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

Posts: 796

Date of registration
: Dec 3rd 2014

Platform: PS4

Battlelog:

Reputation modifier: 9

  • Send private message

71

Tuesday, May 2nd 2017, 9:55pm

The worst examples of these zerg maps imo were the "Close Quarters" maps in BF3. Both teams just blobbed up and ran around in a circle trading points. Fort Veux in BF1 is much the same and is probably the only map in a rotation that will make me leave a server. No strategy, no defence, just sheer numbers and revive train shenanigans. It was even worse in BF3 because in infantry only maps there was literally no point to use anything other than assault with 1 setup. At least this time DICE was smart enough to remove the high ROF close range guns from the medic class. It only took 2 games of woefully unbalanced infantry gameplay.

The most frustrating thing back in BF3 was that servers wiuld actually ban players if they used C4 to boobytrap flags in CQ maps. This was the only even slightly useful defence measure players could take and it was deemed unacceptable by admins. It's almost like they wanted the boring zerg rush gameplay.

VincentNZ

Holy War? No Thanks.

(2,088)

Posts: 2,586

Date of registration
: Jul 25th 2013

Platform: PC

Battlelog:

Reputation modifier: 14

  • Send private message

72

Wednesday, May 3rd 2017, 12:25am

Hmm, we really have different perceptions of the CQ DLC. How many players did you play it with? I never played with more than 24 players. I mean most Domination maps aren't larger in any BF and these were clearly not designed with 64 or even 32 players in mind.

I thought they were alright and well designed, especially Scrapmetal stood out for it's exceptional verticality. While naturally Assaults were the best choice you could get some usage out of the other classes as well, with the right gadgets and of course shotguns and PDWs were all-class. C4 at flags though was rightfully deemed cheap. I thought this was just a way to farm kills without effort. Similar to locking a house in Pearl Market or Metro with C4.

One zerg map I most often found unbearable was Guilin Peaks on higher player counts i.e more than 32. Usually there was one mass of players on each team rolling around the flags in the same direction, crushing all the lone wolfes trying to take other flags. This could be broken up though when you or others were playing in a squad. Here the Zerg definitely had to do with the map design. When you make a circle people will most likel run around in circles.

  • "sid_tai" started this thread

Posts: 218

Date of registration
: Jun 9th 2012

Platform: PC

Battlelog:

Reputation modifier: 10

  • Send private message

73

Wednesday, May 3rd 2017, 5:37am

Right now I am very interested to know if there are any DICE devs who are aware/agree that longer TTK is among the reasons we are seeing the zerg meta right now. I am genuinely waiting for them to release a big patch like one in BF4, where problems like TTK, CQ point system, scout sweet spots etc are getting fixed. Because I actually like the weapon variety and different spread mechanics of this game.

Posts: 3,450

Date of registration
: Mar 19th 2014

Platform: Xbox One

Location: Canada

Battlelog:

Reputation modifier: 15

  • Send private message

74

Wednesday, May 3rd 2017, 6:24am

Another major, and rarely discussed, issue BF1 has introduced in terms of map design is the ability to climb over six-foot walls.

The single worst example of this in action is Scar's central town. It has a whole bunch of neat paths, roads, routes through buildings, and also all the cover is destructible so you can clear a path if you'd rather go straight through. But... why would you bother when you can just walk straight over literally everything? You can go from basically any point in or around the town to any other point there in a straight line.

I'd love to see what BF1 plays like with high vaulting removed.
Who Enjoys, Wins

VincentNZ

Holy War? No Thanks.

(2,088)

Posts: 2,586

Date of registration
: Jul 25th 2013

Platform: PC

Battlelog:

Reputation modifier: 14

  • Send private message

75

Wednesday, May 3rd 2017, 9:51am

Oh yeah good point. It might sound awesome, but what it primarily does is break lanes and sightlines which is one reason why you see so much CQ combat. It is indeed funny how you can close the gap by jumping over two walls, but outside of these areas any flank is going to take minutes.

I think this is indeed just a gimmicky feature, that has an not so desired effect on gameplay. It could be an asset if used right though, but as of now towns are always half-made of walls.

@sid_tai
I guess there are discussions about this stuff, but I would not expect anything to change. A patch like this would be too huge, would turn the game into a different one, and do not forget that there are also people that totally like the game this way or do not care.
Even map design will likely not be adressed, the maps for the DLCs are likely designed already and one should not affect more than another crate or wall on existing maps.
We might see a TTK or BTK change for certain weapons at certain ranges, but nothing more substantial than the BF4 BTK patch. Everything else are core features that can not be reverted, like the sweet spots or the ticket system. We will very likely not see a removal of deaths from the tickets, I can not imagine them going back to the beta system.

Gecko99

thank mr skeltal

(454)

Posts: 212

Date of registration
: Dec 17th 2016

Platform: PC

Location: Kauai

Battlelog:

Reputation modifier: 3

  • Send private message

76

Wednesday, May 3rd 2017, 9:38pm

I'm personally against lower BTK because I believe it's what allows BF1's weapons to all feel uniquely viable.

One of the main two issues I see with decreasing TTK(especially at range) is it removes the Rock, Paper, Scissors dynamic that I love and thought this community liked as well.

My second issue with the proposition is what will happen to SLRs? 3 of the ones we currently have always kill in 3 hits and one can kill in two hits, how can you keep these guns
relevant without breaking them? The Autoloading 8 .35 will also become relatively pointless if automatic weapons gain faster TTK and gain even more ability to tackle multiple targets.

I understand why faster TTK is desired and I don't know how to fix issues such as zerging and low individual player impact but I believe this is wrong way to go about fixing such things.
Autoloading 8 .25 extended user.

Posts: 1,889

Date of registration
: Jan 12th 2014

Platform: PC

Battlelog:

Reputation modifier: 13

  • Send private message

77

Wednesday, May 3rd 2017, 11:15pm

I'm personally against lower BTK because I believe it's what allows BF1's weapons to all feel uniquely viable.

One of the main two issues I see with decreasing TTK(especially at range) is it removes the Rock, Paper, Scissors dynamic that I love and thought this community liked as well.

My second issue with the proposition is what will happen to SLRs? 3 of the ones we currently have always kill in 3 hits and one can kill in two hits, how can you keep these guns
relevant without breaking them? The Autoloading 8 .35 will also become relatively pointless if automatic weapons gain faster TTK and gain even more ability to tackle multiple targets.

I understand why faster TTK is desired and I don't know how to fix issues such as zerging and low individual player impact but I believe this is wrong way to go about fixing such things.


The problem is that they are uniquely viable in very specific circumstances.

All of the best close range <15 m guns are basically spitball guns beyond 20m. There are only two "all range guns" in the game: The model 8 .35, which is hampered by it's 5 round mag. And the Huot, which is barely passable at close range.

This may very well all be balanced but in combination with map design it drives a very close range game and lots of getting ineffectually picked off zerging between flags.

VincentNZ

Holy War? No Thanks.

(2,088)

Posts: 2,586

Date of registration
: Jul 25th 2013

Platform: PC

Battlelog:

Reputation modifier: 14

  • Send private message

78

Wednesday, May 3rd 2017, 11:25pm


One of the main two issues I see with decreasing TTK(especially at range) is it removes the Rock, Paper, Scissors dynamic that I love and thought this community liked as well.



I am not so sure about that. There are a bunch of people, myself included, that do not think the current shooting mechanics are better than in previous iterations or that they are appealing at all. Many discussions here over the last months touched that topic, and they are quite controversial.
It is a similar case in the playerbase. Players leave the game and are not very happy about it, and many can just not put the finger on where the fun has gone. That and frustration is a common feeling around the community, for different reasons. So all in all it is about more than TTK, but it is still integral.

You are right, though, just simply reducing the BTK will cause other problems as well. That is why we discussed other approaches as well here and looked beyond. As a game all mechanics must interlock nicely with each other and BF1 is certainly lacking that synergy. However TTK is one of the few things we can put numbers around and we have been educated that numbers are all that count. :D

This post by "JSLICE20" (Thursday, May 4th 2017, 1:44am) has been deleted by the author himself (Thursday, May 4th 2017, 2:34am) with the following reason: Nope, I said I was done with this silly thread and I meant it! Curse my inability to refrain from posting at times.

  • "sid_tai" started this thread

Posts: 218

Date of registration
: Jun 9th 2012

Platform: PC

Battlelog:

Reputation modifier: 10

  • Send private message

80

Thursday, May 4th 2017, 11:12am


I'm personally against lower BTK because I believe it's what allows BF1's weapons to all feel uniquely viable.

One of the main two issues I see with decreasing TTK(especially at range) is it removes the Rock, Paper, Scissors dynamic that I love and thought this community liked as well.

My second issue with the proposition is what will happen to SLRs? 3 of the ones we currently have always kill in 3 hits and one can kill in two hits, how can you keep these guns
relevant without breaking them? The Autoloading 8 .35 will also become relatively pointless if automatic weapons gain faster TTK and gain even more ability to tackle multiple targets.

I understand why faster TTK is desired and I don't know how to fix issues such as zerging and low individual player impact but I believe this is wrong way to go about fixing such things.



Why can't lower TTK coexist with weapon classes being uniquely viable? We are not aiming to change up the rankings of TTK of each weapon. The only aim is to decrease TTK by 20-30%, to BF4 levels.

When I talk about decrease TTK at range, the aim is to do it to all the weapons. And if you could kill faster with an SLR than an SMG before at that range, you can also kill faster with an SLR than an SMG after at that range.

If you have read one of my comments in a previous page, I proposed increasing ROF of a lot of SLRs to lower their TTK.

Why do you believe it is the wrong way?