Sniper

[INF3RN0]

[QUOTE=Ragoo;210724]
Imho the Sniper Rifle thing is just a really bad exploit since it destroys the balance of Railgun and Sniper Rifle, if the Sniper Rifle has no waiting time between shots.
I have seen a video of someone doing it and you can really easily kill multiple enemies with this.
I do not want that![/QUOTE]

Ok so I think this is where DarkAngel is caught up. The original problem had to do with going unscoped to scope and getting a kill. If you throw in the unscope after and go back to scope and shoot again, it should be equal to the relative time it would take to fire 2 shots scoped. This is what I was trying to explain to DarkAngel, but was not the original topic of debate. The trick you saw has to do with a weapon switch bug that will allow you to shoot faster, but that is completely different from what this was about. Unscope–>scope resulting in a kill is fair play, and as I said before does not require an unscope to result in a kill. Using the unscope to use the weapon switch bug to fire the sniper rifle faster would be something I would be more willing to call an exploit, which is why I do not go that far when I use the sniper rifle.

[INF3RN0]

[QUOTE=Ragoo;210724]
Anyway, regarding balancing in Brink I think even if there were Sniper Rifles (and quickzoom) headshots shouldn’t oneshot heavies because this would be lame since they are so big and slow.[/QUOTE]

The significance of character size is something I am really interested in learning more about. Hopefully it will be in the next game play video because I think this could either be a waaaay cool idea or lead to some woooooah balance issues. If your head is 2x as thick then it should obviously take 2x the bullets .

[Apoc]

[quote=DarkangelUK;210728]Doublepostftw: I mean seriously… if the discussion didn’t involve quickscope, why the hell would inferno make a HUGE walloftext post explaining what it was! And you keep talking about how it’s not an exploit… use your bloody head man!

Here ive made it easy for you, my 1st post on the subject is here, so go from 47 onwards and the talk from me, inferno and tokamak is ALL about quickscope… so don’t bloody say i’ve taken it off subject when i’ve kept on that debate from the get go.[/quote]

Here is a link to my first post, which coincidentally was also the first post of the thread, and as such tends to set out the topic of discussion. I apologise for trying to drag the thread back on topic.

Please note, no where in there does it say please discuss what annoys you about etqw. My point is merely that sniping has a purpose indoor and out. The reason im getting so annoyed is that the topic has now turned into, “is it unfair to quickscope” ok now thats fair enough, people can discuss what they want etc, but if we apply that to the original topic, and take into consideration your post earlier saying that SD guys think quickscoping is an exploit, then im sure, since they are making the game, they wouldnt make the same “mistake” twice. All im hoping for from brink is a sniper, with mid range zoom, about 1 shot a second, with an insta kill headshot (debatable for if heavies should be 1 shot). Im not asking they make it possible for quickscoping. It would be nice, as it adds a fun skillfull ellement to the game, but id be happy with just a normal sniper. Indoor sniping can be done perfectly fine without quickscoping.

[BioSnark]

While we’re pointing out posts, I’d like to point to the answer to your question that was on the first page and that was seemingly skipped over.

[quote=H0RSE;210290]Some quotes on sniping in Brink:

[I]“We don’t have any really hardcore sniping in this game. There is a more accurate rifle that fires a bit slower, but the whole sniper alley thing just isn’t enough fun for enough players.”

“There won’t be any snipers poppin’ headshots from 2 miles down the road…When you and I are killing each other, I can see the whites of your eyes.”

“…we just want to have a level of intensity, where it’s very, very fast, and you don’t have to go very far before you’re right up against the enemy.”[/I][/quote]

[INF3RN0]

Sniper is a yes imo. How it meshes with the game dynamics will be an issue for almost every weapon I think. Need to know more about how much that is going to affect game play SD . Hate to quote myself, but these were my thoughts relating to why snipers are important in any game and how I kinda envision them in Brink.

I think that a sniper limited to mid-range combat would add to the tactical mix. Snipers in a tactical sense most commonly tend to be stationary. They are good at breaking up stationary crossfires and making another team play less aggressively. An example would be having a guy at a top of a hill firing down so that only his head is visible. The spread dynamics of a game tend to make it harder for you to hit the less exposed guy at the top, which is where a sniper comes in handy. This is the same situation when you have someone on level ground who is abusing physical cover. I do agree that having a sniper 100 miles away from you can make it annoying to kill them, but having them within your range will force them to have to be effective enough to stick with it.

[INF3RN0]

While we’re pointing out posts, I’d like to point to the answer to your question that was on the first page and that was seemingly skipped over.

It seems to imply that there will still be sniping in the game, just not as it was in QW. I think. Maybe like the wolf sniper which has a fairly fast RoF and gets HS kills when scoped right?

[Shiv]

And in counterstrikes case less aggressivly means niether team wants to move because they have a shiny 1 shot snipers on all the corners so games take the full time limit almost every time and the first team to move is normally the loser.

yes, very static.

It worked fine in quakewars but tbh brinks distances and amount of cover looks closer to counterstrike. But we will have more than one life enabling us to over run snipers, still… headshot kill/body hurts would be fine i guess. Apart from team mates mopping up what the sniper hits… so the team sits with a sniper anyway and goes straight back to static.

[Apoc]

While we’re pointing out posts, I’d like to point to the answer to your question that was on the first page and that was seemingly skipped over.

I saw, i just wanted to see if the majority of people wanted it etc, since theres always the opportunity to add weapons and shiz in later patch’s

[INF3RN0]

[QUOTE=Shiv;210746]And in counterstrikes case less aggressivly means niether team wants to move because they have a shiny 1 shot snipers on all the corners so games take the full time limit almost every time and the first team to move is normally the loser.

yes, very static.

It worked fine in quakewars but tbh brinks distances and amount of cover looks closer to counterstrike. But we will have more than one life enabling us to over run snipers, still… headshot kill/body hurts would be fine i guess. Apart from team mates mopping up what the sniper hits… so the team sits with a sniper anyway and goes straight back to static.[/QUOTE]

CS is fun, but there’s a reason why AWP is disabled on half the servers lol. I like the QW sniper damage system as well. Forcing snipers to be in closer proximity to regular grunt enemies would be an improvement on that though, so it could turn out well. NEED MORE FOOTAGE /drool.

[Apoc]

[quote=Shiv;210746]And in counterstrikes case less aggressivly means niether team wants to move because they have a shiny 1 shot snipers on all the corners so games take the full time limit almost every time and the first team to move is normally the loser.

yes, very static.

[/quote]

By the looks of the maps, and setting, it looks like there are tons of different ways to go, hopefully there wont be just a couple of choke points that people can camp.

[BioSnark]

It seems to imply that there will still be sniping in the game, just not as it was in QW. I think. Maybe like the wolf sniper which has a fairly fast RoF and gets HS kills when scoped right?

Kay, did more digging and here’s moar!

[quote=Rahdo;204842]1. Will be in the game sniper rifle or weapons with zoom and kill player with one shoot ?

by default, no gun is powerful enough to kill anyone with one bullet. BUT, there are in-game upgrades to temporarily increase the power of the gun, and equally, there are upgrades to increase the length of one’s life meter. So there’s kind of an escalating arms race of weapon power vs. life power that helps ensure that every encounter is unique, and the tide of battle can turn at any moment.[/quote]

in-game upgrades

They talked a bit about … erm… ‘buffing’. Basically your class can ‘buff’ other classes, an engineer can increase your weapons damage, medic can increase your health, soldier can give more ammo etc. All this comes at a cost, of what they call ‘pips’. You can buff yourself, but it costs more… so this adds to the cooperation of the game where you buff me and i’ll buff you (oh dear). It says 2 pips to buff yourself, or 1 pip to buff a team mate. The odd one out obviously is the Operative, but what he lacks towards the team he gives towards the enemy as he can spot undercover enemy Operatives.

Edit: And if you weren’t here for the discussions of body types. They have different durability:

• How many bullets to kill someone?
  not very many, though it varies with guns and upgrades and body types and all that. But people have a tendency to go down fast unless they’re playing smart.

[INF3RN0]

I hope the next footage release gives some good explanations about the effects of all the variables of the game. I mean I like the originality and complexity, but I hope they don’t get ahead of themselves too much. As long as this game is going to get better support than with activision I have hope lol.

[jazevec]

[QUOTE=Apoc;210604]All fps games are aim based.
Hence the name

I challenge you to find a non aim based fps with a larger player base than aim based fps…tbh im just interested to see what you consider a non aim fps…[/QUOTE]

Haha, that’s easy.

Thief, System Shock, Tribes (it’s more about movement and prediction), Warsow, Borderlands (about grind), Portal, Half-Life 2 (story-based; there could be HL2 without aiming but not HL2 without story), Penumbra (essentially no killing), Splinter Cell. Left 4 Dead can also be counted here, because you wouldn’t get far with an aimbot alone.

[Reanimator]

Borderlands is definitely aim-based :rolleyes:

[tokamak]

lol in all those shooters you’re toast if you can’t aim. And Splinter Cell is not a fps.

Ah well, this is going nowhere.

[Stroggafier]

In the interest of bringing things back on topic…I do believe Brink is headed away from aim as number one skill in the game, to a large extent, following the examples cited by @jazevec. This means that the mechanics of accurized shooting, such as sniper, and scope have less of a place in the game, or “aim” must be revamped in order to enhance close-in combat at the expense of headshots, big single shot damage and other sniper type mechanics.

Although “close” is a relative term, close-in combat values weapons with short range, rapid fire, and wide spread. Accuracy is not a big factor. So, any form of accurarized firing, or as I’ve said before, any focus on “aiming” is contrary to this game dynamic. It will be replaced by quick attack movement, superior defense or healing, bigger spread damage (do you “aim” a grenade?), stealth, speed, better knives, etc.

[tokamak]

Indeed, remove all of those and you have quake 3 instagib.

[INF3RN0]

[QUOTE=Stroggafier;210834]In the interest of bringing things back on topic…I do believe Brink is headed away from aim as number one skill in the game, to a large extent, following the examples cited by @jazevec. This means that the mechanics of accurized shooting, such as sniper, and scope have less of a place in the game, or “aim” must be revamped in order to enhance close-in combat at the expense of headshots, big single shot damage and other sniper type mechanics.

Although “close” is a relative term, close-in combat values weapons with short range, rapid fire, and wide spread. Accuracy is not a big factor. So, any form of accurarized firing, or as I’ve said before, any focus on “aiming” is contrary to this game dynamic. It will be replaced by quick attack movement, superior defense or healing, bigger spread damage (do you “aim” a grenade?), stealth, speed, better knives, etc.[/QUOTE]

Mods and patches can fix spreads, damage, etc. One thing that comes with this new form of movement, that I have still not heard confirmation on, is how it is going to affect the hit reg. I can only imagine I will be spending my time sliding from left to right and launching grenades at enemies that can’t seem to kill me…

[shirosae]

Responses to the entire thread:

Sniping Weapons:
I’d like to see them, but not like how ETQW’s sniper rifles are intended to be used, obviously, cause the maps wouldn’t support it. I’d quite like a short-medium range sniper rifle which played like the quickscoped sniping playstyle from ETQW. Have the ironsights slide smoothly in with a ramping up of accuracy, put a recharge on it like ETQW railgun, tweak the sighting speed so it’s not imba. Let people pull out a sidearm immediately, restrict one-shot kills to headshots.

Quickscoping:
Behold the logic on display in this thread: Short-range sniping should not be intentionally included in Brink, because short-range sniping in ETQW relied on an unintended glitch. This is some weapons grade stupid right here, folks.

Quickscoping is an exploit:
Don’t care because it isn’t imba.

Sniping kills games like Counter-Strike and I want Brink to be fast:
Long range sniping slows stuff way down. Close quarters sniping speeds stuff up, if anything. It’s much more like ranged-backstabbing than it is like regular sniping, in that it requires the player doing it to do all sorts of movement and evasion and timing to make it work

Brink doesn’t have aim as it’s defining skill:
Don’t be silly. It’s an FPS where you use guns to shoot at people. The console version has that gravity well aim-assist thing, which isn’t as effective as giving you regular console FPS autoaim. If that’s isn’t an attempt to keep aim important, I don’t know what is.

Movement in Brink:
The impression I’ve got is that SD were very aware of the movement/hitbox/stuttering issues in ETQW and wanted to fix those, to the extent that they rewrote the graphics engine etc.

With the movement I’m more worried about how it feels, compared to regular trickjumping. I’m (very) mildly worried that it’ll feel somewhat empty and soulless, like most games that don’t have any trick jumping. Just circle-jumping, that’s all I want cry

[tokamak]

[QUOTE=shirosae;210844]Brink doesn’t have aim as it’s defining skill:
Don’t be silly. It’s an FPS where you use guns to shoot at people. The console version has that gravity well aim-assist thing, which isn’t as effective as giving you regular console FPS autoaim. If that’s isn’t an attempt to keep aim important, I don’t know what is.[/QUOTE]

It´s important but not defining. Aim helps you win the game but it doesn´t win you the game alone. Hence the instagib comparison where it´s all about aiming (okay and movement). But never mind that, it was a stupid digression anyway.

Agreed with most of what you said.

I would love to have tweakable guns, you can add stuff to it, but at a price (like in COD and R6) the more you add to it, the heavier the gun becomes the more spread you get. In R6 this was incredibly fun as you find yourself going back to the drawing board frequently to get a gun that performed optimally for what you planned to do with it.

Then again I have no idea how this plays out in brink, maybe a set of clear and defined weapons is good enough and it doesn´t need all the shades between them.