Competition games in "normal"

[Dib19]

I've been playing battlefield for a few years now and not until I joined eGO have I ever played competitively. I always used to play on the hardcore servers because I liked the speed of the games more. However because I am playing for the team I have been playing on the "normal" setting more because that what is most similair to the competitions. So, I just had a question as of why are the competitions games alway played on normal? I apologize if there is some unwritten role that I am jus oblivious to but I would just like to know.

 

[TheYonderGod]

It isn't really normal settings, it's mostly hardcore with 100% health. There's friendly fire, no 3d spotting, etc. It's because weapons are balanced for 100% health, not 60%. Not only is it unbalanced at 60%, but with higher health it raises the skill cap, you have to actually aim and go for headshots instead of randomly spraying and hitting someone in the toe to kill them.

 

[Deflagrate]

It isn't really normal settings, it's mostly hardcore with 100% health. There's friendly fire, no 3d spotting, etc. It's because weapons are balanced for 100% health, not 60%. Not only is it unbalanced at 60%, but with higher health it raises the skill cap, you have to actually aim and go for headshots instead of randomly spraying and hitting someone in the toe to kill them.

100% health in no way raises the skill cap. It allows you to make more mistakes that would of killed you if you were playing hardcore. They both have the advantages, this is starting to sound like a normal vs hardcore debate.

If the hit detection wasn't so abysmal, I wouldn't have a problem playing normal (ignoring things like 3D spotting, regen, killcam, 3P views for this argument). The difference in killing a player is generally a single bullet. But I can't tell you how many times I aim center mass at someone 10m away, and have so many shots not register. I can't tell you how many times I can literally see nothing but an enemy's head, and it doesn't register as a headshot. I also love the AN-94, but there's countless times where the second shot doesn't register.

 

[emery03]

Fight! Fight! Fight!

But on a serious note, am I the only one that doesn't get/notice the poor hit reg? And def part of what Yonder is saying is that in normal yes you can get away with more mistakes, but only against a player that is less skilled, or somebody that misses their shot and doesn't get the hs/chest shot or hs/hs to drop you.

 

[Jokerle]

what requires more skill? You can endlessly debate that...
(personal option: competitive normal mode, harder to fight a group of enemies.)

I agree on the weapon balance and that is was designed with 100% health in mind.

Sometimes you have bad hit-reg, BUT most people just complain about it when they actually don't control recoil enough.

Also, if you play hardcore most of the time, switching to normal is really hard because the TTK is soo much different.

 

[KILLERCANKILL]

As yonder said Hardcore health allow for use of too many one hit weapons which discourages skill. For example one sniper with a m98 can cover a whole region in HC while in normal that would be very tough. Also weapons in bf3 are balanced more towards normal due to the damage per bullet. Those who argue that a sniper should be a one shot kill regardless should remember this a game not real life, balancing classes is essential. In the end if you have a good shot, HC or normal shouldn’t really make a big difference to you, your always aiming for the head anyways.

In regards to skill, yes normal takes more patience and you have to be sure of your shot. While it may look like in normal its takes way longer to kill, when you are playing against top teams, even normal health seems less. With even 100% health, making a mistake can cause you your life in a fraction of a second. Normal may let you get away with things at the lower comp level but at the highest level, it really makes no difference.

HC is fun as well and there are some tournaments that run HC ladders but they are never popular. I used to like HC as well but just the sheer amount of team killing in public server discourages me. A yonder said comp setting only have 100% from normal, everything else is essentially HC.

I recommend a balance between HC and Normal, HC gets you in the habit of watching your shot to make sure you are not killing friendlies which is very important in competitive and Normal gets you used to 100% health.

 

[Deflagrate]

I played hardcore modes since CoD4. I started out playing hardcore in BF3, after a discouraging lack of servers, I found myself playing normal all the time. I found it much easier because of all the crutches it has. I did have to adjust to the TTK, as I have a habit of stopping my fire when I think an enemy should be dead, but that was the only real problem. Since then, I've gone back to hardcore and normal mode disgusts me. I can play either, though when I go back to normal, I have to get the hang of the TTK again.

I'm not a fan of people being able to one shot you with a 44 or a Rex, but it outweighs all the things I don't like about normal. It's actually somewhat nice that the bolt action rifles are more powerful, because recon is a grossly underpowered class in this game.

 

[h987654321]

Weapons balancing. Then again when I played comp, it was always M16A3/M416.

 

[Telefrag]

My biggest issue overall with the entire conversation is ballistics in this game. An example, 6.5 grendel in the ACW compared to the 5.56 of many guns in this game. Lets compare to the m4a1 due to similar length of barrel, and more or less same weapons system minus some pretty plastics. Let me show you a few things.

This is 5.56 next to 6.5grendel

The 6.5 grendel ranges from 90gr speer to 129gr hornady. Here is comparison in balistics at muzzle and 500yds in FPS and energy.

5.56 M855 Nato
FPS @ 0: 3116
Energy @ 0: 1186 ft/lbs
FPS @ 500yd: 1442
Energy@ 500yd: 254 ft/lbs

6.5 Grenel 123gr Lapua (round I personally shoot)
FPS @ 0: 2405
Energy @ 0: 1580 ft/lbs
FPS @ 500yd: 1700
Energy @ 500yd: 789 ft/lbs

Yet for the sake of "balance" this is what your looking at in game..
BF3 Dmg Max and Min

M4A1
Max: 25
Min: 14.3

ACW
Max: 20
Min: 16.7

Its like this all over the place on systems that are severely misrepresented. The 338 Lapua is a whole nother argument. This is all I am going to say.. 5.56 next to 7.61x51 nato next toe 338 lapua magnum

 

[Dib19]

So, no one really answered my question of why competitive games are played at 100% health. It was a simple question that turned into a hc vs. normal debate.

 

[KILLERCANKILL]

So, no one really answered my question of why competitive games are played at 100% health. It was a simple question that turned into a hc vs. normal debate.

100% health allows for a more fair competition, tougher to kill opponents from range using one-shot weapons and emphasizes on aiming for the head not just spraying and praying. 100% health has just become the norm in comp gaming, its just how it is now.

M16A3 and M416 are used extensively as they are the most balanced guns in bf3, balancing speed and accuracy. AEK and F2000 are the next best though the AEK is some scenarios is the best gun in bf3 if you can control its recoil. While AK-74 and AN-94 are good guns, their slow speed makes them unfit for close quarters combat. In the end it?s a very individual preference.

 

[Deflagrate]

My biggest issue overall with the entire conversation is ballistics in this game. An example, 6.5 grendel in the ACW compared to the 5.56 of many guns in this game. Lets compare to the m4a1 due to similar length of barrel, and more or less same weapons system minus some pretty plastics. Let me show you a few things.

This is 5.56 next to 6.5grendel
http://www.gunblast.com/images/65Grendel/MVC-509F.jpg[IMG]

The 6.5 grendel ranges from 90gr speer to 129gr hornady. Here is comparison in balistics at muzzle and 500yds in FPS and energy.

5.56 M855 Nato
FPS @ 0: 3116
Energy @ 0: 1186 ft/lbs
FPS @ 500yd: 1442
Energy@ 500yd: 254 ft/lbs

6.5 Grenel 123gr Lapua (round I personally shoot)
FPS @ 0: 2405
Energy @ 0: 1580 ft/lbs
FPS @ 500yd: 1700
Energy @ 500yd: 789 ft/lbs

Yet for the sake of "balance" this is what your looking at in game..
BF3 Dmg Max and Min

M4A1
Max: 25
Min: 14.3

ACW
Max: 20
Min: 16.7

Its like this all over the place on systems that are severely misrepresented. The 338 Lapua is a whole nother argument. This is all I am going to say.. 5.56 next to 7.61x51 nato next toe 338 lapua magnum
[IMG]http://www.huntinggearguy.com/wp-content/uploads/2012/07/223-vs-308-vs-338-Lapua.jpg[IMG][/quote]
That is a personal pet peeve of mine. It's not enough that the gun has a smaller magazine size, they have to make it do [I]less[/I] damage than 5.56?
[QUOTE="Dib19, post: 2346608, member: 57635"]So, no one really answered my question of why competitive games are played at 100% health. It was a simple question that turned into a hc vs. normal debate.[/quote]

It was answered in more than one post; the game is balanced around 100% health.

Look at the bullet damage of guns in the game. They're all based on 100/x. The semi auto sniper rifles come in at 50 (two hit kill), larger caliber rifles/machine guns come in at 34 (three hit kill), most rifles are 25 (four hit kill), then you have some PDWs at 20 damage (five hits to kill) and the PP-19 comes in at 16.7 (six hits to kill).

 

[Dib19]

Thank you now it makes more sense.

 

[dtmt1398]

As yonder said Hardcore health allow for use of too many one hit weapons which discourages skill. For example one sniper with a m98 can cover a whole region in HC while in normal that would be very tough. Also weapons in bf3 are balanced more towards normal due to the damage per bullet. Those who argue that a sniper should be a one shot kill regardless should remember this a game not real life, balancing classes is essential. In the end if you have a good shot, HC or normal shouldn’t really make a big difference to you, your always aiming for the head anyways.

In regards to skill, yes normal takes more patience and you have to be sure of your shot. While it may look like in normal its takes way longer to kill, when you are playing against top teams, even normal health seems less. With even 100% health, making a mistake can cause you your life in a fraction of a second. Normal may let you get away with things at the lower comp level but at the highest level, it really makes no difference.

HC is fun as well and there are some tournaments that run HC ladders but they are never popular. I used to like HC as well but just the sheer amount of team killing in public server discourages me. A yonder said comp setting only have 100% from normal, everything else is essentially HC.

I recommend a balance between HC and Normal, HC gets you in the habit of watching your shot to make sure you are not killing friendlies which is very important in competitive and Normal gets you used to 100% health.

weapons balanced in bf3.... we know thats not true, i think its much more balanced in bfbc2 no offense to peole who think otherwise

 

[emery03]

So, no one really answered my question of why competitive games are played at 100% health. It was a simple question that turned into a hc vs. normal debate.

Lots of people answered it. It's because the guns are designed to be balanced at 100% health.