Community Question: Shooting While Sprinting

(DarkangelUK) #121

You have the foresight to predict random events, you do know what random means, right? If you could predict it, it wouldn’t be random… it’d be a pattern.

(tokamak) #122

A pattern indeed, a battlefield filled with patterns. Chaos to those that can’t see them.

(INF3RN0) #123

I have to just call that this discussion is waste of effort. Toka, sorry to be blunt but you can’t expect anyone here to believe that the balance between tactics and aim are balanced on your personal ability as a standard. I can recognize players who’s smarts are a strong part of their success in game, and I don’t think you set the bar even if you think you have the highest development of “tactics”. If anyone has the info on them, I would appreciate a stat difference between ETQW pub spread with “reduced spread” unlocks and the ETQWPro spread. As far as I am concerned the fall-off of weapons in ETQWPro is really the most significant difference. On top of the entire subject, tactics as an individual player should not be what is important, but instead tactics on a team level. Mediocre players shouldn’t be directly compensated for their lack of ability because they don’t want to play an FPS, but instead they should be forced to work with their teammates as a way of gaining the upper hand. That’s what the game is all about… not everyone can be a winner, so just deal with it lol.

(INF3RN0) #124

[QUOTE=tokamak;386676]
Oh come on, sound plays a really low role in combat.[/QUOTE]

Mid-combat, of course not. Prior to engagement, mui important’e! Lot’s of sound in ETQW though… gosh I’ve been saved from so many rocket camping mexicans because of sound :).

(DarkangelUK) #125

You can see patterns in randomized spread? I’m surprised you view sound as chaos though.

(tokamak) #126

What the hell are you talking about? Even if you can predict the way spread dictates the path of each bullet you would be unable to adjust fast enough to fire straight. So that’s not the random you were initially talking about is it? You were talking about “random” situations, people getting caught with their pants down out in the open, having to chose between running or shooting while already far behind in favour and unable to brute-force their way out. Stop moving the goalpost.

I can recognize players who’s smarts are a strong part of their success in game, and I don’t think you set the bar even if you think you have the highest development of “tactics”. If anyone has the info on them,

Good because I don’t. Stop pretending I want the game specifically tailored to one specific style of playing. As I said before, if there’s one style of playing I prefer then it’s everything and anything.

but instead they should be forced to work with their teammates as a way of gaining the upper hand

Be careful what you wish for. This is what Brink did it FORCED the players to work with their teammates, it became a determining factor.

(DarkangelUK) #127

My goal post has stayed firmly in place, its your view of it that seems to be changing.

You want to punish a player for moving and shooting at the same, if they get caught with their pants down, as you say they’re already far behind in favour of the situation… the only way to counter would be via their own ability to aim and move at the same time, dodging bullets and still getting accurate headshots. The problem is with your proposed method, you remove the player skill from the equation because they’re then punished for moving in the 1st place with increased RANDOM spread. What you call ‘brute forcing their way out’ we call skilfully dealing with the situation over a player who has insufficient aim or ability. Again with punishing the aimer, forcing them to move and have increased spread, or sit still and be sitting duck, adding negatives to an already negative situation… overkill.

(tokamak) #128

They’re punished for having made the wrong decision, they’re punished for having taken a risk and lost. This hasn’t yet determined the fate of the player. The player then needs to chose if he can deal with the situation from a stationary position, or that he needs to run and thus being rendered less efficient at combat. What the player doesn’t get is the luxury of getting his ass to safety while keeping all his shooting facilities. You can’t have your cake and eat it.

A player catching an enemy out in the open has the ability to partially incapacitate certain functions of his enemy. This is to add weight to the decisions players make. This is to add consequences to their actions, this is to add the ability for players with a better situational awareness to stack odds in their favour and force their opponents into paths. That’s where the real tactics are fought on.

Another thing spread does is that it allows the player to determine his area of influence. High spread means a small area of influence. A small area of influence isn’t wholly bad in close confinement, that’s where you gladly take a high spread for the sake of being mobile. In wide open areas this changes, a high spread over distances is incredibly unfavourable so you will be more careful with wasting it on mobility. There’s a bigger cost to being mobile and it’s up to you to decide whether it’s worth that cost.

This doesn’t invalidate good aiming, you still need it in many situations (especially those where your spread is really tight). The only thing it does is that it stops good aim from being the single tool players can keep falling back on every single time. They’re forced to make decisions and think about their actions.

Brink is a clear and obvious example of spread used the wrong way. It doesn’t grant a sufficient advantage to stationary/scoping players. It’s maximum accuracy is still really low and this levels the field for players of all skills. This doesn’t just frustrate the skilled players, it also doesn’t present the lower skilled players with an incentive to develop themselves in the game (which in turn makes the game less addictive).

So do know that I’m not advocating that. But you should know that by now. I want people to be able to control their spread as well as being able to control the way they control their spread (by tailoring their set ups).

(DarkangelUK) #129

[QUOTE=tokamak;386718]They’re punished for having made the wrong decision, they’re punished for having taken a risk and lost. This hasn’t yet determined the fate of the player. The player then needs to chose if he can deal with the situation from a stationary position, or that he needs to run and thus being rendered less efficient at combat. What the player doesn’t get is the luxury of getting his ass to safety while keeping all his shooting facilities. You can’t have your cake and eat it.

A player catching an enemy out in the open has the ability to partially incapacitate certain functions of his enemy. This is to add weight to the decisions players make. This is to add consequences to their actions, this is to add the ability for players with a better situational awareness to stack odds in their favour and force their opponents into paths. That’s where the real tactics are fought on.

Another thing spread does is that it allows the player to determine his area of influence. High spread means a small area of influence. A small area of influence isn’t wholly bad in close confinement, that’s where you gladly take a high spread for the sake of being mobile. In wide open areas this changes, a high spread over distances is incredibly unfavourable so you will be more careful with wasting it on mobility. There’s a bigger cost to being mobile and it’s up to you to decide whether it’s worth that cost.

This doesn’t invalidate good aiming, you still need it in many situations (especially those where your spread is really tight). The only thing it does is that it stops good aim from being the single tool players can keep falling back on every single time. They’re forced to make decisions and think about their actions.[/QUOTE]

Moving is a wrong decision? They’re already punished by having their back turned to the enemy who has all the time in the world to pop a few shots into the back of their head, why do they need punished more?? Moving shouldn’t be punished, the ability to move and aim shouldn’t be punished… as I just stated, the player is already punished for their mistake, the attacking player should be punished for not capitalizing on that mistake even with flat spread… if he can’t hit a target from behind that’s not shooting back to begin with, if he can’t finish the player off in that situation then that’s HIS FAULT, not the enemies. Do they deserve to be given an additional fighting chance even after getting the drop for their lacking as a player? No! Do you honestly believe that good players get by purely on aiming ability alone? Seriously? Flat spread removes nothing you’ve mentioned, except the lottery outcome which I’d gladly do without.

Such a flawed, biased view. If you want to get better and perform better then earn it, don’t demand the system give you it because you’re too damn lazy.

(tokamak) #130

It’s pretty funny, with flat spread most situations will indeed boil down to whether you’re meeting each other in the front or in the back. That’s how far it simplifies the game. Once the spread turns dynamic a whole host of other factors start playing a role. The distance, the cover, what the player is doing, the weapons players are using, the postures of the players (giving cues on the decisions they’re about to make), and yeah, the mobility of the player.

Accuracy plays a strong role here, without accuracy you can’t reap the advantages you managed to stack up for yourself. But once again, it won’t be the single universal tool to solve all situations, a player need to be able to do more than that.

(.Chris.) #131

I want to be able to shoot whilst moving fast.

(tokamak) #132

And I want to be able to shoot through walls.

(DarkangelUK) #133

[QUOTE=tokamak;386721]It’s pretty funny, with flat spread most situations will indeed boil down to whether you’re meeting each other in the front or in the back. That’s how far it simplifies the game. Once the spread turns dynamic a whole host of other factors start playing a role. The distance, the cover, what the player is doing, the weapons players are using, the postures of the players (giving cues on the decisions they’re about to make), and yeah, the mobility of the player.

Accuracy plays a strong role here, without accuracy you can’t reap the advantages you managed to stack up for yourself. But once again, it won’t be the single universal tool to solve all situations, a player need to be able to do more than that.[/QUOTE]

At what point does the above not become a factor with flat spread? The distance: size of target, the cover: exposed hitbox, what the player is doing: ability to hit a moving target, the weapons: damage given, clip size, splash damage if applicable, predicting current role and mobility. Accuracy’s role is diminished and rendered frivolous if you force the system to diminish it with artificial spread, you’re handicapping a players ability and forcing them to under perform below their skill-set for quite frankly no good reason other than to give lesser skilled players a chance.

You of all people know the advantages of a player that can go beyond simply being able to kill the enemy, hell you’ve preached it enough that a game isn’t purely about shooting… that was never in question so i’ve got no idea why you’re bringing it up. If that’s the case, why are you so hell bent on gimping the ability to shoot in a shooter? If that’s all a player can do, then how is that a universal tool to solve all solutions? If a player can perform well in all aspects, then he deserves to reap the rewards for it and not be punished for being better just to even the field.

(tokamak) #134

I don’t think I can say anything more without turning into a stuck record and I doubt you’ll be able to say anything new as well.

(DarkangelUK) #135

Agreed, i’ll call it a day.

(Humate) #136

I want to hide behind rocks, and shoot.

(INF3RN0) #137

[QUOTE=tokamak;386712]

Be careful what you wish for. This is what Brink did it FORCED the players to work with their teammates, it became a determining factor.[/QUOTE]

Uhhhhhhhhh… no duh? We aren’t talking about how Brink put simplistic teamwork before all else. I was very clearly saying that if your struggling to beat someone with superior individual skill, you need to work with your teammates to gain the upper hand derp.

(tokamak) #138

Well that may be an angle not yet covered. Someone with a plan and high situational awareness is able to lay down ambushes, cover chokepoints and corners. The combat potency compared to incoming unsuspecting players will be so high that a prepared player (and yes, with the help of good aiming) is able to take on multiple hostiles.

This power inequality he build through tactics is something that you can’t reach with a flat spread and players of comparable cognitive skill. Dynamic spread gives players a means to find weak spots, flaws in the enemy’s integrity and come down hard on it.

And yes, this IS something I personally love. I absolutely love it when a player is able to find such a weak spot and topple all of it with a creative solution. Accuracy helps in it, without accuracy he would be less able to execute his ideas, but in the end it’s the ideas that are the end and the accuracy the means. Both his cognitive abilities as the ideas he wants to execute amplify his potential combat power way beyond what the average grunt is doing in a game.

It’s not just out-thinking individuals, it’s out-performing entire groups. W:ET had it, ETQW excelled at it and Brink completely ruined it.

(INF3RN0) #139

[QUOTE=tokamak;386721]It’s pretty funny, with flat spread most situations will indeed boil down to whether you’re meeting each other in the front or in the back. That’s how far it simplifies the game. Once the spread turns dynamic a whole host of other factors start playing a role. The distance, the cover, what the player is doing, the weapons players are using, the postures of the players (giving cues on the decisions they’re about to make), and yeah, the mobility of the player.

Accuracy plays a strong role here, without accuracy you can’t reap the advantages you managed to stack up for yourself. But once again, it won’t be the single universal tool to solve all situations, a player need to be able to do more than that.[/QUOTE]

Uhhhhhhhhhhhhhhhhhhhhhhhhhhhhhhhhhhhhhhhhhhhhhhhhhhhhhhhhhhhhhh. You can’t be serious? You talk about tactics and assume that non-dynamic spread leads to flat land aim battles? It’s always about having more cover, while also not limiting your movement. You don’t engage a sniper in the distance with a pistol. Your stance can benefit you. You think about how your engaging your enemies. What are you even talking about at this point? Are you still talking about what you think promod does? It’s like everything your saying can be summed up as “herpa derpa I don’t really know nothn but I’ma pretend like there’s a point to it all”…

(tokamak) #140

Don’t worry, I’m not saying that. It’s possible to have matches that have more going for them than just that. What I’m saying is that any nuances that go beyond running and gunning are AMPLIFIED by dynamic spread.