Author Topic: BATTLEFIELD V  (Read 29622 times)

0 Members and 1 Guest are viewing this topic.

Stoney Mason

  • So Long and thanks for all the fish
  • Senior Member
Re: BATTLEFIELD V
« Reply #120 on: September 06, 2018, 11:45:48 PM »
Played with a few friends all evening. The game does grow on you.

And playing with a competent squad is pretty much op. That has always been the case in battlefield but its doubly so here because of how strict the game is regarding health and ammo. We were just crushing because of that.

Playing solo is a huge challenge by comparison.

benjipwns

  • your bright ideas always burn me
  • Senior Member
Re: BATTLEFIELD V
« Reply #121 on: September 07, 2018, 02:24:13 AM »
seemingly crashes on me during finding a new game after every match...ends with a directx NO DRIVER error lolol

game is pretty damn fancy with dem gfx, though i gotta figure out what tanks the fps when i get shot, only problem because it makes me think "i could have also if..." even though i'm probably down already

guns are lethal in this like wtf...it's bf but i'm nailing dudes with a sten from distance? the substitute system identifying visible dudes is alright, only losers like me ever spot anyway...a group of them popped up to my right and i fired some grenades at them and then there were these wonderful explosions as they also got shot by my squad dudes on otherside of tracks

dat subtle rain storm that comes in, omg DICE why u distractin me from war with pretty

also totally saw a flying upside down halftrack with three bodies hanging off of it just bustin until it smashed into a bridge :lawd

benjipwns

  • your bright ideas always burn me
  • Senior Member
Re: BATTLEFIELD V
« Reply #122 on: September 07, 2018, 02:29:46 AM »
oh apparently DX12 runs like garbage, i probably turned that on...

DX11 frame times, the huge bunch of spikes are a map change:


DX12 frame times:


 :dead

benjipwns

  • your bright ideas always burn me
  • Senior Member
Re: BATTLEFIELD V
« Reply #123 on: September 07, 2018, 02:39:11 AM »
holding down a bombed out building point by myself, getting totally lucky at guessing at where the NAZIS were coming from as i mow them down since they have to single file into the area, repositioning and self-healing, then repeating for three "waves" as i cap it, then like five dudes from my team showing up to close it out and clear the area along with two APCs was pretty fucking epic

bless up :rejoice

benjipwns

  • your bright ideas always burn me
  • Senior Member
Re: BATTLEFIELD V
« Reply #124 on: September 07, 2018, 02:46:29 AM »
also the visual fucking density of rotterdam is already insane and such a crazy leap over bf1's cities, how are we as human beings supposed to be able handle this ray tracing shit added in

Nabbis

  • oops
  • Member
Re: BATTLEFIELD V
« Reply #125 on: September 07, 2018, 03:42:12 AM »
I just sit in a cannon on narvik and get 60 kills by sniping with it. Yes, im that dude.  :doge

Nintex

  • Finish the Fight
  • Senior Member
Re: BATTLEFIELD V
« Reply #126 on: September 09, 2018, 09:04:40 AM »
Yesterday I got hold of a machine gun on the snow map.
The noobs just kept coming. I must've killed about 30.

Driving tanks also feels good. The slow ass turning Tiger turret is on point.

Overall I'm liking it but Angry Joe and his crew made some great points.
BFIV had 80 guns at launch, this has 35. It had all those attachments (longer barrel, extended mag what have you) which are now replaced by a Battlefront like progression system.
It's quite something to see just how much EA has dumbed down Battlefield over the years. BFIV was basically math, science and skill.

EA's now making these 'babbies 1st shooter' games.
🤴

Nabbis

  • oops
  • Member
Re: BATTLEFIELD V
« Reply #127 on: September 09, 2018, 09:09:58 AM »
Yeah, i ain't buying that game. Perhaps in a year if it's actually good though the current direction since Battlefront is trash and i would not count on it. Can't deny i had some fun for about an hour but it feels so soulless and empty for the most part.

TEEEPO

  • hi, i suck
  • Senior Member
Re: BATTLEFIELD V
« Reply #128 on: September 09, 2018, 12:30:23 PM »
possibly the best battlefield since 4  :idont

benjipwns

  • your bright ideas always burn me
  • Senior Member
Re: BATTLEFIELD V
« Reply #129 on: September 10, 2018, 09:49:53 PM »
dude tried to drive a tank through the one building like in the trailer, but it got wedged on debris and nobody could get out because they would get stuck to the tank, and people were squad spawning on them, and other people were trying to get through and getting stuck too

so i threw a moltov at it

someone else rocketed the tank and it flew straight up in the air with everyone still attached to it burning

world war ii was seriously fucked up

eleuin

  • perennial loser
  • Senior Member
Re: BATTLEFIELD V
« Reply #130 on: September 10, 2018, 10:26:59 PM »
I hope they don't tweak the ammo amount too much

thisismyusername

  • GunOn™! Apply directly to forehead!
  • Senior Member
Re: BATTLEFIELD V
« Reply #131 on: September 10, 2018, 10:46:03 PM »

Edit: Meant to quote Stoney. Oops.

I agree with you. But as someone that got burned hard with the last release (the PC version died really fast and everyone went back to 4), I'm not buying this. For one, the spotting change pisses me off. For another, I've seen far too many people not doing what their class should be doing to where the gameplay changes are just going to be more frustration inducing more than anything. I can't count the number of times I've had to run back to a previous set hoping not to die because a medic or support won't resupply/heal you.

Planes are utterly worthless. They turn like boats, and the spotting change means unless a recon (lol at this next part) actually uses their kit items, you're basically firing blind. The bomber is worthless as well, because you can't "time" your bombs, for some reason, there's a "lag"/input lag from when you click to drop to where it actually drops. Something you can adjust to, but still is dumb.


The modes are majorly... boring... I don't know how to put it. I've been tired of Conquest since BF3, and Operations two-day mode doesn't work for me. If Shock Operations (which they introduced in 1 with the last patch) were in with the operation being random (the capture the flags and/or the bombing run) one map-rotation, I'd maybe be happier with the mode.

But as it is, I paid $120 for the last outing, and they brought out a Premium-enabled version for $30 six months later before all the DLC was out. So fuck EA, I'm not buying this outing. And I don't know ANYONE on PC that is going to buy it. Everyone I know that has played in the series past entries for 500+ hours hates it.

benjipwns

  • your bright ideas always burn me
  • Senior Member
Re: BATTLEFIELD V
« Reply #132 on: September 11, 2018, 01:21:25 AM »
All the stuff from BF1's Operations are supposed to be in. I think they may have picked this one because it was supposed to be part of the whole Beta path, you played Rottendam the first day, then the "two days" of Norvik, then random to get the badge.

As a dude who only was playing medic, throwing out packs is broken or misdesigned. You can only do it if the prompt comes up, and you have to be a specific distance from people, too close and you can't just drop them on people anymore. You literally have to "throw" them to people. So my old thing of sneaking into cover where guys are and dropping them some health and then moving onto the next is worthless.

benjipwns

  • your bright ideas always burn me
  • Senior Member
Re: BATTLEFIELD V
« Reply #133 on: September 11, 2018, 01:24:38 AM »
I was a squad leader and after spending five minutes trying to figure out how to get my "reinforcements" I eventually tried to drop a halftrack for us. But it landed on top of this building despite me indicating the road. Where it spent probably the next five minutes or so increasingly fidgeting as it fought its physics model with the structure, eventually, it busted through the roof and smashed down through the whole front side of the building probably scaring the shit out of some dudes who were right next to where it landed. Then they got it in and took it. So success?

benjipwns

  • your bright ideas always burn me
  • Senior Member
Re: BATTLEFIELD V
« Reply #134 on: September 11, 2018, 01:28:25 AM »
the bf beta jank is like a bonus reward for putting in extra time with them beyond just checking it out

spoiler (click to show/hide)
never forget rip in peace wwi veterans

[close]

Stoney Mason

  • So Long and thanks for all the fish
  • Senior Member
Re: BATTLEFIELD V
« Reply #135 on: September 11, 2018, 01:44:06 AM »
Now that the beta is over, I'll post my final impressions.

Overall I'm alot more mixed on it than I wish I was and that's rough since Battlefield historically is my favorite shooter franchise by a long margin.

I'm fine at this point with the ammo and the health stuff. I mean, personally, I'm not overly a fan of this kind of direction. Battlefield hasn't been a tactical shooter in a long time, and adding in these elements from the more hardcore side of things isn't really my favorite thing in the world. But I can deal with it for an iteration of the franchise.

My main issue is that its like trying to turn battlefield into something it hasn't been and the player base hasn't shown me they are up to the challenge. Playing with a squad of friends is a vastly different experience than playing with randoms and that gap has never been larger. Of course I would always love to play with friends but sometimes that just isn't possible but Battlefield 5 is just frustrating and annoying when you play by yourself.  The game is just so much more campy and defensive and the game mechanics really support this kind of play strongly. That's just not my favorite style of play. I don't like to try to capture a flag and there are 4 people hiding in random weirdo spots that the map design supports and the lighting supports. I don't mind this in Rainbow Six siege but that's not why I come to battlefield. There was more stationary defensive play in this beta than I've ever experienced in any battlefield game. That's just not fun for me personally.

Related to this, there is something about the lighting and the design of players that I find really hard to distinguish. DICE has said they are adding rim lighting to the final game and I hope that is a large part of it, but I've never had such trouble picking out players from the background in any battlefield game before. There is also the issue when you go inside a building and people are just camping in the darkness inside a building and just are impossible to see. Even on the snow map I find it hard to see people sitting in the rubble of the destroyed buildings. Maybe my old ass eyes are just failing me, but between that and the tiny ass icons on a lot of things like revives, I feel like I need to stick my face a centimeter from the screen to see anything.

As far as gunplay, I feel like the semi-auto weapons are crap compared to the full auto weapons which is disappointing because Battlefield one eventually ended up with a pretty good balance between the two. I saw no reason to use them here. I know its beta but still.

The beta is super buggy so you can tell DICE is behind at this point which is somewhat concerning.

So yeah, I have some issues with the game at this stage. I'm hoping they put out a big list of things they learned/are changing post beta to reassure me.


Stoney Mason

  • So Long and thanks for all the fish
  • Senior Member
Re: BATTLEFIELD V
« Reply #136 on: September 11, 2018, 01:47:40 AM »
As a dude who only was playing medic, throwing out packs is broken or misdesigned. You can only do it if the prompt comes up, and you have to be a specific distance from people, too close and you can't just drop them on people anymore. You literally have to "throw" them to people. So my old thing of sneaking into cover where guys are and dropping them some health and then moving onto the next is worthless.

Yeah I don't care for it either as someone who almost exclusively plays medic in battlefield games. I just don't know why it all has to be so fiddly now. Why I have to interact with everything instead of a lot of things just being passive like they use to be in battlefield games. I know I'm old man yelling at clouds at some of this stuff, but I just preferred the old mechanics to some of the new choices made.

benjipwns

  • your bright ideas always burn me
  • Senior Member
Re: BATTLEFIELD V
« Reply #137 on: September 11, 2018, 02:18:06 AM »
lol I couldn't figure out how to open doors, I'm mashing E and F and V, and my guy just knifes the door

I wasn't the only one I saw trapped like this, and you can't shoot them out easily.

edit: just checked reddit there's a bunch of threads about it :lol

they say it just plain doesn't work, you should just sprint into them

Stoney Mason

  • So Long and thanks for all the fish
  • Senior Member
Re: BATTLEFIELD V
« Reply #138 on: September 11, 2018, 02:29:24 AM »
Random side note.

I never thought I would see the day where the time to kill in a battlefield game feels shorter than the time to kill in a cod game. But damn if it doesn't feel that way comparing black ops 4 and battlefield 5.

Not personally a fan of that.


Borealis

  • Member
Re: BATTLEFIELD V
« Reply #139 on: September 11, 2018, 04:05:41 AM »
I guess it's a return to BF4 levels of low TTK and high lethality facing infantry, but I can definitely see this system requiring tweaks so that automatics don't become dominant at almost ranges barring long, especially once players become familiar with burst/tap firing.

Playing more, dealing with snipers is fairly frustrating despite the removal of 3D spotting. The current TTK system encourages defensive camping and it's just as easy to stand + snipe per BF1 style. As consolation, no sweet-spot mechanic I guess.

I'm really not a fan of the visual clutter on both UI menus and game world. The absurd lighting contrasts look even more cooked this time round. Also, audio and damage indicators being off.

BFV really feels like it's been given the short end of the stick in terms of development time, certainly when it's come especially to communicating (much needed, imo) changes to squad play. I'm glad they've dropped the horrendous BF1 gimmicks (behemoth, elite classes, gas etc.), but the new material comes with quite a lot of jank atm.

It's disappointing that these 'cinematic' campaigns teach so little in terms of (looking at you and aircraft handling BF1) new controls + features + mechanics. Whilst learning the hard way in BF3/4 (and the others of course) was basically mandatory, these fundamental changes are going to be totally lost on new players whilst those 4/5 clan squads just shred things up on the field at even greater pace.




thisismyusername

  • GunOn™! Apply directly to forehead!
  • Senior Member
Re: BATTLEFIELD V
« Reply #140 on: September 11, 2018, 10:55:02 AM »
I honestly don't think I saw the V2 Rocket more than like 1-2 times in rounds. Despite gaining massive points for the squad, it just... took forever to where it never happened. :lol

BisMarckie

  • Senior Member
Re: BATTLEFIELD V
« Reply #141 on: September 11, 2018, 10:59:20 AM »
Just like in real life :rejoice

Nintex

  • Finish the Fight
  • Senior Member
Re: BATTLEFIELD V
« Reply #142 on: September 11, 2018, 04:32:37 PM »
To me it seems like this game has an identity crisis.

The 'hook' is an alternative 'lesser known' take on WW2 but then they pick the most common weapons and factions (Brits vs. Germans).
They add in more destruction but you can also rebuild stuff and put down defenses locking certain hallways and routes for no particular reason but to limit movement options.
At the same time those defenses can be circumvented by an alternative route that takes you all the way behind enemy lines (those are all over the place).

Sniping is discouraged compared to BF1 (which was a sniper fest) but then the first Assault class gun is pretty much as accurate as a sniper at long/medium range with single shot fire and you can put a 4x scope on it.

There's no DLC and Premium Pass but there's 'upgrades' for guns instead of attachments. So you can unlock stuff like 'Faster bullets'.
I didn't find there to be much difference between classes. As for tanks, there are a wooping 3 vehicles in your company. And like 3 planes.
There's no Heinkel bomber or anything but just 1 BF901 and 2 identical Stuka and Spitfire models instead. The tanks are the Tiger and two models of the Panzer IV for the Axis and 3 different 'Churchill' tanks for the Allies.

It seems by the 'numbers' for a different take on WW2. There's no sign of a Blitzkrieg mode with large vehicle battles either.
Also upgrades to the series like a higher player count I've been expecting for a while still haven't shown up.

A lot will depend on how this 'tides of war' thing is going to play out but I don't expect this game to offer a lot of content based from what I've seen so far.
Angry Joe made the striking comparison that compared to the 35 guns in this game, BF4 had 80+ guns.
 
🤴

Nintex

  • Finish the Fight
  • Senior Member
Re: BATTLEFIELD V
« Reply #143 on: September 11, 2018, 06:16:22 PM »
I see myself agreeing a lot with this guy.

Sure it's fun and looks nice but it is nothing like Battlefield WW2 games used to be.


Even in BF4 it actually took quite some planning and tactics to reach certain points on the map. Now it's just rushing everything with automatics and quick scopes.  :doge
🤴

thisismyusername

  • GunOn™! Apply directly to forehead!
  • Senior Member
Re: BATTLEFIELD V
« Reply #144 on: September 11, 2018, 10:38:06 PM »
That was a mess of a video.

To be honest, I don't really care about the quick-scoping. It's whatever to me. But the problem with the series (for me) has been that DICE doesn't fully think out their sandbox. Mortars have been an issue since BF3, and they continue to include them without actually balancing them in terms of map design (overhead cover that can't be destroyed, thereby making some routes actually not locked down/spammy explosives), and the vehicle balance has been seasawing for each entry.

Like, they flat out admit "we have no idea why people like Bad Company 2."

Spoiler: Because it was fun and despite some balance issues (helicopters on console, destruction on all platforms, map design for Conquest), it was rock solid fun. 1943 was the same: It had 3 maps (well 4 but one of them was a plane map, so fuck that in the count) and you could go up into the air in a plane, bail out and land on a flag sneaky-breaky like and take out folks that were spawning or defending it with your team spawning on you soon after.

DICE keeps changing up systems that don't really need to be changed (beyond suppression, which really should probably just be removed from the game, it's been poorly thought out for 4 entries now) and this change toward a "tacti-cool" sort of deal just flies in the face of "established" rules in BF.

But frankly, DICE has been on the downhill since 1. That entry felt like "EA Battlefront 1 #2" instead of "Battlefield." And this entry feels like "EA Battlefront 2, now with less microtransactions, elite classes removed and no come-back mechanic. Please for the love of god buy this so we can do EA Battlefront 3 from this skeleton" and it's a shame. Because 1) I don't want EA Battlefront (unless it goes back to trying to be like Battlefield a la non-EA Battlefront 1-2) and 2) I don't want that shit implemented into Battlefield. I hated the elite classes. I hated the "laser gun" feeling that 1 (and 5) have. I hate that shit.

I'm not enthused by the WW1 or WW2 setting, but this beta was their chance of convincing me to buy it, and they (speaking as a series fan) blew it. Unless they are going to do a modern combat entry after this and actually 86 their changes and go back to the drawing board and actually work on the sandbox before working on the engine (which IIRC DICE-SE is now nothing but the Frostbite engine house while DICE-LA is the actual developers now, and frankly I don't like DICE-LA coming from CTE experiences) before the actual pretty-fication and map design happens.

The gameplay should be the forefront, but it feels like DICE doesn't give a shit about that at this point to show off their engine for EA.

Stoney Mason

  • So Long and thanks for all the fish
  • Senior Member
Re: BATTLEFIELD V
« Reply #145 on: September 11, 2018, 11:37:24 PM »
Like, they flat out admit "we have no idea why people like Bad Company 2."

Spoiler: Because it was fun and despite some balance issues (helicopters on console, destruction on all platforms, map design for Conquest), it was rock solid fun. 1943 was the same: It had 3 maps (well 4 but one of them was a plane map, so fuck that in the count) and you could go up into the air in a plane, bail out and land on a flag sneaky-breaky like and take out folks that were spawning or defending it with your team spawning on you soon after.

DICE keeps changing up systems that don't really need to be changed (beyond suppression, which really should probably just be removed from the game, it's been poorly thought out for 4 entries now) and this change toward a "tacti-cool" sort of deal just flies in the face of "established" rules in BF.

I agree with this quite a bit. I feel like they are listening to the side of the community that wants battlefield to try to ape arma or something and I just don't think that's the right way for battlefield to play. Battlefield is about fun. It's not a  hardcore sim and that's the wrong way to balance the game imo.

That being said, I'm fine with trying something different for an iteration of the game but yeah, I think they will have re-evaluate going forward exactly what the battlefield franchise wants to be.

thisismyusername

  • GunOn™! Apply directly to forehead!
  • Senior Member
Re: BATTLEFIELD V
« Reply #146 on: September 12, 2018, 10:50:14 AM »
I'm all for them trying to get team-play/squad support going. But the way they're going about it just screws solo players.  There's absolutely no reason that I, as a player with 0 other players in a squad have to run back to base to get ammo (and possibly die in the process!) after firing my sniper rifle like 8 times because supports that run past me don't give me ammo.

I can't count the number of times that I was the only player putting up fortifications (on the bridge in operations to have snipers from A not hit us) and dying/going into negatives KDR in the attempt to help the team. I can't count the number of times I'm in "bleedout" and medics just run past even with no enemies around. I can't count the number of times I've had enemies suddenly "pop" into view behind me when I cleared that area like five seconds before and there was nobody there, and the spotting system not alerting me to it.

It's just... frustrating. Instead of being able to try to "carry" a team, you are not steamrolled because the team won't pull their weight with you.

benjipwns

  • your bright ideas always burn me
  • Senior Member
Re: BATTLEFIELD V
« Reply #147 on: September 14, 2018, 03:53:53 AM »
But like, a lot of that is basic Battlefield problems. I think it was BC2 and BF3? where lots of people played medic for the early guns the class had and would never actually medic. Games would end and I'd have like 90% of the medic points because I was the only one reviving and throwing health around. Actually, BF2 had that too. Really, BF2 was the last time I truly saw most people playing the classes outside of sniper and anti-tank.

I think they shouldn't allow you to go no squad, and definitely should work to make squads be at least four players even if it has to breakup the random small squads to take one from there and stick them into a threesome. Even if your squad isn't acting as a squad, it gives you a big benefit due to the extra spawns, and I've noticed since the start of the franchise that someone being in your squad makes them slightly more likely to actually help you out. Especially if they notice you helping them a lot. That was the case in one of the Beta games, I kept healing and reviving two guys on my team, they weren't doing shit for anyone initially, lots of camping...after about five minutes or so, they started reviving, tossing ammo and giving covering fire in a way that at least seemed a deliberate action. One guy even started flanking those trains/buses on Rottendam with me since the other team kept hiding in them and I kept trying to clear them out. If successful, we'd revive whoever turned out to be the "bait" before moving further. :lol

On Nordik the one match I was in a squad with all snipers, but because they were spawning on me, they learned the "secret" long way around I found, under and through the bridge that's open from the start, we wound out carving out a nice little foothold within enemy territory because they wanted to camp for kills and I enjoyed their unintentional cover as I went to go fuck some people up in molotov fueled suicide ruins on the backside of B's defenses with my snipers cleaning up survivors forced out of cover.

They also need some kind of system to promote squads working together, this has been an issue forever too, you don't even know what the other squads are unless you pull up the scoreboard. You can't know if the four dudes in front of you are four random guys or a squad trying to accomplish something deliberate. And nobody else on our team knew that we had carved out that point, and the path to it, nor when chaos was exploding suddenly in B's defenses and moving up to press them might be a good idea.

The inherent team communications that the game should be doing for you that you can't do hasn't advanced much in all these iterations. I'm sorta okay with 1 not being ideal, but coming back around to WWII and even the map doesn't display your "team's vision" as well as 1942 did.

Eight squads of four dudes didn't randomly attack all over a city from any point, the two squads closest to you or something should be sharing info automatically. Any orders especially.

On Rottendam one team had a single squad defending C, but I don't think any of us knew that, but three of our own squads attacked and cleared it simultaneously from three different directions. We all didn't immediately leave the area, and held back what seemed like a whole bunch of attempts to break back in, with the squads covering the ends we came in in the attack. That was ideal and there should be some kind of reward system at least, like a Squad point boost for working together, even if nobody knows how to use the reinforcements because it doesn't tell you.

The time I mentioned above where I naded a bunch of dudes while others gunned them down, was our squad coming out of a building, those guys being spotted and marked, to bail out another squad in a firefight with them, and overwhelming them from a different side and providing more firepower. It wasn't for a capture point or anything, just a minor chokepoint because of the squad spawn system. But there should be something like ALPHA-BRAVO HAS CLEARED THE BRIDGE pop up and inform the team. It doesn't even tell you who is capturing points. It could be a single dude, or half your team is hanging out over there. Unless you pull up the map, you won't know until you're near there. If you get ALPHA-BRAVO-PART OF DELTA TAKING C as a message that tells your team something and maybe convinces the rest of Delta to stop camping in that building by the spawn and go capture C too.

I know they want to play up the "fog of war" in this version but limit it to your actual POV, have the maps/UI provide the info that you'd get in other ways in real life like knowing your team is launching an offensive at whatever. I can't remember how many times A or B and even BOTH A and B would suddenly be captured when it felt like all of my team was in one location nowhere near capturing them. And we'd often run the table because the defense was just as discombobulated. Rush often was like that for similar reasons.

Stoney Mason

  • So Long and thanks for all the fish
  • Senior Member
Re: BATTLEFIELD V
« Reply #148 on: September 14, 2018, 10:38:45 AM »


I don't agree with most of the hater videos because they try to imply silly stuff like the devs are lazy or they are the I don't want women in my oh so realistic historical shooting franchise even though that franchise has never been remotely close to anything historically accurate not to mention its a videogame mob.

This is closer to my sort of take mainly in the sense that you have competing communities as to which are their favorite battlefields and which determines what is a "true" battlefield game. (Although I personally don't favor the old games like he does)

You have the ancient generation that played Battlefield 1 & 2 where the game was different. You have the Battlefield Bad Company 1 & 2 community who were a different group and responded to different elements like destruction. You have the battlefield 3 & 4 group which liked the cod like focus on tightening up the gunplay. You have the latest generation which came in with Battlefield One.

So you have a lot of different communities who want slightly altered takes on what is a "true" battlefield game. The goal of course is to combine all those elements in the game,but that's very difficult and downright contradictory in a few cases.

It also is tricky when the beta is super buggy and its hard to separate some of the bugs from actual design intent.

« Last Edit: September 14, 2018, 10:46:24 AM by Stoney Mason »

thisismyusername

  • GunOn™! Apply directly to forehead!
  • Senior Member
Re: BATTLEFIELD V
« Reply #149 on: September 14, 2018, 11:12:12 AM »
But like, a lot of that is basic Battlefield problems. I think it was BC2 and BF3? where lots of people played medic for the early guns the class had and would never actually medic. Games would end and I'd have like 90% of the medic points because I was the only one reviving and throwing health around. Actually, BF2 had that too. Really, BF2 was the last time I truly saw most people playing the classes outside of sniper and anti-tank.

Sure, and I don't dispute that. But here it's like "I have to find a medic and support that were killed and then hope they have a medic/ammobox instead of those sticky ones so I can resupply myself as recon to go back to helping the team with priority targets and spotting." Whereas, in BC2/etc. it was MUCH easier to get those items because the boxes that these classes would throw out for themselves also benefit you if you're nearby.

I honestly don't know why DICE decided to bring those sticky items into the game post-4. They were a terrible idea then, and they're still a terrible idea now. The boxes are Area of Effect and benefit the entire team. The stickies only benefit one person and are awkward to use. Might as well just let people place the boxes and help out that way than try to get resupplies.

That said: BC1 did the ammo resupply stations on certain points of the map like this outing (and 2142, 2, 1942 IIRC?) do. So it's a toss-up.

Nintex

  • Finish the Fight
  • Senior Member
Re: BATTLEFIELD V
« Reply #150 on: September 14, 2018, 02:32:39 PM »
What I find most jarring is the remnants of the paid DLC systems of Battlefront 2 that were clearly ripped out or re-purposed.

In fact, this game seems to be a victim of a lack of focus more than anything.
No surprise either. During development the Battle Royale boom happened, Battlefront 2 flopped and the alt-right / omg Nazi's are back hysteria happened.

It was probably hard to keep this game on track as I imagine it has been in development for 2 - 3 years.

I don't see much of this 'forced' team play. In fact my biggest kill streaks resulted for using mounted guns (alone) and sniping really well (alone).
The ammo box mechanic is kinda lame. It seems as if everyone forgot to pack enough ammo repeatedly and somehow is only able to carry two clips at a time.
It would make sense in certain scenario's (Stalingrad / Dunkirk) but other than that it seems to a needless addition.

I wonder if you actually had to pay for those ammo refills at some point.  :doge
🤴

Stoney Mason

  • So Long and thanks for all the fish
  • Senior Member

thisismyusername

  • GunOn™! Apply directly to forehead!
  • Senior Member
Re: BATTLEFIELD V
« Reply #152 on: September 14, 2018, 04:32:58 PM »
* **** wait *** them ** ****** everything but  *********.

benjipwns

  • your bright ideas always burn me
  • Senior Member
Re: BATTLEFIELD V
« Reply #153 on: September 17, 2018, 04:28:54 AM »
i bet DICE got a big ol graph that said "nobody was giving anyone ammo or health"

balancing the vehicles against the BETA data seems like a bad idea considering that so much of the easy anti-tank stuff was further into unlock trees, so nobody had it...they still were barely a problem from what i saw unless they actually had support gunners

i saw more tanks and apcs fuck themselves up than anyone else do anything to them, maybe what they mean about movement and damage states, i mentioned the one tank got stuck in house debris and it was like the debris was constantly slowly damaging it

finally, chat profanity filters are why Trump won

thisismyusername

  • GunOn™! Apply directly to forehead!
  • Senior Member
Re: BATTLEFIELD V
« Reply #154 on: September 17, 2018, 05:01:04 PM »
i bet DICE got a big ol graph that said "nobody was giving anyone ammo or health"

balancing the vehicles against the BETA data seems like a bad idea considering that so much of the easy anti-tank stuff was further into unlock trees, so nobody had it...they still were barely a problem from what i saw unless they actually had support gunners

i saw more tanks and apcs fuck themselves up than anyone else do anything to them, maybe what they mean about movement and damage states, i mentioned the one tank got stuck in house debris and it was like the debris was constantly slowly damaging it

finally, chat profanity filters are why Trump won

The class items were locked unless you ground up. The rocket being locked was fucking dumb. But conversely: Landing long-range shots was funky since it drops like a rock really fast. So the game has the same issue that the last outing has: Tanks can sit in their spawn and wreck havoc without anti-tank options being good enough to hassle/kill them fast.

That said: Tanks weren't able to resupply easily (at least I couldn't figure out a way to resupply them) to where they eventually will run out of ammo and thereby become useless. So... it's a toss up.

They posted a heatmap on fortifications for the Conquest map/Rotterdam on the 13th on their Twitter and there's a bunch of green (less used?) ones around the map, which just... is sad... since Fortifcations HELP the team.

Nintex

  • Finish the Fight
  • Senior Member
Re: BATTLEFIELD V
« Reply #155 on: September 17, 2018, 06:51:20 PM »
These all seem like empty statements

Quote
Progression and Customization – We’re working on making the user journey one that’s smooth and personal.
I mean, this means absolutely nothing. Was it rocky and not personal before or wat?
🤴

thisismyusername

  • GunOn™! Apply directly to forehead!
  • Senior Member
Re: BATTLEFIELD V
« Reply #156 on: September 21, 2018, 12:43:04 PM »

Stoney Mason

  • So Long and thanks for all the fish
  • Senior Member
Re: BATTLEFIELD V
« Reply #157 on: September 21, 2018, 01:25:44 PM »
https://www.ea.com/games/battlefield/news/what-we-learned-from-the-battlefield-5-open-beta

TLDW;

Quote
Tweaking attrition:
Devs want to nudge attrition in the right direction but still want it to be fully part of the game.

More ammo on spawn.

More max ammo capacity.

Ammo tweaking will be weapon specific (not all weapons may be affected, some more than others).

Medpack on spawn.

Improving visibility:
Adding a haze to the background to make enemies stand out. (Example by /u/CrafterOfSwords)

Fixing some lighting issues (notably in Rotterdam).

Fine tuning lighting in specific locations.

Death experience and pacing:
Devs agree with the community that current death timer made the game feel too slow.

Devs want highs and lows moments in the game, but find that the high moments are not high enough (this is partially caused by soldier downtime). They want moments of pure chaos.

Tweaking "bleeding out" timer, you are not punished anymore if you decide to hang on, respawn timer will be reduced accordingly.

Audio immersion:
Fixed the audio bugs which contributed to make the game too silent. Audio should feel like war once again.

Time to kill and time to death:
Trying to find that sweet spot to cater to both players who love it or hate it.

From the data, players have learned to move closer to cover to avoid getting killed too easily.

Certain weapons stand out (more effective at most engagement distances), "won't name specifics *cough*STG*cough*". Those are gonna be tweaked to "bring them into the fold".

Confirmed Netcode issues in regards to Time to death, "you receive more damage than you should be in one update, which is due to packet loss, netcode, delays and high rate of fire weapons". Currently looking into fixing this.

Vehicles (Tanks):
Beta testers felt that the tanks were too slow/heavy and not offensive enough against infantry, but dev says the more agile/anti-infantry tanks weren't in the open beta, as well as anti-aircraft vehicles.

Devs were happy with the tuning on the new turret system on the heavy tanks, but plan to make the turret turn faster on the medium and lighter tanks. Light tanks will have a "very fast" turret turning speed.

Devs want the tanks to be the "dragons of our game", once they show up on the field, "everyone should relate to that". If you see a friendly tank, you should push alongside it, if you see an enemy tank, you should cower in fear.

Heavier tanks are robust, hard to take down, but slow, less effective against infantry, more effective against other vehicles, and the opposite is true for lighter tanks, more agile, used to kill infantry, harass and flank.

Tweaked systemic damage (such as canon disabled or track disabled), they want to reward players who chip away at tanks without necessarily destroying them, but don't want to penalize tank drivers too much, leaving them with nothing to do. Added turret damage which slows down turret turning speed, as well as engine damage, which cripples its movement.

Vehicles (Airplanes):
Beta feedbacks tell that the difference between the two fighter planes was too great and people didn't like it. Devs are taking step to make them much more similar and better than they were in open beta.

Overall players found fighter planes not agile enough.

Not being able to acquire ground targets as easily as in previous titles.

Players most happy with the BF 109 plane, but devs say even that one wasn't were we needed it to be.

Tweaked visibility for pilot and gunner, extended spotting range. "We want planes to participate in the ground combat".

Dev excited about the broader spectrum of vehicle classes in BFV, says it was a bit lacking in BF1.

Talking about anti-aircraft tanks, such as the Flakpanzer and Valentine MK 1 AA, they have "tons of canons and tons of bullets flying through the sky".







benjipwns

  • your bright ideas always burn me
  • Senior Member
Re: BATTLEFIELD V
« Reply #158 on: September 23, 2018, 04:43:50 AM »
Quote
Devs want the tanks to be the "dragons of our game", once they show up on the field, "everyone should relate to that". If you see a friendly tank, you should push alongside it, if you see an enemy tank, you should cower in fear.
🎶dream the impossible dream🎶

benjipwns

  • your bright ideas always burn me
  • Senior Member
Re: BATTLEFIELD V
« Reply #159 on: September 23, 2018, 04:57:50 AM »
That visibility test might mean more if the dude wasn't standing LITERALLY IN FRONT OF ME.

They should scrap that and give gradual outlines to enemies instead as part of their new dynamic spotting system once they fix that to work properly aka redesign it. As you and more teammates "see" the enemy, including knowing their position in other ways like they just hid or are firing, etc. a Titanfall-like (to use another EA title) colored outline should form around them. Just make it a color that is harder to pick out at a very far distance (aka not something bright...I think the existing colors probably would be fine) so snipers can't see dudes outlines and then scope ten miles away. And it stays when they go behind cover until they're not "seen" for long enough to no longer be considered there.

Also, give it to your own team, so you know where your team is as long as you maintain "communication" and lines of sight.

But I'm starting to repeat my own way too long UI design thoughts from above.

Also, they expect me to believe more V1's were dropped in than people planted the first explosives on Narvik?!? Allies had to be some real giant dads to not pull those off.

Stoney Mason

  • So Long and thanks for all the fish
  • Senior Member
Re: BATTLEFIELD V
« Reply #160 on: September 24, 2018, 12:01:38 AM »
I wish the visibility test would have shown it in actual gameplay cameras as a person played. Visibility was my #1 complaint with the beta and its hard to tell from that if it actually is effective when you move around the world.

benjipwns

  • your bright ideas always burn me
  • Senior Member
Re: BATTLEFIELD V
« Reply #161 on: September 24, 2018, 12:06:29 AM »
In the video they mention it's actually only supposed to improve visibility at the 0-50m range. Which, first of all, ENGLISH. But second of all, I have no clue what that's supposed to look like in game. I thought the actual problem was people not being able to see people at some "middle" distance?

Like say dudes under the train tracks in that image.

thisismyusername

  • GunOn™! Apply directly to forehead!
  • Senior Member
Re: BATTLEFIELD V
« Reply #162 on: September 24, 2018, 12:09:42 AM »
Besides which: The fucking gun and model change. The only difference I see is in the background, where they add a film-grain(?) and lighten the entire game up. WTF. :doge

benjipwns

  • your bright ideas always burn me
  • Senior Member
Re: BATTLEFIELD V
« Reply #163 on: September 24, 2018, 12:11:35 AM »
In the video it's a little more clear but yeah, lol at the Axis/Allies switch, it's like how could they make this less explanatory. Oh wait, one image could be Rottendam and the other Narvik!

benjipwns

  • your bright ideas always burn me
  • Senior Member
Re: BATTLEFIELD V
« Reply #164 on: September 24, 2018, 12:14:31 AM »
They should have shown some of the "lighting fixes" since they said those were already complete. I know I saw plenty of places that barely had any kind of dynamic lighting working right on top of the prebaked baseline being nonexistent.

Stoney Mason

  • So Long and thanks for all the fish
  • Senior Member
Re: BATTLEFIELD V
« Reply #165 on: September 24, 2018, 12:36:58 AM »
My main concern I suppose is why is this even an issue. The lighting in Battlefield one was fine. I mean it had some of the issues with dark interiors to a much lesser degree but spotting enemies in just about any normal lighting conditions was perfect. Why is this distance haze even needed. It seems like a more fundmental issue with how the light is being treated in Battlefield 5. Which is not to say it doesn't look "cinematic". But in a shooter, I want to see people first and foremost. I don't want realism in that regard. I want to see enemies like in every other shooter game.

Stoney Mason

  • So Long and thanks for all the fish
  • Senior Member
Re: BATTLEFIELD V
« Reply #166 on: October 05, 2018, 02:36:37 PM »

Stoney Mason

  • So Long and thanks for all the fish
  • Senior Member
Re: BATTLEFIELD V
« Reply #167 on: October 29, 2018, 10:47:10 AM »

Stoney Mason

  • So Long and thanks for all the fish
  • Senior Member

thisismyusername

  • GunOn™! Apply directly to forehead!
  • Senior Member
Re: BATTLEFIELD V
« Reply #169 on: November 01, 2018, 09:12:58 AM »
Too bad it's too little, too late. I'm worried that most folks are going to pass on this because DICE has been too stubborn for too long.

Borealis

  • Member
Re: BATTLEFIELD V
« Reply #170 on: November 01, 2018, 11:36:49 AM »
The turnaround for addressing major fuckery in the open beta has been fucking quick I'll give 'em that.

Stoney Mason

  • So Long and thanks for all the fish
  • Senior Member
Re: BATTLEFIELD V
« Reply #171 on: November 01, 2018, 12:42:32 PM »

Stoney Mason

  • So Long and thanks for all the fish
  • Senior Member
Re: BATTLEFIELD V
« Reply #172 on: November 02, 2018, 01:35:42 PM »

TEEEPO

  • hi, i suck
  • Senior Member
Re: BATTLEFIELD V
« Reply #173 on: November 05, 2018, 10:27:33 PM »
i'm subscribing to origin access so i can play the game come nov 9. i'm moving to australia in dec so this will be the last time i game with my bros :fbm



and if anyone's interested, world war 3 has potential. i bought it based on the description of it playing like a mix between battlefield and tarkov/siege but if anything, it's more reminiscent of bf2. it still has a ways to go but its main bullet-point -- ballistics -- are impressive as hell as well as the sense of scale, weight and mechanics. there's a good reason as to why it's a top seller on steam despite lacking the polish to pull all the elements together.

TEEEPO

  • hi, i suck
  • Senior Member
Re: BATTLEFIELD V
« Reply #174 on: November 08, 2018, 03:08:59 PM »


tomorrow :rejoice

TEEEPO

  • hi, i suck
  • Senior Member
Re: BATTLEFIELD V
« Reply #175 on: November 08, 2018, 06:12:20 PM »
no, today  :rejoice

TEEEPO

  • hi, i suck
  • Senior Member
Re: BATTLEFIELD V
« Reply #176 on: November 08, 2018, 07:01:07 PM »
downloaded, drivers updating  :rejoice

Rahxephon91

  • Senior Member
Re: BATTLEFIELD V
« Reply #177 on: November 09, 2018, 08:18:19 PM »
Well I don’t know. I really don’t like the changes.

I really don’t understand why weapon customization is so downgraded from BF4. So many weapons and so many options to outfit them. I guess because this is WW2. But that’s just a lame excuse. I don’t feel anything for rathe small selection of weapons here. Where as in 4 unlocking weapons and then using them lead to very noticeable and different outcomes.

I don’t like the medic changes. I’m glad we have smgs again over rifles from one. But I don’t like the idea of simply resupplying. I get that dropping a medic crate could lead to simply camping, but also allowed for a quick heal up of your entire team as they pushed though. It also allowed for easy points which really made people play the medic.

I also really don’t like most of the maps. I like how they are built around these cool set prices and aren’t worried about being symmetrical. So they’ve moved on from the shitty conquest maps of Bad Company 2, but only two of them have grabbed me.

But mostly I just don’t like how weapons are so limited.

Stoney Mason

  • So Long and thanks for all the fish
  • Senior Member
Re: BATTLEFIELD V
« Reply #178 on: November 09, 2018, 09:22:42 PM »
I don't have EA access nor will I buy the deluxe early release version so all my impressions are from watching a decent amount of streaming gameplay. The lighting is noticeably improved from the beta which is nice. I think you also begin with a hair more ammo than the beta.

There are still plenty of bugs though. I guess it wouldn't be a battlefield launch without those.  :-\

My only real complaint without having played is that I don't like what they have done with grand operations mode. It seems even more defensive oriented than it was in bf1 and it was already pretty defensive oriented in that game. The air drop game type seems really lame especially since the defense gets to see who is carrying the bomb with a big fat icon on screen. Who's idea was that. Nobody likes modes that do shit like that. Dice has tried it before with obliteration and nobody liked that either. They don't seem to get that attacking should be as fun and reasonable as defending. And without the behemoths, to sort of propel you to victory, I have a feeling defense will always win an absurd amount of these rounds.


thisismyusername

  • GunOn™! Apply directly to forehead!
  • Senior Member
Re: BATTLEFIELD V
« Reply #179 on: November 09, 2018, 11:02:14 PM »
Who's idea was that. Nobody likes modes that do shit like that. Dice has tried it before with obliteration and nobody liked that either.

Speak for yourself. I put in hundreds of hours on that mode and love it to death since it replaced the Rush variant that they fucked up in 4.



I'd kill for that mode to be back in the series. But the air-drop bomb gametype in Operations is not it.

(The only reason Rush beats it in that photo is because 1: I played Rush mostly before giving up on the mode in post-Naval maps and 2: More Rush servers on PC than Obliteration. However once I found a Obliteration "community" server that people basically kept full in the evenings daily, I stuck on that server until 140.)
« Last Edit: November 09, 2018, 11:08:35 PM by thisismyusername »