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

401

Thursday, March 30th 2017, 1:48pm




@marbleduck

Small correction to your Latin pronunciation: in "argumentum ad verecundiam," it's pronounced "ver-ey-cundiam", not "ver-a-cundiam." Just letting you know, because you seem to care about those things.
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

402

Thursday, March 30th 2017, 2:34pm




@marbleduck

Small correction to your Latin pronunciation: in "argumentum ad verecundiam," it's pronounced "ver-ey-cundiam", not "ver-a-cundiam." Just letting you know, because you seem to care about those things.
Meh....

Just repeating the same opinion positions under the pretense that doing so gets them accepted as fact.

You know what I think is stupid? Trying to curb the paradigm of maximizing burst damage against a mobile, high HP, mostly fixed-chunk DPS monster thingy.

Bursting successfully will always work best because it limits the number chunks the tank can throw out. With decaying global pools for failed attempts sans support all that happens is that an extra punishment has been added when a burst fails.

It just totally fails my "will this be more fun" test for what is a huge part of the game meta.

I'm totally on board with ammo 2.0 for making ammo management more relevant although I debate that it would make the game more fun.

I'm totally not on board with the support needed to make assault fight tanks thing, nor am I on board with defining support meta exclusively by supplying ammo. Support was shit for this very reason in a bunch of prior titles. Medic meta would be shit if they were defined by healing/reviving but had shot for guns as well.

VincentNZ

Holy War? No Thanks.

(2,088)

Posts: 2,577

Date of registration
: Jul 25th 2013

Platform: PC

Battlelog:

Reputation modifier: 14

  • Send private message

403

Thursday, March 30th 2017, 6:07pm

Yeah, I agree. I mean he presents his opinion well enough, but there is nothing more to it, his personal interpretation in his usual form. Well informed and slightly insulting. :D

I also do not see the problem why three assaults doing burst damage on a tank should not be viable. Furthermore I do not see why one would think that it is a jolly good idea to make someone lose his ammo after he just died for fighting a superior opponent. Where is the carrot on the stick there?

Then, while everybody who would support ammo 2.0 finds resupplying at a crate for 20+ seconds when he runs out is unbearable and unfun, how fun would it be to spawn and then needing to find a support or a crate just to start being viable again.

I would agree that the average lifespan is so low that you would never run out of ammo and grenades, but it is funny to hear that from a guy, that is directly affected by it, because his lifespan is way longer. I mean in the video you can see him chucking frags all the time, which before would not have been possible. So yeah as a direct profiteur, a reasonable statement on the ammo 2.0

By the way, it is more like ve-reh-cundiam instead of -ey-. Not like in the word "mate", but more similar to, well "meh". But considering english phonetics in general and the difference to my native language it is still likely precise enough. Nevertheless.

verecundia - Wiktionary

Posts: 1,209

Date of registration
: Dec 7th 2011

Platform: PC

Battlelog:

Reputation modifier: 11

  • Send private message

404

Friday, May 12th 2017, 10:54pm

How is 300 kills a grind? Have you guys ever played wow? At least it doesn't require 1250 kills like in hardline.
If you really try hard you can finish this on day one. 300 kills is fast enough.

Anything that takes longer than a round or two is a grind when you have to use a gun you don't like.
Personally I can't aim worth a damn with iron sights so getting 300 kills with the 1906 factory would be amazingly frustrating. The 1906 sniper OTOH seems like I gun I'd really enjoy, but with that kind of unlock requirement I'll try to pretend it doesn't exist.

So, it turns out that I was wrong, I actually had a lot of fun getting the 300 kills with the 1906 factory. It was a bit frustrating to start off when I felt like I couldn't see where I was shooting, but I decided to take it easy and not worry to much about how I was performing or if we were winning or losing. After a few rounds of terrible play I started to get the hang of the gun and found it quite enjoyable, and a very effective tool in the right situation. There's barely any recoil or spread at any relevant range, it's just point and click to kill. The only problem is that some targets are too far away to effectively aim at with iron sights. In the end unlocking the 1906 Sniper was so worth it, the telescopic sight makes taking advantage of the gun's accuray so much easier. I haven't had time to use it that much yet, but it's looking to be my new favorite medic gun!
bob

Posts: 1,877

Date of registration
: Jan 12th 2014

Platform: PC

Battlelog:

Reputation modifier: 13

  • Send private message

405

Friday, May 12th 2017, 11:37pm

How is 300 kills a grind? Have you guys ever played wow? At least it doesn't require 1250 kills like in hardline.
If you really try hard you can finish this on day one. 300 kills is fast enough.

Anything that takes longer than a round or two is a grind when you have to use a gun you don't like.
Personally I can't aim worth a damn with iron sights so getting 300 kills with the 1906 factory would be amazingly frustrating. The 1906 sniper OTOH seems like I gun I'd really enjoy, but with that kind of unlock requirement I'll try to pretend it doesn't exist.

So, it turns out that I was wrong, I actually had a lot of fun getting the 300 kills with the 1906 factory. It was a bit frustrating to start off when I felt like I couldn't see where I was shooting, but I decided to take it easy and not worry to much about how I was performing or if we were winning or losing. After a few rounds of terrible play I started to get the hang of the gun and found it quite enjoyable, and a very effective tool in the right situation. There's barely any recoil or spread at any relevant range, it's just point and click to kill. The only problem is that some targets are too far away to effectively aim at with iron sights. In the end unlocking the 1906 Sniper was so worth it, the telescopic sight makes taking advantage of the gun's accuray so much easier. I haven't had time to use it that much yet, but it's looking to be my new favorite medic gun!


I think I'm less than 10 kills deep with that thing. Every time I use it I keep getting frustrated and going back to one of the Auto 8's.

Posts: 248

Date of registration
: Jun 5th 2015

Platform: Xbox One

Location: Land of the Midnight Sun

Battlelog:

Reputation modifier: 6

  • Send private message

406

Monday, May 15th 2017, 4:44pm

Quoted from "tiggr"

Suppression - make connected to location, and not the enemy player.
Today we use "bubbles" around players to trigger suppression state - remove these, and make suppression weapons when fired repeatedly in the same cone trigger the effect for that cone. IE you are explicitly trying to create a suppressive area in the world (which is visualized with some lingering tracer smoke lines or similar).
Anyone running into that area on the enemy team gets suppressed, you run out you loose it with a little decay.
That would solve the random "last bullet hit my bubble and now im suppressed" and other non-intended suppression that happen with the current system.
It could even mean we could make actual suppression more powerful when you get caught in it as it won't happen randomly anymore.
source

Interesting idea worth sharing here. This has potential, but a few specifics to nail down. Thoughts?

signature 2.1

Things I support
ammo regen pls

Quoted from "NoctyrneSAGA"

_____

When I play with it [Autoloading 8] I feel like I am batman taking out 1 after 1 baddie while they feel helpless and don't know who is talking out their mates.
Remove 3D spotting. Itís a mechanic that rewards bad eyesight.
Wanna help your team by sneaking through enemy territory to provide spawns? THIS IS NOT TEAMWORK FGT I HOPE YOU RUN OUT OF MOTION BALLS TOO EARLY TO BE SUCCESSFUL
Wanna be Javelin squad but only have two guys? BETTER NOT GET YOUR SOFLAM KILLED FGT THIS IS NOT TEAMWORK WITHOUT A SUPPORT DUDE DROPPING AMMO ON YOU EVERY 2 MINUTES
Please post your best M1916 clips Magazines *fixed*.

Cool/Useful Links

What Makes the Best Player?
David Sirlin on Intuition
Archive - Wait But Why - I recommend the posts on AI, and Neuralink, in that order. They are long, but very interesting. Just skim parts of them.

Symthic Databrowser
Battlefield 1 DeployTimes

Posts: 1,877

Date of registration
: Jan 12th 2014

Platform: PC

Battlelog:

Reputation modifier: 13

  • Send private message

407

Monday, May 15th 2017, 7:12pm

Quoted from "tiggr"

Suppression - make connected to location, and not the enemy player.
Today we use "bubbles" around players to trigger suppression state - remove these, and make suppression weapons when fired repeatedly in the same cone trigger the effect for that cone. IE you are explicitly trying to create a suppressive area in the world (which is visualized with some lingering tracer smoke lines or similar).
Anyone running into that area on the enemy team gets suppressed, you run out you loose it with a little decay.
That would solve the random "last bullet hit my bubble and now im suppressed" and other non-intended suppression that happen with the current system.
It could even mean we could make actual suppression more powerful when you get caught in it as it won't happen randomly anymore.
source

Interesting idea worth sharing here. This has potential, but a few specifics to nail down. Thoughts?


That sounds awfully like rewarding people for missing to me. Maybe makes sense for the LMGs because of winding up, but they become suitably deadly very quickly anyway. It also seems highly contrived that one type of gun shooting bullets is magically suppressive, while another type of gun also shooting bullets is not.

With the large TTK and multiple hits to kill at range, getting fired at is IMO sufficiently effective to drive players to cover where they must stay covered and recover health before maneuvering/shooting again. That sounds awfully like supression to me without some sort of magical effect field.

Posts: 3,421

Date of registration
: Mar 19th 2014

Platform: Xbox One

Location: Canada

Battlelog:

Reputation modifier: 15

  • Send private message

408

Monday, May 15th 2017, 11:55pm

The area system sounds really interesting, basically a little more like the other area denial tools like Gas or Incendiary. It should prove far easier to tune Suppression differently for different weapon and tool types, especially with things like radius/area of effect/duration/etc. For example, the Mortar, which is and always will be weak as a damage weapon, could deal immense Suppression over a fairly large radius.


A couple interesting tangent ideas on this:

This would make it far easier to create some sort of counter-tool to Suppression, and Smoke Grenades seem like the best candidate. Any Smoke between you and the shooter would mean no Suppression, or in more technical terms, the "beam/cone" of Suppression would hit Smoke and stop there, just like a wall. This has psychological merit as well, as even if an enemy can fire through Smoke, their effective threatening-ness is lower, as they can only fire into it at random.

Another interesting mechanic could be that a player who is spotted deals no, or drastically reduced, Suppression. A very significant reason for incoming fire being scary/especially dangerous is not knowing where the shots are coming from, but if you know exactly where said enemy is located, their psychological effect is greatly diminished. This ties in very well with Smoke also blocking Suppression, as both are spotting/intel tools.
Who has fun, wins.

Posts: 1,877

Date of registration
: Jan 12th 2014

Platform: PC

Battlelog:

Reputation modifier: 13

  • Send private message

409

Tuesday, May 16th 2017, 12:08am

The area system sounds really interesting, basically a little more like the other area denial tools like Gas or Incendiary. It should prove far easier to tune Suppression differently for different weapon and tool types, especially with things like radius/area of effect/duration/etc. For example, the Mortar, which is and always will be weak as a damage weapon, could deal immense Suppression over a fairly large radius.


A couple interesting tangent ideas on this:

This would make it far easier to create some sort of counter-tool to Suppression, and Smoke Grenades seem like the best candidate. Any Smoke between you and the shooter would mean no Suppression, or in more technical terms, the "beam/cone" of Suppression would hit Smoke and stop there, just like a wall. This has psychological merit as well, as even if an enemy can fire through Smoke, their effective threatening-ness is lower, as they can only fire into it at random.

Another interesting mechanic could be that a player who is spotted deals no, or drastically reduced, Suppression. A very significant reason for incoming fire being scary/especially dangerous is not knowing where the shots are coming from, but if you know exactly where said enemy is located, their psychological effect is greatly diminished. This ties in very well with Smoke also blocking Suppression, as both are spotting/intel tools.


Is BF1 supposed to be an FPS or some sort of tactical strategy game?

The whole essence of suppression is that you need to get under hard cover while getting shot at otherwise you get shot, and getting wounded and/or dying really rather sucks IRL.

The concept does not translate well in a game where dying doesn't matter (much) and fear isn't actualized. Sufficiently rapid engagements can already surprise/startle players into panic firing and IMO that's good enough. Making a magical fear field removes player agency. Also it's a shitty crutch mechanic for soft countering snipers you can't hard counter because someone thought a highly rock-paper-scissors scheme was the most fun way to balance guns.

Shocking concept: tie aiming like shit to actually eating a couple of bullets in the chest instead of from bullets being vaguely sprayed in your direction?

Posts: 226

Date of registration
: Sep 20th 2016

Platform: PC

Battlelog:

Reputation modifier: 3

  • Send private message

410

Wednesday, May 17th 2017, 10:40am

Suppressing an area is an idea I put forward years ago. Glad to see tiggr mention it.