Support NeoGAF

[shouts]

Here's the game for you, then. You can thank me by posting how much you love you're able to kill "dem n00bs" that "suck at shooting" there.



No, I very much get it.

"BAWWWW WHY CAN'T I HIT THE DUDE THAT IS FIRING ON ME FROM DOWN A HALLWAY AND IS CLOSE OR NEAR CLOSE TO HIT ME AND MAKING MY ACCURACY DROP!?"

"Because that's working by design for a game mechanic."

"B-B-BUT THAT MECHANIC SUXXXORSOZOZOZOZOZOZORORZXOSSOZRS *foams at mouth*"

"Dealwithit.gif"

"BUT I DON'T WANT TO! I SHOULD BE ABLE TO HEADSHOT FOOLS EVEN IF THEY'RE LAYING SUPPRESSING FIRE DOWN TO GET ME TO MOVE AWAY FROM THEM!"

"Then you're a dumbass. Go play CoD."

I very much "get it," because I "get" what DICE is doing with the suppression mechanic. Once again, for the slow learners in class *cough*: Suppression is an "Oh shit, I'm being fired on but don't know where" mechanic. You may know where you're being fired from but since the game is meant to lower your accuracy because your character doesn't, you're meant to panic and get away from the suppression zone. *gasp* So why are you a dumbass that continues to go into the suppression zone when you know someone is there laying down fire?

And PROTIP: Not everyone "sucks at shooting" to get suppressive fire going. I can hit you once or twice and then move my aim one or two millimeters to the left/right and then start a suppressive effect on you. It's "bullets whizzing by" and that's what DICE is attempting to portray: You being startled at being fired at and getting away or throwing grenades to flush the suppressor out. Don't complain because you're meant to fall back and attempt another strategy.

I know exactly where I'm taking fire from, I conceal my character so that only my head sticks out. I know this makes it very difficult for him to hit me, primarily because he uses a m249 (high rpm, relatively much spread).

In this particular case I would have gotten swiped if I had tried to relocate, therefore I try to take him out.
Like tachiSama writes: "Suppression confusing the soldier makes perfect sense, but it should not deformate rifles. "

Fine, the suppression effect is trying to simulate a realistic type of scenario. But how realistic is it that a bullet from the L96 fired from 80 feet away makes a 10 feet curve and vanishes into space?

With all the risks that come with being under direct fire from an elevated position, with all the suppression effects, me having a bolt-action rifle vs his bullet hose, I get rewarded for nothing.
Laying down, doing nothing, being static, just accepting the situation with non favorable odds is a reaction of an unexperienced player. That would be the typical reaction of a new player in the FPS genre, or an unexperienced Battlefield player.

The sum of all this is: If my highly accurate rifle is dead on his face and i fire, the bullet should hit. That's it. There shouldn't be situations where " Oh, I can't do shit now apparently because some dude is spraying his LMG towards my location."

And stop arguing like you're in sixth grade. Makes you look stupid. Also funny that you obviously think you're miles ahead skillwise compared to me, I can assure you it's the other way around.

 

[bjb]

Is there an expected ETA on this patch?

 

[Patrick Bateman]

Is there an expected ETA on this patch?

2013

 

[Seanspeed]

You wouldn't be so helpless if you had an automatic rifle or machine gun to fire back. If you're carrying around a sniper rifle, then I'm afraid that at 80ft, you're gonna have to live with that sort of disadvantage.

Both assault and recon classes seem to be ones where you can find yourself in pretty hopeless situations once in a while. Being shot at from 80ft away by a machine gun while all you have is a sniper rifle is gonna be one of those.

The suppression effect should make you scared to stick your head out. I dont see why your superior skill should allow you to bypass the intention of the game mechanic.

 

[Overdoziz]

Suppression actually does something? I've never felt like it was hard to aim while being suppressed.

 

[The Faceless Master]

I know exactly where I'm taking fire from, I conceal my character so that only my head sticks out. I know this makes it very difficult for him to hit me, primarily because he uses a m249 (high rpm, relatively much spread).

In this particular case I would have gotten swiped if I had tried to relocate, therefore I try to take him out.
Like tachiSama writes: "Suppression confusing the soldier makes perfect sense, but it should not deformate rifles. "

Fine, the suppression effect is trying to simulate a realistic type of scenario. But how realistic is it that a bullet from the L96 fired from 80 feet away makes a 10 feet curve and vanishes into space?

With all the risks that come with being under direct fire from an elevated position, with all the suppression effects, me having a bolt-action rifle vs his bullet hose, I get rewarded for nothing.
Laying down, doing nothing, being static, just accepting the situation with non favorable odds is a reaction of an unexperienced player. That would be the typical reaction of a new player in the FPS genre, or an unexperienced Battlefield player.

The sum of all this is: If my highly accurate rifle is dead on his face and i fire, the bullet should hit. That's it. There shouldn't be situations where " Oh, I can't do shit now apparently because some dude is spraying his LMG towards my location."

And stop arguing like you're in sixth grade. Makes you look stupid. Also funny that you obviously think you're miles ahead skillwise compared to me, I can assure you it's the other way around.

shooting at a guy when you're being suppressed in that situation and expecting to kill him is a reaction of an inexperienced BF3 player. experienced players understand the game mechanics of the game they're playing.

 

[hellclerk]

Fine, the suppression effect is trying to simulate a realistic type of scenario. But how realistic is it that a bullet from the L96 fired from 80 feet away makes a 10 feet curve and vanishes into space?

Realistically, an M249 should be ripping you to shreds at that range, I don't care how little of your body is being shown. You're engaging a high ROF, fully automatic, belt-fed weapon at under 25 meters where the SAW is in a defensible position, and you... have a bolt action rifle. You know there's a reason WWI was dominated by the machine gun.

You got your shit fucked in a situation where your loadout was ill suited. I don't care how much you think you had his crosshair over his face, you got put down.

 

[SapientWolf]

Realistically, an M249 should be ripping you to shreds at that range, I don't care how little of your body is being shown. You're engaging a high ROF, fully automatic, belt-fed weapon at under 25 meters where the SAW is in a defensible position, and you... have a bolt action rifle. You know there's a reason WWI was dominated by the machine gun.

You got your shit fucked in a situation where your loadout was ill suited. I don't care how much you think you had his crosshair over his face, you got put down.

SAW's weren't really used for that purpose though. If attackers in a defensible position had a good shot at that range they would be using rifles. Their primary purpose was to keep a position pinned down for a long period of time to allow for maneuvering. M249's really need a suppression buff and an accuracy nerf at long range in order to fit that same role in BF3.

Arguing over implementation is splitting hairs, because any mechanic that makes returning fire artificially difficult in that scenario is unrealistic and contrived. People don't put their head up in real life because of self preservation. If they had no fear of death then there's nothing that would stop them from returning accurate fire short of being shot. It's just a means to an end (allowing SAWs in the game to suppress return fire).

 

[mr_nothin]

My only gripe with the suppression mechanic is that anybody spraying at full auto on any weapon shouldnt have any kind of accuracy.
The stupid Pecheneg LMG can go full auto and have the accuracy of a sniper weapon. There should be a bunch of spread when you're firing full auto and that should be your penalty/tradeoff for suppressing.

I dont care about realism or real life logic. The only thing I care about is balance and what seems logical within the game.
Again, I bring up CS/CSS as they seem to be the only games that got LMGS down. Random but effective if you know how to use them....not this spray and pray bs that's going on in current games.

 

[Seanspeed]

My only gripe with the suppression mechanic is that anybody spraying at full auto on any weapon shouldnt have any kind of accuracy.
The stupid Pecheneg LMG can go full auto and have the accuracy of a sniper weapon. There should be a bunch of spread when you're firing full auto and that should be your penalty/tradeoff for suppressing.

I dont care about realism or real life logic. The only thing I care about is balance and what seems logical within the game.
Again, I bring up CS/CSS as they seem to be the only games that got LMGS down. Random but effective if you know how to use them....not this spray and pray bs that's going on in current games.

If you want balance, then you've got to give Support classes some effective way of killing people, still. Or else nobody would use them. Suppression can be useful in the game, but frankly, it doesn't seem to ever be a huge issue for me. Perhaps that will change with the patch, but as it is, I think the balance is ok. Its not as if Support classes are these killing machines compared to everybody else.

 

[shouts]

shooting at a guy when you're being suppressed in that situation and expecting to kill him is a reaction of an inexperienced BF3 player. experienced players understand the game mechanics of the game they're playing.

I've killed people under fire before, but this instance stood out. I understand the game mechanics, as I've stated a hundred times but apparently that goes right through your head, I say it's not favoring skill for the majority of the time.

 

[AndyD]

I've killed people under fire before, but this instance stood out. I understand the game mechanics, as I've stated a hundred times but apparently that goes right through your head, I say it's not favoring skill for the majority of the time.

You fail to understand that the game should not always favor raw aiming skill. The developers designed it not to. What it does is favor skill at playing within the bounds and rules they set. Adjusting to the rules of the game and being good at that is what's important, not being good at moving the mouse precisely.

 

[Seanspeed]

I understand the game mechanics

And you're trying to cheat them. The point of suppression is so you are suppressed. Since our actual lives aren't actually at stake, you still pop your head out in order to shoot back. Fair enough, but the game actively discourages you from doing it by ruining your accuracy. They want you to think, "Ok, the guy is shooting at me so it wouldn't be smart for me to start shooting back right now."

 

[The Faceless Master]

I've killed people under fire before, but this instance stood out. I understand the game mechanics, as I've stated a hundred times but apparently that goes right through your head, I say it's not favoring skill for the majority of the time.

that's debatable.

 

[rocksteady1983]

Who/what are some of the better commentators/weapon guides/general videos on youtube for battlefield? I'm getting this game next week. Never played a battlefield game before.

 

[DietRob]

Who/what are some of the better commentators/weapon guides/general videos on youtube for battlefield? I'm getting this game next week. Never played a battlefield game before.

I've watched quite a few videos from this youtubers channel.

http://www.youtube.com/user/SHuSTYBANG

He does a pretty good job at breaking down the pros and cons of some of the weapons.

 

[hellclerk]

SAW's weren't really used for that purpose though. If attackers in a defensible position had a good shot at that range they would be using rifles. Their primary purpose was to keep a position pinned down for a long period of time to allow for maneuvering. M249's really need a suppression buff and an accuracy nerf at long range in order to fit that same role in BF3.

Arguing over implementation is splitting hairs, because any mechanic that makes returning fire artificially difficult in that scenario is unrealistic and contrived. People don't put their head up in real life because of self preservation. If they had no fear of death then there's nothing that would stop them from returning accurate fire short of being shot. It's just a means to an end (allowing SAWs in the game to suppress return fire).

You're right, returning fire shouldn't be difficult. Returning ACCURATE fire should. Keep in mind, even if you do miss with a bolt action, there's a good amount of suppression happening even though you miss, and that's only from the bolt actions. I mean, how easy is it actually to shoot with hot lead ricocheting around you? Think of being suppressed as similar to the effects of recoil. Theoretically, with enough strength, overcoming recoil is easy, but the force eventually pushes back on you. It's like that, and the effect of recoil is exactly like that. Really, firing a bolt action rifle isn't actually accurate unless you're set and breathing normally. In the event of being fired upon, the adrenaline alone would make accurate fire at range difficult.

 

[redhot_]

Who/what are some of the better commentators/weapon guides/general videos on youtube for battlefield? I'm getting this game next week. Never played a battlefield game before.

Aw, half the fun is trying things out for yourself.

 

[patapuf]

I've killed people under fire before, but this instance stood out. I understand the game mechanics, as I've stated a hundred times but apparently that goes right through your head, I say it's not favoring skill for the majority of the time.

The involved skill with the suppression mechanic revolves around TEAM PLAY it is not balanced around 1v1! Without the involved teamplay the suppression mechanic is meaningless.

and there is a perk if suppression bothers you a lot.

 

[rocksteady1983]

I've watched quite a few videos from this youtubers channel.

http://www.youtube.com/user/SHuSTYBANG

He does a pretty good job at breaking down the pros and cons of some of the weapons.

Looks to be a good one. Just what I was looking for.

 

[scogoth]

Here's the game for you, then. You can thank me by posting how much you love you're able to kill "dem n00bs" that "suck at shooting" there.

Who do you think is playing bf3 now? If anyone was actually laying down suppressive fire then good on them, but nobody does. Suppression on comes into play when they are try to kill you and can't aim or they use frag usas. People using suppression strategically comes along about as often as a real heli pilot not some sniper trying to to get to the top of caspian tower.

 

[Soma]

Who/what are some of the better commentators/weapon guides/general videos on youtube for battlefield? I'm getting this game next week. Never played a battlefield game before.

My personal favorite BF3/BC2 commentator is TheRussianBadger http://www.youtube.com/user/TheRussianBadger/videos

Entertaining, silly, and pretty informative videos.

 

[rocksteady1983]

My personal favorite BF3/BC2 commentator is TheRussianBadger http://www.youtube.com/user/TheRussianBadger/videos

Entertaining, silly, and pretty informative videos.

Subscribed. Thanks!

 

[RebornYeti]

Suppression actually does something? I've never felt like it was hard to aim while being suppressed.

It's more noticeable when you're trying to snipe. That's where the Suppression Perk really helps out.

 

[hellclerk]

I've killed people under fire before, but this instance stood out. I understand the game mechanics, as I've stated a hundred times but apparently that goes right through your head, I say it's not favoring skill for the majority of the time.

If you can't properly relocate from a suppressed cover position, then I wouldn't exactly call you skilled.

My personal favorite BF3/BC2 commentator is TheRussianBadger http://www.youtube.com/user/TheRussianBadger/videos

Entertaining, silly, and pretty informative videos.

Oh yeah, his videos are pretty insightful, even if I don't always agree. He's pretty hung up on RoF and DPS though, while I tend to prefer weapons based on feel and control. The really wacky thing though is his Jargon. It's all over the map and sometimes you have to kind of guess what the hell he's talking about.

Who do you think is playing bf3 now? If anyone was actually laying down suppressive fire then good on them, but nobody does. Suppression on comes into play when they are try to kill you and can't aim or they use frag usas. People using suppression strategically comes along about as often as a real heli pilot not some sniper trying to to get to the top of caspian tower.

Hey... I lay down suppressive fire when it's needed... ;__;

 

[shouts]

If you can't properly relocate from a suppressed cover position, then I wouldn't exactly call you skilled.

But the random guy spraying his LMG, not because he cares about suppression, but because he so eagerly wants to kill me is apparently skilled. I get it.

 

[hellclerk]

But the random guy spraying his LMG, not because he cares about suppression, but because he so eagerly wants to kill me is apparently skilled. I get it.

Never said that. Of course, you trying to shoot through his suppression doesn't make you much better. In fact, I would say you're the bigger sucker.

Fuck, I want my upgrades here yesterday! I can't take this anymore!

 

[shouts]

Never said that. Of course, you trying to shoot through his suppression doesn't make you much better. In fact, I would say you're the bigger sucker.

Regardless of what happened in that situation it doesn't favor skill. And it is a very small percentage that actually waste bullets suppressing. Every now and then you can hear some support guy putting 200 bullets down an alley but the big majority don't fire bullets only to suppress. They put accurate shots on enemies (at least try), or to some extent prefire in front of a corner.

 

[The_Hitcher89]

Would you guys prefer it if you had to hold the button for 3 or so seconds to enter a vehicle?

 

[Patrick Bateman]

Battlefield 3 - Battlefield 1942 Intro Remake


:O

 

[AndyD]

Would you guys prefer it if you had to hold the button for 3 or so seconds to enter a vehicle?

I think enter can be instant, exit should take a bit. There's a lot of hop out, shoot, hop in when you approach to put some C4 on a tank or whatnot. Not only do they get the advantage of being in a tank, but they can also instantly hop out, shoot then hop in to safety.

Wasn't there a game where you enter/exit took 1-2 seconds?

 

[Rebel Leader]

I think enter can be instant, exit should take a bit. There's a lot of hop out, shoot, hop in when you approach to put some C4 on a tank or whatnot. Not only do they get the advantage of being in a tank, but they can also instantly hop out, shoot then hop in to safety.

Wasn't there a game where you enter/exit took 1-2 seconds?

Halo
---
I'm fine with what it is..

People kill me...I kill people

 

[luiztfc]

Battlefield 3 - Battlefield 1942 Intro Remake


:O

THE TEARS!!

My favorite game ever... I wish they would do a proper remake of this (Sorry BF1943), with all the classes, guns and vehicles (including ships and subs).

Nothing better than to request air support and then seeing the B-17 through the clouds!

 

[Megasoum]

Heh...so looks like zh1nt0 didn't like Owen Good's article about the BF3 community on Kotaku (rightfully so...that article is a piece of crap).

https://twitter.com/#!/zh1nt0/status/173357373296091136

Owen Good showed with his article in Kotaku that he hasn´t got a clue about what the BF community is all about. #sensationalistheadlines

 

[The Faceless Master]

Heh...so looks like zh1nt0 didn't like Owen Good's article about the BF3 community on Kotaku (rightfully so...that article is a piece of crap).

https://twitter.com/#!/zh1nt0/status/173357373296091136

the article seems to be somewhat accurate.

 

[Anton Sugar]

Eh. DICE has become a lot less transparent, or at least communicative, in the past few months. Unless it's some PR slobbing/event, we haven't gotten much SPECIFIC news on when the next patch or DLC is gonna hit.

 

[Old Gimlet Eyes]

Battlefield's can start by looking at itself. I have no desire to buy or play Battlefield 3 because its community seems to be staging a pageant to determine who can be the angriest hypercritical entitled ingrate in video gaming

Lol, what a douche. If I didn't play games because of whiny fans, there wouldn't be much for me to play at all. I think the "Battlefield Blackout" is fucking stupid, but a comment like that is even more ridiculous.

I also don't think it is much to ask for some info on patches and DLC, especially for a massive game like BF3.

 

[Mangotron]

In my opinion the whole game needs to be rearranged. The fact that people are using the USAS with frags to such success is indicative that the game isn't balanced correctly. The game should force you to operate in a squad or die. The way to do this is:

Engineer: Can only use PDW's, it's stupid that it's possible to be carrying rockets, mines, and a full-size assault rifle. It unbalances the class, and allows for too much lone wolfing.

Assault: Currently the best-balanced class. Each of its options have a noticeable impact on how the class plays and balances them well.

Support: Plays too much like assault. I don't care if you have a foregrip or not, you're not going to be able to pop shots off on a SAW like you can on an assault rifle. Accuracy needs a nerf so that you have to set it up to use it effectively, and penetration needs to be greatly increased (A saw can easily take apart a concrete barrier, make it go through it at least.)

Sniper: Class is balanced ok except that sniping is piss poor in this game. Bring back BC2 sniping and add some ghilly suits. Disguise is mostly what defines actual snipers, not equipping a shotgun and running around like you're in Quake. Increase Sniper/Air interaction so that it is possible to alert a air vehicle of ground unit locations, and buff the jets rocket pod/add bombs.

That'd be what I'd want in a patch, but I'm sure they'll just keep playing the "nerf one gun to make another op" cycle that they did for BC2, rather then fixing mechanics.

 

[endlessflood]

Eh. DICE has become a lot less transparent, or at least communicative, in the past few months. Unless it's some PR slobbing/event, we haven't gotten much SPECIFIC news on when the next patch or DLC is gonna hit.

That's because pretty much all of the information was coming from one man (Alan Kertz) and he was taken off BF3 support and put on their new project. The irony is that communicating with the community was never his job, it was just something he did of his own volition. The actual DICE community manager (Daniel Matros) is useless and that's where the problem lies.

 

[The Faceless Master]

That's because pretty much all of the information was coming from one man (Alan Kertz) and he was taken off BF3 support and put on their new project. The irony is that communicating with the community was never his job, it was just something he did of his own volition. The actual DICE community manager (Daniel Matros) is useless and that's where the problem lies.

come on now, you expect a community manager to do things like know what's going on at work and communicate with the community?

 

[BoobPhysics101]

DICE's community manager is a dipshit. I have no idea why they haven't fired that guy.

 

[Megasoum]

come on now, you expect a community manager to do things like know what's going on at work and communicate with the community?

Pfff...it's far more important to spam your twitter account with what you are listening currently!

 

[Patrick Bateman]

DICE's community manager is a dipshit. I have no idea why they haven't fired that guy.

I think it's more the problem that EA and the core of Dice let him hanging. What is he supposed to say everytime someone tells him how bugged the game is except for "We look into it."?

And considering how bugged it is, it blows my mind why people talk about the DLC. First they need to improve and polish the game (that's why I spent 60€ on it), then somewhen maybe they can talk about announcing future DLC..

 

[Biff]

Demize99 isn't the actual community manager?!?

Mind blown.

 

[endlessflood]

Demize99 isn't the actual community manager?!?

Mind blown.

Yeah, for BF3 he was the Core Gameplay Designer. He doesn't just report the changes, he's the one who actually decides which changes get made.

 

[Overdoziz]

Why is there a vehicle in Squad Deathmatch? It makes no sense.

 

[akira28]

Why is there a vehicle in Squad Deathmatch? It makes no sense.

I think they want it to be a point of competition, racing to see who gets it first. I've stolen it a few times from the other team. Taking it down is easy enough with a couple of engies paying attention. If one hoses me, I just respawn with mines and a Javelin.

 

[Overdoziz]

I think they want it to be a point of competition, racing to see who gets it first. I've stolen it a few times from the other team. Taking it down is easy enough with a couple of engies paying attention. If one hoses me, I just respawn with mines and a Javelin.

A point of competition is fine, but not with random spawn locations and the spawnpoint of the vehicle also being random.

 

[The Faceless Master]

A point of competition is fine, but not with random spawn locations and the spawnpoint of the vehicle also being random.

in BC2, people would just camp the vehicle spawn and/or drop AT mines around it. i remember some games on Laguna Presa i would just hide in the bushes near the vehicle spawn with C4 planted and detonate it as soon as people got in.

 

[Overdoziz]

in BC2, people would just camp the vehicle spawn and/or drop AT mines around it. i remember some games on Laguna Presa i would just hide in the bushes near the vehicle spawn with C4 planted and detonate it as soon as people got in.

So just remove the vehicle and be done with it.