| Forum Index > General Games |
|
TigerKarl
1757 Posts
On October 04 2011 10:34 Aduromors wrote: BC2 still had much deadlier infantry combat than BF2. BF has been on the slippery slope to Call of Duty gunplay for years, now the two are practically indistinguishable Why do you even say something like that. Why spreading lies? | ||
|
Zoler
Sweden6339 Posts
Anyone knows if you lose all your points you earned if you didnt' get to complete the match? -.- | ||
|
Lamppost
Canada317 Posts
Compare a f2000 from mw2 to a f2000 from BF3 and you understand my point. It's going to be crazy hard to kill people with assault rifles at 100+ meter and even harder with smg when we actually hit there damage drop range. In my honest opinion operation metro is clearly to blame and I think that's actually the reason they chose that map for beta testing knowing that weapons don't have as much issues at long range like close/medium. Perfect example is try to snipe someone with an ump from the first spawn at around the b bomb(avg range in bc2 I would assume most firefight take place) trust me the ump doesn't seem op at all in those conditions. | ||
|
Aduromors
United States279 Posts
On October 04 2011 10:47 TigerKarl wrote: Why do you even say something like that. Why spreading lies? Anyone who has ever played BF2 recently knows it's true. Hell, the only reason BC2's gunplay isn't as deadly as CoD is because they reduced weapon damage by 25% for the PC version | ||
|
dranko
Sweden378 Posts
On October 04 2011 11:13 Aduromors wrote: Anyone who has ever played BF2 recently knows it's true. Hell, the only reason BC2's gunplay isn't as deadly as CoD is because they reduced weapon damage by 25% for the PC version Well, that the two are indistinguishable, at least I think, is a lie. It's still easier to kill people in CoD (AK with Stopping Power is 2-shot kill, and ZERO recoil on most weapons) than BF3 (Never less than 3 or 4 shots, alot of recoil on some weapons.), and when the damage reduction hits when retail is realesed the diffrence will be even bigger. On October 04 2011 10:54 Zoler wrote: Cool, been disconnected like 5 times now (and no there's nothing with my internet, never lag in any other game and everythings working fine). Anyone knows if you lose all your points you earned if you didnt' get to complete the match? -.- Seems like a toincoss at this point. Sometimes I lose it, sometimes I don't. | ||
|
Taku
Canada2036 Posts
| ||
|
furymonkey
New Zealand1587 Posts
| ||
|
Cedstick
Canada3336 Posts
And same, furymonkey. Would he, by chance, have been named jrsama123? | ||
|
MERLIN.
Canada546 Posts
On October 04 2011 05:16 FagelBagel wrote: Playing tactically (on a realistic level at least) doesn't really work when playing rush. I hate it when I am on the attacking team and people take it nice and slow, all methodical and planned out. You can't win when half the team is crawling through bushes. I can see it working in conquest but in rush you have to keep advancing or you end up getting bogged down and lose all your tickets. Absolutely disagree with this statement... If you have 4-8 friends on party chat, calling firing lines and checking corners while moving through locations, you can go crush another team which doesn't have the same communication... It's comments like that, which ruin the concept of BF... SQUADS are key to success vs good opponents, knowing you're covered is a lot easier to do your job then if not... And working as a "team" isn't crawling through grass... It's just being able to communicate and work together, you can move fast, very fast, faster as a team then without. EX. Today on metro, left side of train station (BIG OPEN AREA) I was using portable smoke grenade launcher M240? something like that with my IFNV scope, and as we moved down there were 4-8 ppl on the right side piinning us down, so i popped 2 smokes onto them, we ran up the left without engaging, popped another 2, and then had a MASSIVE flank and crippled their lines, it's THAT which makes BF a good game... That's why we have squads. | ||
|
MERLIN.
Canada546 Posts
If not, thats a fucking joke... | ||
|
Dizmaul
United States831 Posts
On October 04 2011 12:54 MERLIN. wrote: WILL BF3 HAVE HARDCORE MODE? If not, thats a fucking joke... i really hope | ||
|
OuchyDathurts
United States4588 Posts
| ||
|
Karliath
United States2214 Posts
On October 04 2011 12:54 MERLIN. wrote: WILL BF3 HAVE HARDCORE MODE? If not, thats a fucking joke... So hardcore will be 1 shot for everything? | ||
|
Infernal_dream
United States2359 Posts
| ||
|
semantics
10040 Posts
On October 04 2011 13:06 Karliath wrote: So hardcore will be 1 shot for everything? i think it's friendly fire and no indicators, hud kill cams etc anything to make it like a sim game. | ||
|
echO [W]
United States1495 Posts
On October 04 2011 13:07 semantics wrote: i think it's friendly fire and no indicators, hud kill cams etc anything to make it like a sim game. While I'm all for realism, friendly fire is a massive headache in this situations when your squads are 4 people, on a team of potentially 32 and people who don't know what they're doing. | ||
|
Aduromors
United States279 Posts
On October 04 2011 11:39 Taku wrote: Uh, if I remember right bolt action snipers in BF2 were 2-hit kills(1 hit headshot) with the semi-auto snipers 3 hit, rifles were generally 3 hit kills, SMG/pistols were 4-5 hit kills and Shotguns were shotguns(1 hit up close <3 engie shotgun). rifles took up to 5 or 6 shots to kill in BF2, and 8 for SMGs. Not that it's comparable - horizontal recoil and spread was significantly higher in BF2, it was nearly impossible to kill in one burst outside of cqc or headshots | ||
|
semantics
10040 Posts
On October 04 2011 13:31 Aduromors wrote: ADS reduces spread to 0, there's no downside to firing while moving, limbs and feet take full damage, (and the headshot multiplier is tiny), switching to pistols is instant, and respawn times are short. In CoD, these were deliberate decisions to speed up the pace, but for BC2 and BF3... who the fuck knows, Dice definitely doesn't rifles took up to 5 or 6 shots to kill in BF2, and 8 for SMGs. Not that it's comparable - horizontal recoil and spread was significantly higher in BF2, it was nearly impossible to kill in one burst outside of cqc or headshots That being said in BF2 sniping mean you could hide for days in a clocktower like position instead of having scope glare giving you away every time. if shotguns killed in 1 shot i didn't notice most of the time ppl had that cannon that just shoots round after round of shot gun blasts. | ||
|
Ushio
Canada868 Posts
On October 04 2011 09:50 Excludos wrote: I'd buy it if it was on steam. And I'm not saying that just to be a douche. Tho quite buggy, which is beyond me how they are going to manage this close to release, Battlefield 3 is amazing! Best part for me so far was seeing this guy in recon running around at full speed trying to stab people (CoD style), he had somewhere along 40 deaths and 1 kill. And there are these amazing moments I for some odd reason have only found in battlefield games. Dying from having a tree falling on you, for instance, or standing on the third floor, dodge a rocket, and suddenly be standing on the second floor. BUT, Origin is killing me. I'm not sure if its just me having trouble with it, but it refuses to cooperate with me. It has more bugs than Starship troopers, all the way from the thing crashing, to black dots covering my screen. It keeps random errors (and I mean random. Telling me it can't do something, and then proceed to do it, I get every time I click a button), and the whole thing just smacks of lowend programming. It keeps nagging on me to update my nvidia driver as well. But apparently, the newest nvidia driver isn't new enough..and then it proceeds to start the game anyways. The fact that the game has to be exited and started every time I want to join a server isn't optimal either, especially a buggy game like bf3. 1 out of 4 times I join a server, I have to just quit right away because of input lag..which wouldn't have happened if I didn't have to exit the game all the time! I was really planning on preordering it. But seeing this beta, I think I might wait a couple of weeks to see how things pan out. edit: When I say "origin", I mean the whole package. Including Battlelog They released an old build of the beta due to legal issues. The retail version will be MUCH more refined 100% | ||
|
Taku
Canada2036 Posts
On October 04 2011 13:31 Aduromors wrote: ADS reduces spread to 0, there's no downside to firing while moving, limbs and feet take full damage, (and the headshot multiplier is tiny), switching to pistols is instant, and respawn times are short. In CoD, these were deliberate decisions to speed up the pace, but for BC2 and BF3... who the fuck knows, Dice definitely doesn't rifles took up to 5 or 6 shots to kill in BF2, and 8 for SMGs. Not that it's comparable - horizontal recoil and spread was significantly higher in BF2, it was nearly impossible to kill in one burst outside of cqc or headshots http://wiki.bf2s.com/weapons/comparison My experience is that Assault rifles were 3 hit kill max(except for M16 maybe), especially since I used to main Medic/L85 semi-auto. Also that's why the AK-101/AK-47 were so imbal compared to the M16 <_< Anyways yeah if anyone is complaining about the combat system in BF3 go fire up some Karkand and get equally ripped to shreds and then complain  | ||
| ||
|
|
The PondCast
KCM Race Survival
WardiTV Invitational
Lambo vs Shameless
Rogue vs uThermal
Percival vs YoungYakov
TBD vs GgMaChine
OSC
OSC
ArT vs MindelVK
MiniZergUA vs TBD
Shameless vs TBD
Ultimate Battle
OSC
OSC
ByuN vs MaxPax
herO vs Krystianer
Percival vs Shameless
LetaleX vs YoungYakov
Nicoract vs Gerald
GgMaChine vs ArT
CranKy Ducklings
WardiTV Invitational
[ Show More ] |
|
|
EPT
