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.

## CTE Battlefield Roots Initiative

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: 74

Date of registration
: Sep 17th 2013

Platform: Xbox One

Location: Richmond, VA

Battlelog:

Reputation modifier: 6

Tuesday, March 7th 2017, 6:38am

My last post was definintly through a haze of terrible games won't lie, but there is an issue with tank damage output v. damage taken and right now going after tanks feels worthelss more often than not.

Posts: 274

Date of registration
: Dec 2nd 2013

Platform: PC

Location: Nepped On

Battlelog:

Reputation modifier: 9

Tuesday, March 7th 2017, 7:05am

### Quoted from "tankmayvin"

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.
Ricochets happen absurdly often enough when just fighting the communist box car A7V. Hell, I can even exploit ricochets when I manage to get a hold of an A7V and drive one myself if I know where the rockets and shells are coming from. This is all aside from the fact that ricochets even fucking exist in the first place for the very first time in a BF title, when they could've just done poor angle damage modifiers instead. For what fucking purpose? So our 18 damage AT Rockets can do 2 damage if the driver even so much turns to point his cannon at another sniper? Yeah sure, just let me reposition by getting out of bipoded prone position, sprint to a more favorable angle, prone and wait 1 second for the bipod to deploy, awkardly stand back up b/c the game wants me to do so, and reprone to deploy and shoot again

You are sincerely missing the point we are making, that BF1's infantry AT options are incredibly fucking difficult to utilize with less damage output compared to their previous counterparts. Nobody here disagrees with you that the A7V is a complete piece of shit compared to the M1 Abrams. But guess what? BF34's launchers didn't require an awkward use of a bipod, could be shoulder fired from peeking around corners extremely quickly, had the potential to deal mobility crits and massive rear attack damage, none of which is possible with the AT Rocket. The P O T E N T I A L. And trust me, all these advantages and potential were used quite often on MBTs despite your claim of a >50% hit rate on tank drivers, even with their super acceleration and 360 rotating turrets, because the only tanks that me and my friends ever had problems hitting were ones so preoccupied with their KDR that they didn't want to go near our objectives

This post by "JSLICE20" (Tuesday, March 7th 2017, 7:45am) has been deleted by the author himself (Tuesday, March 7th 2017, 9:44am) with the following reason: Information is incorrect.

Posts: 3,291

Date of registration
: Apr 26th 2013

Platform: PS4

Location: Arizona, USA

Reputation modifier: 15

Tuesday, March 7th 2017, 10:53am

### Source code

1
2
3
4
5
6
7

            0°      45°     60°     75°     90°
MBT Front   0.90x   1.00x   1.08x   1.17x   1.25x
MBT Side    0.90x   1.00x   1.12x   1.33x   1.65x
MBT Rear    0.90x   1.00x   1.33x   2.22x   2.45x
MBT Top     0.90x   1.00x   1.30x   1.65x   1.65x
IFV         0.75x   0.92x   0.95x   1.10x   1.38x
FAC         0.90x   1.00x   1.15x   1.30x   1.45x

Battlefield 1 is indeed a different game, but I 'm pretty sure angle multipliers were recycled for the heavy tank, at least a couple.

So far I've seen anything from 13-17 damage for hits with the Rocket Gun against heavy armor. Specifically: 13, 14, 15, 16, and finally 17. So I was incorrect in thinking that 21 damage was capable. 17 is the max damage as indicated by the max damage hitmarker which I have set to the color blue. The default damage of the Rocket Gun is 150 (15; or with other values divided by 10 for the UI's representation) which has been very consistent as the 45.X°-59.X° angle in past Battlefield titles. I would postulate that it's safe to assume this angle provides a 1.00x damage multiplier in BF1 as well.

150 damage and a 1.00x multiplier is our base. Starting with ~130, the multiplier could be anywhere from 0.84x - 0.89x, ~140 from 0.9x - 0.96x, ~160 from 1.04x - 1.09x, and ~170 from 1.1x - 1.6x. All are assuming the decimal is limited to tenths and not hundredths.
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

### My "Contributions"

This post has been edited 1 times, last edit by "JSLICE20" (Mar 7th 2017, 2:05pm)

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

Tuesday, March 7th 2017, 2:06pm

So I just went a played in a tank to test some things. I ended up going on a 27 killstreak in an A7V Assault on Empire's Edge. A fairly average killstreak for me, neither really good nor really bad. I was mainly doing the BCD flag run, never quite made it to F. It was quite a close match, but we ended up losing by about 30 tickets. Here are some of my reflections from that match:

- It's really, REALLY easy to kite an A7V. Ask the Scout I played ring-around-the-rosie with for a good 30 seconds circling a rock before giving up.

- Whilst an experienced tanker isn't very likely going to overextend and get himself killed, it really doesn't take too much to get him to back off to repair, which is as good as him being dead. This might just be an overly cautious playstyle on my part, I don't really know, but I find that after taking two AT grenade/Rocket Gun hits, I end up retreating to repair. You might think that "oO, how are you getting hit in the first place, you're just a bad tanker?" Which leads me to my third point:

- The limited FoV on the A7V is actually quite hindering. There were plenty of times in that match I was simply getting hit from across the map, especially when pushing C and getting hit from the hillside and D. There's no time to take care of that threat because of the enemies in front of you.

- Whilst the sightlines are quite long in some places, the hill up to C and D forces you to bring your tank into the range of AT grenades (and dynamite at one time). Likewise, sitting outside of B and farming the enemy's spawn doesn't actually achieve anything, as the enemy just keeps spawning, and eventually you'll run out of ammo. You actually need to sit on the flag with your tank, which again, brings you into the range of AT grenades and dynamite. Unless, of course, you can convince the blueberries to cap the flag whilst you farm kills, to which all I can say is good luck.

Some of this might just be me being bad. However, I would also consider myself to be at least an above average tanker. Of course, this was all purely anecdotal, but I don't think it's that far from the truth.
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 1 times, last edit by "Zer0Cod3x" (Mar 7th 2017, 2:12pm)

Salt Miner

Posts: 3,511

Date of registration
: Mar 19th 2014

Platform: Xbox One