Graph over kills per weapon

[BrokenMachine]

Re: Graph over kills per weapon

Dude, I love the knife and I'm not complaining about it.

Nothing about what I said talks about people coming at me with a knife. I've played many games with knifes. I've won knifing competition in BF2 and there isn't a single time there has been a massive knife fight with competitive gamers that I didn't surpass everyone else with kills.

I can speak from experience It is way to easy for me to rush people in BC2 with them looking directly at me with a gun and shooting at me for me to just gank them like they were shooting rubber bbs. The problem isn't the knife and that wasn't the point.

When I play a game for the first time I start out with the "hardest weapon" to use. I use that weapon until I am very good with it. Meaning I'm killing people way more than I am being killed. This takes a lot of tactics and not just running around knifing people. When I get good with those tactics I switch to another poor weapon and use the same tactics. I used the pistol for a bit then I switched to A/T weapons If I remember correctly. I've rarely used an unlock in bf2.

Knifing in BC2 is way easier than BF2 and not just because of BF2 hit reg. It's because BC2 weapons aren't as accurate and do less damage.

Who cares about how good you think you are?

Regardless there is nothing wrong with the weapons in bad company. If you run at me with a knife and I shoot you with a shotgun then chances are I win and your dead and in 1 shot as well. If you are in CQ battles choose a weapon suited for it. A lot of players don't choose the best weapon but rather their favourite weapons and this is where the problem lies. Hardcore mode offers quicker kills than BF2 ever did and I don't believe that BF2's cone of fire is more accurate than BC2's. Can anyone verify this?

[Vreki]

Re: Graph over kills per weapon

^^^THIS!! Thats my whole point. I don't know if I'm just being ignored or people just don't care but I'll repeat myself 100x if need be. The m60 and 40mm are not a problem in HC servers. This has to do with the fact that all guns serve there purpose in that mode.

A problem that only occurs in regular mode. In HC mode it boils down to better aim or whoever saw each other first. The way its supposed to be for any FPS.

Others may be of the opinion that HC is one big spray-and-pray-party, so the point of having different weapons are lost.
So we are ignoring you because we dont care about HC.

[imported_Fish]

Re: Graph over kills per weapon

I don't get why so many people are complainging about the knife. To me it seems no different to any other BF game apart from the fact it has a different animation and doesn't have the stupid range of some previous BF. The dogtags are a great addition to the BF series since they introduced them a while back and it does encourage people to use the knife. If you took away the dogtags im sure the knife count would go down. I don't see how its become like COD apart from the animation being similar?

the dogtag collection is totaly worthless.. kill by the knife or be killed by the knife has no real importance because dice have made it so that a 5 year old can amass a good collection of dogtags.. so all you proud dogtag collectors.. lmfao at you! BF2142 was the be all and end all at tag collecting.. i lost about 2 or 3 tags a week.. alot harder to take the tags in 2142. Being knifed in BC2 is no different to MW2..

[Nicfurious29]

Re: Graph over kills per weapon

Others may be of the opinion that HC is one big spray-and-pray-party, so the point of having different weapons are lost.
So we are ignoring you because we dont care about HC.

I've been around this forum long enough to know others opinions on HC. The point of me posting in this thread is not to promote HC but to point out that the inbalance of the m60 and 40mm is not due to those two weapons in particular but due to the damage weapons do in general in normal mode. Nerfing the m60 and nade launcher will only make another weapon stand out. People will always find the better weapon to use.

[Vreki]

Re: Graph over kills per weapon

So the solution is to make all weapons the same? I disagree, I prefer the weapons to be as different as possible while still balanced.
Its is not easy to do so, I realize that.

[BrokenMachine]

Re: Graph over kills per weapon

the dogtag collection is totaly worthless.. kill by the knife or be killed by the knife has no real importance because dice have made it so that a 5 year old can amass a good collection of dogtags.. so all you proud dogtag collectors.. lmfao at you! BF2142 was the be all and end all at tag collecting.. i lost about 2 or 3 tags a week.. alot harder to take the tags in 2142. Being knifed in BC2 is no different to MW2..

I just can't see how it's easier in Bc2 to get knife kills than it is in 2142. There may be more knifing in bc2 as there is more opportunity to get behind enemy lines because of destruction but harder to knife in 2142? I don't buy it. What exactly makes it harder to knife in 2142?
If there was just conquest to play and knife kills were ridiculously high then I might consider your opinion but rush is a completely different game mode which creates a front line providing more opportunity to knife people. This doesn't mean it's easier or harder. Just that it happens more.

[MrChris_CJ]

Re: Graph over kills per weapon

time for some Redfield style mega posts dawgs

I still don't understand what you mean by me contradicting myself. The explanation you gave doesn't desribe a contradiction.

Anyways, my point is that in no circumstances should a person be able to turn around and kill someone after being shot in the back, regardless of weapon choice. Whether or not someone can aim is not what is being discussed here. Also, my aim is fine. The AN94 is my favorite rifle, especially equiped with the 4x scope.

Like I've stated already, none of these problems occur in HC mode. Which leads me to believe the balance problem is related to the damage weapons do in general and not weapon specific.

On the contrary you should be able to turn around and shoot that guy in the face. If he finds you looking the other way, gets off the first shots and still sucks enough to fail, I would turn around, mow him in the face and lol to myself.

I don't get why so many people are complainging about the knife. To me it seems no different to any other BF game apart from the fact it has a different animation and doesn't have the stupid range of some previous BF. The dogtags are a great addition to the BF series since they introduced them a while back and it does encourage people to use the knife. If you took away the dogtags im sure the knife count would go down. I don't see how its become like COD apart from the animation being similar?

As many have stated before me the only reason the knife is so high on the graph is because EVERY class has it and probably uses once per game. Saying that its wrong that the knife should be up there without looking at WHY its up there is just silly. It DOESN'T necessarily mean that everyone is running around knifing people all the time. It could mean that the majority of players use the knife at least once per game but thats the problem with statistics, you can interperate them in many different ways and totally miss the real reason behind them.

As far as people running at you with a knife and killing you while you try to mow them down, well it happens. Its not a major problem but its just a game and isn't meant to be realistic. The same could happen with a shotgun instead of the knife for example (being a 1 shot kill weapon at close range) but instead of complaining about the firepower of the weapon you were using you complain about the weapon the enemy is using. The knife isn't the problem here its the player who got knived.

As far as destruction goes I think adding the creaking building sound effects has reduced a lot of destruction kills. Before you had no warning but now it is easy to bail before the building goes down.

The thing with the knife is, is that it is entirely different to other battlefields. For a start you don't need to select the weapon, you simply press the win button and most of the time, reg willing you will insta kill the guy. The amount of times I have seen smacktards go for their knives when they are miles away, or those guys that somehow slide across 5 metres to stab someone. It's somewhat comparable to the backstab in TF2, but in a much simpler and easier way. Personally the system doesn't bother me that great a deal, I do prefer the past system because it meant knife kills were rewarding and challenging to get, the new system requires no skill, is available at a button press and extremely powerful. But meh, thats the way it is.

^^^THIS!! Thats my whole point. I don't know if I'm just being ignored or people just don't care but I'll repeat myself 100x if need be. The m60 and 40mm are not a problem in HC servers. This has to do with the fact that all guns serve there purpose in that mode.



A problem that only occurs in regular mode. In HC mode it boils down to better aim or whoever saw each other first. The way its supposed to be for any FPS.

And boom. CoD is a game where its about seeing people first, thats why it turns into a ****ing campfest/adrenaline OD.

I imagine say, a round on Port Valdez in hardcore, other than the snipers one shotting me I won't stick my head out (especially if I am defending) because I can just sit back somewhere and wait for some guy to run past me, then I can pew pew him down in a few bullets regardless of how good I aim. I can hold fire because even with the recoil and spread enough bullets will hit while performing all manner of boring wizardry.

I don't want to turn the thread into a flame hardcore, because I really hate hardcore, but it is precisely the opposite of "how it is supposed to be for an FPS".

An FPS is based on several things, including aim, reflexes and what some would call gamesense.

Aim is 100% required in normal because you don't just instakill people, you have to put rounds into them consistently with good aim, if you can aim you win. In hardcore you need to hit the guy a meagre number of times and generally even spraying an LMG will get you that, prolonged aim is much harder to manage.

Reflexes. Simply put, like I said before, because you see someone first does not mean you should instantly get +1 kills. Seeing him first should give you an advantage, if you are a good player you can take the guy down with minimal fuss (if any at all) if the gods of gaming are not on your side you will end up in the respawn screen and raging, or some other equally dangerous situation. It was the same in games like CS where pixel perfect aim was required to deal the most damage (headshots) and to take someone down not simply burst them in the chest but really double tap them in the skull with an AK47. If you see the guy first you are given the chance to take him down, if you don't you better be ready for a wallbang.

Gamesense. Its a nerd word for brains basically. As a player in battlefield especially you have to be diverse in ability, you have to understand what to do, when to do it, how to do it, from things as simple as moving across a map to knowing where TOWs are, or anticipating enemy moves. The same was said for CS where the highest amount of tension and skill rested on the decision of one player. In hardcore this matters less and it matters more (woah), tactics and strategy can become totally irrelevant with the removal of certain functions and moving as a squad can be a ticket to one guy coming up behind you all and kill every single ****ing one of you by spraying a clip. It offers you the chance to do the same thing, but in the end if still means the gameplay boils down to, running around CoD style and shootin sum bitchez (intentional).

I shall sum up with a nice paragraph here basically.(edit: turns out I lied)

To people who always want higher damage, please for the love of god think about it first.
People play games like CoD HC etc and think its great, because they can hold fire and a guy dies instantly, but CoD comes across as some strange mutant bastardised blend of UT/quake and CSS. They seem to want some twitch/reflex action from the former and gunplay from the latter, but they end up with a crap mix because the guns are ****tard easy to use and people are too easy to kill , and it degenerates into some game born from the devil himself (no I am not a fan of CoD MP in normal or HC).

Hardcore in Battlefield was designed to cater to those people, the red bull drinking teens who run around screaming or sit in a room camping, while literally having a fit as they try to maintain the patience to sit still.

In battlefield you have a much larger map, you have more people, you have more range, you have vehicles, you have all manner of bat**** insane methods of seeing an enemy, spotting an enemy and shooting an enemy and it is a team game. It does not boil down to you in a 1v1 against someone it boils down to you and your team versus that guy, and by extension his team. You might see an enemy soldier running around, but remember, is he on full health, does he have cover, this isn't CoD now where his health regens in .5 ****ing seconds and he has pixel thick bullet proof walls.

If you have overly lethal weapons (yes I know guns are supposed to be lethal, in order to fight off tyrannical governments or whatever) then a game like Battlefield becomes less about the team and more about one guy, holding fire from his lovely position at the back, where he can't be spotted and then gets mortar striked, respawns and does the same thing. And in that time your team has moved all of 2 metres forward.

Now that the rage is out of the way, semi hardcore rage can be said.

If you use the M60 and don't understand why IT IS overpowered then please, take a seat, right over there.

I know (and I have repeated this very line a few times now) that nerfing is frowned upon in BF, it made the M60 in vietnam useless, it lost you some heli missiles blah blah blah

yet we had the same situation with the J10, a plane so hopelessly better than the F35 etc that you either had to be god or have huge cajones to fly against one (there are a few).

The same is said for the M60, it might not have a high ROF but it makes up for that with SHEER KILLING POWER. This is a gun that in close to medium range you can simply hold fire and drop a guy in milliseconds, hardcore ****ing style, at long range you can hold fire as well but most people will understand to tap or burst in which case he goes down in the same amount of time and you still have a ****load of bullets, there is no gun that matches its lethality, versatility and #of kills with magnum ammo (in for the lols). And don't quote guns like the AN94 or M16, those are awesome guns (I am the M16 fanboy) but those guns have drawbacks that make them balanced, the AN94 clipsize, the M16 accuracy and damage.
I use the M60 as a rage gun, if my team is having a hard time I can literally rambo the **** out of it, a map like Islan Inocentes, you get yourself onto that island with an M60 and then you just begin murdering people left right and center, you hold fire until the 100 bullets are gone, then you piss off to reload. Medic squads with those lovely magnum rounds equipped move like a wave across places like that and are extremely difficult to eradicate.

But hardcore would balance stuff like the M60 or the 40mm I hear you say!... But would it. Hardcore makes useless guns useful, or simply it makes them more useful but people will still use guns that are say accurate, or do a ****load of damage, because they can use magnum ammo again and still mow a guy with an M60 like THAT, or they use some pea shooter SMG, that is designed to be weak in normal as a measure of balance in order to keep that engineer class in line (the engineer has awesome balance in normal if you ask me) but **** me in hardcore he can mow people like grass, **** assault rifles man we got Pew Pew 2000s and all that.

The M60 is the gun of choice for noob medics, those guys that slap magnum ammo on, just shoot people they don't heal anyone else or revive, because they are ****ing assholes.

The 40MM is indeed a tool for those other prats that whack on increase explosive damage, have a platinum with it and are rank 9 but the 40mm while being incredibly powerful is offset by some glaring drawbacks that are more easy to exploit than any flaw the M60 might have. I platinumed the 40MM nt myself (at rank 35), imo it could use a longer restock time, the removal of insta kills at point blank with the duds and perhaps some more innaccuracies.

Weapons that shoot bullets are perfectly fine to use in normal if you know how to use them and I seldom die to explosive guys (I seldom die but thats just because I'm an e-peen stroking death machine) through a combination of some of the points I discussed earlier. Running headlong into an MCOM might seem like a good idea old chap but please, when you get hit by the combined forces of god knows how many campers don't complain for your own lack of finesse. For the "fast paced" game BC2 is, it can sometimes pay to take things slow. You could always use one of my greatest BC2 tips to help you, trust me, it has many meanings "CG and noob tube heroes cannot look up,"

I would say more, but I drone on and swear too much.

And yes CSS did have the awp, the one shot sniper of doom, but if you are one of those that thought the gun should be removed from the game and was nooby, please don't talk about it, because I have undoubtedly played CS longer than you (10+ years).

[imported_Rafterman]

Re: Graph over kills per weapon

I just can't see how it's easier in Bc2 to get knife kills than it is in 2142. There may be more knifing in bc2 as there is more opportunity to get behind enemy lines because of destruction but harder to knife in 2142? I don't buy it. What exactly makes it harder to knife in 2142?
If there was just conquest to play and knife kills were ridiculously high then I might consider your opinion but rush is a completely different game mode which creates a front line providing more opportunity to knife people. This doesn't mean it's easier or harder. Just that it happens more.

I believe the point he was trying to make was that you actually had to pull your knife and put yourself out there and not simply hit a button on your mouse. If you're sneaking up on a guy with your knife pulled and he turns around, you're pretty much screwed. In BC2 you can be sneaking up on a guy to knife him and if he turns around, not big deal, just blast him with your M60. The closest thing to BF2/2142 style knifing in BC2 is repair tool and defib kills because you have to make yourself vulnerable.

As to the larger discussion, I think one of the problems is that you move through the weapons much too quickly. I remember in BF2 that it took forever to rank into a new unlockable weapon - therefore guys were forced to get much more familiar with the weapons they used. In BC2, there are so many that just seem disposable. Personally I find the F2000 to be a reaper on the battlefield, but very few guys seem to even use it.

[LunaTiK TunaLiK]

Re: Graph over kills per weapon

Who cares about how good you think you are?

Regardless there is nothing wrong with the weapons in bad company. If you run at me with a knife and I shoot you with a shotgun then chances are I win and your dead and in 1 shot as well. If you are in CQ battles choose a weapon suited for it. A lot of players don't choose the best weapon but rather their favourite weapons and this is where the problem lies. Hardcore mode offers quicker kills than BF2 ever did and I don't believe that BF2's cone of fire is more accurate than BC2's. Can anyone verify this?

Way to miss the point, multiple points. Having the skill to back up my claims makes it credible. If I'm one of the best players with a knife in BF2, use the knife way more than most people in both games, then it would make sense that I can claim that knifing in BC2 is way easier. If the weapons and damage aren't as accurate or as strong it would make sense that this must be a big part of the reason why knifing is so much easier. This is why I support upping the damage on most weapons. This has nothing to do with the knife being over powered.

As to the larger discussion, I think one of the problems is that you move through the weapons much too quickly. I remember in BF2 that it took forever to rank into a new unlockable weapon - therefore guys were forced to get much more familiar with the weapons they used. In BC2, there are so many that just seem disposable. Personally I find the F2000 to be a reaper on the battlefield, but very few guys seem to even use it.

I have a feeling they didn't make this game to go as long as BF2 did without a replacement/sequel of some sort.

[AvalancheDiode]

Re: Graph over kills per weapon

I just can't see how it's easier in Bc2 to get knife kills than it is in 2142. There may be more knifing in bc2 as there is more opportunity to get behind enemy lines because of destruction but harder to knife in 2142? I don't buy it. What exactly makes it harder to knife in 2142?

Knifing in 2142 is not only way harder, but requires more skill.

You not only need to pull out the knife first, but also need to "aim" the knife in 2142. Knifing in BC2 is different. It is a QTE in BC2. You hit the knife button at the right time and you get the tag. No risk for pulling out knife at all.

Also, in 2142, guns are much more deadly than they are in BC2. Especially when someone has Herzog or Clark. ARs in 2142 are more deadlier than M-60 in BC2. There is almost no chance for you to run into a blazing gun and still able to take a tag. Not quite so in BC2, unless it's a Saiga or M60.

In addition to all of the above, knifing in 2142 does not work 100%, while in BC2, there could be some comedic knife kills.

[imported_Rafterman]

Re: Graph over kills per weapon

Knifing in 2142 is not only way harder, but requires more skill.

You not only need to pull out the knife first, but also need to "aim" the knife in 2142. Knifing in BC2 is different. It is a QTE in BC2. You hit the knife button at the right time and you get the tag. No risk for pulling out knife at all.

Also, in 2142, guns are much more deadly than they are in BC2. Especially when someone has Herzog or Clark. ARs in 2142 are more deadlier than M-60 in BC2. There is almost no chance for you to run into a blazing gun and still able to take a tag. Not quite so in BC2, unless it's a Saiga or M60.

In addition to all of the above, knifing in 2142 does not work 100%, while in BC2, there could be some comedic knife kills.

Completely agree. If you're coming around a corner or moving through a building and find yoursel face to face with a bad guy, simlply hit your knife button and there's a great chance you'll get the tag while he's blasting away with his whatever.

[Jonathan_Archer_nx01]

Re: Graph over kills per weapon

So the solution is to make all weapons the same? I disagree, I prefer the weapons to be as different as possible while still balanced.
Its is not easy to do so, I realize that.

It's not actually that hard to do, but Dice is Nuts.

[WolfAlmighty]

Re: Graph over kills per weapon

http://www.xfire.com/video/241f62/

:lol: Crouching Tiger Hidden Recon. I remember knifing someone who was on top of a box and rather than knifing his leg like I had expected my soldier catapulted up onto the box to knife him in the head. Why the hell does DICE want people to use anything except guns (or just one gun) in their games, when they go through all the trouble to put so many different guns in? :boggle:

[BrokenMachine]

Re: Graph over kills per weapon

Way to miss the point, multiple points. Having the skill to back up my claims makes it credible. If I'm one of the best players with a knife in BF2, use the knife way more than most people in both games, then it would make sense that I can claim that knifing in BC2 is way easier. If the weapons and damage aren't as accurate or as strong it would make sense that this must be a big part of the reason why knifing is so much easier. This is why I support upping the damage on most weapons. This has nothing to do with the knife being over powered.

I have a feeling they didn't make this game to go as long as BF2 did without a replacement/sequel of some sort.

I'm not missing the point its just obscured about you talking about yourself all the time. I don't care whether your the king of BF or whatever but I would consider any veteren players opinion equal to that of another regardless of their in game skill. In game skill doesn't make an opinion more valid, playing with a weapon for a long time does but this doesn't require you to tell us how good you are over and over again.

If the weapons aren't as accurate or strong it doesn't mean that knife kills will go up thats just your assumption. As I said before statistics can be interperated in many ways. The new game modes offer us more CQC and more opportunity to knife. This is a more likely reason for knife kills to go up rather than because gun accuracy or damage is different. For this you would need to look at a graph of number of kills at different ranges rather than the graph we have in this thread.

Comparing different game modes of two different games is not a very good way of judging weapon use and ease of weapon use as the different game modes require different tactics and weaponry.

I can see that some people are upset with having to press 1 button instead of 2 to knife but i don't think it requires the amount of skill that some people are making out here. Its funny reading some people trying to justify how much harder it is to use a knife on 2142 or BF2. It doesn't bother me personally and I'd be quite happy to switch to the old system but saying that this graph shows the knife is too easy to use is a bit far fetched for me as there is too many other variables which this graph can't account for.

[DunkinSPE]

Re: Graph over kills per weapon

I know its pretty sad, I expected stuff like the defib but I didn't expect the 40mm shotgun to be there. It makes perfect sense though, most people pick the noob tube. I have started to use the 40mm shotgun lately though and it is immense, I just hope it gets a bit of a range buff to make it more attractive

Shottys are a different beast altogether. I consider the 40MM more of a secondary equip than a true shotgun standalone. Don't get me wrong it's great in a pinch but when you primary weapon has the better range in relation to damage you're probably going to see more kills with the primary fire and maybe bleeder kills with the under-mount shotty if your target closes the distance.

It's a trade-off you make on your play style. Shottys normally require a different set of tactics as the drop in damge over range means you have to get "up close and personal" with your targets. That means using moving from cover to cover and staying out of wide open fields of fire where ranged weapons tend to dominate. However, if you are a sneaky bastard and properly flank the enemy you can get some glorious shotty kills.

I recall recently using the lowly 870MCS on a map getting behind the enemy and spotting a two-medic w/single Assault squad. Popped the first medic in the back of the head at about 2 meters around a corner and the second medic went for the immediate revive. He popped the guy back up just prior to receiving a spread to the head death. The rezed medic started spraying and praying only to glance me and receive another death courtesy of my knife in close quarters. I tried to engage the assault guy who finally noticed something was going on behind him but of course he toobed my bleeding carcass. Needless to say i was laughing my but off during the respawn screen.

Point being Shottys can be fun as hell given the right play style although the KDR trade-off can have an effect due to the range and rate of fire. But the quality of kills and enjoyment of seeing my handiwork as opposed to a message flash is worth it in my book.

And the NS-2000 although slow as hell between fires...brutal at close range. :thumbsup: