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

VincentNZ

Holy War? No Thanks.

(2,305)

Posts: 2,740

Date of registration
: Jul 25th 2013

Platform: PC

Battlelog:

Reputation modifier: 16

  • Send private message

211

Monday, August 6th 2018, 10:45pm

@Ritobasu

I would not say body shots don't matter much, because they do matter. But from watching how high level players play I believe the meta is peek, shoot once, go back quickly peek another side, rinse and repeat. Same for both ARs and SRs. This to me bears more resemblance with twitch shooters than any other category. The only difference is that the movement is sluggish by design.

@VincentNZ

It is about headshots IF the game actually registers a headshot. I have, in multiple occasions, confirmed from my instant replay recordings that I aimed right at the head of the enemy, hit twice and wondered why he didn't die. And I realized from the deathcam that I hit his hand twice. And this behavior persists even during the past weekend, when the hand penetration patch is supposedly live. I have uninstalled it multiple times because of this just to install it again because my mates want us to play together as a squad. On a personal level, I am done with that game.


The patch is not live yet, the patch is still on the Test Server unless you played on there. With the current bug, that you can ride downhill on your grenades I would not expect the patch to come live this week. The "netcode" is absolutely horrible in this game I wonder why they get away with it so much better than BF4 did. In any case it is a frustrating experience to play, at least situationally, on the same lines as DayZ (with similar intransparent netcode) and BF1 with confusing gunplay. :D I certainly feel you.

Posts: 294

Date of registration
: Jun 9th 2012

Platform: PC

Battlelog:

Reputation modifier: 10

  • Send private message

212

Tuesday, August 7th 2018, 9:48am

Quoted

@Ritobasu

I would not say body shots don't matter much, because they do matter. But from watching how high level players play I believe the meta is peek, shoot once, go back quickly peek another side, rinse and repeat. Same for both ARs and SRs. This to me bears more resemblance with twitch shooters than any other category. The only difference is that the movement is sluggish by design.

@VincentNZ

It is about headshots IF the game actually registers a headshot. I have, in multiple occasions, confirmed from my instant replay recordings that I aimed right at the head of the enemy, hit twice and wondered why he didn't die. And I realized from the deathcam that I hit his hand twice. And this behavior persists even during the past weekend, when the hand penetration patch is supposedly live. I have uninstalled it multiple times because of this just to install it again because my mates want us to play together as a squad. On a personal level, I am done with that game.


The patch is not live yet, the patch is still on the Test Server unless you played on there. With the current bug, that you can ride downhill on your grenades I would not expect the patch to come live this week. The "netcode" is absolutely horrible in this game I wonder why they get away with it so much better than BF4 did. In any case it is a frustrating experience to play, at least situationally, on the same lines as DayZ (with similar intransparent netcode) and BF1 with confusing gunplay. :D I certainly feel you.



Oh I thought the patch was live from the stickied post on reddit. I have been playing on the live servers.

I am not at all surprised by the bug that you mentioned. Their physics code has always been, astonishing, to put it nicely.

Posts: 3,640

Date of registration
: Mar 19th 2014

Platform: Xbox One

Location: Canada

Battlelog:

Reputation modifier: 16

  • Send private message

213

Tuesday, August 7th 2018, 8:35pm

I do like to have some sort of evaluation of how good I do, and for others to see as well. Battlelog was great for that, because I could see my improvement over time and could look up others as well in an orderly manner. There is stuff to intepret. In PUBG these numbers (broken down into two) have a direct outcome on my game experience. I used to play Duo a lot with a mate and we are both pretty shit at the gunplay there, but we play the zone smartly so that we mostly end up in the top ten, or might even win quite a few rounds. That does not really change over the season. What does change is the people we are getting matched with. After a couple of days we reached top 1% and many fights are basically lost on sight. So we end up #1-5 with 0-1 kill each and as much enjoyment.
Right now we play in a Squad with 2-3 really good people that carried me to #290, with the same experience. I basically just run along with a winrating of 29% and get killed instantly because I peeked a millisecond too long. That is just not an enjoyable concept of a game. I do not want to be matched with people of my squad's skillgroup, I want to be matched with everybody, otherwise how am I going to get better? Matchmaking in PUBG is all about streamlining the game experience through using irrelevant numbers like a win or kill rating in a game with 100 people. It just does not work. If you play on peak hours there are more than enough people on to allow that algorithm to work.

With BF they seem to move into a similar direction, since they already basically eliminated the server browser in the previous installment. As for matchmaking itself I believe there always has been a system, right? And I know that other games do it as well. I see the appeal, for competitive games like R6, Overwatch and CS, but in games like PUBG and BF where you there a thousand random chances involved it just does not work through an abstract and absurd number. And of course once you drop below a critical number of players, matchamking makes no sense at all anymore.


I was actually agreeing with you on this, I'd prefer to have just the server browser, and if quickmatch needs to stay it should have no "skill" variables whatsoever, just mode/map/region priorities.
Who Enjoys, Wins

Posts: 7

Date of registration
: Jun 15th 2018

Platform: PC

Reputation modifier: 1

  • Send private message

214

Thursday, August 9th 2018, 11:36pm

Battlefield V - Closed Alpha #2 - Starting on the 14th of August ? Battlefield Forums

Weapons changes for the second close alpha (beginning august 14th, preload from august 13th).

Posts: 1,426

Date of registration
: Jun 23rd 2012

Platform: PC

Location: Germany, Bavaria

Battlelog:

Reputation modifier: 12

  • Send private message

215

Friday, August 10th 2018, 12:22am

Quoted

EMP:

Decreased the max damage range from 12 to 8 meters.
Decreased the fall off range from 50 to 40 meters.
Increased the min damage to 14.3.
Added 1 additional magazine on Spawn, one additional magazine on resupplying.

Developer comment: The SMG’s got an increase in effectiveness in short range combat, while being less effective on longer ranges.


Uh... wat... a reduction of min range is an increase in short range effectiveness? An increase in min damage is a nerf at longer ranges?

I only see a probably inconsequential nerf to medium-long range combat along with the quality of life buff magazine that apparently all SMGs and the STG got. I hope this is not a sign of things to come.
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: 294

Date of registration
: Jun 9th 2012

Platform: PC

Battlelog:

Reputation modifier: 10

  • Send private message

216

Friday, August 10th 2018, 2:59pm

Are they saying they want more range segregation like BF1, if so they can count me out.


I am still going to try the beta if they have an open one, but they are running into some serious competition here with INS:S and Blops4. I am already enjoying a lot the beta of insurgency.

Posts: 7

Date of registration
: Jun 15th 2018

Platform: PC

Reputation modifier: 1

  • Send private message

217

Friday, August 10th 2018, 8:22pm

I think that weapons having an optimal range is a good thing, people should think about their weapon strenghts and position accordingly, as a """"tactical"""" shooter should encourage.

Don't forget that classes in BF1 only had one type of weapon so they were segregated to that range, but in BFV you can be a medic and have an smg or a SLR, fighting a different ranges and having a different playstyle depending on the necessity of the moment.

Having one weapon that works well at every range is boring and flattens the weapons variety.

VincentNZ

Holy War? No Thanks.

(2,305)

Posts: 2,740

Date of registration
: Jul 25th 2013

Platform: PC

Battlelog:

Reputation modifier: 16

  • Send private message

218

Friday, August 10th 2018, 8:36pm

I think that weapons having an optimal range is a good thing, people should think about their weapon strenghts and position accordingly, as a """"tactical"""" shooter should encourage.

Don't forget that classes in BF1 only had one type of weapon so they were segregated to that range, but in BFV you can be a medic and have an smg or a SLR, fighting a different ranges and having a different playstyle depending on the necessity of the moment.

Having one weapon that works well at every range is boring and flattens the weapons variety.


Yeah, theoretically this would be the case, but only on paper. If they continue to design shitty maps that only enforce certain types of engagements you are making certains weapons way more obsolete than the M16 ever could. The same can be said about balancing weapons individually, it is much easier to fuck up a weapon this way, and then the nerf and buff cycle just gets out of hand. I mean in BF4 most engagements happened between 0-50m, and every weapon worked this way. They still had niches though, which worked very well.

Posts: 294

Date of registration
: Jun 9th 2012

Platform: PC

Battlelog:

Reputation modifier: 10

  • Send private message

219

Saturday, August 11th 2018, 1:36pm

Quoted

I think that weapons having an optimal range is a good thing, people should think about their weapon strenghts and position accordingly, as a """"tactical"""" shooter should encourage.

Don't forget that classes in BF1 only had one type of weapon so they were segregated to that range, but in BFV you can be a medic and have an smg or a SLR, fighting a different ranges and having a different playstyle depending on the necessity of the moment.

Having one weapon that works well at every range is boring and flattens the weapons variety.
I do not want to see one weapon works for all ranges. On the contrary, I want to see more weapons work over more ranges. Like the PP2000 or UMP9 with Hb in BF4. They are not optimal for medium long range, but at least I can make them work.

Posts: 7

Date of registration
: Jun 15th 2018

Platform: PC

Reputation modifier: 1

  • Send private message

220

Saturday, August 11th 2018, 7:43pm



Yeah, theoretically this would be the case, but only on paper. If they continue to design shitty maps that only enforce certain types of engagements you are making certains weapons way more obsolete than the M16 ever could. The same can be said about balancing weapons individually, it is much easier to fuck up a weapon this way, and then the nerf and buff cycle just gets out of hand. I mean in BF4 most engagements happened between 0-50m, and every weapon worked this way. They still had niches though, which worked very well.


I agree that map design is a big problem. A whole other big problem.

I think BF1 map were really bad in that regard and after seeing Narvik maybe I'm not concerned about cover as in BF1 but I'm definitely concerned about map shape, it's too small and narrow, look like a BC2 rush oriented map and the flags on conquest were awfully close to each other.

Coming back to the EMP stat change, maybe they overnerfed the falloff end range but it is/was pretty similar to BF4 smgs (8m to 50m, 15.4 min dmg ), I don't know its max damage but range falloff and min damage are alike and guns in BFV have, allegedly, less spread.

Edit: I think that's is possible that AR like STG 44 will be the "good at everything, excel at nothing" guns in the game. Will see.

This post has been edited 1 times, last edit by "Daled" (Aug 11th 2018, 7:49pm)