BF1 Multiplayer PC Sucks

@AragingMonk  i dunno. I don't usually play MMOFPS (or MMO's generally). But somehow i am having fun in BF1. Modern warfare is about mobility, while WW1 was about trenches and towns. Lots of camping, if you want to call it that way. Battles that were thought for a few square meters of land...Bloody, senseless. Artilery barrages, machine gun fire, barb wire, gas. The rapid development of the airplane and the appearance of the tank led to the basis of the modern warfare. But that happened late in the war and by the time the loss of human lives was really high. So, i think the MP reflects quite well the time period.

Though, the game does go beyond the historic reality. The automatic weapons were rare and most of the handguns were usually rifles. Many of those rifles were made in the XIX-th century and were unfit for the new type of war. The first AA guns were reconverted machine guns and field artillery, which made them less effective. By the end of the war, though, the AA became an actual thing, with dedicated weaponry. In BF1, those are quite effective, so again a wee bit inaccurate. But a game is supposed to be fun, so we can forgive such derailings from the historical reality. 

Would have loved to see some ships, too. Destroyers, submarines, cruisers, battleships, torpedo ships, mine ships. Just imagine...

I think that each BF has its own merits, though i would love to see a remaster of 1942 or BF: Vietnam. Wasn't a big fan of the 2142, but even that one was fun in its own way.