|
|
| Author |
Thread Statistics | Show CCP posts - 1 post(s) |
Aeon Amadi
Negative-Feedback.
Negative-Feedback
11
   |
Posted - 2015.07.07 16:49:00 -
[1] - Quote
Opening up a thread on Sniper Rifle discussion is almost guaranteed to have every idiot who's never run sniper for any reason other than to redline snipe chiming in about how it isn't broken.
If you really want to make Sniper Rifles good, you first need to think-tank behind closed doors with people that have actually run Sniper Rifles for competitive, team-based goals and not just because it's harder to kill a redline sniper.
Otherwise you'll just get a bunch of really dumb posts like the ones that say "Sniper rifles aren't broken because of all the redline snipers" - which contribute absolutely nothing to the thread but rampant, misplaced sniper hate.
10% of US schools no longer teach Cursive. A decade from now, 10% of the US isn't going to understand all the squiglies.
|
Aeon Amadi
Negative-Feedback.
Negative-Feedback
11
|
Posted - 2015.07.08 03:21:00 -
[2] - Quote
The irony is that CCP designed the maps, reduced the range, and removed traditional sniping locations to prevent them from covering Objectives and removing problem players from higher areas (towers, etc).... and then the community says that Snipers offer nothing to the team.
You get what you pay for, it seems.
10% of US schools no longer teach Cursive. A decade from now, 10% of the US isn't going to understand all the squiglies.
|
Aeon Amadi
Negative-Feedback.
Negative-Feedback
11
|
Posted - 2015.07.08 19:41:00 -
[3] - Quote
Put together a video. All footage was taken from PC.
https://youtu.be/H-1qUgw1rMk
10% of US schools no longer teach Cursive. A decade from now, 10% of the US isn't going to understand all the squiglies.
|
Aeon Amadi
Negative-Feedback.
Negative-Feedback
11
|
Posted - 2015.07.10 13:23:00 -
[4] - Quote
Kain Spero wrote:CCP Rattati wrote:I have no objection to increasing Zoom. Give me feedback. Again, I think the sniper rifle more often encourages bad game play due it's range being such an outlier and it's mechanics that encourage static game play(crouch and don't move to eliminate scope sway). An increased zoom would just encourage bad behavior further I think. The weapon would be better if it maintained it's current zoom and had it's range and damage application looked at. The extreme range of the weapon just leads to bad behavior that is unhelpful often for the team. It would be much better if the weapon fell inline with what many would consider a marksmen rifle. Reduced range but better damage application.
Considering all the sniping I've done for Negative-Feedback, let alone in PC scenarios, and the videos I've recorded and published on youtube -of- that gameplay (none of which involved me being in the redline) I can't really agree with this and I'm somewhat disappointed that I haven't proved to you the effectiveness of a sniper in team-play.
We call out troop movements -WELL- out of scan range, we take out hostiles on or near objectives out of reach of general infantry, we take out high value targets that you guys otherwise just cannot kill. Without that range, you're effectively neutering us.
There are snipers and then there are snipers. Anyone can pick up a sniper rifle and land a lucky kill but it takes an extraordinary amount of practice and skill in order to know where the enemy's hit box is going to be at those distances (hit box lag is a major factor in landing accurate shots and it is difficult to acount for as it is inconsistent).
If the range is nerfed anymore for this 'bad gameplay' you might as well just turn the sniper rifle into a DMR and call it a night. I'd sooner take another hit to mag capacity and lower damage than take yet another range nerf. Do you know how frustrating it is for a target to back-step just out of range? You know how frustrating it is to have to relocate to a completely different position because your target is literally -one meter- out of your range and you're on the very edge of a cliff?
Another nerf to our range would effectively turn us into a pair of binoculars that sheds tears anytime we want to kill something. But, yanno, I guess there's always forge guns.
10% of US schools no longer teach Cursive. A decade from now, 10% of the US isn't going to understand all the squiglies.
|
Aeon Amadi
Negative-Feedback.
Negative-Feedback
11
|
Posted - 2015.07.10 22:00:00 -
[5] - Quote
Kain Spero wrote:Aeon, I have a challenge for you and me. Let's hunt down sniper videos and log the kill ranges and see what the average kill distance is. My hypothesis is we'll find that the average kill is for sure under 400m and more than likely under 300m.
I think that if we can increase the effectiveness of the sniper's damage application at the cost of eliminating fringe ranges we can improve the game play of the sniper role for the role itself and the entire community.
This challenge is prematurely rigged due to map size and objective proximity as they are usually within 200m of one another. Most of your 400m+ kills are taking out someone in the redline. Majority of players are going to be near objectives rather than in the redline, so averages engagement ranges are skewed. Further more, current map design is prohibitive of snipers covering objectives, so what do you want us to do if all of our perches are in the redline due to bowl-shaped maps?
While those 350m+ ranges are at the extreme, they are all the more necessary because once the enemy has someone dug in deep in the redline you're going to want someone to take them out. Who is going to do that if Snipers can't? Reducing range isn't going to stop or discourage redline tactics, it'll promote it, because the counter-sniper has to move closer and closer as the ranges get reduced.
If you want to make Snipers more co-operative to their team, we need better gameplay elements that -are- co-operative. I've suggested things like having a 1m FLUX explosion around where the bullet impacts for more reliable equipment disposal (equipment stops rendering after a certain distance). Target Tagging; a single target lighting up on TacNet for a short duration with a long cool-down. Mobility, which could be done by removing sway while standing or even potentially moving but still retain the hardcore sway when initially looking into the scope to limit quick-scoping. Make it easier for me to do my job before you start proposing ways to make it harder.
There are ways to make a Sniper a legitimate team-player, but the constant and irrational fear of their Risk/Reward ratio makes it difficult for a proposal like that to land. If you want Snipers out of the redline, you have to give them a legitimate reason to leave the safety of it. Don't punish real snipers in the crossfire of trying to knock out redline snipers. And for that matter, what redline snipers are you honestly seeing make a huge difference in PC? So what if their gameplay is bad, they'll just lose faster - let them.
You keep reducing the range on Sniper Rifles you're just going to have a bunch of forgers with magnifying glasses/tape on the center of their screens.
And, as far as range averages go, it's better to look at those kills this way:
(range in meters)
0 - 50:
50 - 100: 1
100 - 150: 1111
150 - 200: 1111
200 - 250: 1
250 - 300: 1111
300 - 350: 1
350 - 400: 111
I only made those kills at <200m because I was in the middle of a -sizable- force of friendlies as we were pushing up on the enemy's redline. This isn't a typical case. I go where I am not going to have to worry about getting murdered and rarely am I ever alone. The group just happened to be pushing forward so I followed, using their suppressive fire as a distraction tactic and hiding in the fray of the assault.
Honestly, best suggestion I can make is this:
High Damage < ------ > High Range
If we followed this model, and kept current headshot modifiers to reward precision - snipers could make the honest to god choice of having high damage/low range rifles (think of a Tactical with Thale's damage) and low damage/high range rifles (a Thale's with Tactical damage). This tradeoff is the best way to encourage snipers to have their own uniqueness in playstyle while limiting the fundamental power of the redline sniper. Counter snipers who are accurate and precise can land those headshots at long range and still make one hit kills (giving way to proper counter-sniping of redline snipers) and the overall effectiveness of the redline sniper is drastically reduced.
What say you?
10% of US schools no longer teach Cursive. A decade from now, 10% of the US isn't going to understand all the squiglies.
|
Aeon Amadi
Negative-Feedback.
Negative-Feedback
11
|
Posted - 2015.07.10 22:11:00 -
[6] - Quote
Extending from my proposal in the previous post:
300m range / 373 damage
350m range / 340 damage
400m range / 250 damage
450m range / 221 damage
And there you have it. Redline snipers would fundamentally be neutered if they wanted to do anything besides guard the home-point unless they were really accurate with the headshots while counter-snipers (real-snipers) would be precise enough to use any of the sniper rifles and still warrant effectiveness.
This increases the difficulty of achieving high damage output, practically forcing headshots, but rewarding taking the risk of lower ranges through higher base damage (essentially allowing you to make those body shots).
All I ask is that if we go with this model that Snipers get -SOMETHING- to make them more effective team-players. Make my job easier and I'm more likely to play ball, but throwing out 'nerf this, nerf that, I challenge you to this' is just going to frustrate me.
10% of US schools no longer teach Cursive. A decade from now, 10% of the US isn't going to understand all the squiglies.
|
Aeon Amadi
Negative-Feedback.
Negative-Feedback
11
|
Posted - 2015.07.10 23:01:00 -
[7] - Quote
Zan Azikuchi wrote:Aeon Amadi wrote:Extending from my proposal in the previous post:
300m range / 373 damage
350m range / 340 damage
400m range / 250 damage
450m range / 221 damage
And there you have it. Redline snipers would fundamentally be neutered if they wanted to do anything besides guard the home-point unless they were really accurate with the headshots while counter-snipers (real-snipers) would be precise enough to use any of the sniper rifles and still warrant effectiveness.
This increases the difficulty of achieving high damage output, practically forcing headshots, but rewarding taking the risk of lower ranges through higher base damage (essentially allowing you to make those body shots).
All I ask is that if we go with this model that Snipers get -SOMETHING- to make them more effective team-players. Make my job easier and I'm more likely to play ball, but throwing out 'nerf this, nerf that, I challenge you to this' is just going to frustrate me. Wait.... All you did was add damage drop off..... I'm fine with that so long as within 300m, we get that 373 damage.....
No, I switched up the damage/range attributes on the current sniper rifle variants. This isn't damage fall-off, it's completely different variants of sniper rifles.
Just to throw out some names for clarity and distinction sake, don't take it literally:
Breach Sniper Rifle: 300m / 373 damage
Assault Sniper Rifle: 350m / 340 damage
Tactical Sniper Rifle: 400m / 250 damage
Redliner Sniper Rifle: 450m / 221 damage
10% of US schools no longer teach Cursive. A decade from now, 10% of the US isn't going to understand all the squiglies.
|
Aeon Amadi
Negative-Feedback.
Negative-Feedback
11
|
Posted - 2015.07.11 20:50:00 -
[8] - Quote
chill penguin wrote:I absolutely despise redline snipers, they give real Snipers a bad name.
I think a lot of people have a mutual hatred of them but I think too many people try to whack the redline snipers in the head with a shovel and catch real snipers in the crossfire.
Just wish people would stop making our job harder.
10% of US schools no longer teach Cursive. A decade from now, 10% of the US isn't going to understand all the squiglies.
|
|
|
| |
|