Do we really need aimpunch?

[waggishVoice]

It’s in the game because SD want to make it “their vision”
Translated:cash bait.

I dunno who the fuck thinks aimpunch and phantom represent good visions, but he’s probably blind.

[Keldrath]

[quote=“Leonine;48402”]I’ve read the first few pages of this thread and I still have no idea why flinching when shot is a bad thing.

You’re all just saying “I hate it”, “It’s bad” etc. etc. but not really explaining why the game would be better without it. Why should a sniper have rock steady aim under fire? Why should assault rifle mercs be able to ADS and pick off people with headshots unhindered even whilst being peppered from afar by SMG fire?

I’ve never been overly affected by aimpunch, I don’t even notice it, I just try to keep strafing and keep my aim steady, and it seems to work, I get far more kills than deaths. I honestly don’t even know what aimpunch is supposed to feel like, you’re all describing some hideous disabling mechanic that makes it impossible to play, I’ve seen nothing like that in DB.[/quote]

This was talked about earlier in the thread. It gives more of an advantage to the person who gets the first shot, to the person who ALREADY has a massive advantage to begin with, and shifts the gameplay into who shoots first trumping who shoots best. It’s a nerf to highly accurate players. Having high accuracy in a shooter is a skill, arguably the most important skill, as it is a shooter after all, where you shoot your enemy. A skill that should be rewarded, not punished.

[Resine]

Leave the Aim-punch when you scope your weapon like with the snipers, get rid of this for everyone weapon that is hip-fired.
Here, solved.

[Samniss_Arandeen]

A player who ambushes another player already has an edge. The ambusher is the one who decides the time and place of the engagement and has taken a chunk of the target’s health before the fight even begins. That’s already a sizable advantage. I’m all for rewarding successful ambushes, but every target must have a reasonable opportunity to react to the threat.

[titaniumCrouton]

[quote=“Harlot;48437”][quote=“Leonine;48402”]I’ve read the first few pages of this thread and I still have no idea why flinching when shot is a bad thing.

You’re all just saying “I hate it”, “It’s bad” etc. etc. but not really explaining why the game would be better without it. Why should a sniper have rock steady aim under fire? Why should assault rifle mercs be able to ADS and pick off people with headshots unhindered even whilst being peppered from afar by SMG fire?

I’ve never been overly affected by aimpunch, I don’t even notice it, I just try to keep strafing and keep my aim steady, and it seems to work, I get far more kills than deaths. I honestly don’t even know what aimpunch is supposed to feel like, you’re all describing some hideous disabling mechanic that makes it impossible to play, I’ve seen nothing like that in DB.[/quote]

As stated, it lowers the skill ceiling and raises the skill floor, effectively working to put everybody on equal ground. It’s also taken an emphasis off of headshot tracking, as it’s easier in most situations to just aim for the body and let aimpunch move your cursor up than aim for the head, get punched and do zero damage by missing.

Dirty Bomb is all about being mechanically superior. From having better movement to tracking the head better than your opponent. If you do those two things better than your opponent, you should win a 1v1 nearly every time. Now, an Emp9 Sparks can bodyshot you and, even if you’re the superior player, you lose that fight a third of the time. Even if you move better and track her head properly, her bodyshots from the Emp9 kick very hard.

Not only do you lose an emphasis on mechanics and headshot tracking, rhythm based weapons were negatively affected. The BR16 and Dreiss, which both require a fair amount of muscle memory for their recoil and firerate, struggle now when you have to constantly correct aim punch. Even the M4 lost out a little. Missing a few shots with it due to punch hurts. So basically, the aim punch rewards you for run n’ spray with a SMG.

It essentially goes against the most basic ideas of what Dirty Bomb is and was advertised as in closed beta. [/quote]

and this is why it needs to go. Not to mention it makes weapons the dries, m14grand, etc nigh unusable since there fire slower and already have a much higher recoil than other weapons due to there semi-auto/power nature and design.

If you get shot first while using one of these weapons, good luck ever getting a hit off. You’re screwed. Aim Punch makes an entire segment of weapons obsolete and useless as it is currently implemented to the point only really die hard fans of these weapons (such as myself) really choose to use them anymore.

[Bottlecaps]

Um this game and it’s longer time to kills make having aim-punch a hindrance. There’s no need to for it in this game in my opinion!

[LifeupOmega]

It’s been a while, we still don’t. It’s awful. Pansy summed it up better than I could.

[_retired]

I’m stunned.

So some people want more recoil to weapons because it requires more skill but still don’t want aim punch because somehow it lowers skill ceiling?

Interesting logic. Sounds like BS to me.

[Ghosthree3]

So some people want more recoil to weapons because it requires more skill but still don’t want aim punch because somehow it lowers skill ceiling?

I want neither.

[_retired]

[quote=“Ghosthree3;65556”]I want neither.[/quote]That actually makes more sense then if you want neither.
I think it’s design choice to favour first strike but I would be glad either way.

It’s just rather strange in general though that people talk about lot about “skills”, headshots and how you must “get good” by adjusting your fire according to weapon’s recoil, your movement, opponent movement etc. but when it comes to someone shooting you especially first (catching you off guard since you are too busy targeting than paying attention) it’s big deal they get punished for it with aimpunch.

Won’t removing it make suppressive fire less useful?

[Ghosthree3]

First strike is already favoured by being the first strike though. How much advantage do you want to give.

Also while I would rather neither aim punch nor recoil, I don’t think it’s realistic for this game. I mean in Quake you can get away with it because the guns are balanced by situation rather than direct comparison. The guns in this game are pretty much all the same between the types so there has to be SOMETHING that sets them apart I guess.

[Leonine]

[quote=“Harlot;48437”]

Dirty Bomb is all about being mechanically superior. From having better movement to tracking the head better than your opponent. [/quote]

If this is true, then why is aimpunch bad? Having to compensate and fix your tracking better than the opponent makes you ‘mechanically superior’ doesn’t it? I use the Dreiss, BR and now the Gran a great deal, and they work well - for me - by compensating for flinch and choosing my shots. I don’t spray, I don’t tap-tap-tap, I aim, I shoot, I aim, I shoot. It works well. In my opinion, aimpunch does not interfere terribly with the intended use of single-shot rifles. If you’re trying to shoot several times a second with the Dreiss then I imagine it’s awful but that’s not, in my opinion, the intended use of the rifle.

What it does interfere with, rightfully so in my opinion, is M4 mercs for example, who spray from a distance and still maintain good accuracy - unless you are shooting at them. Without aimpunch I don’t think SMG mercs would stand a chance at anything beyond medium range.

I’d also argue against the idea that “If you shoot first, you already have the advantage.” - in other games, sure, but this is a class-based shooter. If you’re playing Sparks with an Emp-9, to use your example, and you turn a corner and react quicker, shooting first, you might think you have the advantage.

Except you don’t, because you’re shooting a Fragger and in the second that you had the advantage before he reacts you only reduced his health to 120. He’s now shooting at you with his M4, doing more damage, with higher health. Where exactly is your advantage without aimpunch?

Maybe you think that’s wrong - maybe you think a Sparks should never be able to kill a Fragger, but I personally do think it should at least be possible.

Not to mention instagib snipers, turrets, one-shot chopper kills and so on. I’m not exactly against the idea of aimpunch being removed, but I would like to know what people think the alternative is to those situations. What system should be introduced in place of aimpunch in order to address the problems that aimpunch attempts to solve?

[Ghosthree3]

If this is true, then why is aimpunch bad? Having to compensate and fix your tracking better than the opponent makes you ‘mechanically superior’ doesn’t it?

No because aim punch is essentially random. At any given moment you may or may not have to adjust your aim, you just don’t know. The amount to adjust is also sort of random.

Even recoil is more skilled because you can learn how to counter it mechanically consistently. That cannot be said for aim punch. The counter to aim punch is aim for the chest/high chest as soon as you may get hit and hope for luck headshots.

[watsyurdeal]

Alright, let’s get down to the nitty gritty of this

Why do people not want Aim Punch?

Simple answer, it throws off their aim, more complex answer, it throws off their aim by physically forcing the crosshair to go up. This isn’t the same as something like visual feedback, like the muzzle flash letting you know your gun is firing, or the screen glowing red letting you know you took damage. The visual kick of aim punch would still serve the purpose it needs to, by disorienting the player enough to let them know they’ve been hit.

So what’s the problem? The problem is it actually moves the crosshair, let me put it to you like this, it’s like having a cat who will intentionally tug at your mouse every time you get hit. It’s not something you account for, Recoil, you can control, as Counter Strike has proven, but you cannot accumulate for the aim punch because it’s random, and even more so, you can not possibly know every direction in which you are getting shot from.

So let’s say you’re trying to fight someone, and then you get shot from behind, you’d not only die, but get denied the kill, not because you died before you could get that last shot off, but because your aim was thrown upwards, causing that shot that could have been game changing to miss.

It’s frustrating, plain and simple, and people who argue it’s more realisitc…yea, cause the REVIVR is realistic, as is Refractive Armor, or taking a sticky grenade to the face and not exploding into bits and pieces. That whole argument is shit, and you need to just shut up.

The point is that if they want this game to be competitive, they need to let players feel like THEY are in control of their losses, NOT RNG or the game’s mechanics. Competitve players do not like randomness because they can not build habits, they can not practice and get better at something that changes the rules every time it happens. There are certain things that are just the nature of the game and how it works, but aim punch isn’t one of them, there’s no reason it can’t be tweaked to give you nothing but visual feedback, and not affect your crosshair rising or moving. The only thing that should do that is recoil, why? Because the player CAN compensate for that, they cannot typically compensate for aim punch.

Also, Pansy nailed this topic, go watch her video on it.

[Ardez1]

I could of sworn this conversation had finally died… lol

[_retired]

I sense lot of this “I shoot and someone dies and I don’t pay attention to anything else” type of thing here. It sounds many of the players want kind of “controlled enviroment” with less randomness and less need to adapt to the enviroment/possible random factors (even the other teams other players).

There people think “it’s not cool” when someone surprises you as you aren’t paying enough attention someone shooting to your back or that suppressive fire might make you miss your killshot.

Never believed players of Dirty Bomb where so much control freaks.

EDIT: You may dislike what I’m saying but it’s still true.

[Ghosthree3]

Holy shit your ignorance is over flowing. Did you read any of the recent posts or watch the video?

[_retired]

[quote=“Ghosthree3;65587”]Holy shit your ignorance is over flowing. Did you read any of the recent posts or watch the video?[/quote]And what exactly is your problem about what I said?

Please don’t call me ignorant (without actual reasoning) so I don’t have to call a mod.

EDIT: And I watched the video and read Watsyurdeal post before I commented. It’s rather clear: More one on ones based into learned habits and controlled enviroment over period of time with less randomness which might affect gameplay or perfomance there and now.
Even though I answered the poll in favour of it, it isn’t big issue for me but definately something that has more effects than those that are used against it.

Some people should really learn to relax a bit.

[watsyurdeal]

[quote=“crabbyDimension;65583”]I sense lot of this “I shoot and someone dies and I don’t pay attention to anything else” type of thing here. It sounds many of the players want kind of “controlled enviroment” with less randomness and less need to adapt to the enviroment/possible random factors (even the other teams other players).

There people think “it’s not cool” when someone surprises you as you aren’t paying enough attention someone shooting to your back or that suppressive fire might make you miss your killshot.

Never believed players of Dirty Bomb where so much control freaks.

[/quote]

7:20

Watch that, and explain to me why that’s fair. When someone is shooting you from behind, they already are damaging you, they’re already in a blindspot that you have to turn around and engage them to deal with, why should they ruin a fire fight with another player? Why should they not only rob you of your life but your accuracy too?

[Ghosthree3]

And what exactly is your problem about what I said?

My problem with what you said is you suggested - not even suggested, out right stated - that people want it gone because they want the game to be easier and that they were freaks.
You told people to adapt to a random element, which cannot be adapted to.
You suggested that it’s a good thing that getting crossfired eliminates a players chance at winning a battle rather than simply reducing it from taking double damage thereby making defense overpowered.

You clearly have no competitive experience, or rather, no competitive experience that’s worth anything. Yet you say these things like they are fact. It’s bad, and you should feel bad.

Please don’t call me ignorant (without actual reasoning) so I don’t have to call a mod.

Lold.

EDIT:

Some people should really learn to relax a bit.

Some people should learn how the game works.