Battlefield V


Like I said adrock, not the fastest fire rate or highest damage, but the most controllable & accurate, which means more rounds on target than the other smgs. Don’t get me wrong it’s not the nicest weapon in RL to fire & had some pretty bad flaws (mag release button easy to catch, poor sights etc) for the first few marks but it was crazy cheap to make & extremely reliable. I’ve fired the sten/sterling (post war update) MP 40, Thompson, Grease gun & PPSh and considering the quality of the others compared to it, the sten is by far the deadliest, purely because it was/is the best handling of that era.


Like having to rent servers only from them was even a fix for taking away dedicated community servers, now they don’t even want communities doing that because it’ll cost them…I wonder if allowing communities to front the effort and costs themselves could be a fix?!

Not that it matters to me in terms of BFV, I’m more salty about the general attitude publishers have towards the communities within their audience who’s backs franchises like this have been built on.

Edit: The article does say " by renting server time from publisher Electronic Arts or third-party providers directly.", but as I understood this from talking to the GWs in the BF4 days, these 3rd party server options/customisation options were severely limited and ended up being little different to the official servers. That, to me, is not in the spirit of what I feel ‘community servers’ are.


I don’t think Servers are cost effective any more unless the community has a player base in the 100s and everyone is playing the same game and only that game.

Games require heavy duty systems to run them and with that comes a larger cost that will price out the majority. Then you have to look at it from the developers point of view, how much resource they waste on making the game compatible with servers they don’t control when they could spend that on new content.

Happy to be proved wrong.

Personally, I miss our server but only cos everyone played the game.


you might’ve hit the nail on the head there. we might’ve helped build a franchise, but it’s different folks keeping it going.

Other people built my home, and other people paid for them to build it. But I pay for it now so if any of them turned up expecting anything they’d be disappointed, so i guess that’s fair if not ideal.


Being a cynical person I’m guessing the main reason is that giving us the option of playing a game we like for as long as we like isn’t a priority for the company shareholders


in general i think the entire online gaming landscape has shifted so much that the old way of doing things is just that old. When was the last time ZiiP had enough active players to fill a server?

I like matchmaking systems like how BF5 is atm it doesn’t split the player base like before with DLC and such and can keep servers full. With BF2/2142/3/4 it was pot luck if you chose a server with people still playing any balance settings or an admin that wasn’t a dick ( or of that server was running the map pack i have/don’t have)

End of the day no point getting cross that tings arn’t like they were as they won’t be. Have to make to choice of accepting what BF5 is or not and playing another game. No point arguing at something that won’t change.


Agreed Reno. The only “disappointment” for me in BF V is the size of the size of squad but I am nit picking!


I can’t say I agree @adrock , but without knowing how many of the current player base are repeat customers to the franchise and how many of those oldies and how many of the newbies want dedi-servers, I can’t really make a case otherwise. When there definitely is a portion of the community who want to run their own servers but can’t because EA/Dice have changed their business practices to focus on ‘Games as service’ (and thus require more control over the servers so they can, amongst other things, switch them off when they want to), a practice that simply does not gel with giving players/communities freedom to run their own servers, and when I and at least some of the people here fall in to that portion of players, I can only take this as a statement that they don’t want my/our business.

I understand the points made by @Reno about fragmenting the player base - I’ve experienced that with BF and even more so with ARMA (though the latter is usually a case of free content) - and do agree its an issue, I think the sacrifice of those dedicated servers is a bigger negative than community fragmentation. The latter can be changed by making additional game content more consumer friendly - but I’ll park that point to avoid the boiling mess the discussion might turn in to.

Inspite of the fact that I almost always feel patronised when I’m told “don’t like it don’t play it”, what @Reno (that isn’t a dig directed at you btw) has suggested is the exact thing I’ve done: I’ve played bit for free and then didn’t put money down because the game just doesn’t do what past BF games have done for me and I oppose at least some of the changes that have been made to the franchise over the past few installments.

On @Reno 's point, I feel - even though I’m not practicing what I’m about to preach - that simply skulking off and taking my money with me simply isn’t the right way to respond to a changing business model/changing game design. While a lot of the examples have toxic/negative baggage, being vocal, sharing your opinion and expressing views against the new stuff if you don’t agree with the dirction can directly lead to changes being reversed or some form of compromise being sought. The idea that any form of disagreement with a developers/publishers choices is ‘whining/whinging/crying/etc’ stirs some proper anger in me, especially when the ‘you’re being entitled’ (not a point I’m saying you were even implying, @Reno ) attempted argument ender is trotted out.

I supposed the long and the short for me is: The franchise is no longer for me or those who agree with my gripes about the direction the franchise has headed.

The two of you (three, sorry @MicJules I didn’t spot your replies until I’d already posted) still being at least actively interested in the franchise if not actively playing tells me as much since the two of you seem to respond quite positively to the changes that I respond negatively to, i.e. you’re more likely to be a paying customer than I am with the way things currently are #DollaDollaBillsYall.

It’s just really sad to see something I used to love so much change in to something so unrecogniseable from where I’m sitting.

Ho hum.


thats a good way to look at it.

( please don’t think i was aiming anything at any one, im just geralizing my view on things. I.E overwatch and blizz have pissed me off recently so im avoiding them.

with that mate alot of the people who works on the BF series back in the day arn’t there any more a good few left and made starbreeze ( i think ) the payday series and bungie some of the key people behind HALO ( my favourite shooter series back in the day) have long since left and done new things. I try to follow individuals now in the industry as well as studios and publishers.

Agaian not trying to be antagonistic if i’ve come across like that not my intent, sorry bout that.


It is sad that gaming has gone this way and I agree dedi servers were super cool and being able to pick and choose who to play against was important at that time.

Now though, it is less important because we no longer demand hardcore. So much content was lost when hardcore mode was switched on; it took time to adjust back to Normal :wink: @Reno mode but I don’t miss it.

The matchmaker system is frustrating but its easy; you get on a server and play. Time, these days, goes to fast and people can no longer dedicate vasts amount of time to gaming.

Community is still there even if the server isn’t there. We can still find servers in the browser if we had 20 of us who wanted to play one evening but admins can relax and enjoy their evening now.

So, I am sad that you will not join us playing this game… I agree with @Scottyboy that this game has brought back the enjoyment of the series after the debacle that was BF1.

I am so sad that not many ziips play BF V but you get on with it. Its a game I can pick up and play and most importantly enjoy on my own. It needs friends but you can play without them.

I will say it again cos I feel its important. Communities are bigger than the need for a gaming server. They just are not important any more - the exception is is your community is a competitive clan.


I blame consoles. (*goes off to play on his PS4)


Yeah I didn’t take it that way at all and I wanted to make sure I didn’t come off that way either. I’ve been enough of a dick in this thread to be coming back and starting all over again.

But yeah, times change so we have to change with them or find something else!

I think the other thing coming in to play here is my age: I know 31 doesn’t mean I’m a geriatric, but it certainly has changed my perspective on multiplayer gaming. Wanting dedi-servers for me is so I can avoid swaths of the wider community. I basically want to sit on my lawn and shout at passers by that things ain’t the way they used to be only without the prejudice or old person racism stereotype :smiley:




I like pew pew five.

Got new medic gun. Very good.


Yes so much better than the Sten - loving the new gun!


Fair enough, i assumed you felt differently about it or this discussion would hold significantly less interest :slight_smile:

I assume that the current playerbase has a lot more console users than PC users, and that there’s a similar corresponding split between long term players who want dedicated servers and more recent players who don’t give a shit about that. I’ll openly admit that’s an assumption, but it’s one i’ve found tends to stand up to whatever observations i’ve made. I also don’t believe it would be possible to ever effectively survey and get an objective view of; the only ones who could try would be EA and they understandably have an agenda.

Also in the spirit of openness, i don’t particularly care. I enjoy playing battlefield, the appeal for me has always been the collaborative aspect of squad/teamwork and that’s still there. I also enjoy the discussion and finding out what other people views are, but it’s not like I feel ZiiP is representative of gamers or gaming in any larger sense.

If we had a community server, we’d play against each other, some people would be toxic assholes, and i would stop playing. That was my experience of battlefield in ziip prior to battlefield 1 (so exclusively battlefield 4). The best bits I remember of BF4 for me were when i would hop on with other Alex and/or Tahu and we’d hop on the empty server and try to get it going of an evening, probably because at that stage we were a single squad working together. I appreciate that puts me in the diminished minority as far as ziip goes.

Once shit gets all competitive with folks on chat on both teams i tend to enjoy it less, and i don’t think i’m alone in that. That’s not necessarily a BF thing but a voice comms thing; 3-5 people is ideal, depending on the people, but beyond that i find the chat more of a distraction than anything else. That goes for most games (BF, R6, Overwatch) though. Again, that’s just me.

prior to battlefield 4, i played with other people, had a great time, and none of the groups i ever played with ran their own servers outside of LANs, it never really had appeal for any of us.

yeah that. they don’t care about your business, they’ve got a bigger one that they’re beholden to. It sucks they don’t want to provide what everyone wants to everyone, but that would cost way more for ever diminishing returns. It also sucks that no one else seems to view creating an alternative product to fill that niche as commercially viable. or at least not enough that anyone’s done it successfully enough to stop this being a discussion.

This bothers me when it’s people. a bit. When it’s things I struggle to care as much.

I think you could view it as the people (who play battlefield) having changed, but i see it (by choice) as the playerbase having grown and become inclusive of a lot of people who have very different priorities, alongside my own priorities changing as i’ve aged. Though playing medic exclusively dates back to at least Enemy Territory. But it’s that growth that’s given us newer, more regular battlefields, with a bunch of improvements, and i’ve enjoyed them.

If you go back and play bf2 or 2142 now they just don’t hold up. the gameplay is exactly what it was back when they were new, but apart from Titan mode and the occasional decent map (I’m not a fan of the modern ‘lane based’ approach to multiplayer maps) there’s nothing there i would want newer battlefield games to bring back. While i miss the larger scale of older BF maps (don’t have a vehicle? enjoy your 5 minute jog!), Arma has that covered for me.

Apologies for the old ‘adrock-wall-o-text’; i think part of me wanting to elaborate is coming from the fact i never experienced the thing you miss. Battlefield 4 with ziip was a very mixed experience for me, while 1 and 5 have been much more enjoyable. And that ties back into me not really giving a shit about the lack of support for private/community servers.


New patch in bound. Tuesday 9am I believe.

Full notes here

Highlights for me

New vehicle - Sturmgeschutz IV - unlockable through week 3 Tides of War.
Practice range! -Gadget practice: Practice shooting the Panzerfaust and other gadgets against stationary and
moving targets. Yey! about time.
More cover and trenches added to Panzerstorm - new wooded areas to mask infantry approaches. I like this map and still want to see it put into other game modes. May be my go to Conquest map for a change.

Fixed - Revive counter for downed players. Yey.
Footstep sound tweaked.

Added a horn to the Universal Carrier. Honk away! - Meep Meep

Cancelling an armed grenade can now be done by either pressing reload or any of the
inventory switch buttons. - simple things really.


Feel the thread needs some love.

Epic round with @adrock on frontline twisted steel. Pushed back to our last of 3 defensive artillery points, and we countered all the way back to attack there last point. Back and forth, epic battle, epic squad (best squad at end), 4 X V1’s called in, including the luckiest misplaced one that killed 2 attackers likely to plant on our last arty.

This game has the ability to frustrate and annoy the hell out of me, but at same time provide some of the most very satisfying game play, even in what was technically a defeat.


Sounds like the BF experience to me? Was always like that :smiley:. it makes you scream in agony the minute before you have the biggest smile on your face ever! I would go back to BF5 but I fear with all the extra dlc involved I would need to buy more stuff I don’t really want.

You play vanilla or did you get the subscription/dlcs?


All BFV extra content is free… No more “BF Premium” BS :slight_smile: