EPTBut no, regardless of what you might think, the game is actually broken for the moment.
Battlefield 3 - Page 443
| Forum Index > General Games |
|
FireSA
Australia555 Posts
But no, regardless of what you might think, the game is actually broken for the moment. | ||
|
BBQSAC
Australia89 Posts
| ||
|
Eisregen
Germany967 Posts
 The problem with suppression is not with flank somebody, but vs ppl you have a clear advantage over as you see em first, aim first and shoot first BUT due to distance you are NOT able to kill in an instant, so the guy has time to just fucking spray in your general direction so you wont be able to hit anything, even with the smallest bursts. I mean, fully supressed, 1m distance, zoomed in on the head and missed? lolz :D Too bad I didnt record that one, was hilarious. | ||
|
DyEnasTy
United States3714 Posts
On April 17 2012 10:51 rebdomine wrote: Can't wait to unlock that too but it feels so far away. Don't even have my jav yet. Yeah me either lool. Man I wish xbl had huge servers. But the "rent a server" thing is about to make me quit the game. | ||
|
Rob28
Canada705 Posts
On April 17 2012 23:10 FireSA wrote: ahahaha I was pretty good before, and I am ok now. But no, if I flank, aim down my red dot sight, straight at the body and empty an A-91 clip into the person, and they don't die because they at some point noticed they were being shot at, turned around, and sprayed and prayed......no, the game is terrible now. It killed the A-91 for me. Also ruined the AS VAL though the SCAR seems better now. But no, regardless of what you might think, the game is actually broken for the moment. That's your opinion, but one that seems more based on personal experience rather than cold hard facts. If you want personal experience to dictate the effectiveness of the patch, then in my experience, the patch is good since I jumped from a 1.5 k/d ratio on average to over 2 post-patch. But I know that personal experience is not a credible source. General internet consensus is that supression is too powerful, yet here you are claiming that it's not powerful enough because someone can turn around and kill you when supressed (which, imo, is a good thing because it means you don't insta-die when under supression). Your rationale seems very confusing. My thoughts go to the original accusation: you're just not as good with your weapons as you think you are. That's not the game's fault at all really. | ||
|
askTeivospy
1525 Posts
| ||
|
Shockk
Germany2269 Posts
On April 17 2012 23:02 Rixxe wrote: Honestly, the latest patch should just affect people who were bad to begin with Yeah, and that's why the negative feedback regarding the patch is pretty much unanimous across all skill levels; from beginners complaining on the BF3 forums to professionals outlining the issues in their recent Youtube videos. | ||
|
Zooper31
United States5710 Posts
CS is far simpler game and theres no one talking in chat in servers unless its a couple people who frequent the same server and know each other. TF2 I give you that one, people are hugely talkative in that game. People in general are asshats online, don't expect to go into a game and expect people to help you with every little thing. If anything you will be cursed at and blamed for being new. Simply learn the game yourself, play with friends, or find a good server and join the community. Idk what you were expecting going into a random server of thousands online, sometimes it takes awhile to find a good one. I usually play on the reddit servers and theres always the same people filling the server up so you can get a sense of community. | ||
|
Rixxe
United Kingdom136 Posts
On April 18 2012 16:48 Shockk wrote: Yeah, and that's why the negative feedback regarding the patch is pretty much unanimous across all skill levels; from beginners complaining on the BF3 forums to professionals outlining the issues in their recent Youtube videos. Well obviously beginners will moan, as usually they won't be as good as vets, and therefore will suffer from not getting the first shot away, or knowing the maps, and therefore complaining that it 'must' be the suppression change. Not that they just need to practice. Regarding the 'professionals', i've seen a number of videos where they moan about how it's changed, and about how guns they have used in the past are not usable now. I've also seen other videos, in which the professionals are stating what is good NOW, and how to play with the changes, and what it's like trying do complete objectives WITH the changes. You can cry about it, and say that the changes are so huge the game is terrible and stop playing. Or you can continue playing like the majority of people and accept that some guns have changed, addons have changed, and they way you need to play has changed slightly. Lastly, people moaned BEFORE the patch. Saying 'insert gun here' was too OP, or 'insert map here' needs to change. People will never be happy, so just play the damn game or don't. From my experience, it's still enjoyable, still fun, and i'm still able to get above a 2 k/d ratio on most maps with guns i enjoy. | ||
|
Phelix
1931 Posts
On April 18 2012 17:19 Rixxe wrote: Well obviously beginners will moan, as usually they won't be as good as vets, and therefore will suffer from not getting the first shot away, or knowing the maps, and therefore complaining that it 'must' be the suppression change. Not that they just need to practice. Regarding the 'professionals', i've seen a number of videos where they moan about how it's changed, and about how guns they have used in the past are not usable now. I've also seen other videos, in which the professionals are stating what is good NOW, and how to play with the changes, and what it's like trying do complete objectives WITH the changes. You can cry about it, and say that the changes are so huge the game is terrible and stop playing. Or you can continue playing like the majority of people and accept that some guns have changed, addons have changed, and they way you need to play has changed slightly. Lastly, people moaned BEFORE the patch. Saying 'insert gun here' was too OP, or 'insert map here' needs to change. People will never be happy, so just play the damn game or don't. From my experience, it's still enjoyable, still fun, and i'm still able to get above a 2 k/d ratio on most maps with guns i enjoy. I agree with this sentiment entirely. People will complain about anything and everything, and you have to accept the patch changes. I play for fun now, with my new objective of trying to get 500 kills with each gun, as well has having fun with Rockets and collapsing buildings. The only thing I lament is that there is no True KDR stat as in BF2/BF2142 games, brings all those high KDR people who spam Metro down a notch. + Show Spoiler [Might as well vent about gun imbalances] + Personally, I complain about the M16A3/M4A1 being too good even before pre-patch and DICE did nothing to address it. In fact, they came out stating that those guns were well-balanced. In my opinion, the guns outshines every other weapon in the Assault/Engineer class because of 3 things: 1. Fastest Bullet Velocity (Makes aiming/hit registration easier, increases suppression effect) 2. Shortest Reload Time (Less downtime between fights) 3. Predictable Recoil (A must have for any competitive gameplay) That's why you see BF3 pros run those weapons. (My assumption is that they run them judging by data from symthic, don't watch pro matches/Most pro montage videos are using these weapons). The AEK-971 was the only competitor in the Assault class pre-patch, but with the foregrip nerf and increased spread per shot, makes the gun less useful, even with a buff of predictable spread. Also, I don't think the game will ever allow a 650 RPM gun to dominate (L85A2/AK-74) because by the time you fire enough damage, the FBV and the RPM of the gun of the M16 will kill faster than you can respond. I could be totally wrong, but the way I see it, combined with the new suppression effect makes these guns hard to use in a one-on-one engagement (provided equal skill.) Burst-fire weapons won't be competitive. F2000/FAMAS not viable because of the Foregrip changes. Whenever I hear comments about these 2 guns being underpowered, I facepalm. I've come to accept that things will stay the way they are, and that the only things that we can do is play with the patch, which is also why I will use these 2 guns last in my quest for 500 kills. I hope that in future patches, DICE will promote more gun diversity (or more specifically, less American bias in weapons). Partially because I disliked grinding with Chinese weapons, they were a pain to use with worse stats. | ||
|
Irratonalys
Germany902 Posts
the SKS has gotten a huge buff for example , with an increase of 9 points in max damage from 34 to 43. also the flash suppressor buff works like a charm , since its the only semi auto sniper that can attach one. My setup is flash suppressor , bipod (rarely used) , and PK-A Holo sights. got 500 kills with it in no time. Try it out , but dont put a foregrip or a scope with a bigger magnification then 4X on it , they hurt more than they help. | ||
|
Chriscras
Korea (South)2812 Posts
| ||
|
Shockk
Germany2269 Posts
On April 18 2012 17:19 Rixxe wrote: Or you can continue playing like the majority of people and accept that some guns have changed, addons have changed, and they way you need to play has changed slightly. Except that's not the case. I'm not talking about gun changes, btw, couldn't care less about those. Suppression changes and the various changes to vehicles have changed the game to the worse. Reduced precision is rewarded, vehicles have become death traps against all but the most incompetent of engineers. Jets rule supreme, and skilled pilots can dominate rounds like never before (same goes for maps like Damavand with Scout Choppers which mercilessly decimate vehicles after those were nerfed=. The patch changed the complete metagame. The whole dynamic of how an average map of Battlefield plays out is different. That's not an issue of k/d, spm or general performance but a lesson in how not to patch unless you're interested in alienating a lot of people at once. | ||
|
Ubikuuu!
Italy285 Posts
First, I honestly like the new weapon balance, LMG are no longer assault rifles in disguise, and yes, m16 is still dominant in the competitive scene and all around the best "everyday" weapon, but some weapon now clearly outshines it in some specific (and wider than pre-patch) situations. Suppression I too feel is too much, but eh, it's both ways so it's up to you being the utilizator or the victim of it, all in all makes it easier to break entrenched positions so it's not so bad. What I would like to see people rage at is the incapacity at fixing problems they often clearly identified and declared were going to fix, or at the very least were supported by dozens of video proofs! - MAV riding still possible - Camo still wont save - Flares don't work with laser designated missile (again, I don't support the idea but they wanted to do it and failed). - Helo flares still sometimes don't work against seekers. - Wanted to make jets more vulnerable to seekers, instead made them comletely immune. - Wanted do be more difficult to kill helos with jets, made it easier but lowering the minimum speed of jets - again. - M26 getting unintended advanteges from heavy barrel. - TV still blows up own helicopter. - SOFLAM still completely immune to splash damage. And I am sure I am forgetting some. Luv. | ||
|
zoltanium
Australia171 Posts
On April 18 2012 17:19 Rixxe wrote: Regarding the 'professionals', i've seen a number of videos where they moan about how it's changed, and about how guns they have used in the past are not usable now. I've also seen other videos, in which the professionals are stating what is good NOW, and how to play with the changes, and what it's like trying do complete objectives WITH the changes. You can cry about it, and say that the changes are so huge the game is terrible and stop playing. Or you can continue playing like the majority of people and accept that some guns have changed, addons have changed, and they way you need to play has changed slightly. Id like to see a video from a pro player that argues FOR new suppression that isnt brain dead or suffering from the dunning-kruger effect. The only thing that suppression has changed is that it has bogged down the pace of gameplay. Im sure all the daddy gamers were having wet dreams of all the tacticool suppression flanking maneuvers they were gonna pull against those lame kiddies that didnt play the game 'right'. My KDR/SPM is still 4 and 1000+ respectively in the new patch. All it has in inf is forced everyone to run with the .44 magnum so they cant switch to it when some idiot with a pkp bipod has missed all his bullets. I dont know why they made the new suppression only in hardcore. Thats the best of both worlds. All the people with amnesia who forgot the BF series was always about the arcade fun can keep their suppression. | ||
|
Rixxe
United Kingdom136 Posts
On April 18 2012 18:34 Shockk wrote: Except that's not the case. I'm not talking about gun changes, btw, couldn't care less about those. Suppression changes and the various changes to vehicles have changed the game to the worse. Reduced precision is rewarded, vehicles have become death traps against all but the most incompetent of engineers. Jets rule supreme, and skilled pilots can dominate rounds like never before (same goes for maps like Damavand with Scout Choppers which mercilessly decimate vehicles after those were nerfed=. The patch changed the complete metagame. The whole dynamic of how an average map of Battlefield plays out is different. That's not an issue of k/d, spm or general performance but a lesson in how not to patch unless you're interested in alienating a lot of people at once. How is reduced precision rewarded? If you hit someone with burst fire two things may happen: They will die, in which you get a kill, and go on your merry way. OR they will take damage, and be suppressed. Explain to me, how the suppression change made this any different from before? The only slight change, is that the suppression is increased and shooting back is harder. But if you played before, you'd still realize that finding cover would be the best option, and lets get something clear... you CAN still kill people while suppressed. Granted, when it comes to land vehicles i agree that the fact it takes one engineer no time at all to destroy one is a bit silly. Regarding Jets, well it kind of makes sense. Unless you are able to shoot them down as a tank or infantry (which should be hard) then it's down to other jets. No offense intended with this question, but what do you know about 'how to patch'? Plenty of games i've played in the past changed the meta game or extreme elements of the game to make it better overall, perhaps not as soon as the patch hit, but it made sense for the following changes. Fine, it's not to your taste, and that's been made clear. But it isn't that far from what it was. I'd actually love to see the figures on the number of people who apparently left the game since this new patch. | ||
|
Shockk
Germany2269 Posts
On April 18 2012 19:33 Rixxe wrote: How is reduced precision rewarded? If you hit someone with burst fire two things may happen: They will die, in which you get a kill, and go on your merry way. OR they will take damage, and be suppressed. Explain to me, how the suppression change made this any different from before? The only slight change, is that the suppression is increased and shooting back is harder. But if you played before, you'd still realize that finding cover would be the best option, and lets get something clear... you CAN still kill people while suppressed. The problem is that BF3's suppresion makes no sense, and the patch has just increased the effect. If I aim at someone, have the crosshair on their body and pull the trigger, I should hit, regardless of whether or not a bullet flew by me in the last 4 seconds. BF3 supression makes bullets magically exit the barrel at random angles and not hit. Regardless of whether it's a flank or a straight-out 1vs1, the more skilled player should win the fight - either because he fires first, or because he manages to avoid and return fire. After the patch, the latter option's chance of working has been vastly reduced. Granted, when it comes to land vehicles i agree that the fact it takes one engineer no time at all to destroy one is a bit silly. Regarding Jets, well it kind of makes sense. Unless you are able to shoot them down as a tank or infantry (which should be hard) then it's down to other jets. Jets are broken. Not only are they more efficient against ground and choppers now, they're also weaker against jets due to the reduced main gun damage. So they deal more damage, take less and can avoid it easier. Nothing of that "makes sense". If heat seekers worked properly we could talk again but DICE apparently doesn't deem it neccessary to fix that, ruining every single vehicle / air map since the patch. No offense intended with this question, but what do you know about 'how to patch'? Plenty of games i've played in the past changed the meta game or extreme elements of the game to make it better overall, perhaps not as soon as the patch hit, but it made sense for the following changes. Fine, it's not to your taste, and that's been made clear. But it isn't that far from what it was. A decent developer will gradually implement changes, see how they work out, then either leave them be, tune or revoke them. After that's done, the next changes can be done. Or you just wait a week or two and see if your community can deal with a problem by itself. That, for example, is how Blizzard patches their games outside of Beta phases. Small changes; take time to evaluate them; patch later on - and regular patches at that. DICE patches in enormous intervals, with countless changes at once; many of them not even tested properly (jets broken, MAV riding, blablabla). Best thing is that they "fixed" things that weren't broken, without any announcements as to why or prior community feedback regarding these things (see: tanks). This isn't a matter of personal taste; I'm not arguing because I don't agree with the way they wish to develop their way. I say they did a sloppy and shitty job at patching because they did; because they had no clear vision as to where their game is supposed to go; because they didn't test their patch and its countless changes, and because they have such moronic patching intervals that we'll have to live with this currently broken game for months to come. | ||
|
Rixxe
United Kingdom136 Posts
On April 18 2012 19:50 Shockk wrote: The problem is that BF3's suppresion makes no sense, and the patch has just increased the effect. If I aim at someone, have the crosshair on their body and pull the trigger, I should hit, regardless of whether or not a bullet flew by me in the last 4 seconds. BF3 supression makes bullets magically exit the barrel at random angles and not hit. Regardless of whether it's a flank or a straight-out 1vs1, the more skilled player should win the fight - either because he fires first, or because he manages to avoid and return fire. After the patch, the latter option's chance of working has been vastly reduced. Jets are broken. Not only are they more efficient against ground and choppers now, they're also weaker against jets due to the reduced main gun damage. So they deal more damage, take less and can avoid it easier. Nothing of that "makes sense". If heat seekers worked properly we could talk again but DICE apparently doesn't deem it neccessary to fix that, ruining every single vehicle / air map since the patch. A decent developer will gradually implement changes, see how they work out, then either leave them be, tune or revoke them. After that's done, the next changes can be done. Or you just wait a week or two and see if your community can deal with a problem by itself. That, for example, is how Blizzard patches their games outside of Beta phases. Small changes; take time to evaluate them; patch later on - and regular patches at that. DICE patches in enormous intervals, with countless changes at once; many of them not even tested properly (jets broken, MAV riding, blablabla). Best thing is that they "fixed" things that weren't broken, without any announcements as to why or prior community feedback regarding these things (see: tanks). This isn't a matter of personal taste; I'm not arguing because I don't agree with the way they wish to develop their way. I say they did a sloppy and shitty job at patching because they did; because they had no clear vision as to where their game is supposed to go; because they didn't test their patch and its countless changes, and because they have such moronic patching intervals that we'll have to live with this currently broken game for months to come. Please don't say that Blizzard patch properly. They are just as bad in adding something in (Without testing it properly) and then just rebuilding it when they realize how poorly it turned out (See Paladins in WoW as an example, or BNet2.0?). I also would like DICE to patch MAV riding and such, but it's not hugely game breaking.... the issue i have is the retarded crtizsm that patch gets when infact it isn't so terrible the game doesn't work anymore. Regarding the patching of things that didn't need it, using your example of Tanks: Play on Strike at Karkand, before the patch, one squad with 3 engineers in the tank. It was stupidly difficult to destroy it, and i know for one, there were a large number of people that found an example like that to be stupid. Having no other vehicles to counter it, made semi-infantry maps like that annoying as hell to play on. Also i'm pretty sure they have a direction in which they want the game to go: Close Quarters DLC is coming soon? + Suppression changes + certain gun changes = Perhaps making it so that DLC is infact enjoyable? and not someone with a bipod in a corridor getting 10000000 kills due to not enough suppression and being able to hit everyone 100% of the time? Not saying i'm correct, just perhaps that's the way they want to go. Anyway, yes they need to speed up the Patches. | ||
|
Belisarius
Australia6230 Posts
On April 18 2012 01:59 Rob28 wrote: That's your opinion, but one that seems more based on personal experience rather than cold hard facts. If you want personal experience to dictate the effectiveness of the patch, then in my experience, the patch is good since I jumped from a 1.5 k/d ratio on average to over 2 post-patch. But I know that personal experience is not a credible source. General internet consensus is that supression is too powerful, yet here you are claiming that it's not powerful enough because someone can turn around and kill you when supressed (which, imo, is a good thing because it means you don't insta-die when under supression). Your rationale seems very confusing. My thoughts go to the original accusation: you're just not as good with your weapons as you think you are. That's not the game's fault at all really. He's not claiming that the person killed him, he's claiming that the person was able to turn around and suppress him before he was able to down them outright. Thus, he couldn't kill them, they had no chance of killing him, and nobody died despite two people emptying full clips in plain sight. The issue is that suppression breeds suppression. Being suppressed stops you killing someone, but it doesn't stop you suppressing them back. So everyone ends up suppressed, and nobody ends up dead, and the game gets stupid. | ||
|
Shockk
Germany2269 Posts
Whatever I did after the patch hit - air-air, air-ground, ground-air, ground-ground, infantry-vehicle, vehicle-infantry, the patch changed the dynamics of every single encounter possible (not even counting infantry-infantry because, as said before, I couldn't care less about the gun changes and I usually shoot first, so suppresion's not interesting for me). So I've spent 20+ hours in tanks, 20+ hours in jets, ~20 hours in choppers and most of the rest fighting those vehicles and engineer ... and now I'm supposed to adapt to all of that having changed? No, screw that. It's not even about difficulty - obviously I'd have no massive issues or anything changing my playstyle. It's just that I don't want to. The game's been a certain way since Beta and for months after release and then, on a whim, everything's changed. Gradual change I can live with. Changing everything at once without testing and turning the metagame into a mess simply sucks and killed my fun in the game. | ||
| ||
