; you want them to think "I lost to a SMG up close because I can't hipfire as accurately as he does/I take too long to ADS in time" instead of "I lost to a SMG up close because my damage is awful".

This post has been edited 1 times, last edit by "Ritobasu" (Apr 27th 2017, 1:27pm)