Then there’s your bullet spread mechanic—it’s completely unnecessary. Isn’t the bullet jump caused by gun recoil already a form of spread? Were the guns designed as if they were laser rifles, that you need to add extra spread?

Simply put, recoil is a constant force that can be (mostly) compensated for by dragging your mouse in the opposite direction of where the recoil pushes the barrel of your gun. What this means is that if you have perfect recoil control, you'd be insanely accurate at any range while dumping your entire magazine. It's essentially a skill check.

Spread in Battlefield exists to allow the developers to make specific weapons or weapon classes to be less effective at range. It also allows developers to apply penalties to actions such as shooting on the move, jumping or sliding. 

It's different from recoil as it's not constant. The spread increases per shot. You become less accurate as you keep firing your gun. You can't directly compensate for spread, but you can reduce/reset the build up of spread by burst- or tap firing your gun. It's not that the guns were designed as if they were laser rifles, it's that guns need spread not to be laser rifles to begin with.

There's more to it than that, but I think this is more than enough to explain why spread is absolutely necessary.

GGA-lukis wrote:

As a result, every player feels the TTK (Time to Kill) is way too fast,

I think you mean inconsistent.   Sometimes you feel like you get absolutely melted instantly in one or two shots, other times it feels like you can absolutely absorb everything.   Same with getting kills....there's just no consistency.   They need to sort out the TTK, and probably the netcode/tick rate before anything else

BF4 last real battlefield for me.

You didn't understand what I meant. Recoil and bullet spread are both mechanics designed to make players use single-shot firing to improve accuracy. What I'm saying is that for guns with high recoil, if you want to increase accuracy, you need to control the recoil and use single-shot firing. This has been the case in all previous Battlefield games.

Yet now, an inexplicable random spread has been added to assault rifles. This is equivalent to a double penalty mechanism for assault rifles. Players using assault rifles have to carefully control the changes caused by recoil while preventing the spread from widening.

Does this double penalty mechanism make assault rifles weaker, leading players to eventually abandon them? Will players instead seek higher, more concealed positions and use scopes with higher magnification to fight? The trend I’m describing is already becoming more and more common.

Under the influence of random spread and recoil dispersion, assault rifles can only be used at short distances when enemies are fully exposed. Against enemies even slightly farther away or behind some cover, players are left helpless. Additionally, the current suppression penalty is almost ineffective, which further weakens assault rifles.

Rock paper scissors balance is a wonderful thing.

Recoil patterns can be learnt.

If you master a guns recoil you would be able to zap at many ranges, to counter this you have to control your fire rate also, this is to prevent people going full auto across the map which you could if you mastered the recoil.

So we have 2 skills to learn instead of 1, recoil control and fire rate control.

Recoil is not designed to make players use burst or tap fire to improve accuracy, only spread is. You still need to control recoil and use burst or tap fire, just like you did in previous titles.

I don't know where you get this idea that specifically assault rifles have "inexplicable random spread". You could argue that assault rifles need to have their spread values adjusted, but they aren't mechanically different from any other gun in the game as far as I can tell. This means that the "double penalty mechanism" as you call it, doesn't exist.

Assault rifles can be used perfectly fine at longer distances in Battlefield 6, unless you're specifically using an assault rifle that wasn't meant to perform well at long range to begin with. The SOR-556 is perfectly capable of killing people at well beyond 100 meters. On the contrary the M433 struggles quite a bit beyond close to medium range. 

Suppression in Battlefield 6 isn't ineffective. It does what it was designed to do, which is to stop health regeneration.

I. Collapse of Weapon Balance: The "Dual Strangulation" of Recoil and Spread

The performance gap between the SOR556 and 433 you mentioned is essentially a typical case of mismatched basic attributes and penalty mechanisms. According to the spread rules of the Battlefield series, weapon accuracy is jointly determined by "recoil control" and "spread radius":

• Positive Case: SOR556 – Its ultra-low base recoil (measured vertical recoil is only 22 units) ensures that even with stacked spread penalties, bullet impact points remain concentrated in the effective damage zone. The semi-automatic hit rate within 150 meters can reach over 60%.
• Disastrous Case: 433 – With a high base vertical recoil of 47 units, coupled with spread penalties that increase per shot, the bullet spread radius during full-auto fire is 3 times larger than that of the SOR556. The hit rate beyond 70 meters is less than 15%.

This "double-layer penalty" creates a harsh filter: only weapons with a base recoil below 30 units (such as the M4A1) can barely adapt to mid-range combat. All other assault rifles are forced to retreat to close-quarters battles within 50 meters. This also explains why the SCW (submachine gun) and TR7 (shotgun) have become mainstream – they completely bypass mid-range accuracy requirements and use high close-range burst damage to compensate for mechanical flaws.

II. Failure of the Suppression System: Assault Soldiers’ "Counterattack Dilemma"

The suppression mechanism in the current version only restricts health regeneration, which stands in sharp contrast to the classic design of Battlefield 1:

This weakening directly leads to an imbalance in mid-range confrontations: Designated Marksman Rifles (DMRs) such as the SVK-8.6, relying on 22 units of vertical recoil and the advantage of a 3x scope, can stably score a two-shot kill within 150 meters. However, assault soldiers’ low-magnification scopes (1-2x) make it difficult to track targets beyond 70 meters. Tests show that the target recognition rate with a red dot sight at 80 meters is less than 30%, and the depth-of-field blur during shooting further interferes with aiming. More critically, even if assault soldiers maintain continuous suppressive fire, they cannot force snipers to stop holding their breath – instead, they are accurately counter-killed.

III. Misaligned Class Positioning: From "Frontline Breakthrough" to "Close-Quarters Brawler"

DICE once attempted to strengthen the assault soldier’s "frontline breakthrough" positioning by restricting weapons (banning dual-assault rifle combinations), but mechanical flaws have completely distorted this design:

1. Difficulty in Detection – Lack of reconnaissance tools means mid-range enemies must be identified with the naked eye. The limited field of view of low-magnification scopes turns assault soldiers into "passive targets."
2. Difficulty in Target Acquisition – The Q-mark only covers targets within 50 meters; enemies beyond 70 meters are completely "invisible."
3. Difficulty in Hitting Targets – The dual penalties of recoil and spread, combined with aiming blur, make mid-range shooting a "game of chance."

This ultimately forms a vicious cycle: Assault soldiers are forced to abandon mid-range combat and switch to CQB (Close Quarters Battle) confrontations. This further squeezes the survival space of engineers and support soldiers, exacerbating the imbalance in team coordination – which runs counter to the official original intention of "strengthening class differentiation."

I can further optimize the translation of technical terms (such as weapon names or mechanism descriptions) to align with Battlefield’s official English terminology. Do you want me to adjust and provide a standardized glossary of game-specific terms?

一、武器平衡的崩溃：后坐力与扩散的“双重绞杀”

你提到的SOR556和433的性能差距，本质上是基础属性和惩罚机制不匹配的典型案例。根据《战地风云》系列的扩散规则，武器精度由“后坐力控制”和“扩散半径”共同决定：

• 正面案例：SOR556 – 其超低基础后坐力（测量的垂直后坐力仅为 22 个单位）确保即使有叠加的扩散惩罚，子弹的着弹点仍然集中在有效伤害区域。150米内半自动命中率可达60%以上。
• 灾难性案例：433 – 凭借 47 单位的高基础垂直后坐力，加上每次射击增加的扩散惩罚，全自动射击时的子弹扩散半径是 SOR3 的 556 倍。超过70米的命中率小于15%。

这种“双层惩罚”产生了严酷的过滤器：只有基础后坐力低于 30 单位的武器（例如 M4A1）才能勉强适应中距离战斗。所有其他突击步枪都被迫撤退到 50 米以内的近距离战斗中。这也解释了为什么SCW（冲锋枪）和TR7（霰弹枪）成为主流——它们完全绕过了中程精度要求，使用高近距离爆发伤害来弥补机械缺陷。

二、压制系统的失效：突击兵的“逆袭困境”

当前版本中的压制机制仅限制生命恢复，这与《战地风云 1》的经典设计形成了鲜明的对比：

这种削弱直接导致了中距离对抗的不平衡：SVK-8.6等指定射手步枪（DMR）依靠22单位的垂直后坐力和3倍瞄准镜的优势，可以在150米内稳定地进行两发必杀。然而，突击士兵的低放大倍率瞄准镜（1-2 倍）使得跟踪 70 米以外的目标变得困难。测试表明，80米处使用红点瞄准器的目标识别率不到30%，射击过程中的景深模糊进一步干扰了瞄准。更关键的是，即使突击士兵保持持续的压制火力，他们也无法迫使狙击手停止屏住呼吸——相反，他们会被准确地反杀。

III. 职业定位错位：从“前线突围”到“近身格斗”

DICE曾试图通过限制武器（禁止双突击步枪组合）来加强突击兵的“前线突破”定位，但机械缺陷已经彻底扭曲了这一设计：

1. 难以检测 – 缺乏侦察工具意味着必须用肉眼识别中距离敌人。低倍率瞄准镜的视野有限，将突击士兵变成了“被动目标”。
2. 目标捕获难度 – Q 标记仅覆盖 50 米以内的目标;70米以外的敌人完全“隐形”。
3. 击中目标的难度 – 后坐力和扩散的双重惩罚，加上瞄准模糊，使中距离射击成为一种“机会游戏”。

这最终形成了一个恶性循环：突击兵被迫放弃中距离战斗，转而进行CQB（近距离战斗）对抗。这进一步挤压了工兵和支援兵的生存空间，加剧了团队协同的不平衡——这与官方“加强阶级差异化”的初衷背道而驰。

I. Collapse of Weapon Balance: The "Dual Strangulation" of Recoil and Spread
The performance gap between the SOR556 and 433 you mentioned is essentially a typical case of mismatched basic attributes and penalty mechanisms. According to the spread rules of the Battlefield series, weapon accuracy is jointly determined by "recoil control" and "spread radius":
Positive Case: SOR556 – Its ultra-low base recoil (measured vertical recoil is only 22 units) ensures that even with stacked spread penalties, bullet impact points remain concentrated in the effective damage zone. The semi-automatic hit rate within 150 meters can reach over 60%.
Disastrous Case: 433 – With a high base vertical recoil of 47 units, coupled with spread penalties that increase per shot, the bullet spread radius during full-auto fire is 3 times larger than that of the SOR556. The hit rate beyond 70 meters is less than 15%.
This "double-layer penalty" creates a harsh filter: only weapons with a base recoil below 30 units (such as the M4A1) can barely adapt to mid-range combat. All other assault rifles are forced to retreat to close-quarters battles within 50 meters. This also explains why the SCW (submachine gun) and TR7 (shotgun) have become mainstream – they completely bypass mid-range accuracy requirements and use high close-range burst damage to compensate for mechanical flaws.
II. Failure of the Suppression System: Assault Soldiers’ "Counterattack Dilemma"
The suppression mechanism in the current version only restricts health regeneration, which stands in sharp contrast to the classic design of Battlefield 1:
Mechanism Dimension    Current Version (Health Regen Restriction Only)    Classic Version (Comprehensive Suppression)
Aiming Interference    None    +250% first-shot spread + 123% recoil
Visual Impact    None    Red-tinted screen blur + dynamic shaking
Tactical Value    Extremely low    Can force enemy snipers to reposition
This weakening directly leads to an imbalance in mid-range confrontations: Designated Marksman Rifles (DMRs) such as the SVK-8.6, relying on 22 units of vertical recoil and the advantage of a 3x scope, can stably score a two-shot kill within 150 meters. However, assault soldiers’ low-magnification scopes (1-2x) make it difficult to track targets beyond 70 meters. Tests show that the target recognition rate with a red dot sight at 80 meters is less than 30%, and the depth-of-field blur during shooting further interferes with aiming. More critically, even if assault soldiers maintain continuous suppressive fire, they cannot force snipers to stop holding their breath – instead, they are accurately counter-killed.
III. Misaligned Class Positioning: From "Frontline Breakthrough" to "Close-Quarters Brawler"
DICE once attempted to strengthen the assault soldier’s "frontline breakthrough" positioning by restricting weapons (banning dual-assault rifle combinations), but mechanical flaws have completely distorted this design:
Difficulty in Detection – Lack of reconnaissance tools means mid-range enemies must be identified with the naked eye. The limited field of view of low-magnification scopes turns assault soldiers into "passive targets."
Difficulty in Target Acquisition – The Q-mark only covers targets within 50 meters; enemies beyond 70 meters are completely "invisible."
Difficulty in Hitting Targets – The dual penalties of recoil and spread, combined with aiming blur, make mid-range shooting a "game of chance."
This ultimately forms a vicious cycle: Assault soldiers are forced to abandon mid-range combat and switch to CQB (Close Quarters Battle) confrontations. This further squeezes the survival space of engineers and support soldiers, exacerbating the imbalance in team coordination – which runs counter to the official original intention of "strengthening class differentiation."