Symthic Forum was shut down on January 11th, 2019. You're viewing an archive of this page from 2019-01-09 at 00:54. Thank you all for your support! Please get in touch via the Curse help desk if you need any support using this archive.

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.

## Bayonet Balancing Idea: Dynamic Movement Angle

Holy War? No Thanks.

Posts: 2,838

Date of registration
: Jul 25th 2013

Platform: PC

Battlelog:

Reputation modifier: 16

Friday, May 12th 2017, 11:39am

### Quoted from "tankmayvin"

So writing a PhD dissertation is just hitting keys on a keyboard?

Geez, I hope that quote is done right, here, this wa one was complicated. I am not sure what you meant here, and why I was quoted, but as I am writing my dissertation, I thought I might be able to comment.

Yes the act of hitting the keyboard is exactly what gets your work written. Also pointing and clicking is indeed the act of killing in BF1 through shooting. At the same time you point and press a button for a charge. That is what all that stuff simply boils down to. The important things are the bits that get you to the motoric stuff, the thinking part about it.

So in order to get a meaningful sentence written I have to do research, in order to shoot someone dead I have to think about whether I can manage to get the shots on the body in time, when I want to successfully charge I have to consider a ton of things as well, to evaluate the risk.

The only difference there is the emphasis on a certain task involved, obviously if I type a page a day that is rather slow, but I will get there if the stuff I write is also good. I will kill much faster if I am very accurate, to the point where thinking can take a step back. A succesful charge, with a positive outcome requires some risk assessment as well as motoric capabilities of not being stopped by a dooframe as well as reaction time and being on target.

So I really do not see what the fuzz is about with complaining about bayonet charges, when the only thing changed is how heavily the different skillsets are applied. And it therefore gives, and this is an important factor, a more level playing field in a game that is largely about your motoric skillset.

BY the way I was against the charge mechanics for a while as well and ironically it was Duck that changed my mind with his video. Melee and charging is balanced.

Can't get a title

Posts: 1,531

Date of registration
: Dec 23rd 2013

Platform: Xbox One

Location: The Land of Multitudinous Kangaroos

Reputation modifier: 13

Friday, May 12th 2017, 4:55pm

Ignoring your incredibly stupid statement above:

### Quoted from "commandough"

We can't improve on a flawed mechanic that nobody likes and has zero chance of making it into the next battlefield if everybody pretends that there's some transcendent skill in FPSing.

The biggest problem with the bayonet is that it requires no technical skill whatsoever to use.

If it actually required some sort of technical skill to use, then you'd probably see far less complaining. As for what that would be, I have no idea.
something something Model 8 bestgun

### Quoted from "Pastafarianism"

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...)

### Quoted from "Pastafarianism"

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

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.

### Quoted from "Pastafarianism"

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.

### Quoted from "Zer0Cod3x"

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.

### Quoted from "Pastafarianism"

I... I...

*cries in a corner*

### Quoted from "Veritable"

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.

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?

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

### Quoted from "Pastafarianism"

@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.

Holy War? No Thanks.

Posts: 2,838

Date of registration
: Jul 25th 2013

Platform: PC

Battlelog:

Reputation modifier: 16

Friday, May 12th 2017, 5:18pm

@Zer0Cod3x

Was that meant for me? I just try to put the metaphor used by tank into perspective.

In any case I have no idea where that tone comes from in the last page, by some people. Maybe we should all just take a step back and chill for a second and actually think about acknowledging other opinions. I just do not understand why the discussion here get so hostile since two months.

Symthic Developer

Posts: 3,752

Date of registration
: Mar 21st 2013

Platform: PC

Location: __main__, Finland

Reputation modifier: 17

Friday, May 12th 2017, 5:56pm

Please don't make me close yet another thread due to hostile replies. Is it so hard to avoid negative personal comments?

@VincentNZ
One reason could be the lack of constant moderating and the fuzz about Ammo 2.0.
• 3VerstsNorth - Analysis of game mechanics in BF4 (tickrates, effects of tickrate, etc)
• InterimAegis - Weapon comparisons/scoring.
• leptis - Analysis of shotguns, recoil, recoil control and air drag.
• Veritable - Scoring of BF4/BF1 firearms in terms of usability, firing and other mechanics.
• pmax - Statistical analysis of BF4 players/games.
• Miffyli - Random statistical analysis of BF4 battlereports/players and kill-distances. (list is cluttered with other threads).
Sorry if your name wasn't on the list, I honestly can't recall all names : ( . Nudge me if you want to be included

Posts: 2,015

Date of registration
: Jan 12th 2014

Platform: PC

Battlelog:

Reputation modifier: 14

Friday, May 12th 2017, 11:38pm

### Quoted from "tankmayvin"

So writing a PhD dissertation is just hitting keys on a keyboard?

Geez, I hope that quote is done right, here, this wa one was complicated. I am not sure what you meant here, and why I was quoted, but as I am writing my dissertation, I thought I might be able to comment.

Yes the act of hitting the keyboard is exactly what gets your work written. Also pointing and clicking is indeed the act of killing in BF1 through shooting. At the same time you point and press a button for a charge. That is what all that stuff simply boils down to. The important things are the bits that get you to the motoric stuff, the thinking part about it.

So in order to get a meaningful sentence written I have to do research, in order to shoot someone dead I have to think about whether I can manage to get the shots on the body in time, when I want to successfully charge I have to consider a ton of things as well, to evaluate the risk.

The only difference there is the emphasis on a certain task involved, obviously if I type a page a day that is rather slow, but I will get there if the stuff I write is also good. I will kill much faster if I am very accurate, to the point where thinking can take a step back. A succesful charge, with a positive outcome requires some risk assessment as well as motoric capabilities of not being stopped by a dooframe as well as reaction time and being on target.

So I really do not see what the fuzz is about with complaining about bayonet charges, when the only thing changed is how heavily the different skillsets are applied. And it therefore gives, and this is an important factor, a more level playing field in a game that is largely about your motoric skillset.

BY the way I was against the charge mechanics for a while as well and ironically it was Duck that changed my mind with his video. Melee and charging is balanced.

I butter-fingered your post into my reply to the statement about "just pointing and clicking" somehow, not intentional.

I think you got the essence of my joke, but honestly I think it's obvious enough it doesn't require much elaboration.

Saying that writing a dissertation is pushing buttons on a keyboard is, in fact, an accurate statement; this is precisely how you write. However it is self evidently so absurdly reductionist that it is also a totally useless statement. It describes nothing of the scientific process, research process, and details of the writing process.

By similar analogy we could also say that walking on flat ground, riding a bike, and doing the tight-rope are all simply just "balancing exercises". Again, accurate but totally useless as a meaningful statement.

And so saying "its just pointing and clicking" is not a useful statement either - because the vast majority of gaming (basically anything not puzzle or 2D scrolling, or narrative, etc) involves pointing and clicking as the core interface mechanic.

Good luck on your dissertation btw. I submitted mine a bit over a month ago and am expecting reviews next week

Posts: 2,015

Date of registration
: Jan 12th 2014

Platform: PC

Battlelog:

Reputation modifier: 14

Friday, May 12th 2017, 11:50pm

### Quoted from "Zer0Cod3x"

Ignoring your incredibly stupid statement above:

### Quoted from "commandough"

We can't improve on a flawed mechanic that nobody likes and has zero chance of making it into the next battlefield if everybody pretends that there's some transcendent skill in FPSing.

The biggest problem with the bayonet is that it requires no technical skill whatsoever to use.

If it actually required some sort of technical skill to use, then you'd probably see far less complaining. As for what that would be, I have no idea.

My biggest issues with the charge are not that it's easy to use, but that it provides zero feedback to the target and is effectively impossible to counter if you don't have a weapon that has a combination of deep ammo pool and good DPS. And it's basically impossible to counter for anyone if it's a short or blind corner charge. So it just feels lame.

I think they missed a HUGE opportunity with melee design by making the bayonet a smurf click ability.

The way I see it, they should have made it a barrel mounted melee weapon that allowed you to hot-button melee in range, but with a slower attack rate, wheras other melee weapons would require a delayed weapon switch (similar to sidearms), but would then be much more "handy". Reflecting the realities that dedicated melee weapons were favored for trench combat. Having a bayonet would also allow you to sprint with a "half ADS" and do high melee damage by slamming hitboxes together.

Voila, you've just solved a bunch of problems: bayonet is now a valid loadout choice giving you melee advantages, no more lame charge, no more panic melees which are also frustrating in the high TTK environment and low mag pools of the game, etc.

Can't get a title

Posts: 1,531

Date of registration
: Dec 23rd 2013

Platform: Xbox One

Location: The Land of Multitudinous Kangaroos

Reputation modifier: 13

Saturday, May 13th 2017, 12:30am

@VincentNZ

No, I wasn't talking about you. I was talking about commandough's one-liner.

I expect people on this forum to know better. Such an absurd reply is almost insulting to our intelligence.

As for why it is absurd, tankmayvin explained it very well. The only thing I can add is if technical skill is really so easy to master, as he makes it out to be, then games like Quake, TF2, and CS:GO wouldn't exist as competitive games.
something something Model 8 bestgun

### Quoted from "Pastafarianism"

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...)

### Quoted from "Pastafarianism"

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

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.

### Quoted from "Pastafarianism"

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.

### Quoted from "Zer0Cod3x"

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.

### Quoted from "Pastafarianism"

I... I...

*cries in a corner*

### Quoted from "Veritable"

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.

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?

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

### Quoted from "Pastafarianism"

@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.

This post has been edited 4 times, last edit by "Zer0Cod3x" (May 13th 2017, 1:57am) with the following reason: Bloody hell formatting

Posts: 129

Date of registration
: Oct 8th 2016

Platform: PC

Battlelog:

Reputation modifier: 2

Saturday, May 13th 2017, 12:41am

To expand on my idea, the loss of control via restricting turn speed is bad because there's no room for technical skill if everybody controls the same rate. But you can't exceed the prior limited with failing out of the charge.

Plus restrict the bayonet to the scout and maybe the DMR-style SLRs, and modify the player model to reflect equipping a bayonet.

Then buff the speed, nerf the charge time and make the kill require precise aim at the head or neck region.

Make movement the technical skill.

Posts: 2,015

Date of registration
: Jan 12th 2014

Platform: PC

Battlelog:

Reputation modifier: 14

Saturday, May 13th 2017, 2:24am

### Quoted from "commandough"

To expand on my idea, the loss of control via restricting turn speed is bad because there's no room for technical skill if everybody controls the same rate. But you can't exceed the prior limited with failing out of the charge.

Plus restrict the bayonet to the scout and maybe the DMR-style SLRs, and modify the player model to reflect equipping a bayonet.

Then buff the speed, nerf the charge time and make the kill require precise aim at the head or neck region.

Make movement the technical skill.

The bayonet charge, as a click-ability with bonus damage resistance and high speed and guaranteed one hit kill on connect is simply not a good mechanic that is worth saving.

Not everything implemented in a game is good and worth saving; sunken cost fallacy is a very expensive trap to fall into, and one we should be especially careful about.

Really, BF just has a shit history of melee design. The knife-counter knife push to win from prior titles is pretty terrible as well. Frankly I would have been overall happier if they had of kept it as a flair kill or a punishment to hill camping snipers that got snuck up on. Melee combat simply doesn't translate well into typical FPS shooters. You need a lot of time invested into melee mechanics to make a good PVP melee game when you really get down to it. That's almost double the load because you've got to worry about balancing gunplay and stabby play. Balancing gunplay alone in a way that rich and fun has proven to be challenging enough as it is.

Posts: 3,292

Date of registration
: Apr 26th 2013

Platform: PS4

Location: Arizona, USA

Reputation modifier: 15

Saturday, May 13th 2017, 2:53am

They invested effort into the melee system 'because WWI', I'm sure of it. Any other setting, except maybe WWII or guerilla warfare, probably wouldn't focus on melee all that much.
To Aim Assist or not to Aim Assist, that is the question.

### 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

### 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

### 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