You increased ADS bullet bloom... for why?
Watching every tracer after 4 shots fly into the sky or hit the dirt when my gun/sight was never even pointed that way is some dumb design. The ADS bloom glazers say its suppose to deter people fro...
Forum Discussion
yet if you dont spray and instead burst to reset, you'll still lose gun fights to dudes just holding the trigger.
That only means that they are doing something else that wins them the firefight. If all else is equal and you have better spread control, you'd win the fight.
Make it make sense EA.
I'm not EA but I can understand why they did it. They want a bigger emphasis on using weapons at the correct engagement distance. In addition to that, they want to put a bigger emphasis on bursting and tap firing.
Why cant you just increase sight wobble if you want players to not spray?
Because this is even more unintuitive and feels terrible in its own way. It's kind of what Battlefield 4 did with its sway. I didn't particularly like that part of the game though. If you'd render a dot at the point of aim, you could just cheat the perceived sway.
Don't get me wrong though. I'm not quite sure whether I like the new weapon behavior. I thought the way it worked in the beta was mostly fine.
Battlefield is the only shooter on the planet that treats ADS as a mask for a crosshair. The whole point of going into ADS is for precision.
The ADS simply isnt precise.
I know how battlefield works. ADS spread started off in 2002 with a lot to do because of technical limitations, laggy connections like 56k limited the ability to send precise recoil animations over netcode, it was simpler to implement.
As hardware and internet speeds got better, most all games moved on to the more precise recoil animations.
Battlefield just prefers to stay in the past.
You can keep weapons useful for the intended range with realistic MOAs and damages, you dont need to bloom ADS bullets like they are a hipfire crosshair, and that's something you old battlefield heads just wont ever wrap your head around.
The beta felt very good. Patch 1.0.1.0 ADS bullet spread was increased on purpose, and it feels bad.
you old battlefield heads just wont ever wrap your head around.
I notice that whenever I want to have a nuanced discussion, there's this attempt to first see which camp I belong to (being for or against whatever the premise is). Truth of the matter is that it's not about which camp you belong to. It's not a lack of understanding. To me it's just a matter of trying things out for myself and giving myself the time to form a proper impression.
I don't particularly mind if Battlefield does things differently than other games. What matters is that it's fun, that it feels good and that there's a component of learnable skill involved. So the question I ask myself, is whether the current system actually does that.
My initial impressions after having played it for 2 days is somewhat negative. I think the spread is quite severe for a gameplay mechanic that isn't all that clearly communicated by obvious visual cues. Yes, there's the bullet tracers, or the crosshair widening, but that's very subtle and hard to keep track of mid-firefight.So the way I see it is that you can dial it back again, you can provide more visual cues or you can change the system towards a recoil system like Counterstrike. No matter what you choose though, it'll be something that will require tons of refinement. They won't get it properly implemented the first time around.
Battlefield already plays like counter strike.
The blooming crosshair in counter strike is almost identical to the ADS in BF6.
Same concept. You basically want to counter-strafe in BF6 and not shoot while moving.
If EA wants players to not shoot while moving there should be more sight bobbing while moving and ADS, and more visual recoil instead of like what you said... having to pay attention to tracers.
