|
|
| Author |
Thread Statistics | Show CCP posts - 0 post(s) |
Maximillian Marquis
Planetary Response Organisation
FACTION WARFARE ALLIANCE
15
   |
Posted - 2014.04.01 11:07:00 -
[1] - Quote
Thokk Nightshade wrote:[quote=GeneralButtNaked]
What is the point of being a Sniper if you have to be in range of assault weapons to use them? I have to get into my stance (making me immobile), pull my rifle up, line up the shot, and shoot, while you are putting 10-15-20 rounds in me at the same distance. I get a total of 3-5 shots before reloading and you have a 50 round or more per magazine on rapid fire.
What you are saying is taking away the entire point of a sniper... Reach out and touch someone . The entire purpose of a Sniper (real world) is long range suppression and assistance. Right now it is a 2.5 to 1 ratio (250 vs. 600). That isn't unrealistic by any means, If anything, it is underwhelming. Just like in real life, Snipers SHOULD have more distance to their shots. A 338 Lapua or a 416 Rigby (or a Barrett .50 Cal while we're talking about it) have much longer accurate ranges than an M-16 or AK-47. The three previously mentioned can all reach out to about a mile (the Barrett .50 in 2012 had a confirmed kill at 1.75 miles. Granted, that's a world record, but a 1 mile shot is not unheard of anymore in the sniping world, just extremely difficult.) However, the documented and accepted max effective range is 1.1 miles.
An M16A2 has a max effective range for AREA, not person specific, targets of about 1/2 a mile; an M4 is only 1/3 of a mile. I know as of 2008 the Army didn't even do shooting (for regular forces, I'm not sure on SF, etc.) of 330 yards which is less than 2/10 of a mile. An AK-47 only has about a 225 yard max effective distance which is about 1/10 of a mile. So really, if an assault rifle has a max effective range of 250, we should be seeing 1000 minimum distance which is only 4 times farther, not the 6 times farther of the standard world.
The maps and their layouts have taken the sniper out of 80% of them. I don't want to be a guy just sitting up in the hills picking a few guys off and getting 4-5 kills a game. But many of the maps are set up where there is no Line of Sight to any or only 1 of the Null cannons on the map. If that single null cannon isn't being contested, there's not a whole lot I can do. Until recently, I only had sniper skills so I'm not going charging into the middle of a firefight at 100 meters and in just to get whacked.
On that same note, it is really upsetting when I get into a position to be helpful to the team, see a bunch of reds on a ledge, put 5 or 6 rounds from a maxed out Charge Sniper Rifle (running 3 complex and 1 enhanced light damage modifier) into someone and they don't go down. I had a game recently where there were 3 guys on a ledge (1 heavy and 2 mediums I believe). I put 25 rounds into the three of them. I'd be willing to bet 19 of them hit. I didn't kill one of them. I once hit a heavy with 3 HEAD SHOTS in a row and they still had almost full armor. When I can put 100 rounds out during a match, put 60% on target (I'd say that is a good # for this debate), and I'm only ending up with 6 kills, there is something wrong here. Look at the info in my first comment. Each weapon in this game has it's real world counterpart (the rail and forge gun are protos but there is still something out there.) Most machine guns take several rounds through armor. A shotgun blast is going to take out pretty much anything at close range. On the same note, a Barrett .50 Cal (or anything used for sniping by most miltary snipers) are a one shot, one kill type of weapon. It doesn't make sense that a weapon that should theoretically be a 2 shot at most weapon can't take someone out with 6 or 7 shots.
Something needs to be done to make the Sniper at least a viable option on the battlefield instead of relegating it into uselessness.
1) Excellent information. I am happy to see that there are people informed on real world rifle operation and understand the difference in point and area targetting.
2) I think I love you (see point 1)
3) One thing that bugs me is that the Barrett .50 Cal gets called a "sniper" rifle. I dont care what the manufacturer calls it, I dont care what random users call it. In functionality it is an anti-material rifle and in the service it is classified as such. I'm not harping on YOU specifically, especially considering the information you seem to have. But there are many out there that are just flat unaware of what anti-material weapons are/do. /rant
4) Your ledge example is something I have experienced first hand on multiple occasions. Heavy's are just what their name implies....big, slow, and armored to hell and back. I have no issues with it taking 4-5 rounds to drop one. You have to consider that The Sniper Rifle does considerably less damage to shields eating up multiple bullets....but once those are gone....its magic time! This is highly apparent with the caldari heavy's. Medium suits on the other hand eating 2-3 bullets from a Charged SR or 2 from a Thales though.....so sorry but there is something massively wrong with that.
5) ****Will finishing editing later, emergency situation arose****
|
Maximillian Marquis
Planetary Response Organisation
FACTION WARFARE ALLIANCE
16
|
Posted - 2014.04.04 08:47:00 -
[2] - Quote
I will concur with the scope strength. It is massively annoying when sniping from the "extreme" ranges of 500m away where a portion of the time they wont render (not to mention the buildings and surrounding terrain look like butt) or phase out into building walls or just flat out pop out of existence. 500 meters.....that is NOT that far away people. I was hitting targets in the service with a 240 bravo at that distance without much trouble....and you are telling me that dust sniper tech/optics are barely making the cut? I could understand reduced distance if it was out to 1000, but the suspension of disbelief at this point is bothersome.
On another note I went on a sniping spree with the NT-511, which I used to use very frequently prior to 1.8. However with all the damage nerfs this go 'round that thing hits like a wet noodle. Its taking approx. 5 shots to down SOME mediums...these are non headshots of course, but prior to 1.8 it was somewhere like 3. I do not/can not/will not understand how you can justify it taking that many rounds on mediums (even more bothersome with heavies becoming more popular), hell even some scouts are taking 2-3 shots at a time. Yeah, I'll get hate for saying it, but the phrase "One shot, One Kill" is there for a reason. At this stage of the patch I am not sure the devs were paying attention to everything that the damage mod nerf and proficiency changes were affecting. I still run a 5 damage mod logi and even now its a massive pain in the rear with anything less than proto level weapons (in comparison, naturally). Stop rubber banding our balls CCP!
1) Increase range of SR scopes (back to 800 preferably)
2) Increase SR Damage to compensate for patch reductions
3) Alternative optics (thermal imaging, Night Vision, etc etc)
See you in the burn zone! |
Maximillian Marquis
Planetary Response Organisation
FACTION WARFARE ALLIANCE
16
|
Posted - 2014.04.04 16:01:00 -
[3] - Quote
Spike Slania wrote:Maximillian Marquis wrote:I will concur with the scope strength. It is massively annoying when sniping from the "extreme" ranges of 500m away where a portion of the time they wont render (not to mention the buildings and surrounding terrain look like butt) or phase out into building walls or just flat out pop out of existence. 500 meters.....that is NOT that far away people. I was hitting targets in the service with a 240 bravo at that distance without much trouble....and you are telling me that dust sniper tech/optics are barely making the cut? I could understand reduced distance if it was out to 1000, but the suspension of disbelief at this point is bothersome.
On another note I went on a sniping spree with the NT-511, which I used to use very frequently prior to 1.8. However with all the damage nerfs this go 'round that thing hits like a wet noodle. Its taking approx. 5 shots to down SOME mediums...these are non headshots of course, but prior to 1.8 it was somewhere like 3. I do not/can not/will not understand how you can justify it taking that many rounds on mediums (even more bothersome with heavies becoming more popular), hell even some scouts are taking 2-3 shots at a time. Yeah, I'll get hate for saying it, but the phrase "One shot, One Kill" is there for a reason. At this stage of the patch I am not sure the devs were paying attention to everything that the damage mod nerf and proficiency changes were affecting. I still run a 5 damage mod logi and even now its a massive pain in the rear with anything less than proto level weapons (in comparison, naturally). Stop rubber banding our balls CCP!
1) Increase range of SR scopes (back to 800 preferably)
2) Increase SR Damage to compensate for patch reductions
3) Alternative optics (thermal imaging, Night Vision, etc etc)
See you in the burn zone! The damage thing happened to all weapons, so you wanting a buff to your sniper rifle when all our guns also got nerfed isn't in synch with what CCQ wants. They want people to live longer and work more like a team to take out enemies. We have to deal with our other op weapons before even thinking about making sniper rifles op. Remember, this isn't your typical FPS, it also has RPG elements so it isn't CoD sniping one shot one kill. You just use a hell a lot less shots then everyone else to kill someone.
I'm very well aware of how the nerf's affected weapons across the board, I dont JUST snipe. Sniping is a tool and one that I have found to be increasingly situational. Nor am I asking to make it "OP" as you say, I dont want some massive increase in damage, rather what I would like to see is 1.7 numbers minus SOME. Between dual tank, cloaks (not really an issue imo), higher heavy usage, lower module damage and the proficiency changes (Yes I STILL realize that these affect everyone, point still stands) I am personally seeing a significant drop off kills. I'm sure those anti-snipers out there will proclaim that to be a good thing and that snipers prior to patch were massively out of whack...fine, you are indeed entitled to your opinion. I do agree that the damage might have been a bit on the high side given how people were running their suits. Where we are at now is a bit comical.
Hell, even if there were no possibility of a buff, the range of scopes currently is pitiful and no amount of counter argument will make it otherwise. Last I checked this is a futuristic style game.....I expect to see futuristic ranges on my scope. 600m (which frankly never happens) is a joke. I'd love to say 1200 is about right, but that will never fly (even though by currently military doctrine that is about what you SHOULD be able to reach out and touch) in this game so I figure 800 is a good comprimise along with better ADS rendering of terrain and structures because it looks like smeared butt at the moment. |
Maximillian Marquis
Planetary Response Organisation
FACTION WARFARE ALLIANCE
16
|
Posted - 2014.04.04 16:14:00 -
[4] - Quote
Dauth Jenkins wrote:Spike Slania wrote:Snipers tend to make me angry, and no it's not they keep killing me and I'm losing my suits while they're safely sitting back in the red zone away from the battle complaining that they want hit detection for that kind of range. No, this is about playing Domination and having 3-10 snipers on my own team camping the red line/mountains. Can't really take an objective When most of my team is hiding up in the red line with a sniper rifle thinking they're making a difference, though in all reality I think they really don't care if they win or lose as long as their k/d is good. They don't even bother trying to take out enemy snipers because my guess is if we miss a shot at them, they might figure out where we're at and we might actually die or something.
It's like they group up in the mountains, huddle around, somebody brings a 30 pack, and they just watch their team lose, but it's ok, their k/d is positive! Need more of an incentive for people to put down a sniper rifle and actually get into the battle and actually win a game. Their win/lose ratio might be terrible, but it's all about k/d man. Reminds me of this old comic I read that featured 2 cats as the main characters, they did an Unreal 2004 Assault strip about the train level where the attackers had to board the enemy train. All the attackers just got on their platform with sniper rifles and didn't bother boarding the enemy train then after the battle were like wtf, how did we lose? I got out my sniper rifle and everything. I used to snipe, not to stack kd, but to make isk. I tend to only do it on domination when I can assist with defending from a distance.
I dont Snipe for KD either, but rather because I enjoy it. Its different from all the chaos that goes on when fighting up close and there are days where I would like to play but to relax a little bit more and this allows me to do so. I was a much more active sniper when I first started though and seeing the difference between then and now....well I dont whip out the sniper much anymore (I do still thales it up though  ).
|
|
|
| |
|