{{
`${userDetail.user.displayName}${userDetail.user.cachedBungieGlobalDisplayNameCode ? `#${standardizeBungieGlobalCode(userDetail.user.cachedBungieGlobalDisplayNameCode)}` : ""}`}}
{{getUserClans()}}
Edited by ch33zy burrito:
6/2/2014 3:30:19 AM
21
Should light-machine guns be toned down in BF4?
The light machine gun spam in this game is unbearable. For those of you who don't know, light machine guns are stronger than assault rifles, carry more ammo, fire faster, have the same range as an assault rifle so they can reach you from pretty far away. Unfortunately they have little to no down side in BF4. Sure they slow you down (barely), reload slower (barely), and have standard amounts if recoil but in the end it doesn't make a difference.
English
#Gaming
-
I love how everything is backwards on Console vs. PC. [u]PC[/u] -DMR's are too weak -LMG's are OP [u]Consoles[/u] -DMR's are OP -LMG's can't do shit
-
Snipe the MF's or use the scoped magnum, that is so much fun lol. To be fair got to 111 on BF4 and got bored. Sick of all the glitches and random deaths , skill seems to count for little in that very broken game , -blam!-ing beta. EA are thieving no good MF's. Pushing DICE into releasing an unfinished game.
-
1 ReplyAce all the way man :D
-
3 Repliesthe lmgs suck dude they are an assault rifle with more ammo and bad accuracy that's it
-
Still haven't gotten around to getting BF4 yet, but I can understand your complaint. LMGs seem to much more common and viable in BF4 vs in BF3. However, you have to admit, running around with an M60 like Rambo is so -blam!-ing fun!
-
2 RepliesI'd rather have the developers take out machine guns in [b]EVERY[/b] game.
-
I think they should tone them up
-
8 RepliesYou don't like realism?
-
They're only overpowered if you know how to use them. M240B, no one will shut me down.
-
[quote]I remember how amazing those were with the Medic class in Bad Company 2.[/quote] This. The only downside is reload, which isnt even bad if you can time them, yet class variety is perfectly balanced.
-
Ok first off, they fire a lot slower (except the MG4), take 6+ seconds to reload, and are incredibly inaccurate.
-
I remember how amazing those were with the Medic class in Bad Company 2.
-
4 RepliesLawd no, they can finally go toe to toe with other rifles in the game and are a viable option. I hated how the only truly effective anti-infantry frontliner in BF3 was Assaults, Now any class can do well in CQB but support have a good role in the game now. LMGs are perfect as they are, they aren't OP and they aren't useless peashooters. I'd like them to fix the Bipods a bit more but running and gunning with them is still perfectly viable.
-
1 ReplyI tend to use Shotguns in the support kit. Call me an old romantic.
-
5 Replies[quote]little to no down side in BF4[/quote] You mean like the reload times that are upwards of 8 seconds, or the massive amounts of recoil, or the horrible accuracy and hipfire? Yeah, no downsides. Also, they usually do about the same amount of damage as assault rifles or less, plus the firerates tend to be a little slower than the other automatic weapons. You're actually the first person I've ever seen that thinks LMGs are overpowered.
-
10 RepliesEdited by cRaZyT101: 6/2/2014 10:42:19 AM[quote]light machine guns are stronger than assault rifles[/quote]No, you are wrong. So, [i]so[/i] wrong...
-
No,they shouldn't.Most LMGs actually have very high recoil (M60E4,PKP,M240B) and slow rates of fire.Also,LMGs are horrible for hip fire because the spread is massive.
-
-
1 ReplyWhat should happen is BF4 should stop being a shit game
-
Don't play it, so it doesn't matter...
-
Nah I don't think so. For me, I don't like using the support class itself, apart from the LMGs it has nothing I'm really interested in. I prefer being an engineer or recon, depending on the map. The LMGs are slow and just don't work for me as I like to be in the combat with a fast carbine or assault rifle, blowing up tanks and shit when I see fit.
