Jump to content

Help
Rate Article   * * * * * 3 votes

Demize99, Battlefield 3's core gameplay designer has presented a list of changes for weapons and accessories that may go into effect in the future. The developer is seeking the best balance between accuracy, recoil, and stealth when it comes to adjusting the equipment. The full list of changes and reasoning for all these Battlefield 3 adjustments can be seen below.

Quote

I'm working on a retweak of the accessories in the game currently, as I feel the player is limited in choice due to a few accessories being the clear winners in almost all categories. While this unfortunately means nerfing those that are over used, the goal here is to focus on improving the under performing and under used attachments. Additionally it is the intention for an unmodified weapon to offer the best balance of Recoil, Accuracy, and Stealth. [...] Again, I'm not promising this will go live, and I'm not promising there will be an update, I'm looking for feedback and a discussion.

Thanks, Alan "Demize99" Kertz

Foregrip
The Foregrip is for players who who are in close combat and highly mobile fighting situations. It reduces the horizontal recoil forces that make maintaining a consistant aim on target difficult, however it makes aimed shots more difficult.
  • +34% reduction in horizontal recoil (adjust based on gun)
  • -20% penalty to base accuracy when aimed
Rationale: The Foregrip is quite powerful on weapons with high amounts of horizontal recoil, and is generally the goto attachment for everyone using Assault Rifles and Carbines. Currently it has no downside, which makes it a pure bonus upgrade and is a no brainer. Adjusting the foregrip on a per gun basis will prevent the foregrip from over powering some guns, and also means it doesn't need to be globally nerfed into oblivion. For example, 50% of the FAMAS's recoil is 0.3deg, while 50% of the G3A3's recoil is only 0.1deg. A global 0.1deg might work better, generally it will need to be on a per gun basis. The 20% penalty to aimed fire is about equal to a single shot fired on a Carbine.

Bipod
The Bipod is for Players who wish to setup a position and hold it against the enemy, or make long range shots effectively. When deployed recoil and dispersion are substantially reduced and scope sway is eliminated (except under suppression).
  • +Reduction in horizontal and vertical recoil (% depends on gun type)
  • +Reduction in dispersion (% depends on gun type/ammo type)
  • -Has to be setup to get the benefit
Rationale: The Bipod is underused, has a large penalty of needing to be stationary, yet today doesn't offer enough benefits on Carbines and Assault Rifles to be worth using. A buff of the bipod for these, and perhaps even LMG weapons is likely necessary.

Suppressor
The Suppressor is for players who are mostly focused on Stealth. It uses low velocity rounds, which means better stealth at the cost of reduced range. The Suppressor adds bulk to a weapon due to its size, making firing from the hip more difficult, though a high quality Suppressor provides a small aimed accuracy bonus and reduces the muzzle rise when firing.
  • +Does not appear on minimap when firing.
  • +Reduces sound and visual muzzle signature
  • -Reduced range for both min and max, damage stays the same.
  • -50% penalty to base accuracy from the hip
  • +25% bonus to base accuracy when aimed
  • +10% reduced vertical recoil
Rationale: Today the Suppressor's main penalty is the slower bullet speed, the current 34% penalty to hip fire is almost ignore-able at any range you would hip fire, and with the upcoming buff to aim speed (time to accurate when aiming) the downside needs to be larger. Additionally, the damage over range is only actually applied for LMGs and ARs, removing it and replacing it with a reduced to range makes this more consistent for all weapon types and focuses it more on close range (For reference, today an AR kills with 5 rounds at 40m and drops off to 7 shots, with a suppressor this would be 25m, but beyond 25m the damage would be a flat 6 shots.) Today the Suppressor also gives a 50% bonus to aimed accuracy, which is the same as the heavy barrel, but without the additional recoil. In fact the suppressor reduces vertical recoil by 10%, an amount which is essentially negligible, but is just one more reason to use the suppressor instead of other accessories. Reducing this bonus makes sense, and allows the suppressor to offset the foregrip penalty, while not being as good as the heavy barrel. This is of course over all a nerf but hopefully a minor one to what is essentially not an overpowered, just over used/general purpose, accessory.

Heavy Barrel
The Heavy Barrel is for players who are focused on Accurate Aimed fire. It uses high velocity rounds, which means the bullet drop is reduced and the max range of the weapon is increased at the cost of an increase in auto fire dispersion. The Heavy Barrel adds bulk to a weapon due to its weight, making firing from the hip more difficult, though it gives a substantial increase in aimed accuracy bonus.
  • +Increased maximum range, damage stays the same.
  • -25% increased dispersion per shot
  • +50% bonus to base accuracy when aimed
  • -25% penalty to base accuracy from the hip
Rationale: The Heavy Barrel gets used decently often today, though I think mostly because it's available quite a bit earlier than the Suppressor for Assault Rifles and Carbines. Frankly, the penalty today to recoil, as well as a penalty to deviation, makes the aimed accuracy increase useless, especially since the Suppressor has the accuracy bonus as well. So, let's pull the recoil penalty off this baby entirely, keep the auto fire accuracy penalty to keep it focused on small bursts of accurate aimed fire, and finally, push the maximum range of the rounds out a bit. This will give the Heavy Barrel better performance in medium range by extending the 5 shots to kill window of a 556 or 545 AR from 40 to 65m. Past 65m, the damage would be the same. This is a rather large buff.

Flash Suppressor
The Flash Suppressor is for players who want some additional Stealth, without the range and accuracy penalties of a Suppressor. It works as a recoil compensator, reducing recoil, though it adds a slight bit of bulk making firing from the hip more difficult.
  • +Reduces visual muzzle signature
  • +20% reduced vertical recoil
  • -20% penalty to base accuracy from the hip
Rationale: The Flash Suppressor is underwhelming generally. While it hides the muzzle flash it doesn't hide you on the minimap. I considered allowing it to hide on the minimap, but then it begins to just be a Suppressor without the aim bonus and range penalties. I want it to be something different. By allowing the Flash Suppressor to work as a recoil Compensator, the FS becomes a middle ground between the Suppressor and Heavy Barrel. If you're otherwise happy with the range, damage, and accuracy of your weapon, then the FS should be a nice buff to manageable recoil, without a whole lot of penalty. This is also a large buff.

Target Pointer
The Target Pointer is for players who want to run and gun from the hip. The laser is visible, making the user more visibile to other combatants and thus less Stealthy.
  • -Visible Laser
  • +Laser can dazzle opponents
  • +33% increase in base accuracy from the hip
Rationale: The Target Pointer works well for its role, and generally feels like it doesn't need to be changed.

So what's your opinion on this list? You may agree or disagree with these changes, but even if they do go into effect, remember that we were promised horns for cars over a month ago. Needless to say, I still can't honk at enemy players before I run them over. It will be a little while before we find out if these changes will be in the next update for Battlefield 3.
Posted in: News

Comments

#1 L3GITPRO

    Brigadier General

  • Members
  • 512 posts

Posted 05 January 2012 - 12:57 AM

lol :D 1st!!!

#2 Sting79

    Sergeant

  • Members
  • 84 posts

Posted 05 January 2012 - 12:58 AM

The buff on heavy barrel doesn't seem necessary. All the rest sounds good.

#3 Knightbird

    General

  • Members
  • 864 posts

Posted 05 January 2012 - 01:06 AM

[quote]Suppressor
The Suppressor is for players who are mostly focused on Stealth. It uses low velocity rounds, which means better stealth at the cost of reduced range. The Suppressor adds bulk to a weapon due to its size, making firing from the hip more difficult, though a high quality Suppressor provides a small aimed accuracy bonus and reduces the muzzle rise when firing.
+Does not appear on minimap when firing.
+Reduces sound and visual muzzle signature
-Reduced range for both min and max, damage stays the same.
-50% penalty to base accuracy from the hip
[b]+25% bonus to base accuracy when aimed
+10% reduced vertical recoil[/b][/quote]

I actually like this a lot. Im big into stealth, especially with the G53 and the M27 :P

I particularly like the bolded items. The bonus to accuracy while aimed is awesome; Im always aimed... I don't shoot from the hip unless some fucker jumps around the corner and scares the shit out of me as we collide into each other. Good to have reduced vertical recoil too. I don't mind the reduced range :)

#4 ABATTLEDONKEY

    General

  • Members
  • 857 posts

Posted 05 January 2012 - 02:47 AM

YAY! more focus on inf gameplay for all the COD children. I wonder if EA knows that the BF franchise was built on vehicle warfare and the BC franchise was built on inf play.

#5 Knightbird

    General

  • Members
  • 864 posts

Posted 05 January 2012 - 03:13 AM

[quote]YAY! more focus on inf gameplay for all the COD children. I wonder if EA knows that the BF franchise was built on vehicle warfare and the BC franchise was built on inf play. [/quote]

What a close minded statement.  So since they happen to fix some issue with infantry warfare, all of a sudden they are only focusing on infantry and not vehicles; when the last patches have had numerous vehicle adjustments.. not to mention future patches.

Srsly..

#6 ABATTLEDONKEY

    General

  • Members
  • 857 posts

Posted 05 January 2012 - 03:26 AM

[quote name='Knightbird' timestamp='1325733229' post='79049']
What a close minded statement. So since they happen to fix some issue with infantry warfare, all of a sudden they are only focusing on infantry and not vehicles; when the last patches have had numerous vehicle adjustments.. not to mention future patches.

Srsly..
[/quote]

knight come on. to claim that EA is putting serious effort into their vehicle warfare would just be downright insane. they dont even have 2 types of planes on any single map! my statement was true, this game is primarily focused on inf and in a big way. the issues in the inf side are small small small potatoes compared to the horrendous imbalances of the vehicle warfare and there are many more solutions one can utilize as a player to compensate for the problems when playing as inf. If EA was interested in selling our continued interest in this game as a whole, and not as an inf FPS there would be at least ONE balance suggestion for vehicles in that list.

#7 Knightbird

    General

  • Members
  • 864 posts

Posted 05 January 2012 - 03:52 AM

[quote]knight come on. to claim that EA is putting serious effort into their vehicle warfare would just be downright insane. they dont even have 2 types of planes on any single map! my statement was true, this game is primarily focused on inf and in a big way. the issues in the inf side are small small small potatoes compared to the horrendous imbalances of the vehicle warfare and there are many more solutions one can utilize as a player to compensate for the problems when playing as inf. If EA was interested in selling our continued interest in this game as a whole, and not as an inf FPS there would be at least ONE balance suggestion for vehicles in that list. [/quote]

I'll give you that they have been focusing on infantry more but their vehicles are honestly amazing; certainly lacking in some places as everything can be improved in BF3 in general but I don't agree that the vehicles are "horrendously" imbalanced. In every game that I've been in the vehicle warfare has been pretty balanced. The Tank battles I've been in, as well as attack Helicopters; and I love the frickin Little Bird. Yes certainly vehicles DO need tweaks, ie AA/Planes, but I can only hope and assume its coming.

There are indeed 2 types of planes in each map; each side having their own plane; if you mean on each side having two different planes.. is that really a big deal? It would certainly be interesting but just doesn't seem like a deal breaker. The same could be said about having different tanks, different APCs, different Jeeps, etc.

In no way am I defending EA/DICE though, they certainly need to step up their game when it comes to patches and WHAT to patch. Im in the same boat with everyone else wondering what DICE is up to in their little cubicles all day .


Edit: I've had time to think this over on my drive home from work and I'll say this; Adding more vehicle variety, like different tanks/apcs, etc into the game would be awesome; so don't get me wrong, I'm all for improvement. I just think the current situation is as much of a "lost cause" as it seems

#8 GuyWithTheHat_

    Advanced Member

  • Members
  • PipPipPip
  • 33 posts

Posted 05 January 2012 - 05:36 AM

They fucking need to fix the mics on consoles fuck balancing just yet and fix the GOD DAMN MICS!!!!!!!!!!!!

#9 Project

    General

  • Members
  • 1316 posts

Posted 05 January 2012 - 05:45 AM

[quote name='ABATTLEDONKEY' timestamp='1325733990' post='79051']
knight come on. to claim that EA is putting serious effort into their vehicle warfare would just be downright insane. they dont even have 2 types of planes on any single map! my statement was true, this game is primarily focused on inf and in a big way. the issues in the inf side are small small small potatoes compared to the horrendous imbalances of the vehicle warfare and there are many more solutions one can utilize as a player to compensate for the problems when playing as inf. If EA was interested in selling our continued interest in this game as a whole, and not as an inf FPS there would be at least ONE balance suggestion for vehicles in that list.
[/quote]

You show your ignorance by thinking EA has anything to do with balancing.

#10 ABATTLEDONKEY

    General

  • Members
  • 857 posts

Posted 05 January 2012 - 05:52 AM

[quote name='Knightbird' timestamp='1325735541' post='79053']
I'll give you that they have been focusing on infantry more but their vehicles are honestly amazing; certainly lacking in some places as everything can be improved in BF3 in general but I don't agree that the vehicles are "horrendously" imbalanced. In every game that I've been in the vehicle warfare has been pretty balanced. The Tank battles I've been in, as well as attack Helicopters; and I love the frickin Little Bird. Yes certainly vehicles DO need tweaks, ie AA/Planes, but I can only hope and assume its coming.

There are indeed 2 types of planes in each map; each side having their own plane; if you mean on each side having two different planes.. is that really a big deal? It would certainly be interesting but just doesn't seem like a deal breaker. The same could be said about having different tanks, different APCs, different Jeeps, etc.

In no way am I defending EA/DICE though, they certainly need to step up their game when it comes to patches and WHAT to patch. Im in the same boat with everyone else wondering what DICE is up to in their little cubicles all day .


Edit: I've had time to think this over on my drive home from work and I'll say this; Adding more vehicle variety, like different tanks/apcs, etc into the game would be awesome; so don't get me wrong, I'm all for improvement. I just think the current situation is as much of a "lost cause" as it seems
[/quote][quote name='Knightbird' timestamp='1325735541' post='79053']
I'll give you that they have been focusing on infantry more but their vehicles are honestly amazing; certainly lacking in some places as everything can be improved in BF3 in general but I don't agree that the vehicles are "horrendously" imbalanced. In every game that I've been in the vehicle warfare has been pretty balanced. The Tank battles I've been in, as well as attack Helicopters; and I love the frickin Little Bird. Yes certainly vehicles DO need tweaks, ie AA/Planes, but I can only hope and assume its coming.

There are indeed 2 types of planes in each map; each side having their own plane; if you mean on each side having two different planes.. is that really a big deal? It would certainly be interesting but just doesn't seem like a deal breaker. The same could be said about having different tanks, different APCs, different Jeeps, etc.

In no way am I defending EA/DICE though, they certainly need to step up their game when it comes to patches and WHAT to patch. Im in the same boat with everyone else wondering what DICE is up to in their little cubicles all day .


Edit: I've had time to think this over on my drive home from work and I'll say this; Adding more vehicle variety, like different tanks/apcs, etc into the game would be awesome; so don't get me wrong, I'm all for improvement. I just think the current situation is as much of a "lost cause" as it seems
[/quote]
knight,
I was in fact talking about having 2 different types of planes per team. for example on caspian, take out a fighter on each team and replace it with a ground attack plane (A-10/frogfoot). This would allow for an interaction between air and ground and add a dynamic to the game that, while small, would make a world of difference for pilots/AA crews. I think its fairly obvious that while you seem to be more inf focused then myself we really want the same thing when it comes down the the nuts and bolts. basically I want a wide variety of everything including inf. but if a map is inf, let it cater to inf. if its vehicles let it cater to vehicles and as it stands right now i do not feel that any map is truly vehicle based. It seems that in every map, in every mode this game is an INF FPS with vehicles to enhance the experience, not create it.

I know that my constant whining and complaining is in vain. Ha Ha I have my issues but i figured out that I am in a small group with my opinions. Im 24, but when it comes to my games I will freely admit that I am that old grump from the movie "up". I really struggle with the market trends in the gaming industry and have a great deal of resentment for the cause of the trend. If I had the brains to mod, and were the tools released, I would gladly spend the time to help create a great game, then shut up and go away.

#11 ABATTLEDONKEY

    General

  • Members
  • 857 posts

Posted 05 January 2012 - 05:54 AM

[quote name='Project' timestamp='1325742310' post='79057']
You show your ignorance by thinking EA has anything to do with balancing.
[/quote]

Well I guess my in[quote name='Project' timestamp='1325742310' post='79057']
You show your ignorance by thinking EA has anything to do with balancing.
[/quote]

Well I guess my ignorance is on full Display. Please elaborate on your post so that I understand what your trying to say. As far as i knew the game developer was pretty instrumental in game mechanics. BTW if this is an EA/dice differential post then Its a lost cause because i dont think ill ever get used to differentiating them.

#12 TheWrongPlayer

    Lieutenant General

  • Members
  • 812 posts

Posted 05 January 2012 - 06:47 AM

I was stunned at the rationale part for each attachment. They actually sounded like logical human beings. There was nothing I disagreed with, which was, like, extremely surprising.

Yes, buff the Flash Supp and the heavy Barrel, and and definitely give AR's a heavy bonus with the bipod.

#13 TomaHawkEye

    Sergeant

  • Members
  • 61 posts

Posted 05 January 2012 - 08:51 AM

Why is it such a problem that some attachments are better than others? I don't see a problem with unlocking not so good attachments first, followed by better ones. It gives you something to work towards, and doesn't take long at all. Who cares if the crap ones are never used again? Why can't one weapon be better than another? As long as both teams/all players can unlock/use the better weapon or attachment, I really don't see a problem.
Surely time would be better spend on fixing game play issues, such as spawning right in front of an enemy or when you exit a vehicle you always seem to exit on the side the enemy is attacking you from.

#14 cardyfreak

    Private

  • Members
  • 4 posts

Posted 05 January 2012 - 12:04 PM

I think this sounds great, would make customising your weapon more fun and varied- nine times out of ten I go for suppressor and foregrip cos I like sneaking behind enemy lines, but I used to use the heavy barrel a lot but got sick of everyone else using the loadout I now use and raping me from behind! Fuck em- if you cant beat em, join em! Always thought the flash suppressor seemed pointless but giving these attachments more clear and definate benefits would definitely persuade me to start experimenting more! Hope this comes in!

#15 Dummybait

    Member

  • Members
  • PipPip
  • 22 posts

Posted 05 January 2012 - 12:08 PM

[quote name='TomaHawkEye' timestamp='1325753482' post='79073']
Why is it such a problem that some attachments are better than others? I don't see a problem with unlocking not so good attachments first, followed by better ones. It gives you something to work towards, and doesn't take long at all. Who cares if the crap ones are never used again? Why can't one weapon be better than another? As long as both teams/all players can unlock/use the better weapon or attachment, I really don't see a problem.
Surely time would be better spend on fixing game play issues, such as spawning right in front of an enemy or when you exit a vehicle you always seem to exit on the side the enemy is attacking you from.
[/quote]


You couldn't have said it better! :razz:

#16 blackdeath4u

    Lieutenant

  • Members
  • 134 posts

Posted 05 January 2012 - 12:55 PM

[quote name='TomaHawkEye' timestamp='1325753482' post='79073']
Why is it such a problem that some attachments are better than others? I don't see a problem with unlocking not so good attachments first, followed by better ones. It gives you something to work towards, and doesn't take long at all. Who cares if the crap ones are never used again? Why can't one weapon be better than another? As long as both teams/all players can unlock/use the better weapon or attachment, I really don't see a problem.
Surely time would be better spend on fixing game play issues, such as spawning right in front of an enemy or when you exit a vehicle you always seem to exit on the side the enemy is attacking you from.
[/quote]

I see your point, but you miss something. The thing they are going for is to make some attachments better for a situation, not so much better in general. I like using an AR in single fire from a decent distance.... today I use a supressor to do it, tomorrow i'll use the heavy barrel to get the range buff. I like the barrel now, it just made more sense to use the supressor for the recoil bonus.... now the added recoil of the heavy is gone, it makes more sense to use it on distance weapons.

All good changes in my mind. Why are people complaining? Any fix is better then nothing. Also, bombs please.

#17 Dummybait

    Member

  • Members
  • PipPip
  • 22 posts

Posted 05 January 2012 - 02:07 PM

why they even all the heavy barrel, an attachment is beyond me... it is hardly an attachment. it's part of the gun. more of a perk than anything. on another not.. i'd love to see someone hual a heavy barreled m16 around lol...talk about an unbalance weapon. let alone a g3. talk about heavy..

#18 Dummybait

    Member

  • Members
  • PipPip
  • 22 posts

Posted 05 January 2012 - 02:16 PM

i just don't see an advantage or reason for a heavy barrel on an assualt rifle. if you want better accuracy.. play recon. Another thing that irritates be is getting killed by an m60 or m249 with a 12x scope and a suppresser. i mean seriously? who in their right mind would put a 12x scope on a LMG? let alone a suppresser? the whole idea of support.. is just that...support... throw some ammo and hit the loud pedal.. to keep their heads down.

#19 GothicEmperor

    Lieutenant

  • Members
  • 122 posts

Posted 05 January 2012 - 02:29 PM

gah, accidental double post.

#20 GothicEmperor

    Lieutenant

  • Members
  • 122 posts

Posted 05 January 2012 - 02:31 PM

They all look very sensible, and I can't wait to play with them. I'm already using the Kh2002 with PKA-3, foregrip and flash suppressor, and with these changes I might just dump the foregrip and enjoy the flash suppressor boost.

View PostABATTLEDONKEY, on 05 January 2012 - 05:54 AM, said:

Well I guess my ignorance is on full Display. Please elaborate on your post so that I understand what your trying to say. As far as i knew the game developer was pretty instrumental in game mechanics. BTW if this is an EA/dice differential post then Its a lost cause because i dont think ill ever get used to differentiating them.
You should really try hard to differentiate them. You're making it very hard for people to take you seriously if you don't.