Jump to content


  • Content Count

  • Joined

  • Last visited

  • Days Won


HeiligeRobbe last won the day on July 20

HeiligeRobbe had the most liked content!

Community Reputation

158 Private

About HeiligeRobbe

  • Rank
    First Sergeant

Recent Profile Visitors

The recent visitors block is disabled and is not being shown to other users.

  1. Let's not forget that this holds only theoretically when every shot is a hit. I tried to explain once that the TTK can also be increased by letting firefights take place on longer ranges, thus more shots miss etc. (it's kind of mathematical actually :D).
  2. That's actually not true. DMRs don't one shot in Bf 4: https://symthic.com/bf4-weapon-info?w=M39_EMR
  3. I have no empirical evidence for sure, but if I were to make a guess I would say the Siege community doesn't see the 1BTK headshot as a "big issue". It's rather a core element in said game and if it were such a big issue especially in competitive terms it would make me wonder how the competitive community of Siege can be so alive? 3 BTK for a BR and also for an AR? And what's the point of choosing an BR than in the first place? I do strongly disagree with that from a gameplay perspective KDP (in Bf 3 most of the DMRs had a 1 BTK headshot up close and it wasn't cheesy at all. If you were good with them you could hold your ground against ARs even in CQB but if you didn't land those headshots you were quite dead quite quickly.) Leaving the gameplay arguments aside (I don't think that there is any argument which you would even read given the style of your posts) such a high BTK to the head might lead to another problem: It might kill immersion, atmosphere and fun. In the end this is still a modern military shooter. Of course it is not realistic and not even close to a milsim, but if I hit someone three times in the face with a BR and the player would still be running this would make me scratch my head every single time and look for a game with a more authentic feel in an instant. But maybe I am alone with this? @tynblpb Come on man. I do share your sentiment but this is not the way to respond. It only justifies his "this forum is full of ignorant people" posts.
  4. @KDP did you really not notice this before the AMA? Aren't you always claiming to be such an experienced player to whome everybody should listen to? ^^ The head glitching made this quite obvious from day 1 on. The more I think about it, the more I feel that the second part of the suggestion is just as important because it can be a way to balance long and short barrels. If I am not mistaken one of the main advantages of short barrels is the increased mobility and agility in enclosed areas (the guys who actually served might confirm or correct this ) Probably this can be implemented if going ADS is denied by certain objects and this happens sooner the longer the rifle.
  5. 20 seconds might be too long, but 15 could potentially be a deal. One does spawn quite fast and this can lead to some problems if you fight a squad and they keep spawning on each other over and over again (this is a different matter of course). Didn't not that .6 was bad though At the moment I simply have not much time for gaming but I always had a lot of fun with .6.
  6. I will just link my old suggestion here: Your's is obviously far more fletched out. Regarding the suppressor I would argue against a reduction of bullet speed and increase in bullet drop though, because that's not what suppressors do as far as I understand. In reality they increase muzzle velocity (for supersonic ammo), eliminate muzzle flaah and decrease recoil. To balance this out ingame, they could have an unrealistically high weight and probably increase ADS time because of the added barrel length. Although, I find the sway too pronounced at the moment I find it also kind of plausible that suppressors increase the sway due to the altered weapon balance.
  7. I can agree with almost everything you say but come on man: Don't you think you are quite a bit self-righteous and self-aggrandising here. I mean you are basically claiming you are providing "factual statements" and "logical arguments" and the points others bring up are irrelevant. I mean no offense but i've seen you doing exactly what you are complaining about here, quite frequently (not providing any back up for your argument and declaring your subjective opinion as a fact) Your basic argument here is that the devs should (if at all) listen to the feedback of very good players. Well I can understand that but among the very good WW3 players there seems to be some controversy in many discussions so to whome should the devs listen? And as Fullack said, it's the dev's game. They may or may not take inspiration from what we say. But I definitely don't think that is on any of us to judge that the team made a certain decision one does not like because they listened to the wrong players' feedback. No matter how skilled of a player somebody is, there is always room for humbleness I suppose. Getting back on topic I am absolutely with you about lazing in strikes. It would be much more immersive and I think it would be more challenging and thus more fun to do it actively rather than passively as it right now (I can't be the only one who - in a reaction to being killed by a tank - spawns back in the safety of the base just to call in a Stormbreaker right away and blow the tank to pieces ).
  8. Nice research man! Pretty much what I was suspecting (and somewhere in this forum there should be posts of me about it :D). It is possible to land single fire headshots and counter the sway that's true. The problem I would say is the inconsistency the sway brings due to the changing patterns. I had moments in CQB where I was suddenly thrown off target before starting to shoot because the sway behaved differently than the moments before. This is a problem in my opinion. I love to run the M417 with a moderate magnification scope. If I want to countersnipe someone behind cover on long range and the only thing that stops me from doing it is the sway because I have to hit like one or two pixels it becomes really annoying. That's why I was suggesting a sway reducing attachement once. I think the current amount of sway could be used to balance LMGs and heavy SRs so that you will be forced somewhat to go prone and bipod. But for ARs, BRs, SMGs etc. I would suggest an overall reduction of the sway. In any case and for every gun I would argue for a more predictable/simple sway pattern.
  9. I think it is no bug that picked up weapons only have 30 rounds. You are picking up the weapon on the ground and not searching the dead body for all the spare mags. In my opinion that makes sense. BRs are supposed to take the DMR role as far as I understood. But more variety would be nice of course (although I don't think that adding more weapons is the highest priority at the moment. Not sure though).
  10. I am not quite sure how this is related to the rest of the discussion? Balancing strikes is another matter and I agree that they could be more expensive but what do you mean exactly with "nope"? Do you refer to my 1st proposition in the post before? I honestly don't quite get your point here. Not sure why you sound so aggressive but anyway. I am quite certain that neither TZoning, nor Fullback, nor I have a problem with taking down a Heli. In the current discussion neither of us said it's op and if understood the others correctly that was also not their point. The question is more how well does the heli fit into the flow of the game/Warzone. Sorry buddy but that is quite obviously not true None of us said something in the direction of your quote. Instead we gave reasons why we are not happy with how it is currently implemented in the game and if you try to read the last two paragraphs of my last post you will find two propositions on how to change it. Calm down a bit and read our posts carefully. We did exactly what you claimed we did not and what you claimed we had done we hadn't.
  11. I am with TZoning and Fullback here although I can understand tynblpb's concern. But like Fullback said, it is not that much different from using a RPG and I think it would even work against thermal optics. While it is easy to spot someone you simply cannot look everywhere at the same time. Sure a good tank driver would be very hard to kill like this but speaking of good tank driver that is somewhat expected I would say. The deciding variables here would be in my opinion how long you have to designate your target, how long does it take the rocket to reach the target, and will there be a lock on function. If I have to aim at the tank for three seconds with a laser pointer and then the rocket will be guided in automatically I see no problem at all. If you have to point at the target until the rocket arrives the question is how fast this will be (how long is it now?). But then you should still be able to lead a rocket into a moving tank. I can see this work quite fine. The drone idea sounds really interesting to me too. I don't know if anybody uses the mini heli gadget atm? (I consider it mostly unnecessary given the abundance of flying eye) but if it would get the function of designating targets for your strikes this would be a strong incentive to use it I would say. Speaking about removing the heli. I had two quick thoughts which would avoid it being removed completely: 1. one could consider it becoming an off-map strike as well. On a modern day battlefield you kind of expect a heli I would say. As an off-map strike it could for example cover an area for a limited amount of time and strafe it with MGs OR rockets. The question would be how to balance it properly. 2. Disable the possibility to refill the ammo. Then it too becomes more like a bomb or arty strike in the sense that once you have shot all your rockets it will fly back and you have to wait for the passive cool down before you can call it in again.
  12. Impactful maybe wasn't the best way to put it. I don't think that strikes are not impactful by now. But they are far from being scarce. As a squadleader all anti tank I need is a Stormbreaker in my loadout. For mbts just wait until they took one or two rpgs and the rest of the vehicles can be destroyed instantly. For me the ideal would be that such an off-map strike would be the counter to a really good tanker. Not something I put on all the 20 ground vehicles the enemy team calls in. Instead of impactful "meaningful" would maybe be the better wording. As said I like the fast TTK and don't want people to become 'bulletsponges' again, but although I seldomly agree with him I think TZoning has provided some insight in the 'horizontal kicks' matter and brought up some interesting points. On top I would say that if you have four different levels of armor in the game they should make a difference. But as far as I remember you were among the first to propose full cover heavy armor so I figure you understand my point. The shared cooldown is an interesting idea!
  13. I have to agree with @Artaxiad300062 a bit here. At the moment it is not entirely clear to me where the game is heading to. From what I understood initially WW3 was supposed to catch the feel of older Bf titles (a German magazine nicely titled "looks like Bf 3 but plays like Bf 2") and many players where hyped for that I think. Not being a developer I have no idea how to recreate this feeling but maybe an updated "mission statement" could help to give more clarity here. Many modern games offer "comfort" functions older ones did not have. If I am not mistaken Bf 2 had no kill cam or hit direction indicator, mags were reloaded as a whole and going prone was not only used to get into cover but also to get the highest accuracy out of a gun. Maybe the developers can adress some of these aspects in a weekly report. How much "comfort" does the team intend to grant the players? Like Artaxiad I would love to see a minimalistic HUD like Insurgency has for example but that's just my preference. As for the gunplay - one does not have to search long to find complaints about the random horizontal kicks especially on some ARs and TZoning's research seems to hint that this is related to scope sway. Maybe the team can clarify how the recoil system works exactly and how the outliers enter a spray? I think the recoil is overall very managable in WW3 and I would prefer it to be a bit stronger with more characteristical recoil patterns for each gun (for example there could be guns which become almost impossible to control after 10-12 shots so players have to learn and adjust to each gun. (And I wouldn't mind removing the hit markers as well ) I never read a confirmation that the random horizontal kicks are indeed a thing so this would be my main question here: Has a certain randomness been introduced after 0.3? And was sway increased like TZoning claims? I am excited for the introduction of a horizontal recoil variable and the chance to adjust a gun even more to your preferred playstyle. Then I feel like the TTK and armor system are a delicate topic as well. I like the short base TTK the game offers at the moment but like others I think it is too inconsistent at the moment which I assume is related to the armor system. In the heat of the moment it can feel quite random how many hits are needed for an enemy to go down. Do you consider to introduce a full protection for the heavier vests so that gutshots are not a thing anymore (for ceramic and steel) and I can expected to be protected by my vest? Some additional info on how the armor system works precisely could help as well. In my opinion the armor system sets WW3 apart from its competition (at least from the last modern warfare Bf titles) but it seems to me as if its full potential has not yet been utilized. By the way: Is the penetration of a gun/bullet also depending on the distance? I.e. a gun might not penetrate a ceramic vest from 100m but it does so <10m? Lastly, strikes are something which by now does not feel really rewarding just because they are quite spammable if you are a half decent player. I get that also weaker players are supposed to enjoy all aspects of the game and it can be frustrating if you never can use your custom tank but for me personally that would be one of the largest incentives to get better. The customization options are one of the greatest features of WW3 and players who are excited to try out there personal Leo are most likely willing to go through some learning process until they can use it. Without giving exact numbers I would in general argue for strikes becoming much harder to earn. If I recall correctly the commander in Bf 2 could call in an artillery strike but only quite rarely. Given that everybody can call in a strike I would expect a higher frequency than that but at the moment any kind of strike is quite omnipresent. To sum this up: The technical improvements with the recent update are great. But the recent weekly reports leave a number of questions open, which I think deserve some attention. I for myself would like the game to become more rewarding in the sense that guns become harder to master (but less random to control), strikes become (significantly) harder to earn (but more impactful) and the armor system forces players even more to aim accurately for the head or flanking the enemy by letting the heavier vests cover the full upper body.
  14. Ah, that's what I thought but after a having organized a Bachelor party on Saturday I was also willing to doubt my mental capacities for the moment
  • Create New...