Weekend 1 - Comprehensive Gameplay Feedback From a BF4 Super-Fan

Question

Here is my comprehensive feedback from the first weekend.

I played two of the four nights it was available with friends. I was consistently top 3 on our team (mainly thanks to teamwork and aggressive objective play), and I was able to reach Level 18.

Context: I am a competitive practical shooter and shooting coach who handles many types of guns on a daily basis, a software engineer, and have amateur game development experience.

Disclaimer: I am definitely biased. I think BF4 on Hardcore mode is the best Battlefield experience, and it's not even close, so most of my feedback will be using BF4 as the standard to compare against.

First: Shoutout to the Battlefield Studios team. I haven't been excited for a video game, let alone a Battlefield game, in several years. Battlefield 6 has changed that. I think this game has massive potential and I think the team should feel good about what they've done so far. With the following changes and a server browser, this game could seriously become the best Battlefield ever made.

Snipers
- I don't like the sweet spot mechanic that is currently being used, where you must be in a certain range to guarantee a one-shot kill to the chest. It makes no sense to do all the damage at 100 yards but only 70 damage at 20 yards. Battlefield 4 should be the model for sniping. It was virtually perfect.
- The ability to change your zero distance and realistic bullet drop is exciting to have return. It adds a level of realism that doesn't make it too simulator-ey.
- The sniper glint needs to be reduced by like 90%. Again, BF4 did it right, all they have to do is copy that. Also, an Anti-Reflection Device for sniper scopes as an expensive attachment to eliminate glint would be AWESOME.
Shotguns
- Many people have complained about the shotguns but I think they're in a really good spot. Most of the people who have a problem with it are used to arcade games with shotguns that turn to glitter past 10 feet. This feels much more realistic. They should feel incredibly punishing at close range (0-40m) and fall apart in larger areas, which they do.
Grenades, Grenade Launchers, RPGs
- Basically all of the small explosives need a buff against infantry. Shooting an RPG and seeing it detonate on someone's ankles just to do 40 damage is absolutely comical. Same with Assault's 40mm launcher and frag grenades. These should feel like bombs, and if you can't use them to punish groups of enemies who are too close to each other, they lose their purpose. To balance out a damage buff, slowing down the animation to throw grenades (it currently feels like I'm a ninja) would even this out fairly well.
- Because of all this, smoke grenades are currently the best throwable option because you can deny visibility to snipers and provide concealment to revive teammates.
Pistols
- Pistol gameplay feels alright but not as good as BF4. The only thing I would change is a damage buff. It does way too little damage.
Melee Combat
- I dislike the new melee system and would appreciate a return to the BF4 knife system, where going for a knife kill requires commitment. Getting stuck in that knife-fight animation made it very balanced (and more rewarding when you succeed) compared to the rapid stabbing that the Beta currently has.
Classes
- "Closed Weapon" gameplay is the true Battlefield experience and the dev team should commit to it. Having both open and closed playlists demonstrates a lack of confidence in the identity of the game. Assault players should not have sniper rifles and LMGs available to them, and vice versa. Having carbines, shotguns, and DMRs available to all classes is great and offers more than enough freedom within the Closed Weapon system.
- Assault's two-primary-weapon feature is a little frustrating because of the lack of ammo. I don't hate the idea but I'm also not a fan. You only get ~3 magazines for each primary, so if one is a rifle and the other is a shotgun, your rifle ammo will last you about 1-2 gunfights. It really incentivizes teamwork because you'll be looking for a Support player every 5 seconds though lol.
Vehicles
- They all feel pretty good. I did not get any gameplay in helicopters, but if they feel anything like BF4's helicopters they will be great. The games that came after BF4 made flying too easy. It should be somewhat difficult, and feel very rewarding to get good at it.
- Sometimes tanks feel too.... tanky, and sometimes I melt them. This tells me that they're balanced well lol. It really comes down to the infantry support (engineers using repair torches) to keep the armor alive.
- Machine guns on vehicles should be a little more accurate. It can be very frustrating as a tank/IFV/jeep gunner to have the majority of your shots miss when an AR would totally nail the target, especially since you're a sitting duck on the jeep. It's a lot of risk and very little reward for the gunner.

If you read all of this, thank you for your time. Looking forward to next weekend, and to the October release!

up2d2 · Answer

You touched on points I forgot out of my thread and would love to agree on some.

splash damage needs huge buffing. I put rpgs into groups of people camping in opposite building staircases and got little to no damage. They should’ve been gone. I get you don’t want everyone just running with them and exploiting rpgs. But you need to be rewarded realistically for firing explosives into groups.

the 50 cal on the truck was perfect, but the machine gun in the secondary tank seat was awful?! The amount of engineers fire rpgs into the tank we need to have a good protection system - being the secondary gunner, if that gun has shots whipping everywhere other than where you aim, no one is going to want to sit in the gunners seat and assist. I found myself jumping out because the shots felt so useless.

Closed classes feels like a must, with the exception of DMRs, Carbines, and Shotguns. 2 main game sections split between closed and open tears the players in half. Keep it plain and simple how it worked.

Assault is tricky, I like to two main gun options, but it also feels like a useless class in conquest. I never used it in conquest only small maps like domination or rush. You get too little ammo and it has no real purpose. Where it use to be medic and was a fundamental class and support was purely ammo and mortars or c4s. I liked this better but am open to the change, but assault class needs working. The secondary option should only be open to dmr or shotgun in my opinion. Far distant support (no snipers though) or close distance (shotguns only).

I agree with an expensive sniper option/unlock to take down sniper glint. Everyone will likely use it so it needs to be a counter balance to something else, otherwise this option will be too buffed. Maybe you choose no sniper glint but slower bolt action reload. Or you have faster straight bolt and stay scoped in on the target while reloading but you have sniper glint. You need something as a counter balance to even it out.

otherwise well said! BF4 was perfect.

spiritofgames · Answer

I liked your comments, and I think the Battlefield devs will appreciate your feedback.

I very much agree that Closed Weapon battles should be the norm. Otherwise, you just have four hybridized classes using any weapons that they choose, and I agree with your comments concerning this.

I personally would rather see all battlefields being Closed Weapon battlefields with only ONE selection being for Open Weapons.

The Battlefield Developers will have to make the final decision on this.

grimmlock72 · Answer

i like these notes a lot, the only thing i would add is that LMGs feel underpowered atm:
suppression needs to be buffed some, whats the point of a suppression mechanic if it doesnt do anything, especially against snipers, who can still easily headshot from across the map while "suppressed"? LMGs also feel underpowered at the moment for this reason, they do the same or slightly less damage than ARs but are slower to maneuver making them outclassed at every range because they either cant do enough damage to out gun a higher fire rate AR (which probably also has less recoil) and cant suppress snipers to keep them ineffective for the team. i dont want to have to countersnipe just to deal with snipers, i should be able to suppress them to give my team a chance to move up or flank them. LMGs have a unique ability to be a viable team-based weapon if the suppression mechanic helped the team more, maybe make LMG suppression more effective than other weapons, and maybe even make that suppression buff part of the support's "signature weapon" feature

wrinkledbutz · Answer

Also, some clarity on the squad leader function would be awesome. I could not tell who could give orders the entire time I played. Battlefield 4 did squad leaders very well.

wrinkledbutz · Answer

Thanks for the discussion here, I agree!

I think a really good way to balance the use of an anti-reflection-device on a scope is to make it like real life, where the scope image becomes slightly obscured because of the hexagonal shield that's now in front of the lens. This would make it even more realistic, and balanced because you're gaining stealth and losing a bit of clarity through your scope.

Forum Discussion

Weekend 1 - Comprehensive Gameplay Feedback From a BF4 Super-Fan

7 Replies

About Battlefield 6 Beta General Discussion & Feedback

Recent Discussions

Soldiers Too Hard to Kill - TTK Needs Fixing!

The vehicles in Battlefield 6 are too weak.

Battlefield 6 Beta Feedback

TTD vs TTK

Sniper Rifle Scope Glint, a suggestion.