Let's all work together to speak up—we must not let Battlefield become just another COD-style game focused solely on gunfights. Let Battlefield return to what it's supposed to be.

1. Standing still/Crouch and Prone does increase accuracy, just probably not as noticeable as you'd like it to be.
2. Suppression that affects weapon handling is terrible, rewards people who can't aim and it just makes a blurry inconsistent mess. Glad it's gone and I hope it never comes back.
3. It's not a realistic-style game, it only has realistic aesthetics, not gameplay. If it were it'd have an even lower TTK. I do think that it wouldn't hurt if the TTK was a bit slower on some of the guns though. Especially those that can drop you below 250 ms.
4. Agreed.
5. Obviously they do have statistics on this and the player numbers of Battlefield show that they are speaking to a larger target audience than they have ever done before. TTK isn't inherently tied to age. Slower paced games that have lethal guns do just fine with older target audiences. Game pace isn't determined by TTK alone, there are many different reasons that this game feels relatively fast. Although there's nothing wrong with fast gameplay. As an older gamer, I can keep up just fine.
6. Agreed. 

The damage consistency needs some major work.   Since the REDSEC update, I’ve been consistently dying in four shots but only totalling 40 damage…in fact the two worst I just experienced were OHK for 13, and 9.  Now if I was down in health I’d understand…but I’m dying with full health bars.   

Something’s definitely not right at the moment.

What you're seeing is that it only shows you the last 4 sources of damage. It doesn't necessarily show you the damage that happens before that. So if you're shot by an SMG at let's say 40 meters, chances are that it does around 12.5 damage per shot (rounded off to 13). Since it requires at least 8 shots to down a full health opponent, you're only going to see 50 damage out of the 100.

Regarding the second point, are you telling the assault soldiers to use low-magnification scopes for aimed semi-automatic fire at machine gunners behind cover? Or at mid-to-long range snipers? And then you say this is for helping people aim? Current battlefield environments have already proven you wrong. Without suppression penalties, no one uses low-magnification scopes to deal with snipers or entrenched machine gunners. Instead, they all use weapons like the TR7 SCW-10 for close-quarters combat. This makes the short Time-to-Kill (TTK) of this generation even shorter.

What I'm saying is that returning fire against somebody in a superior position is a pretty good way to lower your life expectancy. Why do you believe you should always be able to fire back at a mounted/entrenched machine gunner or a sniper in an overwatch position?

Assault players are specialized at aggressively pushing forward and contesting objectives. They aren't meant to compete at longer ranges. If a machine gunner or sniper is shooting at you, do the sensible thing and immediately break line of sight. Flank them and then engage them where you have the advantage.

Short-range weapons have no need for low magnification scopes, because of damage drop off. Assault rifles don't do enough damage at the ranges where those scopes would matter. Instead, you could choose to use a DMR, which is much better suited for those engagement distances.

The Core Tactical Logic of Assault Troopers' Advancement

What you’ve described is exactly the core logic behind an assault trooper’s advancement — suppression + gradual approach is the correct tactic, and without a suppression mechanism, this tactic simply cannot be implemented.

1. The Tactical Core of Assault Troopers: Suppression as a Precondition for Advancement

• Machine guns and snipers positioned at long-range rely on stable aiming to hold their ground.
• Only by using suppressive fire to disrupt the enemy’s stable aiming rhythm can assault troopers create a window of opportunity to close in.
• Gradual advancement is not a reckless charge; it follows a cycle of "suppress → take cover → suppress again → push forward again."
• Without suppression, assault troopers will only be exposed to enemy gunfire when advancing, leaving them with no chance to get close at all.

2. Map Adaptability in Breakthrough Mode

• Most maps in Breakthrough Mode have concentrated routes; flanking paths are few and easily detected.
• In this mode, it is impossible to rely on flanking to avoid enemy entrenched positions.
• Only by using suppression to force the enemy’s entrenched weapons to retreat can the defensive line be breached — this is precisely the core role that distinguishes assault troopers from other unit types.

3. Key Conclusion

The purpose of suppression penalties is not to force assault troopers into long-range engagements with the enemy, but to provide them with a tactical tool for "gradual advancement." Without this tool, the assault trooper’s core role as a "breaker" is meaningless.