indigo canyon
I appreciate the efforts of the devs listening to the community to create the best battlefield experienced in their vision, however, community feedback is a double edged sword.
And balancing an incredibly hard and daunting experience, for ANY dev.
For instance, devs have said before they want to make it harder to kill people at long range.
Why?
This isn't the game were limiting the range of kills, even with all their reasons, make sense. A battlefield isn't limited or constrained in such ways.
So if it does not not make sense gameplay wise, settings wise, AND mechanics wise, what made the decision stick? Self belief in your vision and preferred engagement distance for the game? Then map design and weapons must reflect so. But both of this things are closer to semi realism, and thus the tools can do what they do not: Kill people at medium to long range rather effectively. If your aim was not this, then what were you trying to do? Weapons in the game, setting in the game, and its similar games all play like this.
At this point, just pull a World of tanks or world of warships and make players beyond 200 meters be invisible to everyone unless pinged or spotted by someone closer.
Don't chase the perfect balance squirrel, Don't listen to all the vocals here trying to veer off your game. Own your decisions at balancing and carry your vision.
And for fucks sake, remove the bullet trail. Make it a big bullet tracer if you want, but this ain't Halo.
crude fern