There is no aim or suppression penalty to enemies that you're shooting

Why would there need to be an aim or suppression penalty to begin with? 

It would mean that the person who shoots first always has the advantage instead of the person who aims, burst, tracks or chooses their engagements better. Suppression and flinch penalties reward people for bad aim or bad engagements. 

Presumably you had an automatic gun that did equal or less than 25 damage per shot, or you wouldn't have been able to make 3 headshots without killing your opponent. At 30 meters you'd have a pretty significant advantage over the sniper, you shoot faster and are punished less severely for missing a single shot. Yet you failed at landing that last bullet granting you the kill, before the sniper could return fire.

I can't tell you why you were killed first, but the lesson here is that an advantage doesn't guarantee a kill, it simply makes it more likely.

So just because you got killed, doesn't necessarily mean that there's something wrong with the game. That said, there are couple of other fixes that I'd suggest:

1. The headshot multiplier for the base weapon, hollow point and synthetic point needs to be high enough to guarantee a reduction of the bullets to kill. 
2. The sweet spot mechanic needs to be removed. 
3. The bullet drop for snipers needs to be more severe. 
4. The range finder attachment needs a nerf. 

I think that point 1 would be a better way to solve the issue, rather than relying on flinch or suppression. You made 3 headshots, so I think the game should reward that. 

Points 2, 3 and 4 wouldn't necessarily change anything at 30 meters, but it would make snipers less powerful outside of the range of other weapons.

There's a little bit of flinch when getting hit, but it's not significant. As a recon main, I agree with bringing back suppression primarily against snipers. It should only affect your aim at long ranges though. 30 meters like you said you were fighting a sniper at isn't long range though. You had the advantage at that range. 

Besides that I also agree with the comment above that the sweetspot should be removed. I don't like being sniped by other snipers with the sweetspot mechanic. I'm chasing headshots, not easy body shots that anyone can make. Bad aim with a precision weapon shouldn't grant one hit kills just for being a certain distance from the enemy. I didn't really take advantage of sweetspots in BF1 either because they felt cheap. I always used the M95 which didn't have a sweetspot in that game much like the Mini Scout in this game. 

I don't think they need to increase bullet drop.

I do however agree they should fix the rangefinder so you can't just bind it to your firing button so that you never have any bullet drop. I don't use the rangefinder except at extreme ranges, and when I do I manually set it without binding it to the fire button. That's how it's supposed to work. They could easily fix that by making the rangefinder adjust after the shot is fired when bound to the same button.

There should be some flinch/forced sway at the very least...as that would be more realistic.   We already have bullet drop(which actually could use a little fine tuning tbh), but I don't see it as a super game breaking problem

Battlefield is not realistic, nor should it try to be. If you want to convince me why flinch or suppression is good, then please explain from a gameplay perspective, what's so fun about having your aim thrown off every time you're in a firefight? The way a firefight works is fundamental to a first person shooter game. If you screw up those fundamentals, it's absolutely a game breaking problem.

If it wasn't realistic, we wouldn't have bullet drop to take into account over distances in the game.   And having your aim thrown off by bullets snapping by you or hitting the cover right in front of you would be 100% normal.   A bit of flinch would be alright, and more natural.   I don't think you're comprehending what I'm saying.  I'm not saying just the bullets whizzing by shouldn't do it, but the ones hitting the cover as you're trying to aim definitely should...that's all part of a firefight.

the penalty for being shot at first is death 😆

You're making a flawed argument. Arcade games can have realistic elements, but they deliberately choose what to include and what to exclude. 

Besides, the bullet drop in this game isn't even that realistic. It's not affected by wind, temperature, humidity, momentum and the air density is a static value. Do you perhaps think we have the coriolis effect to account for? 

I understand precisely what you're saying and I'm saying that I'm not convinced that it's a good thing. I don't think it should be part of a firefight. I'd like firefights to be a competition between players using skill-based mechanics. Spread and recoil can be dealt with, but you can't exactly counteract flinching.

This is a very difficult balance for Dice, snipers are one-shot-kills (headshots/sweetspot) and that is fundamentally a problem, against weapons that needs 4-5 bullets to kill, It always feel bad to be on the receiving end, when getting one-shotted.

It's the same problem with shotguns, I understand the game-mechanics, but it still feels 'stupid' to be one-shotted.

I personally feel that suppression should not really affect aiming, but getting hit, should still have some penalties. Having the ability to one-shot-kill at any distance is a very strong ability, especially in BF6 where sniping has been made a lot easier than i earlier titles (at least since BF1). 

I think there's certainly a discussion to be had about sniper rifle balance in this game.

The primary mistake people keep making is that they see suppression/flinching as something that's supposed to be a counter to snipers. The problem with that reasoning is that suppression/flinching not only affects snipers, but affects every type of engagement.

Not only that, but this idea to challenge a sniper at range is the same as challenging a shotgun at CQB. It's challenging somebody when they are at an advantage. It seems quite odd to me that people complain about their own mistake and then blame the game for not allowing that mistake to work in their favor.

I don't dispute that Battlefield 6 sniping is too strong, but I just think you need a solution that solves exactly the problem you seek to fix and doesn't just introduce all sorts of unintended side effects. People are laser focused on making the enemy feel some kind of aim penalty without exploring alternative solutions. 

cso7777 wrote:

snipers are one-shot-kills (headshots/sweetspot)

Explain this then lol🤣  https://www.youtube.com