A really bad Battlefield 6
I really can't stand it anymore—this installment of Battlefield is truly the worst one yet. The combat area in the Breakthrough mode is absurdly small, forcing 32v32 players to fight in such a crampe...
Forum Discussion
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.
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."
