Battlefield Franchise Megathread V2 - 'The Future of Warfare Is in the Past' Edition - Games

Anyone know if Hardline still has an OK amount of active players on PC? (Premium is $20 on origin and i'm looking for a change from 4)

[QUOTE=Froggeth;50571810]Anyone know if Hardline still has an OK amount of active players on PC? (Premium is $20 on origin and i'm looking for a change from 4)[/QUOTE] Hardline is dead on PC

[QUOTE=Froggeth;50571810]Anyone know if Hardline still has an OK amount of active players on PC? (Premium is $20 on origin and i'm looking for a change from 4)[/QUOTE] It has a decent amount of players for the base game but premium/DLC servers are basically dead. The free ones have some life in them but you won't consistently find full servers running those maps. [editline]22nd June 2016[/editline] I was thinking about picking up Hardline premium too because I really like the base game but the playerbase just isn't there for the expansions sadly.

[QUOTE=Oblivion Knight;50570780]I think it kinda helps further define class roles, and rewards good positioning/knowing your class' strengths. I'd have to play the open beta if it happens to really see how I feel about it. [/QUOTE] There are surely better ways than to make it all up to RNG though, isn't it? I never find it fun in a game where i know i am aiming right for someone, even while bursting, but a few of my bullets miss due to the spread, while they, using a less accurate weapon, just hold down the fire button and gun me down because RNG favored them, and not me.

[QUOTE=ulvemann43;50572863]There are surely better ways than to make it all up to RNG though, isn't it? I never find it fun in a game where i know i am aiming right for someone, even while bursting, but a few of my bullets miss due to the spread, while they, using a less accurate weapon, just hold down the fire button and gun me down because RNG favored them, and not me.[/QUOTE] Sounds like a super simplified and super specific situation. If the gun has less accuracy then it probably has a higher rate of fire and if you're at the point where the outcome is based on a split decision then why wouldn't the gun more designed for close range combat be the winner? A small amount of spread is not going to define who wins the game unless it is some oddly specific situation that happens like once in a blue moon (1 ticket on each side, both staring down a hallway with the wind and temperature being within 5 degrees of each other) Besides, you're basically saying you want a twitch shooter where the person who shoots first wins when honestly that sounds kind of boring and you can get that same shit on hardcore or COD anyways.

[QUOTE=1chains1;50574163]Besides, you're basically saying you want a twitch shooter where the person who shoots first wins when honestly that sounds kind of boring and you can get that same shit on hardcore or COD anyways.[/QUOTE] Or Battlefield 4 as it is now. I'm of mixed opinions on BF4 gunplay. Its really good and satisfying when taken on its own, easily the best the series has ever had. However, I'm also a bit annoyed on the shifted focus that it has had on the game. When almost every gun is as good as it is, it homogenizes the roles quite a bit, especially with the gun distribution being as free as it is in 4. The older games had a lot more spread, and it made the guns a lot more different from each other than they are now. It also heavily encouraged accurate single shots because headshots were more heavily rewarded than they are now, It wasn't uncommon at all to run an assault rifle in single fire mode in BF2. That said, it didn't feel particularly [i]good[/i], especially when you were firing in iron sights with minimal recoil but you could see your shots flying wildly off mark. While I love BF2 and the other classic era games, I'm not above admitting that the gunplay kind of sucked. Its something modern Battlefield is leagues better at.

[QUOTE=Froggeth;50571810]Anyone know if Hardline still has an OK amount of active players on PC? (Premium is $20 on origin and i'm looking for a change from 4)[/QUOTE] There's usually 3 to 5 64 players servers that are mostly filled, although one is a 24/7 metro style one. But yeah like Raidyr said the expansion servers are mostly gone. I think I saw one that had people in it, and it wasn't max server size. For $5 its definitely worth picking up the base game, most of the new weapons that were released alongside the dlc were free as well so you won't be lacking guns to tinker with if you're worried about not having the dlc content.

[QUOTE=1chains1;50574163] Besides, you're basically saying you want a twitch shooter where the person who shoots first wins when honestly that sounds kind of boring and you can get that same shit on hardcore or COD anyways.[/QUOTE] but thats already how it is in this series? and basically every other fps game?

are all the servers running final stand now? i downloaded it again with second assault being free and theres on average maybe 5 high tick servers running china rising/second assault, almost always its metro, locker or caspian border

[QUOTE=waylander;50574368]are all the servers running final stand now? i downloaded it again with second assault being free and theres on average maybe 5 high tick servers running china rising/second assault, almost always its metro, locker or caspian border[/QUOTE] Very few actually use rotation I found like one that did nothing but DLC maps and of course its just empty 90% of the time. Bare in mind I'm in EU. Just played an Inf Only game on Dragon Valley and I swear literally everyone on both teams were just headless chickens gunning for kills instead of capping. Getting so sick of lone wolves and people who blatantly have no audio or situational awareness. One guy in my squad admitted to having his music on and no game audio so despite being sprayed by 3 people form 30m he didn't react at all then called the team shit. I hope to christ they enforce teamwork better in BF1. I can take all the shitty DLC in the world as long as they work on that.

[QUOTE=1chains1;50574163]Sounds like a super simplified and super specific situation. If the gun has less accuracy then it probably has a higher rate of fire and if you're at the point where the outcome is based on a split decision then why wouldn't the gun more designed for close range combat be the winner? A small amount of spread is not going to define who wins the game unless it is some oddly specific situation that happens like once in a blue moon (1 ticket on each side, both staring down a hallway with the wind and temperature being within 5 degrees of each other) Besides, you're basically saying you want a twitch shooter where the person who shoots first wins when honestly that sounds kind of boring and you can get that same shit on hardcore or COD anyways.[/QUOTE] How is wanting to know where my bullets hit, and make firing multiple shots up to skill rather than luck, wantint a twitch shooter? People already mention that guns in bf1 have ridiculously wide spread on cerrain guns. I'd rather have the guns be reliably accurate but be balanced around their roles by goving, say, SMGs extremely low min damage and fast dropoff, than just making them have the spread of a shotgun because reasons. Takes away so much skill.

[QUOTE=Scratch.;50570812][vid]https://i.imgur.com/pSLQpGR.mp4[/vid][/QUOTE] [i]You see Ivan, when catching bullet before fly away, you always have bullet.[/i]

Is battlefield 4 worth picking up rn for how cheap it is or will I be spanked by all the people who've been playing since launch? Same question about battlefront seeing as they're both pretty cheap.

[QUOTE=KommradKommisar;50574698]Is battlefield 4 worth picking up rn for how cheap it is or will I be spanked by all the people who've been playing since launch? Same question about battlefront seeing as they're both pretty cheap.[/QUOTE] Yes and also yes.

[QUOTE=KommradKommisar;50574698]Is battlefield 4 worth picking up rn for how cheap it is or will I be spanked by all the people who've been playing since launch? Same question about battlefront seeing as they're both pretty cheap.[/QUOTE] bf4 yeah swb, debatable, my friends haven't been recommending it [t]https://jii.moe/4JIP6WBBb.png[/t]

Battlefront is good for when you don't want the hardcore Battlefield experience, you just want to dick around in a quick skirmish and throw grenades at people from mid-air. The dogfight mode, the name escapes me, is also great fun for a few rounds but it's definitely a money sink. I'd only pay full price for it if it came with all the DLC as launch content basically, as it stands now either get it on sale or wait for the inevitable Special Edition with all the DLC included.

[QUOTE=DeVotchKa;50575491]I'd only pay full price for it if it came with all the DLC as launch content basically, as it stands now either get it on sale or wait for the inevitable Special Edition with all the DLC included.[/QUOTE] wait for DLC content to be bundled and on sale :downs: what we do now for battlefield

I can't really understand one thing - is it really that hard for majority of players to tap 'q' when you see a tank/jet/heli/enemy in general? This kind of info is crucial for the team, especially for pilots and engineers.

[QUOTE=ulvemann43;50574438]How is wanting to know where my bullets hit, and make firing multiple shots up to skill rather than luck, wantint a twitch shooter? People already mention that guns in bf1 have ridiculously wide spread on cerrain guns. I'd rather have the guns be reliably accurate but be balanced around their roles by goving, say, SMGs extremely low min damage and fast dropoff, than just making them have the spread of a shotgun because reasons. Takes away so much skill.[/QUOTE] Alright, go fire a WWI era SMG in full auto and tell me how easy it really is to keep it on target.

[QUOTE=DaBeaver;50575623]I can't really understand one thing - is it really that hard for majority of players to tap 'q' when you see a tank/jet/heli/enemy in general? This kind of info is crucial for the team, especially for pilots and engineers.[/QUOTE] doesn't always spot for me I spam it in good faith that I'll hit it

[QUOTE=Taepodong-2;50575667]Alright, go fire a WWI era SMG in full auto and tell me how easy it really is to keep it on target.[/QUOTE] I'd imagine the bullets wouldn't decide to suddenly fire 40 degress in every direction because they feel like it. Not even civil war era muskets were that inaccurate, if my memory serves me right. I don't care if they make the gun bounce around and shake like a rabbit on crack, but making it artificially feel useless at a range by adding a huge random variable to its spread? I'd much more prefer needing to deal with insane recoil, rather than the dumbed down and honestly lazy "oh RNG decided you wouldn't hit those bullets even though you kept your sights on target" approach. I'm all for making guns have distinct roles, heck i applaud that decission, but i want it to feel natural and not just some artificial, dumbed down and RNG filled gimmick. I want close range SMGs that fight, that shake, that you need to struggle to control your aim with if you even dare to engage far medium-long range targets, but that you can still use them, to a very ineffective degree, as long as you can actually lead and land shots. Doesen't matter if it would take you 10, 15, or even more hits, as long as the game actually lets you use that skill. Every single other gun designed for those ranges would tear you to pieces if anyone decent would use them, but at least you would have the option, if you were confident enough. It wouldn't be effective and you'd probably have more luck throwing rocks, but, the option would be there.

[QUOTE=Naught;50574363]but thats already how it is in this series? and basically every other fps game?[/QUOTE] Eh more so in bf4, but there are things that break this monotomy like locational damage, I am not saying a person who shoots first won't win most of the time, that is his given advantage for good positioning. But there has always been a bit of a variable in that things could possibly go awry for the enemy and smart use of tactics can mean you win. For example, in normal you can take a bullet, run around a corner and turn around to see if theyre being too impatient. Adding a slight bit of spread adds to the variables I would honestly like to see, so we dont have lmgs at the front line hip firing with laser accuracy and add to the gameplay. I personally play this game for the moments when you win by the skin of your ballsack because those moments are so intense and satisfying. So for me a slight spread just breaks up the usual gameplay and can throw a curveball that adds a bit of extra challenge. edit - it also emulates the unpredictability of war, it just seems to me itll add more interesting scenarios than headaches.

All the changes to the weapon mechanics have really assuaged my fears of this game just being BF4 with a WWI skin. I'm even totally fine now with there being a 50/50 ratio between automatic and semi/bolt action weapons. Instead of the automatics just being objectively better at everything, they seem to serve specific purposes.

Things going sideways in BF4 isn't necessarily bad, it's just more literal than you think. [video=youtube;kg2yG4g0pyw]http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=kg2yG4g0pyw[/video]

[QUOTE=DaBeaver;50575623]I can't really understand one thing - is it really that hard for majority of players to tap 'q' when you see a tank/jet/heli/enemy in general? This kind of info is crucial for the team, especially for pilots and engineers.[/QUOTE] Are you saying that some people don't do this out of reflex? Hell I press Q on tanks that are already on fire and being gang-banged by several engineers at point blank

Yea half the time I wanna gouge my eyes out because no one seems to understand what the copilot seat in the little bird is for. LOOK AROUND AND CALL OUT TARGETS AND POSSIBLE THINGS THAT COULD SMACK US LIKE A FLY NOT SIT THERE LIKE IM TRANSPORTING A FUCKING VEGETABLE TO A NEW HOSPITAL. Like seriously, go into a pub and just ask in all chat what the copilot seat of the little bird is for. Most people won't know and even the ones that do avoid the spot like the plauge. Recently Ive taken up to exclusively sitting in there hoping the pilot will make use of my spots, and sometimes I can wrack up some really good points, especially if the side seats are open so I can switch to repair/defend. You can actually get a good amount of points if you're working with a smart pilot.

[QUOTE=1chains1;50588458] what the copilot seat of the little bird is for. Most people won't know[/QUOTE] :worried:

Yea you think that, but have you ever actually seen anyone USE it in a pub? Unless you're in voice chat with someone you wont find very many people on that level of cooperation. It is like the spot basically doesn't even exist.

[QUOTE=1chains1;50588711]Yea you think that, but have you ever actually seen anyone USE it in a pub? Unless you're in voice chat with someone you wont find very many people on that level of cooperation. It is like the spot basically doesn't even exist.[/QUOTE] im lost, what can the copilot do in a scout heli? i knew in BF3 you could use a laser painter until they patched it, but ive never noticed anything in BF4

I know that BF1 is late war but it would be funny as hell to see an improvised catapault on at least one of the maps, since they were used fairly early in the war - primarily just thrown together by troops. For example (quote from Trench: A History of Trench Warfare on the Western Front by Dr. Stephen Bull) [i]One built by the Cambridgeshire Regiment in Ploegsteert Wood was indeed a direct copy of a Roman machine, inspired by the classical scholarship of a Cambridge professor[/i] How fucking awesome would that be?