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

  • "Godzy" started this thread

Posts: 82

Date of registration
: Oct 7th 2012

Platform: PC

Battlelog:

Reputation modifier: 4

  • Send private message

1

Monday, November 4th 2013, 4:19pm

Anyone else as impressed with the weapon balance as I am?

As per title, after playing almost a week now and getting my hands on quite a few of the weapons (carbines especially) i must say im really happy with how they have done weapon balancing.

Between, stability/accuracy, RPM, FSR and bullet speed the weapons are all really well balanced. Out of all the carbines in the game i have no clear go to gun and and most of them are situational. High rpm weapons no longer seem to be king at all ranges with burst control, with how well theyve handle stability/spread for these weapons they finally seem to be effective in there designed-for ranges while low/medium rate of fire guns start to win out the further it goes out.

Posts: 7,780

Date of registration
: Feb 25th 2012

Platform: PC

Location: italy

Battlelog:

Reputation modifier: 19

  • Send private message

2

Monday, November 4th 2013, 4:24pm

As per title, after playing almost a week now and getting my hands on quite a few of the weapons (carbines especially) i must say im really happy with how they have done weapon balancing.

Between, stability/accuracy, RPM, FSR and bullet speed the weapons are all really well balanced. Out of all the carbines in the game i have no clear go to gun and and most of them are situational. High rpm weapons no longer seem to be king at all ranges with burst control, with how well theyve handle stability/spread for these weapons they finally seem to be effective in there designed-for ranges while low/medium rate of fire guns start to win out the further it goes out.

yeah... didn't see such balance from quite some time,wonder how it works against bc2 balance...
"I'm just a loot whore."


stuff mostly unrelated to BF4 that interests nobody



bf4
on 13/05/2016
23rd M320FB user on pc(13/05/16)
rush mode score RANK:2794 TOP:2% OUT OF:215398
obliteration mode scoreRANK:994 TOP:1% OUT OF:159466
handgun medals RANK:2236 TOP:2% OUT OF:143874
longest headshot RANK:9512 TOP:4% OUT OF:257589
recon score RANK:10871 TOP:4% OUT OF:274899
general score per minute RANK:10016 TOP:4% OUT OF:294774

bf3
31/3/2012 4:58:

Headshot distance RANK:493* TOP:0%
Revives per assault minute RANK: 6019 TOP: 3%
Headshots / kill percentage RANK:25947 TOP:13%
MVP ribbons RANK:18824 TOP:11%

*= 6 if we not count the EOD BOT headshots

@kataklism

ARGUMENT DESTROYED 100

ENEMY KILLED [REASON] JSLICE20 100


WRITING SPREE STOPPED 500

link to full-size old avatar:
http://i.imgur.com/4X0321O.gif




Posts: 328

Date of registration
: Jun 12th 2013

Platform: PC

Location: US

Battlelog:

Reputation modifier: 5

  • Send private message

3

Monday, November 4th 2013, 5:20pm

The only weapon that don't feel balanced are the DMRs. They force you to play in a spammy way instead of focusing on accuracy. Aiming for the head is bad since they don't have a bonus head shot multiplier and won't kill in 1 shot, making your follow up shot go mostly over the targets shoulders. I could get used to them as they are now if they would reduce the spread increase per shot. I had some success using the RFB with its bullpup bonus and the ergo grip, dancing around and aiming for the target's groin area. Well I guess a nut shot multiplier could work for them too.
The fact that someone has an opinion, doesn't make their opinion a fact. Making just arguments first requires an acknowledgement of intellectual humility, while valid arguments require you to not commit fallacies of logic and rhetoric.

  • "Godzy" started this thread

Posts: 82

Date of registration
: Oct 7th 2012

Platform: PC

Battlelog:

Reputation modifier: 4

  • Send private message

4

Monday, November 4th 2013, 5:28pm

The only weapon that don't feel balanced are the DMRs. They force you to play in a spammy way instead of focusing on accuracy. Aiming for the head is bad since they don't have a bonus head shot multiplier and won't kill in 1 shot, making your follow up shot go mostly over the targets shoulders. I could get used to them as they are now if they would reduce the spread increase per shot. I had some success using the RFB with its bullpup bonus and the ergo grip, dancing around and aiming for the target's groin area. Well I guess a nut shot multiplier could work for them too.
I agree, even from the beta they are just awful, bout the only thing i find them good at is killing roofies that are sitting still, 2 shots lettin the recoil reset after the first will always get em, but a bolt is better for this anyway? The rest im enjoying though.


Class balance is finally back from bc2.

hunturk

Owner Of The World's Most Powerful Neck

(1,652)

Posts: 5,753

Date of registration
: Aug 4th 2012

Platform: PC

Location: City of Steel

Battlelog:

Reputation modifier: 16

  • Send private message

5

Monday, November 4th 2013, 5:29pm

The only weapon that don't feel balanced are the DMRs. They force you to play in a spammy way instead of focusing on accuracy. Aiming for the head is bad since they don't have a bonus head shot multiplier and won't kill in 1 shot, making your follow up shot go mostly over the targets shoulders. I could get used to them as they are now if they would reduce the spread increase per shot. I had some success using the RFB with its bullpup bonus and the ergo grip, dancing around and aiming for the target's groin area. Well I guess a nut shot multiplier could work for them too.
I agree, even from the beta they are just awful, its quite painful really. The rest im enjoying though.


Class balance is finally back from bc2.
People look back on that with too fond a memory. It took DICE a long time to get the balance right.

Remember the M60?
Personally, i don't take a stance on whether or not there is a creating entity because i'm humble enough to realize, in my fucking insignificance, the concept escapes my comprehension with a lead of 9001 light years.
"Any substance able to evoke an organised flow of symbolic information seemingly issuing from somewhere outside one's sense of self, or ego, has to be worth studying, especially if the experience appears more real than real" - Simon G. Powell.

RIP SRAW

Wadayoutalkenabeet

  • "Godzy" started this thread

Posts: 82

Date of registration
: Oct 7th 2012

Platform: PC

Battlelog:

Reputation modifier: 4

  • Send private message

6

Monday, November 4th 2013, 5:57pm

Remember the M60?
Unfortunately no, i played the bc2 series prolly more towards the middle of its run. Wasnt around from the start.

Posts: 568

Date of registration
: Sep 5th 2013

Platform: PC

Location: Trentino, Italy

Battlelog:

Reputation modifier: 3

  • Send private message

7

Monday, November 4th 2013, 6:02pm

@hunturk
Sure you are right, however look at the balance of BC2 against the BF3's one. The difference is not irrelevant and both games have reached the end of their lifespan (no more patches). BC2 sure had and still has his problems, but as far as having a fairly balanced multiplayer it really surpasses BF3 (and has a debeteably better campaign), in my opinion.
Clean signature best signature

Posts: 1,373

Date of registration
: Jun 23rd 2012

Platform: PC

Location: Germany, Bavaria

Battlelog:

Reputation modifier: 11

  • Send private message

8

Monday, November 4th 2013, 6:18pm

Remember the M60?
Unfortunately no, i played the bc2 series prolly more towards the middle of its run. Wasnt around from the start.

The M60 originally had 25-20 damage, which was insane for BFBC2 standards where Assault Rifles dealt between 12.5 (without dropoff at range) to 16.7 (drop off to 14.3 or 12.5) max damage (!). It was nerfed twice, first to 20-16.7 then to 16.7-14.3.

I sorta miss the longer TTKs that came along.

But BTT: I like the balancing as well, but I do see some cookie-cutter weapons and some candidates that have been forgotten in post-beta-balancing (I'm looking at you, AKU-12!)

Still, it's a good step up from the BF3 monotony with the ACE-23 being very competitive to the M416 and SCAR-H in the assault rifle category. Sadly, there are no really good bullpups with ~750 RPM apart from the PDW-R yet. The A-91 is ok, but dat muzzle drift still lets it down.

Carbines are a nice touch, being a middle ground between the PDWs, which are awesome for stealth and up-close-and-personal and the assault rifles. They're also quite varied, with many of them being very versatile.
Zormau - Battlelog / Battlefield 4

Memorable quotes not taken yet:


Of course, this ignores the non-constant cross-sectional first moment of area across the chest as well as non-constant material properties of the boob; it would be difficult to perform a more detailed analysis (as in, I'd have to have a shape function AND I'd need to derive a function for elastic modulus as a function of lateral breast coordinate) but whatever. It's 2am and I'm lazy.


I always believed science should be very hands on experience.

You should also answer this question I had posed in that thread: Would you be willing to pay your surgeon more if he was going to use a chainsaw for the opening incision of surgery? Clearly using a chainsaw isn't truly suited for surgery but that doesn't really matter. If he's "skilled" enough to be able to use the wrong tools of the trade, he should be rewarded for that skill right?


Posts: 30

Date of registration
: Oct 1st 2013

Platform: PC

Battlelog:

Reputation modifier: 3

  • Send private message

9

Monday, November 4th 2013, 7:10pm

I feel like the gun balance in BC2 spoiled me. BF4's gun/class balance isn't nearly as good, and I don't understand why DICE doesn't just follow the gun/class balance they already established in BC2.

The Bad
- Assault Rifles completely overpower all other small arms. In BC2 this was never the case, and you never saw the same assault/medic whoring that is rampant in infantry gamemodes in BF3 and BF4. I think a lot of people don't realize that, in BC2, what made the assault class good was not the assault rifles, but the grenade launcher. With BF3 and BF4, it seems like DICE has shifted the power out of the grenade launchers and into the assault rifles, which is why you see all of the best guns in BF3/4 belonging to assault.

- LMGs are just bad assault rifles with big magazines. In BC2, they were different in the fact that they had really good non-moving and sustained fire accuracy (low spread increase per shot). I wish that, instead of just making the LMGs worse versions of a similar design, they followed BC2's implementation of a gun that feels and acts differently. And even if the LMGs were still slightly worse in BC2, that was okay because they had arguably the most useful gadgets: the medkit and the defibrillators. Nowadays you have the most OP weapons combined with the most OP gadgets, and everything goes to shit.

- Gadgets are not well balanced, which causes the weapons to be imbalanced. I touched on this a bit in the above points. In BC2, the gadgets combined with the weapons are what made all of the classes well balanced. Assault had the grenade launcher, which was much more lethal than BF3/4's incarnations, and could be self-resupplied at a reasonable rate. Engineers could make up for their close-ranged weapons by using the deadly rocket launchers, which were much faster and more lethal than launchers of BF3/4. Medics had the medkit and defibrillators, which have always been some of the best gadgets in Battlefield. Instead, we have the GL, medkit, and defibs, which are some of the best gadgets in the game, all belonging to a class that also has the best weapons in the game. The support class gets screwed over, becoming an ammo delivery boy and carrying inferior assault rifles. Engineer also gets screwed over because their launchers are not very effective against infantry, but their weapons are made for CQC only. Recon got both their motion sensors and C4 back along with the new PLD, so they are actually a very competitive class.

- DMRs don't have a role. The 4 shot kill at longer ranges, combined with their stupidly high spread/spread increase completely kills the usefulness of these weapons.

- Shotgun slugs have been made obsolete with the body armor perk. It would be one thing if the armor perk reduced the 1-hit-kill range, but instead it completely eliminates it. Definitely not ideal.


The Good
- Weapon balance in a given weapon type is actually quite good this time around. For example, each of the assault rifles all have a defined role and are not hugely outclassed by a few select rifles (like in BF3). This is pretty consistent for each weapon type as well.

- All-kit carbines are the one saving grace of BF4. Weapon balance between different weapon types has been pretty shitty in both BF3 and BF4, but all is good when you can simply use an oh-so-slightly inferior AR with any class you desire.

This post has been edited 1 times, last edit by "Vintar" (Nov 4th 2013, 7:16pm)


Posts: 257

Date of registration
: Jun 23rd 2012

Platform: PC

Location: Holland

Battlelog:

Reputation modifier: 5

  • Send private message

10

Monday, November 4th 2013, 8:19pm

I think the weapon balance is already much better than what BF3 and BC2 started out with; so that's somewhat of a good sign in any case.

Let's just hope they are willing to go a bit further than they did in BF3 to get the balance good though. I felt like in BF3 they were too scared to take big steps. Which is why, other than nerfing the blatant obvious things, not much was done and certain weapons (like the M16A3) were super strong throughout. I also hope they're not afraid to take on classes as a whole, because some classes might need that.

As for the weapon balance though:
I really like the new approach to balancing low RoF weapons to be much more effective at range. In BF3 a few weapons in this state, like for example the SAR-21, would have already been discarded for not putting out enough firepower. But due to their low recoil and spread increase, you can turn these into really potent longer range weapons in BF4.

Assault rifles feel quite potent overall; but with carbines being available for every class and a lot of carbines being really competitive I feel like it's much less of an issue than back in BF3.

Carbines feel quite balanced, seeing as they are available for everyone. Not seeing one pop out as super powerful just yet (although the ACE 52 with a compensator and angled foregrip is quite good).

LMGs I can't say much about it yet. I don't play support that much (not because it's the worst class, which it is really; but it's just not my thing), but what I can say so far is:
- U-100 MK5 feels like a poor mans assault rifle to me.
- Type 88 is a pretty bad second one as well, with the low RoF you're gonna get outclassed by most things.
- Unlocking the M249 SAW is the first thing I did in Singleplayer for good reason. It's actually a really fun support weapon and one that can come along much better. High rate of fire, yet good controlability make it decent. The spread increase is horrid though.
- I find the bipods in BF4 to be much worse than in BF3 for some reason. I feel like I can't get good angles on them at all, which makes it really hard to use the LMGs effectively because the spread increase per round is just a killer.

I'm not yet 100% yet on the Bolt actions. I really like sniping, and on one hand I absolutely love the removal of the old suppression and I feel like the BA is much more useful across the board now.
But the amount of youtubers using it as a glorified slug shotgun has been increasing drastically over the past few days.
Another thing I'd like to see is slightly more variation. Back in BF3 we had 5 bolt action rifles, 2 of which only came with expansions. In BF4 we have 9 bolt actions right from the get go; yet I feel like the amount of variation between them hasn't increased enough. The addition accelerated bullet drop is a nice extra thing, but I feel more could've been done.

The biggest discrepancy in weapon balance so far though, is without any doubt DMRs.
DICE really needs to be on top of this, because DMRs are absolute garbage at the moment. The damage reduction and spread increase on them was really unnecessary and they have now all been turned into bad BF3 SKS ripoffs. This change made them lack in variation and straight up killing power.
If you compare the BF3 DMRs to the BF4 DMRs there are 3 things that immidiately grab the attention:
1. They doubled the FSR mulitplier. Making the DMRs kick like a mule. This means that getting off the followup shots is a lot harder and even takes longer. Their effective RoF is lower than in BF3, even though statistically the RoF is very similar.
2. They reduced the damage significantly. BF4 no longer has the long range accurate rifles that can pop a guy pretty effectively from range. Ironically the next closest thing to M39 in BF4 is a SCAR-H with a heavy barrel on single shot mode.
3. None of the DMRs come with that low base spread of 0.0167 anymore, they're all 0.05 (similar to the M417 in BF3) or higher.

Due to this most of the DMRs don't even make sense for me. Why would I sacrifice 73 RPM (thats 22%), and about 50% less recoil that the SKS offers for 2-3 extra damage that most of the other DMRs come with?

I think DICE went wrong on these for some unknown reason. It might be the reason why I have practically never encountered anyone with a DMR.
It might be they were afraid that all classes had access to the power of the SKS+HB from BF3; or maybe they want to protect the recon's role as long range champion. But even then I don't see enough reason.
The accurate DMRs really weren't all that good back in BF3 either, and they have been nerfed rather than the SKS. And the recon has a lot up it's sleeve now that it comes with C4 and Claymores.

This post has been edited 1 times, last edit by "Nyth" (Nov 4th 2013, 8:26pm)