Battlefield V |OT| Band of Brothers and Sisters

Olengie

Member
Oct 25, 2017
2,018
Had a great match on Hamada as a tank. Took down about 5 tanks while defending C point with the help of my squad who were playing as support. Then there was server disconnected.
 

Ostron

Member
Mar 23, 2019
76
I can't say I agree with that. He presents good arguments and goes in depth with his discussions and thinking. I prefer him to the majority of the other BF content creators.
Speaks more to the dearth of BF content creators. Levelcap is lucky if he manages to be concise for 2 minutes before he starts to go in circles to reach the 10 minute mark and checks out. Click-baity and just as reactionary as the player-base as a whole.

Ji3A3 puts in work and provides genuinely useful content. FabianChills is the best for entertainment IMO. Other than that it's a bunch of guys regurgitating reddit, and a lot of them didn't come out of the reveal debacle in a good light.
 

EatChildren

Wonder from Down Under
Member
Oct 27, 2017
2,178
I just don't think there's an MMG problem. Yes, there's issues with people camping in rubble and using MMGs, but camping is inherently a problem with Battlefield full stop and I don't know if there's a solution without disrupting the game design and map objectives to deter camping and transforming the metagame into something Battlefield isn't known for. I think we need to be careful when we criticise metagame in games like Battlefield that we're not just complaining about a style of play that is valid, just because it annoys us and disrupts our own. It's like when people whine about classes not being about to do X or Y, when uniformity between classes is not only extremely difficult but basically makes having classes redundant. Strengths/weaknesses to loadouts, classes, and style of play is the entire point of a game like Battlefield. Players need to play to their strengths, not their weaknesses, and accept when they've been bested or haphazardly handled a situation.

With MMGs and camping the core issue is in the visual busyness and asset density of maps, visibility of players, and accuracy of the guns. All combined it creates scenarios where campers aren't so much carefully defending, as exploiting the terrain to clip through objects or remain so obscured and hidden that they have an advantage not through strategic use of game systems but exploitation. And contributing to this problem is Battlefield V's incoherent design, where it doesn't know if it wants to be an arcade run and gun shooter or a hardcore military sim.

I don't mind LevelCap, I just find his criticisms of the game too frequently drop into the former observation; upset the game he's playing doesn't fully accommodate or compliment his specific style of play with little consideration for the broader strokes of a Battlefield Conquest sandbox environment. He's notorious for whining about tanks for this exact reason, because it disrupts his Call of Duty run-and-gun kill streaks and they're too hard to kill and annoying and other bullshit. It's no surprise his suggestions for the MMGs steer it away from being a defensive weapon with limited mobility. His idea of Battlefield is constant infantry focused run-and-gun play, and the reality is this isn't Battlefield no matter how much he likes it. The usefulness of defensive play in Conquest is evident when one team is doing it and the other is not. It's part of the formula.

But yeah, I just don't think there's an inherent MMG problem. Almost all of Battlefield V's balance problems tie back to other issues. MMGs a problem because of bipods? No, it's because of the damage model, player visibility, and cluttered level design. It's like saying high powered snipers are a problem, because the approach for these players is exactly the same as MMG camping; camp with a high powered rifle, only over an even longer distances, and pick off targets. The issue isn't the rifles, nor the class. The issue is the flat, open topography of most of the maps making this role too easy and flexible to play.

"Tanks are too powerful in Battlefield 1". They weren't, ever. Players just fucking sucked at trying to kill them.
 

Forerunner

The Fallen
Oct 30, 2017
4,793
San Diego
My issues with MMGs there are really no serious drawbacks to them in this game. In other games that feature them, I have no issues with them because they are balanced. BF V’s MMGs are the lowest skill ceiling weapon with insane damage output. The largest drawback to MMGs in this game is the fact that you can’t ADS. It sounds like a huge drawback, but in reality, it isn’t due to how the game is designed. Subpar visibility means you can pretty much camp anywhere and get kills with little effort. The high dps means you can win in CQC just hip firing and at range you have insane accuracy with barely any recoil. There are no other weapons in the game that give you a huge magazine, the highest dps possible, and are extremely easy to use. That’s my problem with them. If I get killed by a sniper. Whatever, the guy is a good shot, good for him. When I get killed by some MMGer that you can’t even see that is just spraying in your general direction, it’s frustrating. Of course some people will just be like; oh you have to play smarter. Playing smart has nothing to do with it. The DPS from MMGs barely gives you enough time to react before you are deleted.

I understand why players use them. This game has a lower TTK than other BFs, plus when combined with the visibility, they are less likely to move as much. So if you’re staying put more, you might as well use the weapons that give you the highest dps with the least amount of effort. I know it’ll never change. If DICE had an issue with them, they would have changed them by now, but they haven’t and won’t. There is already a huge backlash if you say they need some fixing. Some players don’t want their easy guns fixed. Players enjoy feeling powerful, that’s the whole point of video games with power fantasy. Look at all these players I can mow down! I’m so good.

Then I have to remember, while this game is supposedly competitive, it’s not; it’s as casual as you can get. It is just chaos. MMGs are banned in the competitive scene for a good reason. However, we aren’t playing in a competitive scene, so whatever.

TLDR: I need to stop taking the game so seriously and let everyone use whatever they want.
 
Last edited:

dm101

Member
Nov 13, 2018
675
I just don't think there's an MMG problem. Yes, there's issues with people camping in rubble and using MMGs, but camping is inherently a problem with Battlefield full stop and I don't know if there's a solution without disrupting the game design and map objectives to deter camping and transforming the metagame into something Battlefield isn't known for. I think we need to be careful when we criticise metagame in games like Battlefield that we're not just complaining about a style of play that is valid, just because it annoys us and disrupts our own. It's like when people whine about classes not being about to do X or Y, when uniformity between classes is not only extremely difficult but basically makes having classes redundant. Strengths/weaknesses to loadouts, classes, and style of play is the entire point of a game like Battlefield. Players need to play to their strengths, not their weaknesses, and accept when they've been bested or haphazardly handled a situation.

With MMGs and camping the core issue is in the visual busyness and asset density of maps, visibility of players, and accuracy of the guns. All combined it creates scenarios where campers aren't so much carefully defending, as exploiting the terrain to clip through objects or remain so obscured and hidden that they have an advantage not through strategic use of game systems but exploitation. And contributing to this problem is Battlefield V's incoherent design, where it doesn't know if it wants to be an arcade run and gun shooter or a hardcore military sim.

I don't mind LevelCap, I just find his criticisms of the game too frequently drop into the former observation; upset the game he's playing doesn't fully accommodate or compliment his specific style of play with little consideration for the broader strokes of a Battlefield Conquest sandbox environment. He's notorious for whining about tanks for this exact reason, because it disrupts his Call of Duty run-and-gun kill streaks and they're too hard to kill and annoying and other bullshit. It's no surprise his suggestions for the MMGs steer it away from being a defensive weapon with limited mobility. His idea of Battlefield is constant infantry focused run-and-gun play, and the reality is this isn't Battlefield no matter how much he likes it. The usefulness of defensive play in Conquest is evident when one team is doing it and the other is not. It's part of the formula.

But yeah, I just don't think there's an inherent MMG problem. Almost all of Battlefield V's balance problems tie back to other issues. MMGs a problem because of bipods? No, it's because of the damage model, player visibility, and cluttered level design. It's like saying high powered snipers are a problem, because the approach for these players is exactly the same as MMG camping; camp with a high powered rifle, only over an even longer distances, and pick off targets. The issue isn't the rifles, nor the class. The issue is the flat, open topography of most of the maps making this role too easy and flexible to play.

"Tanks are too powerful in Battlefield 1". They weren't, ever. Players just fucking sucked at trying to kill them.
You are very well written/spoken and you have excellent points.
I enjoy the mmgs not to exploit, but to use the terrain for cover. I do this with all classes.
 

dm101

Member
Nov 13, 2018
675
My issues with MMGs there are really no serious drawbacks to them in this game. In other games that feature them, I have no issues with them because they are balanced. BF V’s MMGs are the lowest skill ceiling weapon with insane damage output. The largest drawback to MMGs in this game is the fact that you can’t ADS. It sounds like a huge drawback, but in reality, it isn’t due to how the game is designed. Subpar visibility means you can pretty much camp anywhere and get kills with little effort. The high dps means you can win in CQC just hip firing and at range you have insane accuracy with barely any recoil. There are no other weapons in the game that give you a huge magazine, the highest dps possible, and are extremely easy to use. That’s my problem with them. If I get killed by a sniper. Whatever, the guy is a good shot, good for him. When I get killed by some MMGer that you can’t even see that is just spraying in your general direction, it’s frustrating. Of course some people will just be like; oh you have to play smarter. Playing smart has nothing to do with it. The DPS from MMGs barely gives you enough time to react before you are deleted.

I understand why players use them. This game has a lower TTK than other BFs, plus when combined with the visibility, they are less likely to move as much. So if you’re staying put more, you might as well use the weapons that give you the highest dps with the least amount of effort. I know it’ll never change. If DICE had an issue with them, they would have changed them by now, but they haven’t and won’t. There is already a huge backlash if you say they need some fixing. Some players don’t want their easy guns fixed. Players enjoy feeling powerful, that’s the whole point of video games with power fantasy. Look at all these players I can mow down! I’m so good.

Then I have to remember, while this game is supposedly competitive, it’s not; it’s as casual as you can get. It is just chaos. MMGs are banned in the competitive scene for a good reason. However, we aren’t playing in a competitive scene, so whatever.

TLDR: I need to stop taking the game so seriously and let everyone use whatever they want.
Good points as well. I like all the weapons, but mmgs are some of my favourite not because I'm not a good player, but because I have fun with them. And fun is why I play BFV and all video games for that matter.
 
Last edited:
Oct 26, 2017
1,342
The Netherlands
Don’t know if it has anything to do with the delay of Al Sudan large, but the performance on the small map is horrible.
Other maps are fine, but on Al Sudan I get huge frame drops.

And I have to come back from my initial praise for the map, I t’s actually a pretty boring map if you played it a couple of times.
And it’s pretty obvious that it originated from a SP map, you can’t even jump through the windows cause they’re too small... 😑
 

Forerunner

The Fallen
Oct 30, 2017
4,793
San Diego
As much as I don't like them, I will say the S2-200 is a well designed weapon. It clearly has strengths and weaknesses. All the other MMGs play similar to each other.

The spec tree needs work though. Incendiary rounds makes little sense. If you're bipod, you're not going to be looking up at the sky at aircraft. So, that means you'll be hip firing and you'll need a lot more round than 30 to score any meaningful damage since you're going to be missing.
 
Last edited:

Owlowiscious

Member
Oct 27, 2017
1,372
This week's gun is my new fav. I'm going to gold it out I like it so much.
can a crappy player as myself get multikills? can I get enough for the mission? if so, how?

or should I not expect to be able to complete that objective with my skill level?

this is all moot, since i probably won't play until after the weekly ends in less than 20 hours, but I'm still curious about what I could have done.
 

Forerunner

The Fallen
Oct 30, 2017
4,793
San Diego
can a crappy player as myself get multikills? can I get enough for the mission? if so, how?

or should I not expect to be able to complete that objective with my skill level?

this is all moot, since i probably won't play until after the weekly ends in less than 20 hours, but I'm still curious about what I could have done.
Unless they changed it, you can just farm the AI in Combined Arms to complete it.
 

dm101

Member
Nov 13, 2018
675
So I just jumped into a round where I couldn't kill any of the baddies. I emptied entire clips...

Well, that's a new one.
 

Ostron

Member
Mar 23, 2019
76
Combined Arms hasn't been tracking anything for me since the patch. :D

Not even weapon progress. Not that it really matters.
 

Forerunner

The Fallen
Oct 30, 2017
4,793
San Diego
I warmed up to the S2-200 a lot. It's a pretty fun gun. Getting the muiltkills with it isn't difficult. Best advice is to focus hip-fire it more. You can actually push out the range a lot more than you'd think. Plus the skin looks good.

 

SG-17

Community Resettler
Member
Oct 25, 2017
8,282
I just don't understand why Battlefield of all of the big AAA MP games has such recurrent issues with stability and bugfixing. It's been an ongoing issue for a decade now.

Is it Frostbite? I feel like its Frostbite.
 

Skade

Member
Oct 28, 2017
2,897
Games putting rarities on items like this always makes me laugh, like how the fuck do you define what dirt texture is common and which is epic? The shade of brown? The amount of dirt? It's so weird
I suppose it's more about the shape of the dirt. I guess. But this one sucks balls.
 

Skade

Member
Oct 28, 2017
2,897
Pretty sure there was stuff like this in the original trailers and screenshots, but I think DICE removed them after the "MUH HISTORICAL ACCURACY" bullshit
They are probably just holding them back for the Muricans. That's at least what i was thinking until last week where we got GI uniforms to unlock. So... I guess we'll have that to buy at some point.
 
Oct 26, 2017
1,342
The Netherlands
I don’t even notice most of the customizations on other players. Sure, outfits are noticeable, but face paint and weapon skins? Most of the time I’m so focused on putting a few bullets into their cranium, that I don’t see them.
 
Oct 27, 2017
1,806
Combined Arms hasn't been tracking anything for me since the patch. :D

Not even weapon progress. Not that it really matters.
I got my new MG double-kills on bots.

So I just jumped into a round where I couldn't kill any of the baddies. I emptied entire clips...

Well, that's a new one.
Terrible pilot, terrible shooter. You need to land the bullets to kill someone, not just empty the clip.

But seriously, I don't think that I ran into this issue, it is kind of L2P category if I miss shots that were definitely supposed to land. Predator camo's, on the other hand, they roam the field.

Pretty sure there was stuff like this in the original trailers and screenshots, but I think DICE removed them after the "MUH HISTORICAL ACCURACY" bullshit
It is a funny story because the robot arms were never meant for multiplayer, not there is any story regarding those characters.

I will go on the limb and say that the limited customization that we have is a technical/manpower issue. The character-customization is god damn poor in this game: several faces, no hair, no accessories. Even the limited Division 1 customization was miles better with facial features, hair, tattoos, shades and hats. And Division 1 kind of adopted cosmetic microtransactions one year down the line...
 

dm101

Member
Nov 13, 2018
675
I was on the ground and shot three enemies at point blank range and nothing. Ps, I'm a pretty good shot. I just hit 4.50 kd yesterday woo hoo.
 

Tokyo_Funk

Member
Dec 10, 2018
1,834
Pretty sure there was stuff like this in the original trailers and screenshots, but I think DICE removed them after the "MUH HISTORICAL ACCURACY" bullshit
There were a lot of "Historical accuracy" crybabies who thought the Indian face paint, the leather masks and the sniper camo did not exist, even though they're everywhere on collectors sites.





Don't get me started on the prosthetics. Lots of people saying "Robo lady" and "Cyborg" over a hinged prosthetic from the time.
 

dm101

Member
Nov 13, 2018
675
I've come to realize that the game crashes on the X every time I try to get into a game on Rotterdam.
 
Oct 27, 2017
1,806
I was on the ground and shot three enemies at point blank range and nothing. Ps, I'm a pretty good shot. I just hit 4.50 kd yesterday woo hoo.
Perhaps the game is working as intended, and it is your eyes who deceive you:


I am tired of DICE recycling the same pre-release graphic of a german with binoculars in the desert, and the Toad from X-men movie with the tank. It is even used twice in two different achievement this week... Come on, can't you take new screenshots?
 

dm101

Member
Nov 13, 2018
675
Perhaps the game is working as intended, and it is your eyes who deceive you:


I am tired of DICE recycling the same pre-release graphic of a german with binoculars in the desert, and the Toad from X-men movie with the tank. It is even used twice in two different achievement this week... Come on, can't you take new screenshots?
Lol nice.
 

Forerunner

The Fallen
Oct 30, 2017
4,793
San Diego
The hotfix last night was supposed to fix hit registration. I haven't tested it yet.


Update Notes

Hello Battlefield™ V players!

This update is a smaller Hotfix which addresses a few critical issues that were introduced with the previous update.

Change list:
  • Fix for hit registration which was the most noticeable when using airplanes. Players should see improvements across the entire game, as we have learned that this was affecting all Vehicles and Infantry under certain circumstances.
  • Face paints for the Axis male soldiers are once again functional
  • Stability improvements to the game client
 

Forerunner

The Fallen
Oct 30, 2017
4,793
San Diego
Did they fix the invisible bug?
No

We’re still investigating potential fixes for the ‘Invisible Soldier’ issue that appeared with the recent updates. Originally we believed that this was caused by faulty customization options, however after extensive testing we’ve learned that this is a purely random occurrence that exists on the client side only, and whilst harmful to the gameplay experience, it’s something that we’re confident isn’t something that’s able to be intentionally exploited by players.
 

VariantX

Member
Oct 25, 2017
5,057
Columbia, SC
I just don't think there's an MMG problem. Yes, there's issues with people camping in rubble and using MMGs, but camping is inherently a problem with Battlefield full stop and I don't know if there's a solution without disrupting the game design and map objectives to deter camping and transforming the metagame into something Battlefield isn't known for. I think we need to be careful when we criticise metagame in games like Battlefield that we're not just complaining about a style of play that is valid, just because it annoys us and disrupts our own. It's like when people whine about classes not being about to do X or Y, when uniformity between classes is not only extremely difficult but basically makes having classes redundant. Strengths/weaknesses to loadouts, classes, and style of play is the entire point of a game like Battlefield. Players need to play to their strengths, not their weaknesses, and accept when they've been bested or haphazardly handled a situation.

With MMGs and camping the core issue is in the visual busyness and asset density of maps, visibility of players, and accuracy of the guns. All combined it creates scenarios where campers aren't so much carefully defending, as exploiting the terrain to clip through objects or remain so obscured and hidden that they have an advantage not through strategic use of game systems but exploitation. And contributing to this problem is Battlefield V's incoherent design, where it doesn't know if it wants to be an arcade run and gun shooter or a hardcore military sim.

I don't mind LevelCap, I just find his criticisms of the game too frequently drop into the former observation; upset the game he's playing doesn't fully accommodate or compliment his specific style of play with little consideration for the broader strokes of a Battlefield Conquest sandbox environment. He's notorious for whining about tanks for this exact reason, because it disrupts his Call of Duty run-and-gun kill streaks and they're too hard to kill and annoying and other bullshit. It's no surprise his suggestions for the MMGs steer it away from being a defensive weapon with limited mobility. His idea of Battlefield is constant infantry focused run-and-gun play, and the reality is this isn't Battlefield no matter how much he likes it. The usefulness of defensive play in Conquest is evident when one team is doing it and the other is not. It's part of the formula.

But yeah, I just don't think there's an inherent MMG problem. Almost all of Battlefield V's balance problems tie back to other issues. MMGs a problem because of bipods? No, it's because of the damage model, player visibility, and cluttered level design. It's like saying high powered snipers are a problem, because the approach for these players is exactly the same as MMG camping; camp with a high powered rifle, only over an even longer distances, and pick off targets. The issue isn't the rifles, nor the class. The issue is the flat, open topography of most of the maps making this role too easy and flexible to play.

"Tanks are too powerful in Battlefield 1". They weren't, ever. Players just fucking sucked at trying to kill them.
I agree with the bolded. Not being able to get into your groove and get your shit started is simply not a knock against the game if the players on the opposing team are using their available resources and skill to prevent you from doing so. Its not like they're carpet bombing you with gadgets from their base, now that was some bullshit that absolutely needed adjustment.