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

  • "BleedingUranium" started this thread

Posts: 3,304

Date of registration
: Mar 19th 2014

Platform: Xbox One

Location: Canada

Battlelog:

Reputation modifier: 14

  • Send private message

1

Monday, May 15th 2017, 12:48am

Making Vertical Recoil random, just like H-Recoil

At present V-Recoil doesn't have a lot of meaningful effect on balance, and that's specifically because it's entirely consistent and predicable. The only thing that adds an element of difficulty to it is First Shot Multiplier, but past that bump it's just "hold mouse/stick down". This is bad for a few reasons, but especially for two that play off each other. It effectively eliminates V-Recoil as a balancing factor, which is unfortunate because recoil feels better and is more intuitive than spread.


So, why can't V-Recoil work just like H-Recoil? The Rem 8 has 0.85 V-Recoil and 0.15 H-Recoil; a shot can recoil anywhere between 0.15 left and 0.15 right at random, but will always recoil 0.85 up.

But what if it wasn't every time? It wouldn't have to be between 0.0 and max value, the chance to have zero recoil at all would feel immensely bizarre, but within a range could work. To just grab some random numbers here, the Rem 8 could have between 0.7 and 0.85 V-Recoil, a fairly small zone as it's supposed to be a consistent rifle.

The Automatico could, instead of 0.4 V-Recoil every shot, have between 0.15 and 0.4 every shot. Or maybe making it an average of 0.4 would be better, something like 0.3 to 0.55.

The MG 15, instead of 0.33 V-Recoil, could be 0.25 to 0.45, or something like that.


I'm not really trying to run real numbers here, there are far too many people more qualified than me for that, but I do think this is a concept worth looking into.
Who has fun, wins.

Oscar

Sona tank jungle

(1,824)

Posts: 7,821

Date of registration
: May 30th 2012

Platform: PS4

Location: SURROUNDED BY FUCKING MOUNTAINS

Battlelog:

Reputation modifier: 18

  • Send private message

2

Monday, May 15th 2017, 1:00am

VRec has 5% variation to either side iirc.

0.85 would be 0.81/0.89~ but don't quote me on this because I might just be misremembering things.
Bro of Legion, the lurker ninja mod | Tesla FTW | RNG is evil.

Quoted from "MsMuchLove"

I find majority of the complaints I hear about this game somehow never appear in my games.

VincentNZ

Holy War? No Thanks.

(2,022)

Posts: 2,537

Date of registration
: Jul 25th 2013

Platform: PC

Battlelog:

Reputation modifier: 14

  • Send private message

3

Monday, May 15th 2017, 10:30am

I wonder what effect that would have in total in the handling of the gun if it can still only move in one direction. I honestly have no idea, I think I could be thrown off totally because I had to compensate differently in every burst, or that I would not notice a difference at all, because in longer bursts recoil will accumulate to the same or less amount anyway.

You are right in any case, that spread and recoil interacts differently in BF1 and I find it rather unintuitive. Do you think that recoil control would be easier or harder with your suggestion?

NoctyrneSAGA

PvF 2017 Champion

(9,349)

Posts: 6,928

Date of registration
: Apr 3rd 2012

Platform: PC

Battlelog:

Reputation modifier: 19

  • Send private message

4

Monday, May 15th 2017, 10:45am

You're not going to be able to compensate for it and the randomized recoil is just basically going to be shaky cam.
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™.

Zer0Cod3x

Can't get a title

(1,327)

Posts: 1,528

Date of registration
: Dec 23rd 2013

Platform: Xbox One

Location: The Land of Multitudinous Kangaroos

Reputation modifier: 12

  • Send private message

5

Monday, May 15th 2017, 11:12am

HRec and spread already work well enough for designating effective engagement ranges. Why do you need another factor?

Besides, I have a feeling that randomised VRec would just turn your shooting into a screen shake simulator.


That being said, the depth of technical skill involved in controlling recoil could still definitely be improved upon. In addition to increasing the VRec across all weapons in general, why not have a second or third shot recoil multiplier, or have downwards recoil? It not only adds more variety and uniqueness to the weapons, but also increases the level of technical skill required to use them.
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.


VincentNZ

Holy War? No Thanks.

(2,022)

Posts: 2,537

Date of registration
: Jul 25th 2013

Platform: PC

Battlelog:

Reputation modifier: 14

  • Send private message

6

Monday, May 15th 2017, 11:50am

I think Bleeding Uranium wanted not to increase the average V-Rec overall, but randomize so that it stays the same on average. I doubt that we would see a difference in automatic weapons at all. Could be different for semi-auto though and indeed increase the screen shake, especially with scopes, I guess.

As for technical skill and recoil, well I think this would be a terrible idea. BF3 and 4 build up a system that was still intuitive and tried to be authentic. With BF1 they threw that overboard with spread multipliers, negative spread and a reduced spread decrease.
Spread and recoil used to synergize well, now they are rather unrelated and work independently, which is not very immersive. Also stuff like thrid shot recoil modifier (apart from burst weapons) and downwards recoil are totally absurd in terms of authenticity, how is a weapon supposed to go downward by shot recoil.
Added to that we already have in BF1 a third accuracy determining factor, which is all the visual stuff going on when shooting.

BF1 also is already a very accuracy oriented game, where motoric trumps cognitive skill all the time. Increasing that would just leave even more players behind.

NoctyrneSAGA

PvF 2017 Champion

(9,349)

Posts: 6,928

Date of registration
: Apr 3rd 2012

Platform: PC

Battlelog:

Reputation modifier: 19

  • Send private message

7

Monday, May 15th 2017, 12:51pm

BF3 and 4 build up a system that was still intuitive and tried to be authentic.


BF3 wound up with the M16A3 meta.

BF4 wound up with the microburst/tapfire meta.

Authenticity isn't going to save garbage gameplay.

With BF1 they threw that overboard with spread multipliers, negative spread and a reduced spread decrease.


What's wrong with this?

Spread multiplier killed microburst/tapfire except for Factory variants.

Negative spread has "authentic" origins with watching your impacts and adjusting accordingly aka walking your fire.

Spread decrease actually matters now and if you want large amounts of it, you grab a Factory or Low Weight variant.

Spread and recoil used to synergize well, now they are rather unrelated and work independently, which is not very immersive.


Immersion is not a compelling reason.

Spread and recoil are both still used to modulate damage ouput through hitrate together. That is unchanged.

Even the LMG with negative spread increase still has minSpread to regulate hitrate. And to make up for that negative SIPS, it uses hRec as a substitute. How is that independent?
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™.

Zer0Cod3x

Can't get a title

(1,327)

Posts: 1,528

Date of registration
: Dec 23rd 2013

Platform: Xbox One

Location: The Land of Multitudinous Kangaroos

Reputation modifier: 12

  • Send private message

8

Monday, May 15th 2017, 1:27pm

As for technical skill and recoil, well I think this would be a terrible idea. BF3 and 4 build up a system that was still intuitive and tried to be authentic. With BF1 they threw that overboard with spread multipliers, negative spread and a reduced spread decrease.
Spread and recoil used to synergize well, now they are rather unrelated and work independently, which is not very immersive.

I don't think a microburst meta can be called "intuitive" and "authentic." It's a brainless way of shooting that requires no real skill at all.

You are assuming that because BF1's weapon mechanics are relatively more complex than those in previous BF titles, they are worse. This, apart from being completely illogical, could hardly be further from the case.

Also stuff like thrid shot recoil modifier (apart from burst weapons) and downwards recoil are totally absurd in terms of authenticity, how is a weapon supposed to go downward by shot recoil.

The same way LMGs decrease in spread over time.

I don't really want to explain balance > reality.

BF1 also is already a very accuracy oriented game, where motoric trumps cognitive skill all the time. Increasing that would just leave even more players behind.

I hardly think that holding M1 on an LMG requires much technical skill at all.

The biggest complaint about BF1 from many players is that it's too "casual," and "doesn't require much skill to be good at the game." I think that many players, including myself, would welcome an increase to the skill ceiling in the game. How has making a game require more skill ever been a bad thing?
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.


VincentNZ

Holy War? No Thanks.

(2,022)

Posts: 2,537

Date of registration
: Jul 25th 2013

Platform: PC

Battlelog:

Reputation modifier: 14

  • Send private message

9

Monday, May 15th 2017, 2:40pm

Well thank you both for your two in-depth responses. I've been through this before with Noctyrne and it is quite good to have a second opinion on this as well.

We sure have different takes on what is defined as authentic and intuitive. In BF3 and 4 you would control the recoil as good as you can and when recoil was too much, your spread also started to kick in, so it would feel naturally intuitive or smooth. This did lead to the M16 Meta, which I think is overrated because it did not render the weapons obsolete unless in a very tiny confined space that handled itself. Public play was unaffected on the whole because it was still the engagement that dictated the outcome not the weapons of the players.

In BF4 they largely removed this, by making small adjustments to the system and in the end we had something that came very close to something called balance. Everything was usable and working as intended.

In BF1 we added a couple of more things like negative spread and first shot spread multiplier, which is indeed problematic from a "authenticity reason", because this is not how weapons work. Granted, weapons do not work like in BF4 either. The general principle is easy, you go ADS the recoil hits your shoulder and naturally the barrel will be moved upwards because your whole body works as a lever. It will not go down. Also holding a gun to your face is very tiring especially when it fires so you will not get more accurate the more your shoot. This is also true for bipodded weapons, but it happens slower because you eliminate the natural sway. Negative spread and first shot spread multiplier are therefore features that were intended to make the shooting mechanics more complicated (not complex) and less intuitive. Probably added with the best intentions, but it does lead to a lot of inconsistent moments.

I mean why would an SMG suddenly be crazily inaccurate? It is less accurate because of a shorter barrel but that works in the first shot as well, represented by usually higher base spread. Negative spread makes even less sense, because LMGs have a longer barrel to be more accurate (simplified), so why would they start off inaccurate and become "lasers" when your shoulder is already hurting?

So spread and recoil were mechanics to mimic real shooting and transfer it to a game and that worked well enough. The doubled system also works as a way to balance for different accuracy levels by decreasing the possible maximum accuracy. That is why most players would average between 15-25% accuracy in BF4 with automatic weapons. Spread also accounts for other things indirectly like suppression, wind, climate, pulse etc., so that is definitely a plus for RNG.

Yes I think BF3 and 4 shooting mechanics were way better, for the same reasons you guys like the new system more. I think a system that is easy to grasp and works similar for all weapons is better than a system where half the players will not even bother to understand. That is just asking for misunderstandings, as seen so often on the forums.
Of course, here we are a rather educated bunch, I wonder if there are many guys here that do not have a college background. I can say that I have difficulties grasping every aspect of the shooting mechanics now, while for BF3 and 4 it was easy enough to explain to others.
Just take a look at the forums, misconceptions and misunderstandings are happening all the time. People do not know how the shooting works and even when presented in an orderly fashion here, people will either give up or only understand parts of it. Now it would be easy to blame them for being uneducated fools, but this does not really apply now does it? Intuition is needed in games, player's feeling and perception should match with the numbers, otherwise you will not get far.

I will not get into detail why I think this game favours motoric over cognitive, we covered this aprtly elsewhere. On the topic at hand I think we have a very complicated system as is, and adding more to that just makes the game wide and not deep. However if H-Rec is also randomized, V-Rec could be as well, although I have no idea how it would affect the different weapon classes and firemodes. I would find it intriguing though as a concept to play around.

Edit: Geez, such a long post again. Sorry BleedingUranium. :D

Posts: 269

Date of registration
: Dec 2nd 2013

Platform: PC

Location: Nepped On

Battlelog:

Reputation modifier: 9

  • Send private message

10

Monday, May 15th 2017, 3:36pm

The biggest complaint about BF1 from many players is that it's too "casual," and "doesn't require much skill to be good at the game."
I think one of the biggest reasons why people actually complain about this from an infantry perspective, aside from the usual Automatico/Hellriegel/Shotgun whining, is the bolt-actions in this game. How else do you explain the massive upgrades they get while every other respective weapon class gets "downgraded" from BF4?

Separate from this, I used to be excited over the unique primaries and roles that every class got. But the longer I play this game, the more I actually yearn for something similar to BF3 and BF4's weapon balance. M16A3 meta didn't mean the M60E4 or the G3A3 was totally obsolete, and neither did the BF4 tapfire meta mean an entire class of primaries wasn't able to do anything meaningful in certain situations. If I pick Assault, there's absolutely nothing I can do about the Scout 80m away taking potshots at me. If I pick Benet-Mercie Support, it becomes a massive risk to push up on objectives with my teammates and run into a randomly spawning Automatico. I think one of the reasons why I eventually gravitated towards the Medic class is that they are probably the most versatile when it comes to fighting at all ranges, whether up close or far away, at the cost of a relatively high skill req to do well.

I wonder if you can achieve BF3/BF4's class weapon balance that intentionally blurs the line between class roles and engagement distances, while maintaining BF1's unique class system. Is this even possible?