Battlefield V

[Spartacus]

1 minute ago, Darth Pees said:

This is a battlefield game, the maps are huge for a reason. The intent of this game is to allow people to play however they want to play and still be successful. Forcing players to play a certain way (which is the direction they've been going the past few iterations of Battlefield with the sniping) goes against the very intent of Battlefield at its core.

Instead, why not actually make snipers useful? Why not make their rifles kill people to the chest? Why not allow them to destroy or damage vehicles from a distance? This way bad snipers can still be useful, good snipers can be dangerous and the people playing the other classes aren't tied down by all the bad snipers doing nothing all game like they are now.

Because too many people snipe already. If they make them "Useful" you will have all of the maps become snipe fests. Its true that BF has always been designed to allow you to play styles and I am fine with it but when the objective is to capture a point the main goal of the team should be capture the point. Snipers are generally not doing anything like that. The design of Battlefield in its current form just isn't setup in a way to make them useful. Its too easy to revive a down ally or spawn on squad mates. I have rarely if ever seen a sniper take out more than a couple squad mates. I've never seen one take out an entire squad. I've taken out full squads with one well placed grenade or a clip of the BAR. 

I would be alright giving snipers additional utility as long range spotters or some other sort of skill that directly supports allies. I want no part in giving snipers additional killing power without limiting there numbers.

[AFlaccoSeagulls]

7 minutes ago, Spartacus said:

Because too many people snipe already. If they make them "Useful" you will have all of the maps become snipe fests.

This isn't what happened with previous battlefields. Granted, the player count for those games was 12v12 not 64v64 or some wild player count they have now. Furthermore, if you're in vehicles and capturing points, sniping becomes moot. Or you can counter-snipe. There's so many ways to take out snipers or combat them. The theory that "oh well if they actually become useful what will we do?!" is kind of crazy, tbh.

7 minutes ago, Spartacus said:

Its true that BF has always been designed to allow you to play styles and I am fine with it but when the objective is to capture a point the main goal of the team should be capture the point. Snipers are generally not doing anything like that.

I mean...yeah? Not every role in the game should be designed to attack and secure an objective. However, if snipers are actually able to kill people effectively, do you think that would encourage them to play more aggressively or less aggressively? If I know I can kill someone with one shot to the chest, am I going to want to get more kills running around or sit on a mountain? Snipers hide now because they are useless. Doesn't mean they wouldn't serve a purpose to help push an objective.

7 minutes ago, Spartacus said:

The design of Battlefield in its current form just isn't setup in a way to make them useful. Its too easy to revive a down ally or spawn on squad mates. I have rarely if ever seen a sniper take out more than a couple squad mates. I've never seen one take out an entire squad. I've taken out full squads with one well placed grenade or a clip of the BAR. 

You haven't played a battlefield game where snipers can actually do that. I used to wipe full squads in seconds with a sniper rifle in BF2:MC and BC1 and BC2. Nowadays it's impossible to land that many headshots or quickswitch to your pistol that many times in succession. So I do agree with you that right now the current form isn't setup to make them useful. That's the entire premise of my argument that they need to be changed  

7 minutes ago, Spartacus said:

I would be alright giving snipers additional utility as long range spotters or some other sort of skill that directly supports allies. I want no part in giving snipers additional killing power without limiting there numbers.

Again, giving them long range spotting or targeting has already been done and lead to nothing useful because snipers end up sitting on a hill spotting/targeting a tank for 5 minutes while all the engineers run around without doing anything about it. And since you can't communicate outside of your squad, if you don't have any engineers in your squad then you're actually completely useless.

At this point I would settle simply for the ability to wreck havoc on infantry without any gadgets (aside from maybe C4 or something) to eliminate tanks. I just want snipers to be able to do something meaningful again if you're a good player with that class, rather than forcing someone to be a very good player to even make a miniscule of impact against other good players.

[Norm]

1 hour ago, Spartacus said:

It would improve just due to not having 20 of them on your team. Forcing both offense and defense to be closer to the objectives where the action should be taking place. The best games are always the ones where offense and defense ebbs and flows with the majority of the players for both teams playing them. 

Its a moot point really though. They will never get rid of the sniper classes as much as I would them them to do so. 

To be honest, I have some selfish resistance to this just because I switch to scout and take out two or three hill humpers relatively often that my stupid team can't seem to deal with. With limitations I'll probably never be able to do that and now one guy who's one shotting me that nobody else can deal with is impervious, more or less, yeah there's still ways to get them but my best way is taken. I'm way more run and gun than I should be in these games so I'm hardly a sniper defender. IDK what the answer is. There's just so many guys that want to play like that part of me feels like they'll always be worthless even without a sniper class lol

I played a WW1 game on PC that had limited scoped weapons and people whored them and they were so OP. Then they took them away and the same people just did it without Scopes but now they couldn't kill anyone lol

[Norm]

1 hour ago, Darth Pees said:

This is a battlefield game, the maps are huge for a reason. The intent of this game is to allow people to play however they want to play and still be successful. Forcing players to play a certain way (which is the direction they've been going the past few iterations of Battlefield with the sniping) goes against the very intent of Battlefield at its core.

Instead, why not actually make snipers useful? Why not make their rifles kill people to the chest? Why not allow them to destroy or damage vehicles from a distance? This way bad snipers can still be useful, good snipers can be dangerous and the people playing the other classes aren't tied down by all the bad snipers doing nothing all game like they are now.

This is an issue for sure. They are making them harder to have an impact with the idea fewer people will use them and only high end players, but the crap players don't care and now they are even worse. They don't care, they want to snipe lol. IDK who to blame there.

[AFlaccoSeagulls]

6 minutes ago, NormSizedMidget said:

This is an issue for sure. They are making them harder to have an impact with the idea fewer people will use them and only high end players, but the crap players don't care and now they are even worse. They don't care, they want to snipe lol. IDK who to blame there.

Yeah they're purposefully trying to deter people from sniping, which I completely disagree with. If you're going that avenue, just remove it from the game. I don't know why they would spend time actively developing ways to make people not want to play a class, yet include it in the game.

IMO either make sniping useful at all levels, or remove it and figure out something better.

[Norm]

13 minutes ago, Darth Pees said:

Yeah they're purposefully trying to deter people from sniping, which I completely disagree with. If you're going that avenue, just remove it from the game. I don't know why they would spend time actively developing ways to make people not want to play a class, yet include it in the game.

IMO either make sniping useful at all levels, or remove it and figure out something better.

$$. I think it's that simple

[Spartacus]

1 minute ago, Darth Pees said:

This isn't what happened with previous battlefields. Granted, the player count for those games was 12v12 not 64v64 or some wild player count they have now. Furthermore, if you're in vehicles and capturing points, sniping becomes moot. Or you can counter-snipe. There's so many ways to take out snipers or combat them. The theory that "oh well if they actually become useful what will we do?!" is kind of crazy, tbh.

Vehicles are sparse and are more shock troops then actual strategy. Counter-sniping leave one big weakness while your counter sniping your not going for the object so you are just creating more of a problem than resolving. 

 

3 minutes ago, Darth Pees said:

I mean...yeah? Not every role in the game should be designed to attack and secure an objective. However, if snipers are actually able to kill people effectively, do you think that would encourage them to play more aggressively or less aggressively? If I know I can kill someone with one shot to the chest, am I going to want to get more kills running around or sit on a mountain? Snipers hide now because they are useless. Doesn't mean they wouldn't serve a purpose to help push an objective.

I think your giving people way too much credit. People play sniper specifically for the line up from range and scope people. Lets just say what your saying does occur you would take a game that plays within realism (Very loosely but better than most) and makes it a counter strike quick scoping paradise. That's just as bad if not worse than the current form. 

 

5 minutes ago, Darth Pees said:

You haven't played a battlefield game where snipers can actually do that. I used to wipe full squads in seconds with a sniper rifle in BF2:MC and BC1 and BC2. Nowadays it's impossible to land that many headshots or quickswitch to your pistol that many times in succession. So I do agree with you that right now the current form isn't setup to make them useful. That's the entire premise of my argument that they need to be changed  

I've played pretty much every battlefield to date. I have played a lot more of BC1, BC2, BF3 than any of the others however but I stand by that statement. I would rather have literally any other class than sniper in my party on any map of any battlefield. I think the issue I have is like you said in a previous post there is no effective counter for a sniper except counter sniping. I don't really count vehicles as a counter as they are not really meant to deal with snipers as much as deal with other vehicles and infantry as well as being mobile armor. So making them more powerful then other classes would easily make them OP. I like the way they are currently more than in any of BF game to date. 

[Spartacus]

35 minutes ago, NormSizedMidget said:

This is an issue for sure. They are making them harder to have an impact with the idea fewer people will use them and only high end players, but the crap players don't care and now they are even worse. They don't care, they want to snipe lol. IDK who to blame there.

I think what you have to do is give them a ton more utility. The faction is called a "Scout" for a reason. Right now they offer little to no utility except doming other snipers. So most of the time they just sit there and fire at each other over the actual important stuff taking place int he middle. I wouldn't be opposed to giving them more vehicle demolition abilities or something that would make them not rely so much on the single target killing. 

Right now their only utility is spotting which is underutilized and not all that useful with the amount of people in a match. I don't know what you could give them to add utility but i'm sure theirs something. 

[AFlaccoSeagulls]

4 minutes ago, Spartacus said:

Vehicles are sparse and are more shock troops then actual strategy. Counter-sniping leave one big weakness while your counter sniping your not going for the object so you are just creating more of a problem than resolving. 

Depending on the game, vehicles are everywhere. There's always at least 4 tanks, 4 transport vehicles, and like 4 air vehicles. That's 12 potential vehicles for a team of maybe 20-30? And most vehicles hold 2+ people, so I mean there's plenty of vehicles to go around. And in Battlefield, tanks and combat vehicles are a huge part of the strategy. 

Also, you can both counter-snipe and play objectives. It's not that difficult. 

4 minutes ago, Spartacus said:

I think your giving people way too much credit. People play sniper specifically for the line up from range and scope people. Lets just say what your saying does occur you would take a game that plays within realism (Very loosely but better than most) and makes it a counter strike quick scoping paradise. That's just as bad if not worse than the current form. 

I mean pick your poison here. Do you want people to be useless not playing the objective, useful and not playing the objective, or useful and playing the objective? Useless and not playing the objective is what we have now. Useful and not playing the objective is what I'm proposing (OHK to the chest and utility to disable/kill vehicles). Useful and playing the objective is more geared towards the "sweet spot" idea, or having sniper rifles OHK to any part of the body within a certain range but yes it opens the door for players to use their sniper rifles like shotguns and start quickscoping.

4 minutes ago, Spartacus said:

I think the issue I have is like you said in a previous post there is no effective counter for a sniper except counter sniping. I don't really count vehicles as a counter as they are not really meant to deal with snipers as much as deal with other vehicles and infantry as well as being mobile armor.

Counter-sniping is the most direct way. Another way is simply to get in a vehicle and then you're protected. Vehicles are 100% also a counter to snipers, just like any other infantry. But then again, by this logic there's no counters for any other classes if you're eliminating vehicles as a counter and saying the only way to kill a sniper is to shoot him. That's how you kill any class.

4 minutes ago, Spartacus said:

So making them more powerful then other classes would easily make them OP. I like the way they are currently more than in any of BF game to date. 

They're not more powerful than the other classes, though. You can still have scope sway, bullet lead/drop, heck even scope glare - just give me the ability to kill people from range without aiming for the head. Whether you implement that where snipers kill within a sweet spot, or under a certain range, or OHK to the chest at all ranges - just give me something to work with so I can contribute. Snipers are inherently powerful, that's the realistic idea here. I can kill you at ranges where you're helpless against me.

[Spartacus]

3 minutes ago, Darth Pees said:

Snipers are inherently powerful, that's the realistic idea here. I can kill you at ranges where you're helpless against me.

That's the idea but snipers are also not a direct combat fighter and not 1/4 of any military force are snipers which happens in BF. That's why I think they need to have additional utility but not necessarily more single kill damage. Some sort of support roll besides tagging. Smoke screens maybe or something that makes them useful to the front line fighters without making them OP. 

[AFlaccoSeagulls]

11 minutes ago, Spartacus said:

That's the idea but snipers are also not a direct combat fighter and not 1/4 of any military force are snipers which happens in BF. That's why I think they need to have additional utility but not necessarily more single kill damage. Some sort of support roll besides tagging. Smoke screens maybe or something that makes them useful to the front line fighters without making them OP. 

Snipers are not a front line role, though. I would concede the killing power if I was given back my ability to call in strikes on vehicles from range. Then I'd be more okay with not being able to kill from a distance without a headshot. But there's got to be some give and take here because ever since BC2, it's been all take. First we lost the laser designator and it was replaced with a mortar strike. Then we lost the mortar strike for C4 and also lost the OHK under 25m feature, while simultaneously getting scope glare/sway and bullet lead/drop. But snipers have never gained any additional utility or killing power.

[showtime]

Personally, I don't really like sniping all that much, but they're an important part of the team.  I remember in one Battlefield game, they had this thing where they could set something down and the squad could spawn on it.  Or in BFBC:2 they had the recon ball they could throw out and teammates could see enemies behind walls and such.  Obviously BFBC:2 was a smaller scale game than the Battlefield games of today, but that's just an example.

Also, I remember in BFBC:2 the spotting system was so important.  Spotting enemies was critical because you could see where they were running and snipers usually had such a great vantage point since they could overlook a lot of the map.  So snipers spamming their recon ball and spotting people were a help.  Or they could call things out from a distance.

Sniping has it's role in every game, it's a completely different play style.  It has to be in the game other wise the game would be boring with everyone playing the game exactly the same.  Besides, sniping in Battlefield has never been that useless just because there's so many people in a game.  And Battlefield has been more of a game where I can accept being one shot by a sniper just because of the nature of the game. 

A game that shouldn't really have sniping is Call of Duty.  1.  Because the maps are so small the game is made to be played at a run and gun pace.  2.  Because snipers in that game aren't used how snipers are supposed to be used.  People use snipers in CoD to run and gun, which is complete BS.  Snipers one shot people in CoD an can be fired off the hip like a pistol.  THAT is the game where sniping ruins the game. 

[Norm]

3 hours ago, showtime said:

Personally, I don't really like sniping all that much, but they're an important part of the team.  I remember in one Battlefield game, they had this thing where they could set something down and the squad could spawn on it.  Or in BFBC:2 they had the recon ball they could throw out and teammates could see enemies behind walls and such.  Obviously BFBC:2 was a smaller scale game than the Battlefield games of today, but that's just an example.

Also, I remember in BFBC:2 the spotting system was so important.  Spotting enemies was critical because you could see where they were running and snipers usually had such a great vantage point since they could overlook a lot of the map.  So snipers spamming their recon ball and spotting people were a help.  Or they could call things out from a distance.

Sniping has it's role in every game, it's a completely different play style.  It has to be in the game other wise the game would be boring with everyone playing the game exactly the same.  Besides, sniping in Battlefield has never been that useless just because there's so many people in a game.  And Battlefield has been more of a game where I can accept being one shot by a sniper just because of the nature of the game. 

A game that shouldn't really have sniping is Call of Duty.  1.  Because the maps are so small the game is made to be played at a run and gun pace.  2.  Because snipers in that game aren't used how snipers are supposed to be used.  People use snipers in CoD to run and gun, which is complete BS.  Snipers one shot people in CoD an can be fired off the hip like a pistol.  THAT is the game where sniping ruins the game. 

Bc2 also had all kit weapons so you could take the recon utility and have an SMG or whatever

[AFlaccoSeagulls]

On 6/4/2018 at 3:06 PM, NormSizedMidget said:

Bc2 also had all kit weapons so you could take the recon utility and have an SMG or whatever

That was BF3/BF4 you could do that. Same thing with the spawn beacon.

Bad Company the Recon kits didn't have the all kit weapons IIRC. 

[Norm]

3 hours ago, Darth Pees said:

That was BF3/BF4 you could do that. Same thing with the spawn beacon.

Bad Company the Recon kits didn't have the all kit weapons IIRC. 

BC2 did. IDK about bc1 because it wasn't on PC. I remember using shotguns, the Thompson and M14 on recon because I hated sniping lol and yeah 3/4 did too. I brain farted there and was locked onto bad company era for some reason