All aboard the BF5 hype train

Discuss the campaign and all things BF.

Moderator: Executive

User avatar
RazY70
Supporting Member
Supporting Member
Posts: 1134
Joined: Thu Jun 28, 2012 12:24 pm

Re: All aboard the BF5 hype train

Post by RazY70 »

Part of the justifications I read for introducing the new system is was that players did not understand the previous one. Well, now they don't seem to understand the new one, and we've come a full circle. Great!

Both systems aim to achieve a similar outcome and both do a reasonable job at it. However, I don't like it when a system strips away game elements which worked perfectly fine for 14 years. I like the ticket and ticket bleed mechanics and the extra layer they add; I like that death is factored into the system and has an impact (even if marginal); I don't like the continuous trend of dumbing things down system which wasn't overly sophisticated to begin with.

Image
Image
User avatar
Róka
Posts: 1077
Joined: Thu Jun 28, 2012 8:39 pm
Location: South Texas

Re: All aboard the BF5 hype train

Post by Róka »

RazY70 wrote:Part of the justifications I read for introducing the new system is was that players did not understand the previous one. Well, now they don't seem to understand the new one, and we've come a full circle. Great!

Both systems aim to achieve a similar outcome and both do a reasonable job at it. However, I don't like it when a system strips away game elements which worked perfectly fine for 14 years. I like the ticket and ticket bleed mechanics and the extra layer they add; I like that death is factored into the system and has an impact (even if marginal); I don't like the continuous trend of dumbing things down system which wasn't overly sophisticated to begin with.
This. I get that many people didn't and still don't understand the past or new ticket system, but while ikjadoon states facts of the new conquest system and makes logical arguments about its pros, he unreasonably blasts anyone that makes a counter argument or tries to prove why the past system was better. The new system is quite linear and doesn't take deaths into account, we all understand that. But the old system had much more potential in different games.
Natetendo83 wrote:So looking at your BF4 history I see that you got the Revive ribbon 37 times. That means you revived a minimum of 5 people in that match. That's 5 tickets saved by just you in that match. Now what say 5 other teammates also got a revive ribbon. That's now a minimum of 30 tickets saved in a match. Tell me, what would the game lose by having that in the game? If it doesn't make a difference most of the time then why not add it? But what about those times when it DOES make a difference? Those games that are so close that a handful of revives actually turned the tide?

This is why we want the old system back. Not to completely alter how the game plays, but to add more depth and elements to how a game could potentially pan out. Imagine those 30 revives and now stack onto that those 30 people collectively went on to kill 50 enemy players after they were revived? That's now an 80 point swing because you saved 30 tickets and cost the other team 50.
This is why I like the original system. But ikjadoon misreads the initial comment because he has his head so far stuck up his ass that he goes on to write a page-long reply to Natetendo83 about how stupid he is for thinking that revives +1 a ticket to your team.
Despite having a pretty good OP (Which, to be honest, the credit goes to the data miners, not him for stating what is obvious. Those of us here that played the alpha and/or beta already understood the new system just by playing a few matches and seeing the in-game results. Joining an empty server helped alot, too. We didn't need to data mine.) that guy is so fraking ignorant and smug in the rest of his replies.

Placeholder for thoughts on the reddit post regarding the "weakest links throwing the game."
How do we look at this? Should the players that are really good at PTFO AND KTFO (killing the frak outta) enemies not be rewarded - the same way the crappy players are... well, crappy?
So, with the old system, PTFO & KTFO players get rewarded really well - both playstyles, separate and together, affect tickets+score.
With the new system, PTFO & KTFO players still get rewarded - the enemy team just isn't punished as much. If you are doing both, you're probably capping a lot of flags AND stopping enemies from getting near them/capping them back. However, killing doesn't affect tickets, just score.
Is it better or worse that if you're really good at BF then the enemy team has less of a chance to win (if your kills take away their tickets then they have less overall round time to cap back because they're wasting tickets)? If deaths don't directly change tickets then the enemy doesn't have to worry about dying as much as they do capping back.
Personally, I like having deaths deplete tickets. Sure, you'll have a slight increase in games that aren't so close, but you'll have a greater variety in how teams switch leads and close games that don't only depend on caps.
ikjadoon also has two other arguments I have a huge problem with.
1) His argument for "kill-farming" is snipers that kill unskillful players. Okay, AS FAR AS I REMEMBER, in ALL of the past BF games, SNIPERS WEREN'T THE ONES GOING 50-2 AND TURNING THE TIDE OF THE GAME. It was players that were really skilled in vehicles, and on the even rarer occasion, very skilled shooters (you can be fraking perfect with your decisions and firefights but most likely you'll die more than twice even if you're nearing the top of the scoreboard as infantry-only).
2) His argument about how DICE simplified it for us since many players didn't understand the previous ticket bleed meaning since deaths don't count and tickets go up it's like CoD Domination. "But since it's CoD Domination, us BF veterans shouldn't have a problem only worrying about PTFO and not KTFO enemy team." I understand this logic, but put a little more thought into it. We've played BF for a long time, we understood the old system, and we LIKED the depth of the gameplay that affects tickets.
This really only affects competitive/organized gameplay, and the maybe 10% of pubby games where the majority of people know what they're doing, but GC is where I play most of the time. I like to take the GC part seriously in that everything I'm doing is getting my team closer to winning, whereas in pubby games I really don't care if I win or lose I'm mainly having fun fooling around or try-harding (in which case I just care if I got to the top of the scoreboard, not win/lose).
ImageImage
User avatar
matsif
Executive
Executive
Posts: 4495
Joined: Mon Jul 20, 2009 8:23 pm
Location: I don't exist.

Re: All aboard the BF5 hype train

Post by matsif »

I started writing a book to respond to all of the nonsense in those threads, but really it was just me rehashing everything I've already said.

so to avoid that I'll just tl;dr and say that the numbers that were datamined just prove to me that all of my issues are reality. it's not a case of misunderstanding the systems, it's a case of DICE making the game shallower for no real reason but to appeal to more 30 minute a week console players. removing game depth cannot be seen as anything else, it's the same for the gunplay being spread only.

but it's all ok guys, remember EA is super cool because snoop dog got high and played BF1 at an event.
woke up this morning, put on my slippers, walked in the kitchen and died
User avatar
ZebraPeps
Supporting Member
Supporting Member
Posts: 388
Joined: Mon Sep 10, 2012 4:51 am
Location: Sweden

Re: All aboard the BF5 hype train

Post by ZebraPeps »

I enjoy the original system as well and I'm not full on board with the change either, but to learn the new mechanics by reading the "passionate" discussions and people's comments on positives and negatives made me reflect on other aspects, I'll get to that later.

I didn't mind playing the new system on BF1 Alpha and Beta (there weren't a lot of PTFO in those games anyway, most players were just trying the new mechanics) and I'll probably adapt to it once BF1 releases cause I really really enjoyed the Alpha and Beta.
The new setting (WWI) and dynamics with classes/vehicles/gunplay were actually quite refreshing. Brought me back to 1942 and BF2 moment/experience which I appreciate a lot. BF3 and BF4 were just riddled with mindless gadgets and weaponry. BF1 will probably have its share of bloating as well... sentries already there (glorified battle pickups), battlepacks with tons of useless skins and whatnot. Still, the different dynamics to gunplay and class system makes it way more interesting than BF4 ever was. After beta was over and I wen't back to some rounds of BF4 it just felt so... bland.
Gunplay in BF4 is all about microbursting/move mouse down to compensate recoil - it's booooooring. People complain about spread in BF1, well - as far as I've read there aren't more spread in BF1 than in BF4, the weapons just needs to be used within their intended purpose - unlike BF4 where u can be just as successful with a PDW as an ASSAULT rifle although they "should" be different... I'm all for the new gunplay mechanics in BF1.

Anyways, regarding the ticket system, since there are so many discussions (and outrage) about the different systems on several forums one could hope it might lead DICE to giving the option of running old school ticket bleed or new flag point system (assuming there will be private servers).

Now, the other aspect I was thinking about for the new ticket system was how it might impact Global Conflict, and actually it might not be a negative thing... Taking into account that campaigns, since the "Starfisher Epic", have felt and been commented on as completely unbalanced (the forum archives are full of complaints/threads about team balance) the new ticket system might work in favour of Global Conflict original campaign system. If, as some people say, the new system "artificially" leads to more close rounds, that might actually be a good thing. The "bad team" will probably still lose the campaign, but maybe won't get roflstomped every round with the negative effect of people dropping like flies from the community. Players might actually keep showing up for battledays since more close rounds could inspire hope of producing wins and most of all - having FUN.
Dunno if I'm completely off on this, but just wanted to mention it and see response on this.
Image
User avatar
Róka
Posts: 1077
Joined: Thu Jun 28, 2012 8:39 pm
Location: South Texas

Re: All aboard the BF5 hype train

Post by Róka »

ZebraPeps wrote:Now, the other aspect I was thinking about for the new ticket system was how it might impact Global Conflict, and actually it might not be a negative thing... Taking into account that campaigns, since the "Starfisher Epic", have felt and been commented on as completely unbalanced (the forum archives are full of complaints/threads about team balance) the new ticket system might work in favour of Global Conflict original campaign system. If, as some people say, the new system "artificially" leads to more close rounds, that might actually be a good thing. The "bad team" will probably still lose the campaign, but maybe won't get roflstomped every round with the negative effect of people dropping like flies from the community. Players might actually keep showing up for battledays since more close rounds could inspire hope of producing wins and most of all - having FUN.
I completely agree with this. I guess the only way I can put it... the new ticket system won't be stopping me from buying the game. I simply prefer having the old ticket system as it is part of the original BF gameplay. Obviously I don't have control over how other people play their game, but I also prefer that the fix would be players getting better, not the game being simplified. And while I enjoy the idea of roflstomping, it gets boring for the winning team, too, especially in GC. Yes, it won't be as boring anymore, but I'd rather have enemies step up to the roflstomping and compete (somewhat unrealistic at this point).
ImageImage
User avatar
matsif
Executive
Executive
Posts: 4495
Joined: Mon Jul 20, 2009 8:23 pm
Location: I don't exist.

Re: All aboard the BF5 hype train

Post by matsif »

just so everyone is clear on the server information (as this is extremely important to if we can adopt this game or not), I've been digging around for any rumors I can find as DICE remains silent. anyone who has frequented the various server threads on the BF forums has probably already seen this info, but so everyone is clear, I'll post what I've found/looked up. this is going to be a text wall so bear with me.

-----------

first up, the rumor mill itself. remember, this is still not confirmed by DICE and thus isn't written in stone until they break their silence over it, but their silence this late into things does speak volumes for what's going to happen. this info from AUK was the first thing that really reported this information and I've seen the same info from separate sources on some other forums, including the procon forums.

http://www.anarchygaming.uk/Forum/battl ... r-rentals/
Guys

Just a heads up, I thought might interest you.

GPortal, (our Oaks server provider), has just informed us that they won't be providing any BF1 servers. In fact NO providers will be selling/renting BF1 servers in the traditional way they do now.

Instead MS Azure, Amazone, AWS and i3d will provide server resources to DICE for selling on to communities directly; there will be limited access to server settings adjustments and NO procon (and I guess any alternative) option. So basically identical to the console model they deployed for BF4.

I've no reason to doubt what he's told us is accurate and I guess there's time for EA to change their minds - but this is going to kill a LOT of Battlefield communities, with lack of server admin control, imo.
-----------

so, to address what some of this means for us should it be true, I started looking into how BF4 servers were handled on consoles as that's most likely similar to what we're going to get with the given rumors.

without going into every specific, the tl;dr of the matter is if we're getting something along the lines of the BF4 console server model we're not getting rcon controls. the rcon commands apparently still exist in the BF1 beta binaries, but there's a good chance we'll have no way to access them because EA likely won't give us an rcon console (like those of you who TA'd in BF4 should be familiar with on the NFO site) or a way for the guys at procon (or similar) to plug into it, at least to start off. this removes a lot of commands server admins need to run the game at our pacing and quite possibly kills the game for our use entirely. annoying workarounds look to be possible, but we're talking a lot of extended time between maps and live rounds.

also, the providers reportedly being chosen in the rumors reportedly (through some guys at procon) don't even own servers strong enough to run BF4 with 70 slots at 60hz tick rate, and run all of their servers through VMs, so server performance is probably going to be down overall. we're likely to not have a choice of provider either, we'll just be able to choose a region for the servers and be stuck with whatever DICE grabs out of the bag.

but for some good news, we should have a reasonable amount of game setting controls and if this is indeed what happens servers should be cheaper. 90 days of server rental on PS4 for BF4 was $60, and we were paying much more than that for a monthly sub at NFO. if anyone looked at the server info page in the beta, we should be able to play with some/all of these items in terms of game settings, but I wouldn't expect to be able to play with much else.

-----------

so, basically our use of this game hangs on DICE's official word on servers and what controls they end up offering. given the survey you guys want to play it, but in terms of server control there's a very good chance that we're not going to be able to. I'm keeping a very close eye on this so if any more info comes out I'll post it up.
woke up this morning, put on my slippers, walked in the kitchen and died
cairdazar
Supporting Member
Supporting Member
Posts: 555
Joined: Mon Feb 13, 2012 4:24 am
Location: sweden

Re: All aboard the BF5 hype train

Post by cairdazar »

Don't forget to tell EA that you think about the beta https://www.surveymonkey.com/r/9YFYK3Y
Image
Image
Image
KoffeinFlummi
Supporting Member
Supporting Member
Posts: 1686
Joined: Mon Feb 13, 2012 1:08 pm
Location: Germany

Re: All aboard the BF5 hype train

Post by KoffeinFlummi »

matsif wrote:also, the providers reportedly being chosen in the rumors reportedly (through some guys at procon) don't even own servers strong enough to run BF4 with 70 slots at 60hz tick rate, and run all of their servers through VMs, so server performance is probably going to be down overall. we're likely to not have a choice of provider either, we'll just be able to choose a region for the servers and be stuck with whatever DICE grabs out of the bag.
I haven't read into server stuff for BF at all, but I highly doubt that platforms like AWS aren't able to provide enough juice for a game server, even on a VM. After all, they basically run half the internet.
Image
o1oo1
Supporting Member
Supporting Member
Posts: 745
Joined: Tue Oct 02, 2012 3:49 pm

Re: All aboard the BF5 hype train

Post by o1oo1 »

The first thing we run into without server controls is assigning players to teams
Image
User avatar
RazY70
Supporting Member
Supporting Member
Posts: 1134
Joined: Thu Jun 28, 2012 12:24 pm

Re: All aboard the BF5 hype train

Post by RazY70 »

Image

This is just sad :(
Image
User avatar
A Docile Sloth
Executive
Executive
Posts: 2323
Joined: Sun Jun 24, 2012 4:32 pm
Location: Somewhere where you aren't.

Re: All aboard the BF5 hype train

Post by A Docile Sloth »

At a guess:
Assault is so high as it's the only class with a (useful) fully automatic weapon plus AT capabilities.
Sniper Scout is a close second because sniper.
Support is next because LMG.
Medic is under used as you have to press a button to request a revive and when people do, you only see the icon if the dead guy is on your screen (it doesn't float around the edges). Plus holding space to get to the deploy screen quicker which people probably used because the medics weren't reviving them because they couldn't see the dead people. So your perks are useless and the class only gets semi-auto weapons. Plus no big medic bag unless you knew about the "career" website or until all unlocks were unlocked.
Image
User avatar
Nix
Posts: 499
Joined: Wed Apr 03, 2013 12:56 pm
Location: Arizona, United States

Re: All aboard the BF5 hype train

Post by Nix »

Medics: 10%
I have a really hard time believing that. I felt like there were too many medics in a round sometimes.
Image
MAAfield 4: MAA Rising, Second MAA, MAA Strike, MAA's Teeth, Final MAA, MAA Operations, Community MAA and Legacy MAA
User avatar
ZebraPeps
Supporting Member
Supporting Member
Posts: 388
Joined: Mon Sep 10, 2012 4:51 am
Location: Sweden

Re: All aboard the BF5 hype train

Post by ZebraPeps »

Nix wrote:
Medics: 10%
I have a really hard time believing that. I felt like there were too many medics in a round sometimes.
:D
Yeah, also had some rounds with abnoxious team setup, enemy tanks were going rampant cause my team were all playing medics & scouts, like wtf!?
But hey, it was Beta so everyone were just fooling around doing weird stuff...
Image
User avatar
Róka
Posts: 1077
Joined: Thu Jun 28, 2012 8:39 pm
Location: South Texas

Re: All aboard the BF5 hype train

Post by Róka »

ZebraPeps wrote:
Nix wrote:
Medics: 10%
I have a really hard time believing that. I felt like there were too many medics in a round sometimes.
:D
Yeah, also had some rounds with abnoxious team setup, enemy tanks were going rampant cause my team were all playing medics & scouts, like wtf!?
But hey, it was Beta so everyone were just fooling around doing weird stuff...
Looking at the trends in BF3 and BF4, I don't think it has as much to do with it just being a beta as it has to do with the majority of players being rando pubbies (i.e. won't change upon release).
ImageImage
User avatar
Jokerle
Supporting Member
Supporting Member
Posts: 1986
Joined: Fri Jan 11, 2013 1:13 pm
Location: latest crashsite

Re: All aboard the BF5 hype train

Post by Jokerle »

ZebraPeps wrote:
Nix wrote:
Medics: 10%
I have a really hard time believing that. I felt like there were too many medics in a round sometimes.
:D
Yeah, also had some rounds with abnoxious team setup, enemy tanks were going rampant cause my team were all playing medics & scouts, like wtf!?
But hey, it was Beta so everyone were just fooling around doing weird stuff...
Tanks also ran rampant because one needed to unlock the anti-gun for the assault first. It is quite obnoxious for the tankers.
Wat ne Wuchtbrumme!
Post Reply