CTE Battlefield Roots Initiative - Page 14 - Battlefield 1: CTE Discussion

JSLICE20

(2,444)

Posts: 3,292

Date of registration
: Apr 26th 2013

Platform: PS4

Location: Arizona, USA

Reputation modifier: 15

131

Wednesday, March 8th 2017, 9:54am

This is Beginning to Become a Thing in this Thread Now

Quoted from "Oscar"

Even though RPG/SMAW reload time is 50%+ slower than rocket gun 3.15 vs 4.6-5. The "potential" of a rear shot dealing up to 49/55 damage makes them superior choices.

Is this where I say that no good Tanker will allow you to do that, because APS/Smokescreen existed, 360Â° rotating turrets, etc etc?

Quoted from "Oscar"

Rear and even side multipliers are not a factor if we're talking good Tankers, because you'll be dispatched with at most having shot once. And the Arsenal of grenades fills the "role" of punishing overly aggressive Tankers that get too close (and ~45m isn't even that close).

Excuse my French but I'm going to be completely blunt: I don't give a flying fuck about skilled tankers. That's right, I said 'fuck.' Skilled tankers are going to do well regardless of the tools they have because skilled players have the tendency to be smart when it comes to their craft meaning they know the inherent benefits and liabilities and can form a playstyle accordingly. This is why I'm saying the skill floor is too low for vehicles; all a tank has to do right now is sit comfortably outside an objective to meaningfully contribute to the match because the long range AT projectile is prone to garbage damage at weird angles. A lot of the time it just isn't manageable to reposition for a good 90Â° hit which will only do 17 damage. Have fun with that.

Who cares about reload times when it comes to BF4's launchers? You could engage and disengage very quickly because there was no need to deploy them which made the reloads a non-issue.

Here's some more data for your "enjoyment":

45Â°, 1.00x multiplier shots with the SMAW, RPG, and Rocket Gun will do 200, 225, and 150 damage to a 1000 HP tank. SMAWs and RPGs have a default rocket surplus of 4 while the Rocket Gun only has 3. With all rockets expended we're looking at 1000, 1125, and 600 total possible damage. The time to expend all rockets is 25s, 24s, and 12.6s. Technically, the Rocket Gun still has better DPS at 47.6 than the SMAW at 40 or the RPG at 46.8, but if you happen to survive even until or after that 4th rocket you're left to find ammo to continue that marginally better DPS. Also keep in mind this is the 1.00x multiplier DPS. The RPG and SMAW will skyrocket well past the Rocket Gun's crap damage multipliers at sharper angles since a measly ~160 and ~170 damage is the best you can do past that though.

Honestly, if we didn't have to deploy the Rocket Gun I would have no problem but that's not going to happen. Therefore the only solution is to alter some other component(s) as a compromise.

Quoted from "Oscar"

It still does 0.01%+ to stop an internal repair cycle but otherwise punishes poor aim. You can angle your vehicle in the same fashion you could do in previous titles to reduce incoming damage, but vehicles don't turn fast enough to make it so that you can reliably turn incoming fire into ricochets. There's also plenty of damage sources against vehicles that don't rely on angles (dynamite, any grenade, mines, Limpet charges).

Rocket Guns are only really necessary for long range AT capabilities or when you have expended your close range AT gadgets. At 60m+, ricochets are going to happen a-whole-damn-lot more than you think. It gives an attentive tanker about half a second+ to react to that, which, granted, isn't a whole lot but it's enough to screw up a decently angled shot.

I find it utterly hilarious that you listed off the close range AT tools. They aren't projectile based, so of course they're not going to have any angle multipliers. Oh and newsflash, these REQUIRE for the tank to be in CLOSE RANGE to do damage with these tools. Up close That's the whole friggen' point we're trying to make here. I get that infantry have some pretty deadly close range AT armaments at their disposal, but when do you ever find a tanker that's aggressively pushing a bunch of infantry that isn't totally brain dead? When? He's going to get shit on because a majority of the AT equipment in this game focuses on close range. It makes sense for them to play a ranged role because the Rocket Gun, being the ONLY long range AT gadget besides the HE Mortar (and don't make me laugh with a mention of the HE crossbow or rifle grenade), does pitiful damage at range especially when that bread-box shaped piece of shit rotates from side to side when shifting to different targets.

Quoted from "Oscar"

And of course "vehicles in vantage positions" being a problem to deal with, which was the same in previous titles. I'm not even going to go over to why your examples of tanks on D Fao C-D Edge are shit, mayvin already touched on it a bit and it seems you didn't bother to read what he wrote.

BF4 didn't have a lot of elevation changes in terrain that allowed tanks perfect sight lines onto objectives in the base game though. I mean shit, they were all pretty flat as hell concerning topography, and even if I'm neglecting one or two examples they weren't situated over objectives. Unlike BF1.

Yeah, like you're one to accuse another of not reading what another wrote...

Quoted from "TheMightyVoice"

I actually fucked up when I said A7V, I meant to say landship. It was quite late at night. Aside from that, is a lower skill floor on infantry farming vehicles the worst possible thing? It simply makes the game more accessible while reducing the negative impact of having inexperienced players on your (or the enemy) team.

Ah, I see. Even so, the A7V is a force multiplier when you think about it.
Having gunners does provide an advantage that would be gone otherwise, therefore force multiplier.

I really, really don't want a powerful asset that can be effectively used by everyone and their mother. Tanks should not be easy to use, they just shouldn't. They contain the most powerful and efficient anti-infantry and anti-armor weaponry while having the most health and survivability of anything on the ground. So yes, having this system in place is the worst possible thing. It's bad enough that you have to worry about pro tankers roaming about who really know what they are doing and it's flat out obnoxious and infuriating when Joe Schmo can hop into one and just be slightly less effective than Mr. Tankwhore.

Quoted from "TheMightyVoice"

I assume with your "flat 20 damage" bit you mean AT rocket gun, but I don't think you're in the right with that, to be quite honest. 20 minimum damage, assuming you don't miss any shots, means you can do 80% do a tank without resupply or even using any other gadgets or weapons as long as you don't let them repair.

Oh no no no no, you misunderstand. I've detailed before that any damage increase would have to reflect a reduction somewhere else and I figured ammo count would be appropriate. A 1.00x minimum of 20 with a max of 22 (the same separation as the current 15-17 damage range) would be offset by removing the 4th rocket which holds a similar damage output: 13-17 with 4 rockets = 52-68 and 18-22 with 3 rockets = 54-66. The total damage output remains relatively unchanged but the DPS is increased. That seems more reasonable, yeah?

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

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

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

 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

Quoted from "Zer0Cod3x"

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

My "Contributions"

Gun Sway Modifiers (Hidden Attachments in Variants)
Gadget, Stationary, and Vehicle Weaponry Stats (Pre-Official)

This post has been edited 2 times, last edit by "JSLICE20" (Mar 8th 2017, 11:03am)

Legion

Moderator

(1,520)

Posts: 440

Date of registration
: Apr 14th 2012

Platform: PC

Location: Germany

Battlelog:

Reputation modifier: 12

132

Wednesday, March 8th 2017, 10:17pm

@JSlice
The reason we bring up skilled tankers is to contrast them to those who barely know about the vehicle and can thus barely utilise a fraction of its capabilities. And it is painfully obvious that most of the people in this thread have never fought with or against a decent tank player. The kind that can dodge an RPG launched 10m away from him if he sees the engineer who's about to fire it.
For the rocket gun, there is no projectile that would have trouble getting 5th place in a snail race, there is no massive trail that tells you exactly where the shooter is hiding and the sounds are much quieter from a tank perspective, letting it blend into the surrounding noise. From a DPS perspective, it is already in the same ballpark as BF4 launchers for side shots, worse for rear shots but much stronger for frontal shots. It is worse primarily in 2 aspects, burst damage and the requirement to use a bipod. For burst damage, you add a couple more assaults and that's it. Or you use grenades, as already implied earlier in this thread.

@Ritobasu
What you seem to have forgotten is that angle modifiers in BF4 were quite unkind, even to the rear shots you are so fond of. A BF4 tank had an angle modifier of 0.9 for poor angle shots on every side and it reached that fairly quickly. Meaning that for everything but perfectly perpendicular shots, BF4 AT damage is actually much lower than you imply. And to be more specific, it meant that your rockets would hit for 21 damage for a shot to the rear in most realistic situations.
Additionally, you overestimate the amount of time that an RPG/SMAW reload cancel shaved off, underestimate how finicky the timing for it is and you forgot that if you fail to properly do, your reload is actually longer than before. Not to mention that for you, people are apparently good enough at RPGing that they can reliably hit that timing but so bad at tanks that the only way they could perform worse is by afking, which is at best untruthful.

@Iwo Jima
There are no assumptions in my post. There are possibilities in there with a note that it won't work quite as well in realistic situations. Though, after some calculations, a group of 5 players can heavily damage a plane fairly quickly even if they have terrible accuracy.
Also, I have seen it happen in public. As my calculations would imply, the plane died fairly quickly.
Additionally, anti armor threats were more significant at close range in all 3 games. In BF4, the only thing that could contest a tank at long range was an attack helicopter as everything else was dodged or spoofed.
You are also ignoring that farming infantry has been the best way to utilise tanks since BF3 as it allows your infantry to push up and take an objective.

Bro of Oscar, the gentleman ninja
Rules. Read them, follow them.

Quoted

[22:09:20] Failure117: Legion: Tank Expert and Pokemon Afficianado

[16:21:16] Oscar Perez Lijo: In soviet russia legion is top poster

JSLICE20

(2,444)

Posts: 3,292

Date of registration
: Apr 26th 2013

Platform: PS4

Location: Arizona, USA

Reputation modifier: 15

133

Thursday, March 9th 2017, 12:59am

Quoted from "Legion"

@JSlice
The reason we bring up skilled tankers is to contrast them to those who barely know about the vehicle and can thus barely utilise a fraction of its capabilities.And it is painfully obvious that most of the people in this thread have never fought with or against a decent tank player. The kind that can dodge an RPG launched 10m away from him if he sees the engineer who's about to fire it.

I understand the reasoning for comparing the skilled to the un-skilled. If you've seen any of my posts regarding infantry play, specifically in reference to the Model 8, you'll see what I'm talking about.
Well yeah, I've already stated at least once that I never ever encountered a tanker who could easily dodge dumb fires. This simply was not a facet that I had to deal with, so I don't know what pure hell dealing with these mofos actually presented. I'm thankful to have been able to avoid it, and it was probably due to being on PS4 where ultra pro tankers weren't as commonplace or in my case basically non-existent.

Quoted from "Legion"

For the rocket gun, there is no projectile that would have trouble getting 5th place in a snail race, there is no massive trail that tells you exactly where the shooter is hiding and the sounds are much quieter from a tank perspective, letting it blend into the surrounding noise.

I don't deny that the Rocket Gun is superior in some aspects, but the absolute biggest detriment to its effectiveness is having to deploy the damn thing. And sometimes when you try to deploy it onto a capable surface and try to ADS it just NOPEs you. Repeatedly. Or the times you dive to go prone and your dumbass soldier pops back up again like a gopher out of a hole for no apparent reason other than to troll you. I get these are glitches, but they severely multiply the already present vulnerability leaving an extra second or two to get domed by a Scout. It lacks severe usability, and I'm not talking usability as in ease of use, just practical utility in general. It simply sucks as a long range AT device.

Quoted from "Legion"

From a DPS perspective, it is already in the same ballpark as BF4 launchers for side shots, worse for rear shots but much stronger for frontal shots. It is worse primarily in 2 aspects, burst damage and the requirement to use a bipod. For burst damage, you add a couple more assaults and that's it. Or you use grenades, as already implied earlier in this thread.

Grenades aren't going to be 100% reliable at long range, the range I already explicitly stated that the Rocket Gun is really only necessary for unless you already blew your grenade load earlier, haven't resupplied yet, and now have to resort to using it for close range AT damage if or when applicable. Through having the same multipliers on all sides of the tank there is no incentive to try and flank it, especially if a bunch of infantry are nearby. You might as well bite the bullet and just go for any shot that you can get, stand up and dance around to reload, and plant your ass back down to maintain DPS and fire as many rockets you can muster before getting blown to smithereens or shot to shreds.

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

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

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

 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

Quoted from "Zer0Cod3x"

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

My "Contributions"

Gun Sway Modifiers (Hidden Attachments in Variants)
Gadget, Stationary, and Vehicle Weaponry Stats (Pre-Official)

This post has been edited 2 times, last edit by "JSLICE20" (Mar 9th 2017, 5:49am) with the following reason: Spelling, grammar; general items that proofreading would be good for...

Spectacle

(586)

Posts: 1,236

Date of registration
: Dec 7th 2011

Platform: PC

Battlelog:

Reputation modifier: 12

134

Thursday, March 9th 2017, 8:09am

If these "skilled tankers" are so rare that nobody has actually seen them, even when they are long term players with hundreds of hours in Battlefield, it would be absolutely silly to balance the game around them.

bob

NoctyrneSAGA

PvF 2017 Champion

(10,345)

Posts: 7,304

Date of registration
: Apr 3rd 2012

Platform: PC

Battlelog:

Reputation modifier: 19

135

Thursday, March 9th 2017, 8:19am

Do we need to revisit again why the game needs to be balanced around high-level players that actually know what they're doing?

Or are we actually fine with letting them run around dominating as they please?

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?

Quoted from "blahdy"

If it flies, it diesÂ.

Spectacle

(586)

Posts: 1,236

Date of registration
: Dec 7th 2011

Platform: PC

Battlelog:

Reputation modifier: 12

136

Thursday, March 9th 2017, 9:03am

If they really are as rare that you might only encounter them once or twice in your battlefield career then I see no problem with letting them dominate, they deserve it.

When balancing a game like Battlefield you should take the top 0.5% of players into consideration, not the 0.005%. If BF was an e-sports game it would be different, but it's not.

bob

Ritobasu

(1,065)

Posts: 292

Date of registration
: Dec 2nd 2013

Platform: PC

Location: California

Battlelog:

Reputation modifier: 10

137

Thursday, March 9th 2017, 9:27am

Quoted

What you seem to have forgotten is that angle modifiers in BF4 were quite unkind, even to the rear shots you are so fond of. A BF4 tank had an angle modifier of 0.9 for poor angle shots on every side and it reached that fairly quickly. Meaning that for everything but perfectly perpendicular shots, BF4 AT damage is actually much lower than you imply. And to be more specific, it meant that your rockets would hit for 21 damage for a shot to the rear in most realistic situations.

A modifier of 0.9 and 18-20 damage for poor angle rear shots, while the same thing in BF1 gets you 0.2 modifier and 3 damage? On top of lower base damage (15% AT Rocket vs 20% SMAW & 22.5% RPG), and cumbersome bipod deployment?

There's absolutely no way any sane AT person would opt for BF1's system, even with all the benefits you listed of better velocity, less visibility, and better theoretical DPS assuming AT crews are allowed to sit perfectly still. EVEN with all the advantages of BF4 MBT's mobility and fancy bells/whistles, and the "disadvantages" of BF1's A7V ("disadvantages" in quotation marks, because they also get buffed in ways MBTs didn't).

Quoted

Additionally, you overestimate the amount of time that an RPG/SMAW reload cancel shaved off, underestimate how finicky the timing for it is and you forgot that if you fail to properly do, your reload is actually longer than before. Not to mention that for you, people are apparently good enough at RPGing that they can reliably hit that timing but so bad at tanks that the only way they could perform worse is by afking, which is at best untruthful.

Again, the video that I linked says that it's a simple matter of switching weapons as soon as the ammo counter goes from 0 to 1. You are also not factoring in the awkward pause from letting the reload animation of launchers fully play out before you can actually fire. I honestly wish I had BF4 installed so I could record webms to demonstrate how much time it shaves off, because you clearly underestimate how much of a difference a full second or even a fraction of a second matters.

Quoted

You are also ignoring that farming infantry has been the best way to utilise tanks since BF3 as it allows your infantry to push up and take an objective.

This is a fundamentally flawed way to utilize tanks, something that even Tankmayvin would vehemently disagree with, and it demonstrates an unfortunately common lack of understanding of the purpose vehicles have and should serve.

Vehicles are tools to be utilized to support their team in any way possible to help secure objectives. If that means sitting on a hill overlooking a broad path to multiple objectives and destroying anything that tries to cross, then yes, farming infantry is one way to contribute to your team's victory. But it also means spearheading an assault and providing your own infantry cover so they can help capture or defend points, something that I used to see a lot of "tank pros" avoid doing and instead complain that their team is useless and point to their own kill count for vindication.

Me and my friends (one of which was formerly World #1 Engineer in BF4 and a BF veteran) would always joke about seeing someone like RussianPaladin or a vehicle main on the opposite team, and call out that their team was going to lose. More often than not, we were right. Vehicle mains who spend all game farming infantry but refusing to actively help contest points were simply putting a huge burden on their infantry teammates, because all his victims would end up spawning at points over and over, preventing any capture. Again, let me quote Tankmayvin:

Quoted from "tankmayvin"

Back camping tanks are largely irrelevant in altering the course of a match since they aren't going to be farming enough kills to make up for a deficient map presence.

Proper use of tanks in BF has always required methodical flag pushing and interdiction. If you do that in BF1 in most maps, you're going to get grenades chucked at you.

The only time vehicle mains actually prevailed was if they were fighting a team that was too frightened to move and fight back. Not exceptionally hard, since even the average pub would try to spawn somewhere else where the tank wasn't or go Engineer to retaliate. AT options were much stronger all around, and despite what you continue to repeat over and over about professional tank drivers dodging 10m rockets, let me refer back to Tankmayvin once more:

Quoted

Proper use of tanks in BF has always required methodical flag pushing and interdiction. If you do that in... most maps, you're going to get grenades [or RPG/SMAW/Launchers] chucked at you.

Time and time again, I'm sensing that nobody wants to talk about the core issues (massive AT gadget downgrades, massive tank upgrades like ricochets/Emergency Repair) a few of us are bringing up. Instead, we get hear horror stories about how BF34's tanks were untouchable (they weren't) and that BF1 infantry have a far easier time dealing with BF1's tanks (they don't).

NoctyrneSAGA

PvF 2017 Champion

(10,345)

Posts: 7,304

Date of registration
: Apr 3rd 2012

Platform: PC

Battlelog:

Reputation modifier: 19

138

Thursday, March 9th 2017, 10:34am

Quoted from "Ritobasu"

This is a fundamentally flawed way to utilize tanks, something that even Tankmayvin would vehemently disagree with, and it demonstrates an unfortunately common lack of understanding of the purpose vehicles have and should serve.

Vehicles are tools to be utilized to support their team in any way possible to help secure objectives. If that means sitting on a hill overlooking a broad path to multiple objectives and destroying anything that tries to cross, then yes, farming infantry is one way to contribute to your team's victory. But it also means spearheading an assault and providing your own infantry cover so they can help capture or defend points, something that I used to see a lot of "tank pros" avoid doing and instead complain that their team is useless and point to their own kill count for vindication.

Funny you should mention that since tankmayvin has historically referred to armor as a way to farm infantry.

Yes, he goes on to objectives to do the farming.

Where else would you go farm?

And even if you killed enemies not on an objective, tanks send them to the respawn screen quickly and efficiently. Enemies cannot capture or defend objectives from there. They cannot heal or resupply teammates from there. The enemy cannot do anything from the respawn screen.

That is why farming is so valuable even if you don't go directly on to an objective.

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?

Quoted from "blahdy"

If it flies, it diesÂ.

JSLICE20

(2,444)

Posts: 3,292

Date of registration
: Apr 26th 2013

Platform: PS4

Location: Arizona, USA

Reputation modifier: 15

139

Thursday, March 9th 2017, 3:58pm

Quoted from "NoctyrneSAGA"

That is why farming is so valuable even if you don't go directly on to an objective.

Which is also why being able to farm so effectively WELL OUTSIDE of an objective is causing problems. Because the most potent AT gadgets cannot reach these tanks when on or near said objectives. And, well, I'm sure you've seen all the comments pertaining to the Rocket Gun. To summarize, it's trash.

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

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

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

 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

Quoted from "Zer0Cod3x"

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

My "Contributions"

Gun Sway Modifiers (Hidden Attachments in Variants)
Gadget, Stationary, and Vehicle Weaponry Stats (Pre-Official)

Iwo_Jima

(339)

Posts: 460

Date of registration
: Mar 25th 2014

Platform: PC

Battlelog:

Reputation modifier: 8

140

Thursday, March 9th 2017, 7:49pm

Quoted from "JSLICE20"

Quoted from "NoctyrneSAGA"

That is why farming is so valuable even if you don't go directly on to an objective.

And, well, I'm sure you've seen all the comments pertaining to the Rocket Gun. To summarize, it's trash.

Not if a squad of 5 assaultplayers uses it and survive long enough and little to no ricochets happen and, and, and...

Same debate with the airplanes. Squad of communicating thus coÃ¶rdinating supportplayers can bring them down fast and easy, no biggie!

/s

Meanwhile on the publics, it's a whole different story. I've never seen both happen in my BF1 lifetime. But that's anecdotal, so idk right?

RIP Sraw

This is Beginning to Become a Thing in this Thread Now

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

Default Aim Assist Data

Source code

No Slowdown Data

Source code

No Auto Rotation Data

Source code

Prepare your laughbox

My "Contributions"

Quoted

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

Default Aim Assist Data

Source code

No Slowdown Data

Source code

No Auto Rotation Data

Source code

Prepare your laughbox

My "Contributions"

Quoted

Quoted

Quoted

Quoted

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

Default Aim Assist Data

Source code

No Slowdown Data

Source code

No Auto Rotation Data

Source code

Prepare your laughbox

My "Contributions"

Similar threads