|
|
| Author |
Thread Statistics | Show CCP posts - 1 post(s) |
trollsroyce
Seraphim Initiative.
CRONOS.
165
   |
Posted - 2013.01.16 10:17:00 -
[1] - Quote
Field control sniping is a mini game in a fight. You assign people to act as a general detriment to other team. It's ultimately balanced as the other team can either try to topple field control or just stick to control points and stay in cover not to die to reinforcements. The second solution just does not happen in public games; I've won multiple games to reinf in a losing MCC battle.
Just like page sniping is a mini game to forums |
trollsroyce
Seraphim Initiative.
CRONOS.
165
|
Posted - 2013.01.16 18:46:00 -
[2] - Quote
MD 87 wrote:Players should be forced of their own redline, after a certain amount of time.
Sniping from for within the safety of the redline, revokes the mancard of said sniper. Just saying...
it took me this long to realize what redline meant. Thought it was nato jargon |
trollsroyce
Seraphim Initiative.
CRONOS.
165
|
Posted - 2013.01.17 15:23:00 -
[3] - Quote
KEROSIINI-TERO wrote:Snipers are pretty okay in Dust at the moment (January 2013)
Things to tune:
- Add ballistic/travel time to bullets in order to make hitting farther and farther more and more difficult (small tune-up to damage to balance usability).
That would make the shots more rewarding and would emphasize player skill in longshots.
Also as a bonus, this would make redline sniping less tempting as the range from safe area tends to be long (unless redlined, but thats okay then)
- Fix the remaining hitdetection issues to get rid of the bugged advantage of high positions. Also aids snipers so they won't be affected by that LOS yes but barrel clipping -problem
I dislike this suggestion, as it makes sniping more luck based (depending on enemy dodge pattern and movement). The games, where sniping works on a high level play, all employ instant bullet flight. Sniping is fairly balanced currently, based on the maps: a good offensive player on a tight map makes about the same difference as a good sniper on a large, open map. This is just IMHO.
Counter-strike had a good approach to sniping as well as q1 tf. Battlefield series is a good example of how bullet flight makes sniping useless in high level play. Planetside 2 sniping is very situational and mostly meaningless as well.
This all goes for skirmish, btw. In the tight ambush maps delayed sniping could work as well. Snipers are now a working field control asset because of the long range capability. Reducing the range capability would make them tactical units like the rest. |
trollsroyce
Seraphim Initiative.
CRONOS.
165
|
Posted - 2013.01.17 17:30:00 -
[4] - Quote
ArMaGeDoN The Cat wrote:trollsroyce wrote:KEROSIINI-TERO wrote:Snipers are pretty okay in Dust at the moment (January 2013)
Things to tune:
- Add ballistic/travel time to bullets in order to make hitting farther and farther more and more difficult (small tune-up to damage to balance usability).
That would make the shots more rewarding and would emphasize player skill in longshots.
Also as a bonus, this would make redline sniping less tempting as the range from safe area tends to be long (unless redlined, but thats okay then)
- Fix the remaining hitdetection issues to get rid of the bugged advantage of high positions. Also aids snipers so they won't be affected by that LOS yes but barrel clipping -problem I dislike this suggestion, as it makes sniping more luck based (depending on enemy dodge pattern and movement). The games, where sniping works on a high level play, all employ instant bullet flight. Sniping is fairly balanced currently, based on the maps: a good offensive player on a tight map makes about the same difference as a good sniper on a large, open map. This is just IMHO. Counter-strike had a good approach to sniping as well as q1 tf. Battlefield series is a good example of how bullet flight makes sniping useless in high level play. Planetside 2 sniping is very situational and mostly meaningless as well. This all goes for skirmish, btw. In the tight ambush maps delayed sniping could work as well. Snipers are now a working field control asset because of the long range capability. Reducing the range capability would make them tactical units like the rest. Non of the counter strike maps (The original ones, not the community made ones) give snipers a range where only they can see the enemy, so it balanced out. You had a very powerful weapon, but miss a shot and an assault rifle will gun you down. So comparing it to CS is dumb, and I'm saying it as a past CS player.
Comparison of the mechanic with cs shows that it works brilliantly for mid ranges and close. Battlefield mechanic sucks more the closer you get.
Comparison with q1tf shows the mechanic allows for balanced and beautiful field control games. Battlefield mechanic renders snipers nigh useless in high level.
Your point is one sided but accurate in its own right; I should have written more coherently. |
trollsroyce
Seraphim Initiative.
CRONOS.
165
|
Posted - 2013.01.20 14:04:00 -
[5] - Quote
Fivetimes Infinity wrote:Tailss Prower wrote:OH and anyone saying i'm just getting free kills why not acturally try sniping and see how well you do cause while it may be easy for me since I snipe in just about every fps game I play but there are many I have watched who could take like 10 shots and maybe hit the guy once and if you sneak up on me and kill me then good for you as I don't care about my warpoints or those so called free kills as my k/d means nothing to me I snipe for the pure sport of sniping and no one can tell me any different I sniped all through Precursor and for about a week during Codex. In Precursor I had a couple thousand kills and 10.something KDR, and in Codex I had a few hundred kills and 13.89 KDR. You can try and act like KDR means nothing, but snipers are about the only role in the game where KDR is a useful metric for determining skill. So don't try and act as if you have some kind of authority on sniping unique to yourself. That said, you are getting free kills for no effort. Playing as a solo sniper versus playing as solo infantry now, I spend more on my equipment as infantry, I get fewer kills, and while I'll get more WP because I'll revive/hack as I go along, I do so while having a much greater challenge in front of me. Snipers shooting me, enemy infantry of all types, LAVs trying to run me over, turrets shooting me, grenade spam every game... it's pretty undeniable that infantry is a lot more difficult and has less of a pay-off. Why should one of the safest roles in the game also be the most powerful, while requiring the least SP and being as hard as putting a dot on a target and pulling a trigger a couple times?
Simply because a sniper is not contributing to the objectives game in any other way than killing enemies to deter them from playing efficiently. If the main purpose of a sniper is to kill, therifle has to be damn overpowered at it. Otherwise any other role would be more important for the team.
I only consider my games contributive when I pop more than 30 enemies in a public game while also killing off tactically important hostiles. If the rifle can't steadily pull that off, then I should be playing heavy assault. In most maps I end up going with ar, since sniper spots cannot control enough of the field.
As far as kdr goes, a sniper with under 20 kills was most likely dragged by the team as dead weight. Still he might have a good kdr. Kills per minute, or WP per minute would be the best metric of a snipers contribution to a match. |
|
|
| |
|