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: 140

Date of registration
: May 16th 2012

Platform: PC

Reputation modifier: 7

  • Send private message

101

Monday, March 6th 2017, 7:13am

A little bit off tangent, but I'm still disappointed that DICE has not considered removing the global spawn mechanic on the seats of many vehicles. It severely hurts the viability of vehicles like the bomber and landship when the non-driver occupants cannot swap seats or get out to repair for fear of their seat being taken by a non-communicating blueberry.

TheMightyVoice

The Pantless Messiah Returns

(1,830)

Posts: 793

Date of registration
: May 22nd 2012

Platform: PC

Location: Behind my M240B

Battlelog:

Reputation modifier: 13

  • Send private message

102

Monday, March 6th 2017, 9:42am

HOLY SHIT! You actually posted on a Battlefield-related topic?! Glad to see your input again. I always enjoyed your perspective in regards to BF4. :D

Onto the reply:

Spoiler one

See, I think the skill floor is too low concerning many of BF1's vehicles making them really good even in the hands of an idiot. Well maybe not an 'idiot' idiot but I think you get my point. I think infantry gameplay is rather fantastic and well balanced though, but that's just my opinion. Certain planes and tanks are just super easy to do good in and then there are others that require more thought and strategy. Fighters and attack planes easily have more survivability than bombers, because bombers need a rear gunner in order to survive against opposing planes and a good pilot because they are so fricking slow, cumbersome, and big making them easy targets for practically anything that can damage them. Plus the pilot's only offensive armaments are bomb payloads that need an understanding of how the predictive sights work when incorporating velocity and altitude.


Spoiler two

Fighters, attack planes, and heavy tanks are basically easy mode options because they are just as effective with no communication or teamwork necessary as the vehicles that require teamwork or communication in order to be effective at all, against infantry that is. To me, this is stupid. More effort should equal more profit, but BF1 seems to ignore this philosophy in some areas *vehicles-ahem-vehicles*. Sorry, something was caught in my throat. And this is incredibly odd because the ease of use infantry weapons in the game offer no statistical advantage to those that require more effort out of the player, and yet assets like the fighter, attack plane, and heavy tank continue to dominate against infantry.


Spoiler three

I had friends that regularly played BF3, then sort of gave up on BF4, and completely left the franchise after Hardline (which wasn't really a Battlefield game, but whatever). I now have to start from scratch with BF1 and have made some acquaintances here on Symthic, but not ones to regularly squad up with. And I'll be damned if I try to befriend some players in random games. I've been down that road before and it hasn't turned out well, so as a result I am limited in my my options. Like I said tanks and planes would become a non-factor if I had the necessary bodies to coordinate with me, but I don't. Not now at least; I'm hoping this will change soon.


Spoiler four

However, I'm curious as to what can be done to combat a force multiplier when insufficient bodies are present. What then? Just quit and find a new server or choose a different game mode? Because that's what some people are relegated to do and that seems like a flaw in the gameplay. Maybe not to you but to me. If you respond, I really only care about what you have to say to this paragraph.
In response to spoiler one... Just the other day I played an entire match on foot as Cavalry fighting buttloads of vehicles. Final count left me with 1 plane I'd killed with my rifle, and 2 armored vehicles blown up, along with some other infantry kills gotten while out-positioning said armored vehicles. Didn't die the whole round. Cavalry op, obviously.
More to the point, if I played an entire round fighting almost exclusively armor or squads with an armor advantage and couldn't be killed, is the skill floor too low? Are all the vehicles dank af for farming infantry no matter how bad you are? I would be unlikely to agree.

In response to spoiler two, yes, some vehicles are easier to solo farm infantry with. This is intentional. The vehicles more oriented towards wrecking other vehicles and objectives, however, require teamwork. This much is true, but I believe it to be for a variety of reasons. Frankly, requiring many people to work in coordination inside of a force multiplier in order to easily take on infantry is silly. Kind of negates the point of being a force multiplier in the first place if it's not actually multiplying anything. If a vehicle requires 2-3 people in order to even really engage 1-2 infantry, that's not force multiplication. That's just silly, especially if farming infantry is that vehicle's specialty. This is not the case, however, for BF1. In BF1, the vehicles that require teamwork are typically the most effective vehicles at busting through fortifications, through enemy armor, and hammering objectives into next week, rather than having rapid fire splash damage infantry farming weapons. The A7V and bomber are examples of this. I don't see any problem here, it's a problem with the players, not the game. You don't change the balance of the game just because sometimes the players in public matches have skewed teams, this will simply lead to even MORE skewed game results, which leads to less fun.

In response to spoiler three, forbidding yourself from attempting to find future squadmates in-game is only hurting yourself as a player and a person. Certainly not every individual you find will mesh with you on a personal level, and sometimes you'll find those you'd wish you hadn't found, but the reason the saying "Nothing ventured, nothing gained" has had such staying power is because in addition to being very catchy, it is fundamentally true. It has remained true for all of the 7-odd centuries since apparent point of origin, and I presume will continue to remain true unless it turns out we all live in the matrix. There will be no return on investment if you refuse to invest. Take the opportunity to grow as a person, and you may find your enjoyment of your games to be improved.

And finally, in response to spoiler four, if insufficient bodies are present, you find yourself woefully outmatched, and know that you have no chance to succeed in bringing down an enemy force multiplier, you don't quit the match. Retreat is an option. Reassess the overall situation, and either regroup with teammates such that engaging the armored vehicle with them may be possible if you encounter it, or shift your attention to a different objective upon which an overwhelming enemy force is not present on. I know some FPS players aren't fond of strategy, but if they want to play Battlefield, they need to get used to the idea that not every task can be undertaken alone. That is not, has not been, and hopefully never will be the spirit of the series.
Eat your heart out, Badger.

Spoiler Spoiler


<elementofprgress> yummm baby jesus
<elementofprgress> but i'd prefer jesus with ketchup

<cloon> women are allowed to play hockey?
<daddygreeenjeans> body checks are a fundamental part of women's suffrage

<Riesig> "... I'M GAY..."

steamboat28: the doctors at the ER found my nipples, too!
steamboat28: it just..y'know...took them a razor and two orderlies.

<Legion> And damn, now I really want some [redacted] penetrator measurements

<Rezal> peipin, why did you tell them you brought your phone?
<Pepin_the_Short> Because there’s like a one in five chance of getting searched on the way out
<Pepin_the_Short> And trying to sneak the fucker out is way worse than letting them look at Cloon’s dick pics.

17:52:08 <Rezal> Unfortunately, this video is not available in your country because it could contain music, for which we could not agree on conditions of use with GEMA.
17:52:15 <ToTheSun> lolgema
17:52:15 <TheMightyVoice> lolgema

<Legion> But I literally am Hitler right now
Somehow my bullets are magnetically attracted to popular Youtubers, but theirs rarely seem to hit me.

Posts: 3,292

Date of registration
: Apr 26th 2013

Platform: PS4

Location: Arizona, USA

Reputation modifier: 15

  • Send private message

103

Monday, March 6th 2017, 11:06am

More to the point, if I played an entire round fighting almost exclusively armor or squads with an armor advantage and couldn't be killed, is the skill floor too low? Are all the vehicles dank af for farming infantry no matter how bad you are? I would be unlikely to agree.

Well no, obviously not. Higher skilled players will inevitably perform better than those whose skill does not match up. Vehicles themselves have pretty high skill ceilings, well certain ones anyway, but even the most casual of casuals can do fairly well in BF1's solo vehicles; they won't do AS well as the pros, but the defensive abilities of a few variations of tanks and planes offer safety nets for bad players and then enhance the, seemingly, already unstoppable nature of the pros.

Kind of negates the point of being a force multiplier in the first place if it's not actually multiplying anything. If a vehicle requires 2-3 people in order to even really engage 1-2 infantry, that's not force multiplication. That's just silly, especially if farming infantry is that vehicle's specialty. This is not the case, however, for BF1. In BF1, the vehicles that require teamwork are typically the most effective vehicles at busting through fortifications, through enemy armor, and hammering objectives into next week, rather than having rapid fire splash damage infantry farming weapons.The A7V and bomber are examples of this.

Well, I think we identified our problem here. I consider the A7V to be a powerful solo vehicle while you just labeled it as a force multiplier. How can one vehicle serve as both and still be considered balanced? I figured it would be one or the other, but both? No wonder it's still the most used tank. It's a hybrid; it incorporates impressive (but not the best) infantry farming capabilities, high resistance to AT damage, and it's effectiveness is multiplied through several gunner positions. With the bomber or Landship, you NEED occupants to not just be effective, but to survive. A7V tankers don't need support to stay alive, although it helps immensely if there is.

I don't see any problem here, it's a problem with the players, not the game. You don't change the balance of the game just because sometimes the players in public matches have skewed teams, this will simply lead to even MORE skewed game results, which leads to less fun.

Yeah, I've already touched on this a couple times. Let me explain that I'm not requesting or demanding to be able to consistently and easily solo vehicles on my own, but I think a compromise exists through tweaking certain values here and there that the damage output of a single Assault can be increased just enough to where the damage dealt actually does something meaningful or makes it look like something meaningful was accomplished.

If I could do a flat, min damage of 20 to heavies everytime, excluding ricochets, I'd be good with that. 20 is a comforting number for damage dealt because anything less from 15-19 just doesn't appear worth it. Which is strange because 19 is one less than 20, but just looks shitty in comparison. It's more psychological than statistical, but I don't think I'm the only one who holds this perspective either.

Retreat is an option. Reassess the overall situation, and either regroup with teammates such that engaging the armored vehicle with them may be possible if you encounter it, or shift your attention to a different objective upon which an overwhelming enemy force is not present on. I know some FPS players aren't fond of strategy, but if they want to play Battlefield, they need to get used to the idea that not every task can be undertaken alone. That is not, has not been, and hopefully never will be the spirit of the series.

Oh, trust me, I've retreated plenty. Plen-ty of times. Namely because I was probably not playing Assault at the time, but retreat has been fairly common nevertheless. I said this before, I see tons of Assaults in Conquest but somehow a lot of the time they just ignore tanks. I'll spot the shit out of armor trying to give them them context clues through audio cues and shoot at it to see if any of them are noticing, but it's futile. They'd rather focus on the infantry aspect and use their SMGs or Shotguns to grab a couple stupid kills instead. The tunnel vision is real.

I really think that the attempts to recruit a large casual audience into BF1 has harmed the AT gameplay. BF3/4 weren't nearly as terrible when it came to dealing with armor, Engineers were plentiful and they had a tendency to engage tanks or other vehicles really at all times and not just when the vehicles start shitting all over everyone. It's almost like a significant portion of these players don't even know what the Assault class is designed for; it is THAT bad MightyVoice. I mean when I first picked up BF3, I had no fricken clue how the game was supposed to be played but I learned probably within the first 30 rank ups. I see players in the 50s and 60s that still can't figure out the game or refuse to figure out the game. It's one of the two. This influx of newcomers has been painful and continues to be because apparently Battlefield's style and strategy is too much for their feeble minds to comprehend. I'm done ranting now, but thanks for the interesting conversation.
To Aim Assist or not to Aim Assist, that is the question.

Nope. Aim Assist or bust; here's why:

Default Aim Assist Data

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

No Slowdown Data

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


No Auto Rotation Data

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

Prepare your laughbox

the Sebstalder is quiet good since it can 3hit kill at any distanc ,but In my opinion i actually thikn the sweeper is better, its got a really really fast firerate that can beat alll those Noobmaticos, Helregall adn shitguns in close quarters , and its also really accurate out to like l;ong range,. overall great allround gun, jsut my 2$ tho

This post has been edited 1 times, last edit by "JSLICE20" (Mar 7th 2017, 1:02am)


Posts: 2,015

Date of registration
: Jan 12th 2014

Platform: PC

Battlelog:

Reputation modifier: 14

  • Send private message

104

Tuesday, March 7th 2017, 3:02am

@tankmayvin
You seriously just sound like a tank player who doesn't want his position challenged. Tanks may not have 360 rotation now and are therefore "weak" but AT damage against them is pathetic. Not to mention it's never "you v. tank" but "you v. tank + the 3 guys that just spawned on it". Tanks are way to strong as is and if the only counter is everyone go assault or our tank + assault there's a problem.
QQ?

Guess what, don't care about your personal opinions about my character. I mean, you sound like the typical fodder player that states his opinion as fact. It isn't fact.

The fact is that tanks are actually weaker than they have been since BFV. They are objectively worse than BF3/BF4 tanks by a significant margin. If you don't believe me, why don't you read all of the other posts arguing basically the same thing.

I am starting to really suspect the problem in BF1 isn't the vehicles, or the planes, or really any balancing issue so much as the 10:1 replacement of skill and gamesmanship with salt by the player base.

Posts: 3,639

Date of registration
: Mar 19th 2014

Platform: Xbox One

Location: Canada

Battlelog:

Reputation modifier: 16

  • Send private message

105

Tuesday, March 7th 2017, 3:20am

They're only objectively worse if you're looking purely at tank stats, instead of tanks and their relationships to their counter tools, which are also worse. Tanks are directly worse, but that's rather irrelevant when they're actually better in a relative sense.
Who Enjoys, Wins

Posts: 2,015

Date of registration
: Jan 12th 2014

Platform: PC

Battlelog:

Reputation modifier: 14

  • Send private message

106

Tuesday, March 7th 2017, 3:23am

They're only objectively worse if you're looking purely at tank stats, instead of tanks and their relationships to their counter tools, which are also worse. Tanks are directly worse, but that's rather irrelevant when they're actually better in a relative sense.
They are relatively worse. Legion and I went over this already. I've seen zero refutation of this but rather an awful lot of whining.

Posts: 3,639

Date of registration
: Mar 19th 2014

Platform: Xbox One

Location: Canada

Battlelog:

Reputation modifier: 16

  • Send private message

107

Tuesday, March 7th 2017, 3:25am

I can say the same. I don't think we're going to agree on this, but that's usually the case when someone "mains" a thing.
Who Enjoys, Wins

Posts: 3,292

Date of registration
: Apr 26th 2013

Platform: PS4

Location: Arizona, USA

Reputation modifier: 15

  • Send private message

108

Tuesday, March 7th 2017, 4:25am

They are relatively worse. Legion and I went over this already. I've seen zero refutation of this but rather an awful lot of whining.

Right, because what you and Legion say about tanks is absolute truth. Don't get me wrong, experts more often than not know exactly what they are talking about when it comes to knowledge and understanding about their field of expertise, however, by the same token, they aren't infallible in their opinions either. A fresh set of eyes can help see things that they may possibly overlook because the level of their expertise is so high.

The armor discussion turns into such a shitshow everytime because the site still lacks the proper vehicle data for members to prove or disprove certain opinions. We literally only have anecdotes to reliably discuss anything related to tanks or AT. There are some useful pieces of data in the files (however, the data available is pretty basic), but not everyone knows about the Data Browser or doesn't know how to use the Data Browser. Then those people are left to ask around for information or just go off of what they consistently encounter in-game since we don't have visual and concrete evidence yet, so you can't blame 'em. And I don't blame those who are responsible for creating new data tools either; their contributions are by their own volition. No pay, no motivation other than to inform the uninformed and educate the uneducated.

I'm just highlighting why certain points of view exist concerning the armor - AT dynamic, this isn't to say my perspective is right or yours is wrong. Chances are that you and Legion are indeed right, but I haven't seen much of anything concrete to believe it. Truly, the only way to determine the truth of the matter would be to conduct an experiment; have the same 64 players play BF4 and BF1 going through each vanilla map twice on Conquest and compare the results. Not the win/ loss results, but the results concerning land vehicle play which involve infantry kills in tanks, vehicles damage or destroyed by infantry those sort of things. I don't have the resources to conduct said experiment but if someone did I think we could definitively find our answer.
To Aim Assist or not to Aim Assist, that is the question.

Nope. Aim Assist or bust; here's why:

Default Aim Assist Data

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

No Slowdown Data

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


No Auto Rotation Data

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

Prepare your laughbox

the Sebstalder is quiet good since it can 3hit kill at any distanc ,but In my opinion i actually thikn the sweeper is better, its got a really really fast firerate that can beat alll those Noobmaticos, Helregall adn shitguns in close quarters , and its also really accurate out to like l;ong range,. overall great allround gun, jsut my 2$ tho


Posts: 292

Date of registration
: Dec 2nd 2013

Platform: PC

Location: California

Battlelog:

Reputation modifier: 10

  • Send private message

109

Tuesday, March 7th 2017, 4:34am

I can say the same. I don't think we're going to agree on this, but that's usually the case when someone "mains" a thing.
It's not always the case thankfully, I think the world #1 Fighter pilot on BFT actually made a Reddit post saying the Trench Fighter was stupid and suggested completely reasonable nerfs and buffs to all planes to better balance them out relative to each other.

How can we even begin to have an objective discussion about balancing vehicles, when tank drivers adamantly claim AT Rockets are much better at dealing with armor than BF34's Launchers with absolutely no consideration from the current BF1's infantry perspective? The only refutation I've seen glosses over how grossly OP BF4 tanks were, and just ignores how fucking shit BF1's AT options are

@JSLICE20

Instead of conducting a 64 player experiment that is subject to so many variables to make any sort of sensible conclusion, we can simply start with easily replicable data and results.

  • How much does a perpendicular shot with an RPG-7 to the rear of a MBT do? What about with BF1's AT Rocket on the rear of an A7V?
  • What is the minimum amount of damage a poor angle shot will do to a MBT in BF4? With an AT Rocket on an A7V? (Hint; *LOUD RICOCHET NOISES*)
  • How many shots from an RPG-7 does it take to kill a MBT equipped with Active Protection? How many from an AT Rocket against an A7V with Emergency Repair?
  • How long does it take for an Engineer to fire accurately at a MBT 60m away with a RPG-7? 20m away? How long for an Assault with the AT Rocket at 60 and 20m?
  • We can even do experiments that highlight the huge differences between MBTs and A7Vs, like measuring turret turning speed and top speed at highest acceleration.

Chances are, you probably already know these things without actually having to do the hard research and data mining, and the reason why people like me are arguing against the current infantry/vehicle balance

This post has been edited 4 times, last edit by "Ritobasu" (Mar 7th 2017, 4:57am)


Posts: 2,015

Date of registration
: Jan 12th 2014

Platform: PC

Battlelog:

Reputation modifier: 14

  • Send private message

110

Tuesday, March 7th 2017, 5:22am

If you are routinely scoring ricochets in BF1 you're just bad. I only get ricochets at extreme range due to plunging fire against that stupid roof panel. Hell the landship ricochets more often because there is actual incentive to aim other than dead center of mass.

Damage per hit isn't relevant. We've already gone over this. Actually being able to deal damage and not just have it repair monkeyed away is what matters. BF3/BF4 tanks simply didn't get hit, miss rates of >>>50% between dodging and just shooting the lame duck trying to guide his slow ass SRAW were typical. Who cares that dumb drivers sat still for EZ kills. Those dumb drivers get digested by the opposition very quickly.

Trenchfighter is another matter entirely. Darting is exceptionally easy/forgiving and has insane uptime. But at least it's not BF2 level airpower stupid.