|
|
| Author |
Thread Statistics | Show CCP posts - 0 post(s) |
CaptBuckle
3dge of D4rkness
SoulWing Alliance
10
   |
Posted - 2012.12.26 17:45:00 -
[1] - Quote
Apologies if this has been discussed before, but I didin't see it in the first 5 pages.
Is there a difference, other than whether you are on the giving or receiving end, between "camping" and "holding a tactically advantageous position"? If so, how do you draw the distinction?
People usually use the word "camping" in a negative light. I can kind of understand QQing about "spawn camping"[1]...but without experiential evidence, I'm not yet convinced that a coordinated simultaneous drop of a couple of squads couldn't break a spawn camp. I'm also not convinced that perhaps drop uplinks are simply being played wrong. I.e., instead of expecting it to be a new "permanent" CRU-replacement, maybe we should simply be using it to regroup a squad when needed, then abandon that uplink.
But if the enemy is camping a CRU without flipping it, should we really be upset about that? Presumably, that means they have a squad tied down, not doing any good toward securing or attacking null cannons or reducing clone count.
Anyway, what are the thoughts on this in the DUST community? What is the difference, if any?
[1] With regard to "spawn camping", and "revival camping", I've posted my own thread in Feedback/Requests that maybe no kills or WP should be awarded for "re-killing" someone that isn't back in the fight yet (maybe give it 2 seconds for that kill to count for anything). Still allows the camping to be used to suppress the number of clones on the battle field, perhaps allowing for some sort of tactical advantage such as building a clone deficit between teams...but doesn't let someone inflate their K/D ratio or gain "freebie" WP toward orbital strikes with a bunch of easy kills. Here's the link if anyone is interested.
https://forums.dust514.com/default.aspx?g=posts&m=443818#post443818 |
CaptBuckle
3dge of D4rkness
SoulWing Alliance
10
|
Posted - 2012.12.26 18:51:00 -
[2] - Quote
Grimmiers wrote:You should be invincible on spawn at least until your screen fades in completely and there should be an effect to show you're invincible.
I don't really want this to be a thread to be about what CCP should or shouldn't be doing to discourage spawn camping. I want this thread to be about exploring what people think "camping" really is...and is it a bad thing or not?
That said, I don't like this proposal. First, I don't like any "invincibility" solution. This isn't Street Fighter or Double Dragon or any other type of arcade game. Second, this does nothing to counter the fact that the enemy has a head start aiming at your brain pan while you can't move or even be aware of them at all. |
CaptBuckle
3dge of D4rkness
SoulWing Alliance
10
|
Posted - 2012.12.26 19:01:00 -
[3] - Quote
Green Wedges wrote:I thought we were supposed to treat Dust like it is a real war. I know if I saw a bunch of enemies coming from a position, I would sit there and kill them as long as they remained stupid enough to keep coming. This is war. Adapt or die.
I understand about complaining about "spawncamping" in games like COD because you cannot choose where to spawn. Most of the people complaining about this in Dust are the people who choose to drop into an extremely hot area and die instantly. Yea, that means maybe you have to spawn 400m away from everything, but if the enemy team is doing that good of a job of holding down the map, so be it.
If there is something both teams can do, how can anyone say it is unfair? Don't like getting spawncamped? Then do a better job of defending the area.
I agree with you...to a point. Take the CRU, for example. You could say by camping a CRU you are indirectly reducing the enemy clone count by preventing them from getting free spawns off of the CRU. But that logic is completely asinine because the best way for you to deny the enemy free spawns is to move in and take the CRU. So you as an individual and as a corp are getting an inflated K/D ratio and WP without actually contributing to the battle in any material way.
In other words, your inflated K/D ratio from spawn camping is not an actual reflection of how "good" you or your corporation actually are.
If instead you _take_ the CRU, then set a defend on it, now you are defending a resource for your own team. That seems a much more advantageous tactic not just for your own K/D ratio, but for your whole team. Now, your K/D ratio actually reflects your contribution to the battle.
A case could be made for camping uplinks and objectives to create an enemy clone deficit...but I can't see it for a CRU. |
CaptBuckle
3dge of D4rkness
SoulWing Alliance
10
|
Posted - 2012.12.26 19:09:00 -
[4] - Quote
Forlorn Destrier wrote:Are all spawn camps "camping"? Yes. Are all who "camp" spawn campers? No. You can camp other areas. Manus peak for example, where B used to be, is a great place to "camp" even with an AR because it is close enough to attack C and is easily defensible. Is there anything wrong with this? No. Is it camping? Yes.
To me there is no difference between "camping" and "holding an advantageous position" other than if someone else is doing it is a negative thing because it can deny you your objective.
Is spawn camping bad? Yes - and I'm sure I've angered a few people when I killed the uplink of the opposing force - with the idea that I would rather force them to spawn farther off giving us a better chance to set up a viable defense instead of a circle of people with our back facing out waiting for that HMG to mow us all down.
I was going to respond to this, but noticed that the quoted text is showing two more paragraphs than I originally saw in the thread...
I'll just say that "where B used to be [...] because it is close enough to attack C and is easily defensible" certainly sounds like a tactically advantageous position to me. So the purpose of "camping" that would not be to artificially inflate one's K/D ratio. |
CaptBuckle
3dge of D4rkness
SoulWing Alliance
10
|
Posted - 2012.12.26 19:39:00 -
[5] - Quote
jenza aranda wrote:I play to win, so as far as i am concerned, camping a CRU or drop uplink is a perfectly valid tactic.
(Note: when I am referring to "camping" an objective or a CRU or whatever, I mean doing so _without_ hacking or destroying it.)
I can see how camping an objective, or even the MCC, base or a default spawn location can contribute to winning a match. All of those cases can help create, even up or widen a clone deficit between the two teams.
But camping a CRU doesn't create or widen a clone deficit. At best it just keeps a few players off of the field for 3-5 extra seconds. Doesn't seem like a siginificant contribution to trying to win a match...but seems like a great way to cheaply boost players' and corps' K/D ratios and other stats.
(I'm not at all suggesting that is what you or BetaMax Beta are doing, jenza. In fact, to my knowledge, I don't think I've been in a match with you, personally. I'm only questioning the tactics, in general...trying to get a gauge on what people think about the topic...) |
CaptBuckle
3dge of D4rkness
SoulWing Alliance
10
|
Posted - 2012.12.26 20:11:00 -
[6] - Quote
Perseus Gallento wrote:Tenchu-13 wrote:Camping a CRU without hacking it is spawncamping no matter how you look at it. there is only 1 good reason for such behaviour and that is spawnkilling. If you're 4 around a CRU it takes you 5 kitten seconds to hack the thing, so hack it and move on (or stay... whatever you like) but don't keep it active on the other teams color just to gun down whoever spawns there.
- I have also been thinking that maybe a 2 sec. "no-guns/healt-invulnarabilty" period "could" counter spawnkilling...
As someone who has been using droplinks since the beginning there should be a 'destruct' option so the initial poser can indeed destroy any dl he dropped in case it gets camped or is deemed counterproductive for the general flow of the battle.
Agree. A camped uplink could even be turned into an advantage if you give its destruction some powerful splash damage. This would be a deterrent to would-be campers. Or maybe have the ability to deploy an explosive or other type of weapon instead of spawning there yourself. Something to clear the path or freeze the enemy and give you a fighting chance.
I could see this...but just like with anything else, gotta have the skills. Just like you can have a combination nanohive with armor repair, you could have a combination drop uplink with remote explosives...but you can only equip it if you have both the skills for the drop uplink and for the remote explosives. (Demolition for the remote explosives, isn't it? And I don't have the skill list in front of me to remember what allows a non-militia drop uplink to be equiped...) |
CaptBuckle
3dge of D4rkness
SoulWing Alliance
10
|
Posted - 2012.12.26 20:23:00 -
[7] - Quote
semperfi1999 wrote:This would also make more people want to spawn from CRUs instead of other areas since it would not decrease the clone count.
Um...isn't that already the whole point of the CRU? ...that it doesn't reduce the clone count?
-»\(-¦_o)/-»
...maybe that hasn't been implemented, yet...I guess I haven't really looked to see if the total dropped when I've spawned in. |
|
|
| |
|