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

  • "revic_crew" started this thread

Posts: 630

Date of registration
: Jan 27th 2013

Platform: PC

Battlelog:

Reputation modifier: 5

  • Send private message

1

Wednesday, February 5th 2014, 8:09am

Balancing PDWs (and slow ROF, standard damage weapons)

I know some people have been complaining that PDWs are useless... I disagree, but they still offer little reason to choose them over carbines.
The CZ3A1 might be the best CQB weapon in the game and the PDW-R has the best hip fire accuracy while still firing at a respectable 750rpm, however the is little reason to use the others instead of an equivalent carbine.

For example, the UMP45, it's a good gun but the ACE 52 basically outclasses it completely. It has superior accuracy, shoots quicker and holds its damage out at further ranges.
The SG553 is basically a more accurate and higher damaging at range version of the MX4, with a quicker reload too.

The main advantage PDWs have is better hip fire accuracy, but compared to the hip fire of certain BF3 guns like the P90 and MP7 it's sorely lacking in BF4. Yes the UMP45 has better hip fire than the ACE 52, and the MX4 hip fires better than the SG553 but it still isn't really good enough to count on and overall it's really a tiny advantage while statistically everything else is worse.

This balance works fine on something like the CZ3A1 because it fills the niche of absolutely destroying people up close, its competitor the FAMAS has a longer reload and less bullets. But what about something like the UMP-9? It might have better hip fire accuracy than, say, the AK-5C, but even so, the 700 rpm is outclassed by many other weapons in the game, so even at close ranges where PDWs are supposed to excel in, it can't even do its own job well.

I'm not saying it should have an increased ROF, because otherwise there will be no variety in PDWs but something needs to be more balanced. One of my thoughts is that PDW hip fire accuracy (with laser sight) should be on par with hip fire accuracy of BF3's P90/MP7/UMP/etc, which will clearly differentiate its hipfire from that of carbines, and perhaps even allow something like the PP2000 (650rpm) to compete with an AK-5C (700rpm) purely on the basis of being able to be on target first due to not having to ADS.

What are your suggestions or thoughts on this?



Also, slow ROF weapons with 'standard' damage models (25 dmg). Less recoil so better for longer ranges, right? It still doesn't seem like a big enough advantage to warrant using them, in my opinion; it's still kinda easy to be super accurate with even AEKs and FAMASes. Perhaps they should reduce their base spread, or maybe increase damage to 30 or reduce their drop-off? This would make them actually useful at the ranges they are intended for.

Posts: 1,000

Date of registration
: Nov 5th 2013

Platform: PC

Battlelog:

Reputation modifier: 6

  • Send private message

2

Wednesday, February 5th 2014, 8:42am

I haven't played much with PDWs and the reason is simple: engineer is a class only useful in game-modes with vehicles. And those modes feature mostly large maps (even if some parts are close quarterish). So unless you're planning on defending your vehicle, you're usually better off with something capable of mid-range engagements. Also, the fact that there are some carbines that work almost as good as PDWs (ACW-R, SG553 & MTAR) doesn't help the case.

Quoted

I'm not saying it should have an increased ROF, because otherwise there will be no variety in PDWs but something needs to be more balanced. One of my thoughts is that PDW hip fire accuracy (with laser sight) should be on par with hip fire accuracy of BF3's P90/MP7/UMP/etc, which will clearly differentiate its hipfire from that of carbines, and perhaps even allow something like the PP2000 (650rpm) to compete with an AK-5C (700rpm) purely on the basis of being able to be on target first due to not having to ADS.


I'm not sure what you mean here. They retained their 1/1.5 hip spread. And are betters than carbines which have 2/2.5 in avg.

I think a nice change to give the PDWs some flavour would be to shorten their reload times by 20%.
This is where I'm coming from: Clicky

Labby

Moderator

(6,445)

Posts: 1,940

Date of registration
: Sep 26th 2012

Platform: PC

Location: State of Confusion

Battlelog:

Reputation modifier: 15

  • Send private message

3

Wednesday, February 5th 2014, 9:07am

For the low damage PDW's in particular(P90, JS2, MP7) lower spread increase per shot would be a big help. In BF3 PDW's had half the spread increase of other weapons. Lower spread increase makes hipfire more viable, and allows them to remain somewhat accurate for longer bursts.
[Aetherblade Medium Boots]

JOIN THE TEAMSPEAK (L)EVOLUTION: teamsym.nitrado.net


Posts: 253

Date of registration
: Jan 15th 2014

Platform: PS4

Location: NJ

Battlelog:

Reputation modifier: 5

  • Send private message

4

Wednesday, February 5th 2014, 9:13am

I still wish Battlefield would just start giving moment bonuses for the lightweight weapons already, if the PDW's/Shotguns gave 110% speed and transitioned to ADS faster they'd be worthwhile to use.

5

Wednesday, February 5th 2014, 10:00am

If they had more starting ammo capacity I would use them more, they chew through ammo, and most times when using them I'm left running around with my side arm.

Posts: 360

Date of registration
: Nov 8th 2013

Platform: Xbox One

Location: Newport Beach, CA

Battlelog:

Reputation modifier: 3

  • Send private message

6

Wednesday, February 5th 2014, 10:18am

I think balancing is difficult when you consider there are modes/maps with vehicles and aircraft. The Engineer Kit is the anti-vehicle/aircraft kit and the Assault Kit is perceived as the anti-infantry kit. Improving Engineer anti-infantry capability creates imbalance in regards to class specific roles IMO.

PDW's have better usage on here than BF3 considering hip firing is a lot less forgiving, so their hip fire advantage makes a more noticeable difference on BF4. The UMP's advantage over the ACE 52 is close quarters strafing + ADS firing or strafing + hip firing. Firing from the hip takes less time than ADS'ing and firing in CQC situations. It's up to the players to take advantage of this stuff.

  • "revic_crew" started this thread

Posts: 630

Date of registration
: Jan 27th 2013

Platform: PC

Battlelog:

Reputation modifier: 5

  • Send private message

7

Wednesday, February 5th 2014, 10:43am

Comparing BF4 PDWs with 1.0 hip spread compared to BF3 PDWs with 1.0 hip spread, the numbers are the same yet it still feels weaker in BF4 than in BF3. Same with the carbines' average hip spread of 2.0.
In CQB the ACE 52 can still hip fire almost as effectively as the UMP45 whilst both are still too inaccurate to hip fire from anything greater than ~8 metres, while I would have no hesitation doing so with the BF3 UMP-45. The advantage doesn't seem big enough hence my suggestion that PDW hip fire should be further tightened

Posts: 49

Date of registration
: Feb 5th 2014

Platform: PC

Battlelog:

Reputation modifier: 2

  • Send private message

8

Wednesday, February 5th 2014, 1:29pm

Improving Engineer anti-infantry capability creates imbalance in regards to class specific roles IMO.
You are most likely right.
On the other hand the Engineer in BF4 has access to carbines, shotguns and DMRs so his weapon based anti infantry capabilities are practically on the same level as the ones of the assault.

In hindsight the idear of makeing the PDWs class specific and the carbines available to all wasn't such a great idear. Players being what they are they will simply ignore the harder to use or percieved as less powerfull weapon and go straight for what they think is the good stuff.

I would love to see the PDWs improved in a way their run and gun capabilities make them THE CQB choice besides shotguns (higher movement while aiming, faster reload, faster ADS even if only slightly sounds like a really good idear)...
but this would still not change the fact that it is engineer exclusive and the engineer is not the CQB specialist class. Its very likely a team made up of mostly engineers will fail on Locker even if the PDW would be more close combat monsters as they allready are. The other items of the kit are simply not usefull in such a situation.

I do like the PDWs and I use them fairly often but not as often as I want to since they are engineer exclusive. Having the choice of a highly effective weapon for the map but a kit otherwise useless for my team I tend to pick another kit.
But still shooting people up with a weapon percieved as inferiour is huge fun. After all if you run around with a silenced UMP45 you are something special... even on a 64 player server.

Another nice idear to improve the PDWs would be to give them higher bullet speed when silenced. Seriously most PDWs allready have subsonic bullets to start with. Why are they further slowed by a silencer? On the other hand several other weapons retain supersonic bullets even if a sincer is fitted. That simply doesn't make any sense.

Posts: 121

Date of registration
: Jun 27th 2012

Platform: PS4

Location: UK

Battlelog:

Reputation modifier: 5

  • Send private message

9

Wednesday, February 5th 2014, 7:47pm

If they had more starting ammo capacity I would use them more, they chew through ammo, and most times when using them I'm left running around with my side arm.


I second this. This is the No. 1 reason my P90 doesn't get the love it deserves. Ok there are ammo packs & perks to help out, but relying on them is a bit unreliable.

In hindsight the idear of makeing the PDWs class specific and the carbines available to all wasn't such a great idear. Players being what they are they will simply ignore the harder to use or percieved as less powerfull weapon and go straight for what they think is the good stuff


I think the key here is 'harder to use'. The PDW's require, in general, higher skill levels to use effectively (I'm thinking map and situational awareness, rather than recoil management). If you don't use them right you're going to get chewed up pretty quickly. The carbines on the other hand are much more rounded, and therefore much more forgiving to use. It also doesn't help that the starting carbine is basically like playing on easy mode.

I would love to see carbines and PDW's back the way they were in BF3, mostly so I can go back to using my sneaky-sneaky suppressed P90 on recon, but oh well...
I like the fact that my name implies I am a Scottish, Counter Strike loving, girl.

Not all of these are necessarily true

  • "revic_crew" started this thread

Posts: 630

Date of registration
: Jan 27th 2013

Platform: PC

Battlelog:

Reputation modifier: 5

  • Send private message

10

Thursday, February 6th 2014, 3:55am

In hindsight the idear of makeing the PDWs class specific and the carbines available to all wasn't such a great idear. Players being what they are they will simply ignore the harder to use or percieved as less powerfull weapon and go straight for what they think is the good stuff.
Exactly, the hip fire advantage isn't enough to make up for PDWs' other disadvantages vs carbines, if it was closer to BF3 PDW hip fire it would be vastly improved.