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: 3,674

Date of registration
: Mar 19th 2014

Platform: Xbox One

Location: Canada

Battlelog:

Reputation modifier: 16

  • Send private message

11

Wednesday, March 14th 2018, 4:26pm

People consider getting tank kills with the field gun to be difficult?


No, more so just tedious, as it often requires a lot of "right place, right time" situations.

I'm sure this one would be far easier in Ops, especially Beyond The Marne, but from a Conquest perspective it was simply faster to do the other requirements. I wasn't trying to skip it intentionally, it simply happened slower than the multikills requirement.
Who Enjoys, Wins

Posts: 2,015

Date of registration
: Jan 12th 2014

Platform: PC

Battlelog:

Reputation modifier: 14

  • Send private message

12

Wednesday, March 14th 2018, 10:15pm

It's not difficult, its very tedious. The field gun is, at best a weapon of opportunity. Usually it's a death sentence. I don't think I've ever even lost a fight to a field gun before since you can either splash-kill the gunner, or hose him down through the aiming slit with a coax. Or just slowly drive away. Assuming you don't use a shitty light vehicle.

The passenger assists and passenger kills are bad enough, but camping around a field gun is really just boring.

My biggest issue is really, why do I want to play badly on purpose to get some shiny? Why can't I just get tanker shit by driving tanks like a sane game design would dictate?

It's like that killing planes unlock garbage. Why can't it be something sane like deal x damage against planes?

All of this spec shit is basically wasted bandwidth when you see the overwhelming population running the stock crap because they're done with grinding for every bit of content.

This post has been edited 1 times, last edit by "tankmayvin" (Mar 14th 2018, 10:24pm)


NoctyrneSAGA

PvF 2017 Champion

(10,320)

Posts: 7,284

Date of registration
: Apr 3rd 2012

Platform: PC

Battlelog:

Reputation modifier: 19

  • Send private message

13

Wednesday, March 14th 2018, 10:59pm

I remember them saying the service assignments weren't meant to be completed quickly and were meant to increase the breadth/depth of a player's knowledge of the game.

It's why unlocks on one kit require progression from another, why you see really bizarre tasks, and why some are just really grindy.
Data Browser

Passive Spotting is the future!

"Skill" may indeed be the most magical of words. Chant it well enough and any desire can be yours.

Are you a scrub?

If it flies, it dies™.

Posts: 2,015

Date of registration
: Jan 12th 2014

Platform: PC

Battlelog:

Reputation modifier: 14

  • Send private message

14

Thursday, March 15th 2018, 11:55am

I remember them saying the service assignments weren't meant to be completed quickly and were meant to increase the breadth/depth of a player's knowledge of the game.

It's why unlocks on one kit require progression from another, why you see really bizarre tasks, and why some are just really grindy.


There isn't that much meat to BF1 that you need that degree of handholding or carrot leading/stick beating, to explore it all.

At a more fundamental level it poses a balance problem. If it's not something universally accessible to the average player, it's not something that they can make extremely powerful from a balancing perspective. At least not if they want a well balanced game.

And for the most part that's what they seem to be, fun but not terribly useful. Only stacked explosive resistance, reduced spotting, times are similar are genuinely really, really useful. You can see and interact with weapons, and so people want to put the effort to get those. For the most part the weapon unlocks are also pretty quick. Specs are neither of those things.

The overwhelming volume of players on my kill-feed are running stock specs. With BF1 being more or less at the end of life, that translates to the specs being a failed bit of added content. It's something we should have had day 1 like other titles that introduced them. Not part of the "oops, lets try to get BF1 feature complete to the level of BF4". Feature incompleteness like that is just not very acceptable in a AAA game. I would have been fine if they decided to omit the specs as being fiddly and sort of bad design (which I thought they were), and added something else instead. But they just left it out and then tossed it in later.

Hau_ruck

Tow me daddy!

(1,085)

  • "Hau_ruck" started this thread

Posts: 880

Date of registration
: Dec 3rd 2014

Platform: PS4

Battlelog:

Reputation modifier: 10

  • Send private message

15

Thursday, March 15th 2018, 3:34pm

It's not difficult, its very tedious. The field gun is, at best a weapon of opportunity. Usually it's a death sentence. I don't think I've ever even lost a fight to a field gun before since you can either splash-kill the gunner, or hose him down through the aiming slit with a coax. Or just slowly drive away. Assuming you don't use a shitty light vehicle.

The passenger assists and passenger kills are bad enough, but camping around a field gun is really just boring.

My biggest issue is really, why do I want to play badly on purpose to get some shiny? Why can't I just get tanker shit by driving tanks like a sane game design would dictate?

It's like that killing planes unlock garbage. Why can't it be something sane like deal x damage against planes?

All of this spec shit is basically wasted bandwidth when you see the overwhelming population running the stock crap because they're done with grinding for every bit of content.



You seem to misunderstand what the field gun is for on a fundamental level. It isn't meant to fight a tank 1 v1, any more than an assault with a rocket gun or a support with an HE mortar is meant to fight a tank 1v1. It is designed to supplement a teams AT and AI options by providing what is essentially a stationary tank cannon (only far more damaging than most tank guns). So the idea is that when team A's tank fight's Team B's tank, one of Team A's infantry jumps on the field gun and obliterates the tank while it is distracted.

A fight between a tank and field gun doesn't happen in a vacuum. Usually a tank will be busy clearing out a point or fighting another tank. The field gun can then easily land yuge damage, and unlike a tank it can't run out of shells. This is before we get to the field guns anti infantry properties, but they aren't really relevant here. Basically the FG is similar to the TOW from BF4 except where the TOW was only slightly more powerful than infantry AT, the FG does roughly 2x damage compared with the rocket gun and offers a decent amount of protection to the gunner assuming his team mates hold the flanks against infantry. Unlike most of DICE's stationary weapons, the FG is far from a death trap.

Posts: 2,015

Date of registration
: Jan 12th 2014

Platform: PC

Battlelog:

Reputation modifier: 14

  • Send private message

16

Friday, March 16th 2018, 6:42pm

It's not difficult, its very tedious. The field gun is, at best a weapon of opportunity. Usually it's a death sentence. I don't think I've ever even lost a fight to a field gun before since you can either splash-kill the gunner, or hose him down through the aiming slit with a coax. Or just slowly drive away. Assuming you don't use a shitty light vehicle.

The passenger assists and passenger kills are bad enough, but camping around a field gun is really just boring.

My biggest issue is really, why do I want to play badly on purpose to get some shiny? Why can't I just get tanker shit by driving tanks like a sane game design would dictate?

It's like that killing planes unlock garbage. Why can't it be something sane like deal x damage against planes?

All of this spec shit is basically wasted bandwidth when you see the overwhelming population running the stock crap because they're done with grinding for every bit of content.



You seem to misunderstand what the field gun is for on a fundamental level. It isn't meant to fight a tank 1 v1, any more than an assault with a rocket gun or a support with an HE mortar is meant to fight a tank 1v1. It is designed to supplement a teams AT and AI options by providing what is essentially a stationary tank cannon (only far more damaging than most tank guns). So the idea is that when team A's tank fight's Team B's tank, one of Team A's infantry jumps on the field gun and obliterates the tank while it is distracted.

A fight between a tank and field gun doesn't happen in a vacuum. Usually a tank will be busy clearing out a point or fighting another tank. The field gun can then easily land yuge damage, and unlike a tank it can't run out of shells. This is before we get to the field guns anti infantry properties, but they aren't really relevant here. Basically the FG is similar to the TOW from BF4 except where the TOW was only slightly more powerful than infantry AT, the FG does roughly 2x damage compared with the rocket gun and offers a decent amount of protection to the gunner assuming his team mates hold the flanks against infantry. Unlike most of DICE's stationary weapons, the FG is far from a death trap.


I think you fundamentally misunderstand where I'm coming from.

I can routinely pull 60 + kills without dying using one of the tanks. Why would I ever waste my time diddling around with something that isn't a tank to do a shitty job of what I can do with a tank?

Forcing players to deviate from things they like and are good at in order to unlock things they want for the things they like/are good at is garbage game design IMO.

You make it sound like I'm too stupid to test things out myself. I'm not, I just don't want to waste my time. I know fully well what the FG can and can't do and it's overall pretty bad compared to other AT options. I blow up guys trying to use the FG constantly, I know what it can do.

The very notion that the purpose of the specs is to force people to "learn the game" as Noct suggests is IMO pretty damn insulting.

Posts: 3,674

Date of registration
: Mar 19th 2014

Platform: Xbox One

Location: Canada

Battlelog:

Reputation modifier: 16

  • Send private message

17

Friday, March 16th 2018, 7:23pm

A good player is a well-rounded player. To be a good player, you're expected to use every item and tool in the game.

You don't get to dedicate yourself to one tiny niche, then complain the devs are "forcing" you to do other things.
Who Enjoys, Wins

Posts: 2,015

Date of registration
: Jan 12th 2014

Platform: PC

Battlelog:

Reputation modifier: 14

  • Send private message

18

Friday, March 16th 2018, 8:31pm

A good player is a well-rounded player. To be a good player, you're expected to use every item and tool in the game.

You don't get to dedicate yourself to one tiny niche, then complain the devs are "forcing" you to do other things.


No. Not really. In fact that's completely garbage. Who the hell are you to arbitrate what a "good player" is anyway? Don't pass off opinion as fact.

I can do whatever the hell I want and still complain that content I paid for is locked behind having to play the game a certain way. I am entitled to complain as a paying customer. This is hardly like I'm saying anything new, people have been complaining about having to do stupid grinds to unlock paid content since it was a thing. So at least a solid decade. The only people who seem to like it are the people who just aren't very good and need something to do, or people who get off on "pride and accomplishment".

Either way I'm a solid pilot and do just fine PTFO'ing as infantry, so it really has nothing to do with me. Camping around a field gun is just a waste of time as a dedicated task to grind out a piece of content.

The only stationaries worth camping are the fort gun, and the AA if you've got friendly planes who need their tails cleared and will reliably fly back to lure enemy planes in. And even then, you're not exactly going to MVP doing that now are you? Because that's what a "good player" does in a "competitive" game, they seek to maximize their impact on the outcome of the game in whatever way they can. Thats why we have things called points, to reward/instruct you on how "well" you're doing. Or you know, for people who just don't care they try to have fun, fun is great too.

NoctyrneSAGA

PvF 2017 Champion

(10,320)

Posts: 7,284

Date of registration
: Apr 3rd 2012

Platform: PC

Battlelog:

Reputation modifier: 19

  • Send private message

19

Friday, March 16th 2018, 8:36pm

The very notion that the purpose of the specs is to force people to "learn the game" as Noct suggests is IMO pretty damn insulting.


For competent players like you, yes It's a waste of time.

Unfortunately, you are a dying breed.
Data Browser

Passive Spotting is the future!

"Skill" may indeed be the most magical of words. Chant it well enough and any desire can be yours.

Are you a scrub?

If it flies, it dies™.

Posts: 181

Date of registration
: Dec 14th 2016

Platform: PS4

Location: UK

Battlelog:

Reputation modifier: 5

  • Send private message

20

Friday, March 16th 2018, 10:02pm

The very notion that the purpose of the specs is to force people to "learn the game" as Noct suggests is IMO pretty damn insulting.


For competent players like you, yes It's a waste of time.

Unfortunately, you are a dying breed.


I'd argue that a KDR of 1.44 is well below his absolute potential, and that being forced to break bad habits and venture out of one's comfort zones is no more a waste of time for him than it is for most.