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

Posts: 3,636

Date of registration
: Mar 19th 2014

Platform: Xbox One

Location: Canada

Battlelog:

Reputation modifier: 16

  • Send private message

81

Saturday, June 2nd 2018, 11:53pm

Blaming everyone else for not following your plan that they're not aware of. That makes sense.

Good tactics are those that actually work in practice, not only in theory.
Who Enjoys, Wins

NoctyrneSAGA

PvF 2017 Champion

(9,997)

Posts: 7,187

Date of registration
: Apr 3rd 2012

Platform: PC

Battlelog:

Reputation modifier: 19

  • Send private message

82

Sunday, June 3rd 2018, 1:36am

Blaming everyone else for not following your plan that they're not aware of.


Why did you assume I don't do a callout?

I callout objectives I shell a good time beforehand whether I'm using the Infiltrator, Destroyer, Artillery Truck, Ilya, Dreadnought, etc. That's just common sense.

It's been a problem since launch. You can type in the chat as much as you want and unless they are paying attention and have complete faith in you, no one will push.

They will just accuse you of camping and being useless even if you completely raze a flag.
Data Browser

Passive Spotting is the future!

With this, I'll rid MGO3 of infestation. Sans bad gameplay MGO3 will be torn asunder. And then it shall be free. People will suffer, of course - a phantom pain.

Reddit and Konami will rewrite the records... And I will be demonized in human memory. But... The thirst for good gameplay that I have planted will infest MGO3. No one can stop it now. The Rebalance Mod will unleash that thirst unto the future.


Are you a scrub?

If it flies, it dies™.

Posts: 3,636

Date of registration
: Mar 19th 2014

Platform: Xbox One

Location: Canada

Battlelog:

Reputation modifier: 16

  • Send private message

83

Sunday, June 3rd 2018, 2:15am

What I'm saying is a tactic can't just be good in a vacuum, it has to be good in real gameplay situations too. Shelling an area for an infantry attack when said infantry has no interest in attacking said location, is not a sound strategy. It's basically a spin on "if everyone did things by the book, everything would work". But people don't do that, so what "works" is determined by whatever given situation and people you find yourself with.

A mark of a good player is being able to read the flow of a match, battle, and read both friendly and enemy players to figure out what is going to work best, accounting for those variables.
Who Enjoys, Wins

Posts: 2,015

Date of registration
: Jan 12th 2014

Platform: PC

Battlelog:

Reputation modifier: 14

  • Send private message

84

Sunday, June 3rd 2018, 4:33am

That would be hilarious any amazing. Really though, just being able to tow in general is going to be a huge game-changer.


You saw it here first folks: It's going to be a gimmicky mechanic that isn't used by top-tier vehicle players

Seeing how "top-tier" vehicle players are usually more concerned with farming kills than helping their team, this would not surprise me.

There are tons of complaints in BF1 about how stationary weapons are badly placed. A coordinated squad that can relocate a weapon to where it will be most useful will defintiely have an advantage, if the stationaries in BFV have as much firepower as those in BF1.


The problem with stationary weapons in BF is that they are stationary. BF is just too fast and too mobile outside of the infantry grinders for them to be very useful. Lack of 3D spotting might meaningfully extend their useful lifespan though.

The other issue is that people might drive semi-useful guns to places where they are totally useless. Lowest common denominator and all that.

Posts: 2,015

Date of registration
: Jan 12th 2014

Platform: PC

Battlelog:

Reputation modifier: 14

  • Send private message

85

Sunday, June 3rd 2018, 4:39am

Seeing how "top-tier" vehicle players are usually more concerned with farming kills than helping their team, this would not surprise me.


Implying that sending enemies to the respawn screen constantly is not helpful to the team.

Especially when said enemies are contesting a flag.


On Operations, sitting back as an attacking tank and farming defenders from a distance is invariably useless and a total waste of a vehicle slot. Farming infantry should only be a byproduct of playing the objective; it should not be the primary focus in and of itself.


Tanks that roll up on flags without an infantry sweep just die in seconds without doing anything and then you've got no tank for ~2 minutes. That's far more wasteful than sweeping the visible portions of a flag indefinitely.

I'm tired of people blaming one player for the failure of an entire team. Tanks aren't that powerful of an asset. They don't win rounds alone.

Also operations is a trash gamemode that doesn't work well with how all of the mechanics in BF come together. So there is that going on too.

Posts: 180

Date of registration
: Dec 14th 2016

Platform: PS4

Location: UK

Battlelog:

Reputation modifier: 4

  • Send private message

86

Sunday, June 3rd 2018, 11:41am

Tanks that roll up on flags without an infantry sweep just die in seconds without doing anything and then you've got no tank for ~2 minutes. That's far more wasteful than sweeping the visible portions of a flag indefinitely.


Except how one operates a tank is not binary. The whole point of a mobile tank is to clear infantry, move up to the ground you just won, and rinse and repeat. Without the seocnd part, the enemies will just file back in and you'll be making ZERO progress. I'm not sure why you're naming an arguably worse tank strategy as some sort of justification for an already horrific one.



I'm tired of people blaming one player for the failure of an entire team. Tanks aren't that powerful of an asset. They don't win rounds alone.



This sentiment is precisely the main reason why I've never had any appetite for Conquest, particularly in BF1's guise. In Operations, the objectives are laid out right in front of you and the onus is on YOU to navigate your way to victory. This is true on foot, but it's greatly accentuated when in control of a steel monster. So when I see my team getting hammered and I find someone's hoarding our tank and sitting back, immobile and on 50-0, I absolutely blame them because tanks ARE a powerful asset and I COULD be winning the round alone in one.

I remember you once stated that you don't play Operations on the principle that you can't properly flank. Well as a competitive person, I don't play Conquest because the absence of feeling in control of the outcome of the match leaves me completely devoid of any enthusiasm.



Also operations is a trash gamemode that doesn't work well with how all of the mechanics in BF come together. So there is that going on too.


Both game modes have their flaws in BF1; it's subjective how these flaws are valued to an individual. Making throwaway comments like passing off the second most popular game mode (and the only reason I and plenty others stuck around BF1 for more than a couple of months) as "trash", just because you don't like it, seems a little juvenile.

Posts: 2,015

Date of registration
: Jan 12th 2014

Platform: PC

Battlelog:

Reputation modifier: 14

  • Send private message

87

Sunday, June 3rd 2018, 10:57pm



Except how one operates a tank is not binary. The whole point of a mobile tank is to clear infantry, move up to the ground you just won, and rinse and repeat. Without the seocnd part, the enemies will just file back in and you'll be making ZERO progress. I'm not sure why you're naming an arguably worse tank strategy as some sort of justification for an already horrific one.


You are erecting a straw man. I quite clearly said that tanks cannot move up without infantry support. If the infantry doesn't move up, the tank cannot. Under those circumstances it should be hanging back.

Quoted

This sentiment is precisely the main reason why I've never had any appetite for Conquest, particularly in BF1's guise. In Operations, the objectives are laid out right in front of you and the onus is on YOU to navigate your way to victory. This is true on foot, but it's greatly accentuated when in control of a steel monster. So when I see my team getting hammered and I find someone's hoarding our tank and sitting back, immobile and on 50-0, I absolutely blame them because tanks ARE a powerful asset and I COULD be winning the round alone in one.


Why has the discourse on this forum degraded to people wanking over how good they are in BF? Have we really run out of useful things to talk about?

For whatever it's worth as a top 1% tanker, I'm calling you on your ability to single handedly carry a match. If the rest of team isn't remotely in the match, it doesn't matter how much you think you can carry.

Quoted

I remember you once stated that you don't play Operations on the principle that you can't properly flank. Well as a competitive person, I don't play Conquest because the absence of feeling in control of the outcome of the match leaves me completely devoid of any enthusiasm.


I don't play operations because it's not fun to me, in large part because it bashes two teams together in a linear fashion that I find tedious. You can't do anything in OPs other than bash better than the other guys are bashing. It's under-developed as a gameplay mode.


Quoted

Both game modes have their flaws in BF1; it's subjective how these flaws are valued to an individual. Making throwaway comments like passing off the second most popular game mode (and the only reason I and plenty others stuck around BF1 for more than a couple of months) as "trash", just because you don't like it, seems a little juvenile.


"Second most popular game mode" is a cheap way of bypassing the fact that Ops is insignificant in terms of player interest and time spent. Secondary game modes are a waste of dev time in BF. They always have been, that's why they come and go after only single titles. The only ones they have been remotely interesting are Rush and Titans, and neither really contested Conq, which has been going strong as a gamemode for over 10 years.

Capture the flag is just a very good way to play games, and it's one that really maximizes all of the things that BF has to offer. I don't think it's coincidental that other game modes always end up being "tacked-on" in terms of appeal/investment.

Posts: 16

Date of registration
: Oct 5th 2013

Platform: PC

Battlelog:

Reputation modifier: 7

  • Send private message

88

Saturday, June 9th 2018, 9:32pm

New gameplay is out and... the gunplay looks dumbed down. Where's the recoil? DICE, you can't just remove spread and give the guns no recoil.

And what's with the damage? The Bren deals 34~35 damage on body shots.

Posts: 292

Date of registration
: Dec 2nd 2013

Platform: PC

Location: California

Battlelog:

Reputation modifier: 10

  • Send private message

89

Saturday, June 9th 2018, 10:24pm

Red flags for me from the gameplay videos out:

  • Panzerfaust doing 20 damage to a rear hit on a Heavy Tank. How is this going to work out with ammo and gadget scarcity?
  • Ricochets still exist
  • Vehicle slot system is back
  • Bolt Actions still doing extremely high minimum damage, also indirectly buffed by people not being able to regen to full HP

Guess I'll see how these play out when I head over to the EA Play booths tom, but it's not looking good. Still the same stuff that made BF1 unplayable for me

Posts: 444

Date of registration
: Mar 25th 2014

Platform: PC

Battlelog:

Reputation modifier: 7

  • Send private message

90

Saturday, June 9th 2018, 10:52pm

All the authentic grievances set aside,

Things I hate from the pre-alpha footage:


- the rate of building things. Everyone will build and hole up like crazy with how fast they can build fortifications.Creating chokepoints is good, right? Well, not in a game from designers that are notorious for creating bad maps in previous games that introduced several... chokepoints!
- tanks can yet again see 360 all around them. What happened to the major downfalls of tanks in WW2, namely the low visibility of the tankcrew? Putting dynamite and limpets on tanks in BF1 rarely ever happened against decent tankers that (ab)used 3rd pov

- AT weapons, the almighty panzerfaust did damage as if it was an AT rifle. From up close. In the rear. There doesnt seem to be penetrating effects either.


- supply points in the air. Come on, that's just silly. I like the idea of having to return to an area to refill and repair, but what happened to the airfields concept from BF1942 and BF2?
- the gunplay. All the weapons behaved really... I dont know.. is CoD-like a word?



- The STG44 and how it behaved looked childish almost. Ive seen much better depictions of the STG44 in other WW2 games- Sturmtiger seems like the ultimate hillcamp tank with a supportplayer creating a supplypoint near it. With how the map seems to be made in the footage and what DICE did to BF1 and the 3rd pov system for tanks, it wont be flanked. The more if I envision out of bound areas to that (the teams have to spawn somewhere safe, don't they? Very reminiscent of BF1 Operation maps, that were in general poorly designed with vehicles on. Actually... in my opinion, Operations was and is a boring, un-creative gamemode. One of the key aspects of Battlefield, the player freedom and creativity, are nullified in Operations. It's mindnumbing. I hate it.


- the map gave me very bad memories of Brusilov Keep. My god that map sucked. But this is total irrational.



- crosshair. Crosshairs everywhere.I dont have positive expectations about this game after the reveal and this.
RIP Sraw

This post has been edited 4 times, last edit by "Iwo_Jima" (Jun 9th 2018, 11:08pm)