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

Zer0Cod3x

Can't get a title

(1,327)

Posts: 1,530

Date of registration
: Dec 23rd 2013

Platform: Xbox One

Location: The Land of Multitudinous Kangaroos

Reputation modifier: 12

  • Send private message

391

Wednesday, March 29th 2017, 2:05pm

I frequently run out of ammo using automatico though.

Is this actually the case, or just negative bias?

Running out of ammo is an infrequent occurrence (for the vast majority of players), and is also quite a negative experience. Thus, it is easily memorable. However, I don't think it happens nearly as frequently as players might remember it to happen.


What does "frequently" mean? Sure, you might run out of ammo once, or even twice in a single game if you're an excellent player. But how does this stack up to your average deaths per game?

Chances are, the number of times you run out of ammo in a game is much, MUCH smaller than the number of times you die per game.

I'm not sure that having more than enough small arms ammo to survive a typical life is a problem even worth fixing.

Support is strong simply deploying it's own gadgets, repairing vehicles, and resupplying other gadgets/grenades.

Put it this way.

Why is a Medic needed after basically every gunfight, and a Support only needed after every 10 gunfights?


Sure, Support's LMGs and own gadgets might be useful in certain scenarios, but this doesn't excuse the fact that ammo, arguably its most important gadget, is mostly useless for the vast majority of players.

Other than the lack of passive regen on things like flare guns exactly what is so bad about Ammo 1.0?

Grenades every 6 s? Having access to a constant supply of ammo being useless?
something something Model 8 bestgun


How to ice an A-91

Next, wanna try adding a guy that you KNOW is bad, and just testing to see that? Example: PP-2000 (god I so wanna love this gun, and yet...)

Example: PP-2000 (god I so wanna love this gun, and yet...)

PP-2000 added. Y'know, it's not that bad....

Yes, it comes in last so far, but that is mostly because I'm making it shoot at 100m ADS - Not Moving as one of the criteria. Even then, between 50-100m Not Moving, when you include Useability, it is only 1.37% worse than the MTAR-21. Within 50m then it even beats the A-91.

Have a look, vs. the A-91 Carbine:




Using it with Muzzle Brake and Compensator is a wash in terms of overall performance. Comp is SLIGHTLY more accurate, while MB is SLIGHTLY more easy to use. Their overall scores are basically tied, with MB just ahead. I guess either can be recommended.

But... You can't be counting for the fact that it takes 9 bullets to kill at "long" range... Don't you dare tell me my A-91 is worse than a 9 BTK 650 RPM mediocre PDW.

Also. Just go heavy barrel. The recoil is low enough.

Well, technically...

Comparing a PP2K with HB and an A-91 with comp and stubby (as you suggested in an earlier post), at 50m not moving, the A-91 is only better by 4 damage per hitrate. While at 75m and 100m, surprisingly the PP2K does better than the A-91 (I'm pretty damn surprised as well).

And 10m and 50m moving the PP2K also does more damage per hitrate than the A-91. At 25m the A-91 is only better by about half a bullet's damage as well.

In addition, the PP2K has a much larger mag size and substantially less recoil. And it looks hella awesome. So comparing the A-91 to a PDW is of some worth after all, as the PP2K is better (technically, not practically) than the A-91.

Mind blown.

I... I...

*cries in a corner*

Zer0Cod3x explained it very well. If you look at the raw numbers right here on Symthic Comparison, you can see how that happened:

A-91 vs PP-2000 | BF4 Weapon Comparison | Symthic

A-91's "23%" RPM advantage only afforded it 1 extra round.

Reload times are wash.

Velocities are wash.

V-Recoil are wash (and this is HBar on PP2k vs. A-91 without).

Hipfire and ADS - Moving are better on the PP2k, but it's a PDW and not the surprising part.

The surprising part is that, as equipped (and we see above that PP2k HBar has almost same V-Recoil as A-91 without HBar so why not?), the PDW performs better at 50 - 100m than a bloody Carbine. Why?

H-Recoil Spread, 0.525 vs. 0.45, advantage PP2k.

SIPS, 42% better on the PP2k.

And here is the most important part. ADS - Not Moving Spread, 0.35 vs. 0.2, 43% improvement.

Without HBar then of course the PP2k loses, which is why when I add all the attachments together for an Overall Ranking, it would slot below the A-91. Run HBar on it, though, then... I'm sorry

@Veritable
@Zer0Cod3x
I... I...
But...
Wha...
I AM HAVING AN EXISTENTIAL CRISIS IN SCHOOL BECAUSE OF YOU TWO.

FUCK YOU NERDS AND YOUR FANCY NUMBERS

SEXY RUSSIAN BULLPUPS FTW.

In all seriousness, thank you both so much for giving me the numbers. I still don't want to accept them. You have led the horse to water. I still need to drink.


Posts: 1,877

Date of registration
: Jan 12th 2014

Platform: PC

Battlelog:

Reputation modifier: 13

  • Send private message

392

Wednesday, March 29th 2017, 2:31pm

First, it's the Community TEST Enviroment. Testing whether these things work out or not is kinda what it's there for.
Also, how exactly are K-Bullet OP on paper? Even with only 1 shot for the rocket gun, an assault will do almost three times the damage(175 base vs ~65 base against an A7V) and it's not much more difficult to land.
With the current CTE stats, a full rocket gun dump will do 525 damage. Then you add another 175 damage every 8s when supplied or every 30s without. Full K-bullet dump is 260 damage with another 65 every 4 seconds or every 20s without a support. As you probably noted, this is all before angle mods. A bit annoying when driving a tank but if they amass enough K-Bullets to kill me, having the same amount of RGs shot at me would be much more concerning.


The sniper is doing half the damage, but for virtually no threat to himself. He doesn't have to prone, can engage further can fire from well behind cover so that you can't easily splash him. He can also dump his damage faster and interrupt repair cycling way better. 3-4 is a major threat, and there are always gaggles of snipers out and about. RGs are comparatively easier to counter fire as well.

After supply is blown, the K bullet is doing almost as much dmg as the RG over time, but in chunks that are twice as fast, and overall from a much safer position.

A sniper with ammo 2.0 can basically interrupt internal repair cycle indefinitely.

Quoted

Why should the fight get easier as it goes on? You'll have to explain that one to me as I think it's completely nonsensical. We are not in a singleplayer game where the player might've selected a difficulty that's too high for them. If they are in over their heads, it's matchmaking that needs to be fixed. All you encourage is having people throw bodies at tanks instead of actually learning how to handle them.


Why should the fight get harder either? Throwing bodies at tanks and overwhelming them is a GREAT way to kill tanks, as it should be.

Quoted

Because the only things that Support brought to the game were repairing and sustained, ranged damage. Their infantry support abilities were completely irrelevant in most situations and broken in others, making a redesign necessary. What you think is a change aimed towards fixing grenade spam is actually a change made to make resupply relevant with grenade spam fix as a secondary goal. And that then necessitates that a support is more valuable for a given amount of assaults than another assault is. Because if it is not then why bother with it? You'd lose burst damage and not gain much in return. Now it's a choice between the additional burst damage of an assault against the sustained damage and manpower efficiency of a support.


I'm failing to see how those are insufficient things. All the recon class brings is BAs and the ability to burst-spot. Why does the support class suddenly need to be a linchpin? The class weapons are already great as are the gadgets. Repairing is bloody amazing.

The only time support resupply is OP is on shitty maps. The easier redesign is to simply not design shitty maps that have 3 chokepoints for 64 players, ie 10 grenade tossers per team, per lane.

Burst damage dominates winning fights against vehicles. All of the time, every time.

Quoted

Because every class should be relevant in every situation. It's not a difficult concept to grasp. Look at medics in BF3/4 and you'll understand.


Opinion /= fact.

Medics are relevant against vehicles, by picking up or healing players that are engaging the tank. They should not be equivalently relevant in all situations, which is what was underpinning Ammo 2.0. Medics in BF3/BF4 were generally target practice for vehicles, just like they are target practice in bF1 and have been target practice for every other BF title.

Quoted

As for resupply stations and similar, it's bad for balance because suddenly, everything depends more on how often you pass by one of these stations rather than than actively resupplying.
Alternatively, and this is the version I prefer, simply use them as a reskin for the passive effects. Put a couple bandages and some ammo in a small crate every 50ish meters and tell the community that being in a certain radius near those enables slow healing and resupply.
Problem is, people start with too much ammo for resupply to be relevant. If you drop their ammo capacity down, they need some way of regaining it without a support. Supports should be there to enhance fighting abilities of nearby allies, not be there to have a fighting chance.
So, use them as cover for systems already in place.


And again, it's the same issue of pulling in two directions. You want to slash ammo so that there is a "point" to having supports around but suddenly you want to make sure they are enhancing only, not required to be able to win.

The two concepts are entirely at odds. Either the shrunken pool of ammo plus passive regen lets players fight just as well as they did before, which means support is still not all that relevant. Or they find themselves more frequently in situations where they don't have the required ammo and need a support to have a "fighting chance". There is no magical middle ground to be had.

Posts: 1,877

Date of registration
: Jan 12th 2014

Platform: PC

Battlelog:

Reputation modifier: 13

  • Send private message

393

Wednesday, March 29th 2017, 2:54pm

Quoted from "Zer0Cod3x"


Is this actually the case, or just negative bias?

Running out of ammo is an infrequent occurrence (for the vast majority of players), and is also quite a negative experience. Thus, it is easily memorable. However, I don't think it happens nearly as frequently as players might remember it to happen.


What does "frequently" mean? Sure, you might run out of ammo once, or even twice in a single game if you're an excellent player. But how does this stack up to your average deaths per game?

Chances are, the number of times you run out of ammo in a game is much, MUCH smaller than the number of times you die per game.


Meh...I can go entire rounds without dying in a tank. Are you telling me I should be beholden to a support player to keep that kill streak going like in the "good old days"?

5-6 kills can run an automatico dry if they aren't from dumping on a group of tight nit guys from behind. Hardly an outrageous scenario.


Quoted

Put it this way.

Why is a Medic needed after basically every gunfight, and a Support only needed after every 10 gunfights?


You only need a medic every firefight if you die or if its an indecisive fight that didn't end enemy presence on a flag.

Quoted

Sure, Support's LMGs and own gadgets might be useful in certain scenarios, but this doesn't excuse the fact that ammo, arguably its most important gadget, is mostly useless for the vast majority of players.


That's because other than grenades there is nothing worth spamming in BF1. Prior titles had stingers that needed spamming (from inside helo), javelins, C4 that was actually good, rifle/ub grenades/ub rockets, specialist grenades/mines, etc, etc, etc.

The issue is gadget meta.

Quoted

Grenades every 6 s? Having access to a constant supply of ammo being useless?


Only an issue on the shittiest of the maps. Even if you shrunk the ammo pool to like 2 mags per life, with an average KDR of about 1. It still wouldn't matter for most players.

And most importantly: running out of ammo is not fun when you can't reliably get it resupplied.

VincentNZ

Holy War? No Thanks.

(2,088)

Posts: 2,584

Date of registration
: Jul 25th 2013

Platform: PC

Battlelog:

Reputation modifier: 14

  • Send private message

394

Wednesday, March 29th 2017, 3:24pm



Why is a Medic needed after basically every gunfight, and a Support only needed after every 10 gunfights?


Sure, Support's LMGs and own gadgets might be useful in certain scenarios, but this doesn't excuse the fact that ammo, arguably its most important gadget, is mostly useless for the vast majority of players.


Just to chime in on that particular point: The reason you would need a medic more is simple. It is because TTK increased across the board, many weapons are not suited well for the engagements you have, all the while you are put under pressure from far aaway snipers. So you generally have more damage dealt to you at all times, so you need more time to heal up, which will just get worse from kill to kill likely. Also explosives have received a huge buff putting further damage on you.
In BF4 one would be able to get a flank going with three kills and nothing but some scratches, mostly regardless of weapon or class. That is just the logical result of the stat changes in BF1 now though, that this does not work any longer.

So comparing the need for a support class and ammo to the heal from the medic class is a bit off.

I never considered running out of ammo a negative thing either. It was an indicator of how good you were at that current run. Still I was always happy when a support was around, and personally always got a lot of points from resupplying. I never felt dependant on the support class at all, I was functioning well on my own, but having a support around was still convenient.
The only gripe I had with it was the increased resupply time for launchers that they introduced late in the game cycle, becasue that actively hurt me as a support and passively as an engineer. So from then on resupplies really dropped. You were better off taking up the kit of the engi next to you to fight that tank.

Posts: 204

Date of registration
: Apr 5th 2012

Platform: PS4

Location: Here

Battlelog:

Reputation modifier: 8

  • Send private message

395

Wednesday, March 29th 2017, 6:08pm

Why not make the support class itself function as the ammo box in an AOE rather than have to carry a box that takes a gadget slot? This would allow them to carry an additional useful gadget and could be balanced through a slower resupply rate and by the support only being able to self resupply primary weapon ammo. I think this would make support a more relevant and desirable class choice overall.

VincentNZ

Holy War? No Thanks.

(2,088)

Posts: 2,584

Date of registration
: Jul 25th 2013

Platform: PC

Battlelog:

Reputation modifier: 14

  • Send private message

396

Wednesday, March 29th 2017, 6:20pm

Yeah but that opens up other cans of worms, like a flock of assaults following the support so that the resupply does not get aborted. Then of course you would have to think about the radius of the support in which he resupplies. An ammo crate thrown by a support is a stationary thing, while the support will very likely be out and about after a couple of seconds. So for full potential you would still have people camping the Support instead of the crate, or, even worse, the support would need to camp the asaults. :D

Also I would not want to encourage loadouts without any teamwork value any further. Supports running with the Limpet and the Mortar should not be a more common sight.

Posts: 204

Date of registration
: Apr 5th 2012

Platform: PS4

Location: Here

Battlelog:

Reputation modifier: 8

  • Send private message

397

Wednesday, March 29th 2017, 6:33pm

Or, if the idea were properly fleshed out, it could encourage squads/teams to stick together more while making the support player feel like they could make more meaningful contributions to the team. This kind of goes back to the 'fun' aspect of the game. Right now, a support can bring ammo and a wrench in an optimal selfless role but will have a much less fun time doing so. Why not make it more fun to play support by being able to use other gadgets while still serving that purpose by being the guy everyone wants to have around?

This post has been edited 1 times, last edit by "hxsolo" (Mar 29th 2017, 7:03pm)


Posts: 3,429

Date of registration
: Mar 19th 2014

Platform: Xbox One

Location: Canada

Battlelog:

Reputation modifier: 15

  • Send private message

398

Thursday, March 30th 2017, 1:07am

I think one of the flaws in the thinking behind 2.0 is that it defines Support as being Ammo. Support has MGs, the repair gadget, and indirect fire weapons too. It's one of the most diverse, jack-of-all-trades classes in terms of roles; Ammo gadgets don't have to be relevant at literally all times. Most other gadgets aren't relevant at all times either anyway.

Ammo and Health are not directly equatable, and they were never supposed to be. Medic is "more relevant" with Health than Support is with Ammo because that's about all Medic actually does. Medic may be the best infantry-killing class and has powerful revive and healing abilities... but relative the SMGs and MGs, SLRs are far more unforgiving and lack the same suppressive/mag dump ability and are more focused to specific ranges and roles, while Medic is also effectively worthless for AT purposes.

Yeah, you can say that Medic can be relevant to AT by proxy, though reviving/healing AT players, but it only has that high degree of relevance because that's the only way it's relevant. Support's Ammo doesn't need to be as powerful in AT situations to the same degree because Support has much stronger and a wider variety of AT options than Medic does.

Medic may be an uber-powerful healer, but he's basically only that. Support has a much wider variety of abilities and buffs, and therefore each of those are not going to be as strong as Medic's healing potential.



Ammo does not need to be relevant in every situation and engagement, Support does.
Who has fun, wins.

VincentNZ

Holy War? No Thanks.

(2,088)

Posts: 2,584

Date of registration
: Jul 25th 2013

Platform: PC

Battlelog:

Reputation modifier: 14

  • Send private message

399

Thursday, March 30th 2017, 1:32am

I would say though that Ammo is still the most defining gadget. It is the basic team value. Of course the support also does stuff like fire support, but that is value hard to measure. But I agree, the secondary gadget is definitely the thing that completes the class.

Posts: 1,877

Date of registration
: Jan 12th 2014

Platform: PC

Battlelog:

Reputation modifier: 13

  • Send private message

400

Thursday, March 30th 2017, 4:34am

I would say though that Ammo is still the most defining gadget. It is the basic team value. Of course the support also does stuff like fire support, but that is value hard to measure. But I agree, the secondary gadget is definitely the thing that completes the class.
That's only because support as an ammo spammer has been a contrivance drilled in over 5 of the 7 titles where many of them have made the support shitty in direct combat. BFV had a far more nebulous class system where stuff you consider support was rolled into the "engineer", and AT and medic were rolled into the "heavy" class. Every one of those titles has had idiosyncratic twists on their vision of support too. For eg 2142 giving support the shotgun, etc. BF1 rolling engineer into assault + support. etc.

BF1 support is clearly not designed to be defined by ammo supply, just as the medic is not defined by either the syringe or the medpack because the game lets you spawn equipped with no ammo, or without one of the medical gadgets. In BF3 with the potency of the paddles there was zero reason to run medpack imo. Just let them die and revive gang through fights.

In BF1 Ammo free loadout for dedicated repair guys is ideal for eg. You don't need anything but xbow and wrench. If your shooting your lmg at all enough to run it dry your doing vehicle support wrong.