EPTBattlefield 4 - Page 55
| Forum Index > General Games |
|
KnT
Australia243 Posts
| ||
|
Divine-Sneaker
Denmark1225 Posts
It doesn't help that pretty much removed all air gameplay from bf4, when that was something most of my friends were heavily focused on. Trying to get in an attack chopper for the first 4 months of the games lifespan has just been nothing but sad and free tickets for the enemy team. | ||
digmouse
China6326 Posts
| ||
|
hootsushi
Germany3468 Posts
On February 24 2014 06:51 Divine-Sneaker wrote: Still play occassionally and I've not had crash issues for months. It's just frustrating to play when Dice have done everything in their power to try and level the playingfield between a mentally retarded 3 year old and a top level competitive player. All the little lock-on mechanics, homing weapons and mechanics that disallow skilled players to have stand out performances are just beyond retarded. It doesn't help that pretty much removed all air gameplay from bf4, when that was something most of my friends were heavily focused on. Trying to get in an attack chopper for the first 4 months of the games lifespan has just been nothing but sad and free tickets for the enemy team. I don't know what Dice was thinking when they nerfed the attack/transport chopper into the ground. I really don't. | ||
|
Pik
Germany176 Posts
I dont get it, everywhere people write how terrible the clusterfuck is, but everybody plays it... | ||
|
Torte de Lini
Germany38463 Posts
On February 24 2014 08:53 Pik wrote: Seems like everybody is back playing Metro... I dont get it, everywhere people write how terrible the clusterfuck is, but everybody plays it... silent majority. | ||
|
Mithhaike
Singapore2759 Posts
On February 24 2014 02:17 Ethenielle wrote: I played a bit of second assault... Metro is full out grenade spam through doorways, Oman is the equivalent of filling a paint window with brown and looking at it for half an hour, Firestorm is just full chaos and caspian is OK. But for me the worst part is that the game is still just Battlefield. Take a chopper? You're shot down almost before you take off because of HVM-II, MAA and the odd stinger. Take some armor? Well, go on a streak and have it ended by some clown sitting on his iPad and sending cruise missiles down on your head, or even AC-130/Bomber/Artillery. There is just too much no-skill unavoidable damage in this game for me to bear anymore. If I want enjoyable infantry combat I'll go play CS instead. PS. The best part? Next DLC will have anti-helicopter mines. I shit you not. I agree with you on the maps. Metro is actually okay with a no explosives rule though. Firestorm/Caspian is fine, while Oman is unbalanced because thats how the map was designed. As for unavoidable damage you mentioned, air is pretty nerfed i agree, but its doable with friends. Little Birds are still extremely strong with a dedicated repairer. My squad likes to run a RPG & Stinger in little birds too which gives the little bird an extra bit of firepower. Tank? You just need to tank more. I am a dedicated ground pounder with half of my time in tanks, I've never died to cruise missiles/ac130/artillery. Bomber, once my first time on silk road. There is no unavoidable damage in BF4. You need more experience and learn what to do. Tip: Keep moving. AC130 takes 4 hits to take you out. Artillery shots coming to you are obvious with like 4sec of warning if you actually keep an eye in the sky, you can see the smoke trails incoming in your general direction, get out of there. Same thing with bomber, you can see the bomber long before the bombs are launched, if your moving NO bombers will target you as they only get 4shots and they want kills. On February 24 2014 04:50 Torte de Lini wrote: Waiting for a mode that actually appeals to me. I hit rank 50 and I've lost all desire to play. Even when I play with a friend; it's kind of mindless unorganized blandness. I instantly die as soon as I spawn or I walk about 50 metres out of base to just die and I see why Titanfall appeals to so many people; less players, get some kills (even if they are just dumb AI) and you feel like you had your run that had some momentum. With BF4, unless I'm playing Operation Locker, I play short bursts of dying. Same advice with up there. You guys seem to be blaming the game when it seems to me that perhaps you guys should learn to play BF4 better. Yes there's some games where its stupid, spawn on teammates insta death happens more often than it should, but I do not walk 50m out of base and die. Killstreaks aren't hard at all, i get them all the time. I had a amazing kill streak of 14-0 yesterday before getting flanked and died by my fault, I should have checked the flank before shooting at a target that i shouldn't have. If you really want killstreaks, use a Suppressor. BF4 peeps over rely on the mini map(so do i), Suppressors are good for killstreaks especially when flanking. People just dont turn around even when friendlies die beside them. This is BF, a tactical game. There's always some sort of cover nearby that you can run along unless its metro/locker/silk road. Silk road there's plenty of cover in D flag though. You shouldnt be dying like that if you know the map and make use of cover. | ||
|
Mithhaike
Singapore2759 Posts
On February 24 2014 07:12 digmouse wrote: I still feel DICE hasn't been able to improve their hit detection, especially after playing Titanfall beta and went back to play some Halo 4 this issue is more glaring every minute, the game does improve a lot regarding stability, haven't encountered a single crash lately but the hit detection (aka cover kills) is still horrible and rage inducing. Cover kills? You mean head glitching? thats unavoidable part of fps though, giving you the ability to shoot behind cover means head glitching is unavoidable. It's also a calculated risk, as the only part exposed is the head, 2 shots into the dome piece your dead too. Head glitching really only works against people with poor aim. Besides people dont rage when their the one doing the head glitching only when their on the receiving end. I see this as fair play. I do have beef with the invisible walls though, especially in building debris. Thats horrible design by DICE and should have been fixed long ago. i do get what you mean by hit detection, i was in titanfall and I had only 1kill trade over the entire session. BF4 kill trades are still happening, though not as bad as before. | ||
|
digmouse
China6326 Posts
On February 24 2014 09:44 Mithhaike wrote: Cover kills? You mean head glitching? thats unavoidable part of fps though, giving you the ability to shoot behind cover means head glitching is unavoidable. It's also a calculated risk, as the only part exposed is the head, 2 shots into the dome piece your dead too. Head glitching really only works against people with poor aim. Besides people dont rage when their the one doing the head glitching only when their on the receiving end. I see this as fair play. I do have beef with the invisible walls though, especially in building debris. Thats horrible design by DICE and should have been fixed long ago. i do get what you mean by hit detection, i was in titanfall and I had only 1kill trade over the entire session. BF4 kill trades are still happening, though not as bad as before. Yeah I should be more clear, I meant the all over the place random hit markers where you are not really sure where you bullets went despite you have a sub 50ms ping and in close to medium range, it is annoying as hell. | ||
|
Divine-Sneaker
Denmark1225 Posts
Technically heatseekers aren't unavoidable. However with a lot of maps lacking cliffs or buildings you can fly behind and 25 second flare recharge, it's almost as if they're unavoidable. Same goes for getting spammed by 5 mbt law's a second, or the fact that even the otherwise skillful choice in the sraw still somehow manages to get the ability to lock on to targets. Outside of immediate infantry duels which have their own frustrations in game engine limitations or whatever it is, the vehicle gameplay has largely deteriorated into a state of Quicktime Eventfield 4: dreadful mechanics. Unavoidable, while really not the proper choice of word, describes so very well how much of the gameplay ends up feeling. If I'm the best player in the world at my role, I shouldn't have to inevitably die to a handful of scrubs spamming left mouse button unless I make mistakes. Currently, we're much closer to the other extreme which is sad. | ||
|
Mithhaike
Singapore2759 Posts
Divine-Sneaker I totally agree in that case, Air pretty much have unavoidable damage due to map design. I truly think that anti-ar lockon stingers etc are OP. 1 guy with stinger will pretty much render enemy air useless. 45dmg per lock on stinger that doesn't require you to maintain lock is pretty insane. It's just fire and forget. Igla at least is better balanced in the sense that you have to maintain the lock. The squad i run with usually have just 1guy with stinger, rest rpg/smaws. 1 Stinger is enough to get any air off my squad. However anti-ground armor devices are not OP. Your talking about MBT-Laws etc which are super fast firing and have a pseudo-lockon mechanic, which I have to ask where is your infantry? I feel that Laws are balanced behind the fact that they do very little damage already. It takes 5 Laws to take out a tank for example, which is plenty of time for the armor to respond and run away. The major threat to ground armor is not other armor, it's infantry & air(mainly because you cant hit air). If your armor is in the position where it's getting hit by 5 MBT-Laws, it is supposed to die, which is what you described. Armor are supposed to be something that works with infantry, not rushing up solo and owning everything. The problem you described seems more of a playstyle issue, that armor got caught out of position, which he should pay for it in the first place. Think about it this way, in a fight with available cover, 1 good engineer with a appropriate anti-tank device(rpg/smaw/law) would have no issue in taking out any enemy tank/LAV. However in a fight with no cover, the armor should tear the infantry a new one. To take out infantry behind cover, you need other infantry....which makes the whole thing fair. A ground armor piece isn't supposed to be a powerhouse that rapes everything. It's a tactical game where all 3 aspect of the game, air/armor/infantry are supposed to work together to do objectives. I truly think that air needs a buff, while everything else is fine. Except for invisible walls and unbalanced maps(Oman). How I wish they released Bazaar instead of Oman though, Grand Bazaar was easily my favourite BF3 map by far. | ||
|
KnT
Australia243 Posts
| ||
|
Divine-Sneaker
Denmark1225 Posts
Think off 5 rpg's being fired instead. Several of them might miss now because their shooter isn't the greatest at aiming, or the tank pilot may be able to dodge one or two on his own. 5 sraws being used, this time the 5 shooters are all standing still and vulnerable to getting shot by teammates or simply being killed by the tank before the rocket reaches its target, or they might miss once again. Since we're playing a shooter, you should not be rewarded for not aiming. It used to be a very skillful part of being a good armor pilot that you can use angles and good movement to consistently dodge rpg's. That entire aspect is simply taken out with a single weapon that somehow got pushed to be the stock weapon. When a weapon removes more gameplay that it can possibly add, it's just a fucking terrible design. It shouldn't be in the game when we still have the other 4 anti ground launchers. It's boring, skillless and a thoroughly frustrating thing to deal with. Similarly the Slams are just dumb and unnecessary by design. We already have mines that serve the same role and c4 that acts as its more versatile sibling that requires a trigger. Slams do nothing but break the game due to all the invisible walls, hidden angles and all that crap, which means slams end up being far too well hidden for them to be good gameplay. Mines are fine in that they can still be seen if they're lying on a road and you're being aware of your sorroundings. You won't be looking in obscure places for mines, since they can't be anywhere else than on the ground. Slams, not so much. See that invisible crevice near the wall? Oh, there happens to be a cluster of 3 slams hidden somewhere you can't actually see them. etc. etc. They add nothing to gameplay and their only purpose is to annoy people while replacing the standard mine which was a mechanic that's worked absolutely fine for 12 years. Regular mines are at least possible to spot, and properly using terrain to hide them is something that actually takes thought as opposed to putting slams on the ceiling, a branch or an invisible wall. It isn't that being out of position shouldn't be punishable, it's that punishing another players mistake should require you to not fuck up yourself or at least allow the armor pilot to have a counterplay of his own. Lockon weapons punish small mistakes far too harhsly for the input they require from the user. That's the issue. I can go further into detail about the specific weapon/gadgets and the design flaws if you want, but I have faith that you get the point I was trying to get across. | ||
|
Mithhaike
Singapore2759 Posts
Personally I think that the lockon weapons with the exception of Stingers are pretty okay. Even MBT-Laws. I actually disagree with the slams being nerfed btw, I feel they add quite a important dimension to counter armor. Any armor player would know to check the ground for mines, and pretty much never die to mines. Slams is a way to pit the armor vs the infantry in a fun mindgame FOR WORLD DOMINATION MUAHAHHAAHAHA It isn't that being out of position shouldn't be punishable, it's that punishing another players mistake should require you to not fuck up yourself or at least allow the armor pilot to have a counterplay of his own. What I do not get is this. Why should punishing people's mistakes requires the guy to have a way,to possibly to stop you from punishing them? I have to disagree  If you fucked up your positioning, you should die without having a chance to recover. This should then teach you not to do the same mistakes again. I guess that applies to slams, if you die to slams in that area, you learn from it and from then on will check that particular area for slams. I think it serves as lessons learnt, which you can then apply against the enemy themself. | ||
|
Divine-Sneaker
Denmark1225 Posts
I've died less than a dozen times to mines/slams in my bf4 playtime so far so it's not that I have a personal vendetta against the type of people who put these down all the time. However they were put into the game, pretty clearly, with no other rationale than them being "cool". That's bad game design and they've still not been altered significantly enough that I can condone the choice to add them in the first place. On the subject of punishing mistakes I believe that we need to define what we're discussing if we intend to reach an understanding :D When I mention that I believe there should be an option for counterplay in almost any situation, I start out with the assumption that not all players are of equal skill levels. I assume that I'm viewing the scenario as myself being in the situation and whomever else involved as being the standard type of uncooperative, unaware, ignorant and not quite skilled pub player. The discrepancy in knowledge, skill or whatever that I assume is big enough that I believe that a slight mistake on my part shouldn't instantly lead to my doom every time. Were I to assume a different scenario where we had two teams of skilled competitive players, then sure, a slight mistake might definitely lead to a different result. We can then argue whether balancing and designing with competitive play or the average pub game in mind is the right choice, and whether zhint0's claim that bf4 will be the premier competitive FPS in a couple months is going to hold true  That is however how I choose to view it, and given this type of scenario I find that many mechanics in bf4 currently punish mistakes either too harshly or way too easily compared to the amount of input needed. I find that allowing players with less skill do more and more, while players with more skill can do less and less to differentiate themselves is bad. Lockon weapons are simply the biggest offender and the most obvious mechanic that violates my design philosophy. | ||
|
altered
Switzerland646 Posts
New maps: Caspian and Firestorm are great maps. They were good in BF3 and are even better in BF4. The slight changes to terrain make them more interesting for inf and armor. Metro is metro, 2014 version will be better for 24 and smaller player counts while still being a clusterfuck in 64p. But thats what metro players want, isnt it? Oman is a shitty map for pubs, the reason for this is that there is so much mapspawnable armor wich results in a snowballing effect since the side that starts to win gets more and more armor untill the got all of it. In organized play its hard to say how this map will play out. Though i have to say it will be interesting to see how the metagame evolves with on a map where they went for total asymetric ballance. Russians have more armor and easier access to the gunship while US has 2 boats and a transport. The sandstorm is strategically interesting too and tbh looks really cool. MBT LAW: Its a bad launcher already and will be even worse after the next ballance patch. People who complain about it being overpowered and not being able to dodge it just dont realise that you actually can dodge them but you have to abuse different terrain to do so. Empty vehicles (jeeps, mraps, bikes, quads) all distract the LAW, overhead cover completely denys all damage from laws since they will always hit the ceiling instead of the tank. IMO the LAW mechanics added depth to the armor gameplay since you have to use different sorts of cover depending on what launchers your opponents use now. The LAW is somewhat effective against headglitching tanks but even then if that tank has a repper they wont hurt him really since they always do mindamage and cant do crits wich means you will always be able to run. Mines: Slams are definitely too powerfull compared to mines atm. There is no reason to use mines except when you want to place more than 3 slams. DICE already announced a nerf though so i guess it will be ok after the next ballance patch. | ||
|
Mithhaike
Singapore2759 Posts
Like if i got shot in the back first, i shouldn't be able to whip around and down the other guy instead. However, truth be told, its often that you can turn around and kill that guy first because he suck and can't aim.I call that fair enough. Another example is that it doesn't matter that slams are easy to use and can be placed in some extremely good concealed areas, if i didn't check it before i went through, i should die for it. You speak of how DICE is balancing for the average baddie instead of the better players, i would like to point out that the better players will still be higher in KDR/objectives played. It's easy to differentiate the good players from the bad despite your claim that it takes lesser for the bad players to do more. I totally disagree with what you've said here. My stance is that despite what DICE has done, baddies will still be baddies and good players will still win them, but the baddies still stand a chance if the good players made mistakes. It's no fun if the baddies get raped 0-30 every round or something afterall. That sort of things kill the community/amount of people playing BF4 fast as they feel that they had no chance, why should they play? Altered, the balance you talked about has already been implemented. Slams are already nerfed and MBT LAW too. | ||
|
Divine-Sneaker
Denmark1225 Posts
While appealing to the lowest common denominator is probably better for business, it certainly doesn't let the game live up to its full potential. Really, is it good gameplay if we have to cater to the people who feel entitled to be entertained if their preferred playstyle is to run their genitalia across the keyboard? We'll probably have to agree to disagree, but I feel like it's skewed way too far in favor of not even having to aim etc. for it being a shooter | ||
|
Torte de Lini
Germany38463 Posts
| ||
|
Divine-Sneaker
Denmark1225 Posts
In pubs where the overall objective of actually winning the round is entirely unimportant to most people, any sort of tactical or strategical input gets lost instantly. | ||
| ||
