Snipers

[aimology]

[QUOTE=tokamak;197795]Okay granted, it can be difficult, but that still doesn’t make it balanced. The quick scope tactic makes the combat highly bipolar. The battle can end in one shot, this means that only the quickscoper decides how this battle will end. You can’t kill him before he has made his shot, if he hits, he has won, if he misses, then he’s likely to have lost. This is different for other guys; by using assault rifles or shotguns at least both sides will have a chance, this means that both persons will have an influence on the outcome of the battle depending on both their skills and not just that of one person.

Quickscoping might not be overpowered or anything, but the fun in it certainly only lies by the one wielding the sniper rifle, and not the one at the receiving end who has no control whatsoever.

Another thing is that, without it, no sane person would ever bring a sniper to a close quarters fight. It would simply have way too much spread to make it a reliable weapon. This is the way SD balanced the sniper out of the close quarters and back to the longer ranges of engagement. Quickscoping is and will always be a way around of this balancing feature.[/QUOTE]

So by your theory, you make the point of using a sniper rifle useless by slowing it down? Thats pretty dumb. I think the recoil should be crazy hard and you should not be allowed to hit a target with a “no scope” but quick scoping should be allowed. Pretty sure in real life they have multiple chambers, that hold more then 1 bullet and its basically a quick scope. If someone wants to take it up close and hit a headshot by “zooming” then thats his problem, because most likely he wont win if the other guy can actually aim. But if he some how has the time to zoom while getting shot and hits the guy in the face, he deserves the win. Nice try… A sniper should be able to get 1 shot off if he is being rushed. He shouldnt have to wait for a ridiculous reload time.

[darthmob]

[QUOTE=shirosae;197794]Is it significantly different to how it worked in CS 1.5? I didn’t really mind it back then since the bonus wasn’t that much really, although it annoyed me that it was a bonus for such a skill-less activation. And I preferred DoD anyway :P[/QUOTE]To be honest I have no idea. The only reason I played CS was because other people played it as well. It’s way too slow and features too much waiting for my taste.

[QUOTE=tokamak;197795]Another thing is that, without it, no sane person would ever bring a sniper to a close quarters fight. It would simply have way too much spread to make it a reliable weapon. This is the way SD balanced the sniper out of the close quarters and back to the longer ranges of engagement. Quickscoping is and will always be a way around of this balancing feature.[/QUOTE]These things make multiplayer interesting. There are always people who think outside the box and that’s how the gameplay evolves. I would not play a game for years if it was always the same. You could complain about people jumping over the walls on Volcano and that they are exploiting the game’s physics. You don’t do that - you adapt your playstyle accordingly and find ways to counter it.

[shirosae]

[QUOTE=tokamak;197795]Okay granted, it can be difficult, but that still doesn’t make it balanced. The quick scope tactic makes the combat highly bipolar. The battle can end in one shot, this means that only the quickscoper decides how this battle will end. You can’t kill him before he has made his shot, if he hits, he has won, if he misses, then he’s likely to have lost.

This is different for other guys; by using assault rifles or shotguns at least both sides will have a chance, this means that both persons will have an influence on the outcome of the battle depending on both their skills and not just that of one person.[/quote]

In this regard it’s not very different at all; If I have an AR and you have a Lacerator, and I get my consecutive headshots in first, it doesn’t matter what you do, because my gun fires faster. If my aim is on I win, regardless of what you do.

Quickscoping might not be overpowered or anything, but the fun in it certainly only lies by the one wielding the sniper rifle, and not the one at the receiving end who has no control whatsoever.

You could say exactly the same thing about the one in the Tormentor shooting repairing engineers behind the MCP, or the one with the backstabs, or the one with the Plasma Arty covering the approach to the EMP on Sewer, or the one with the Obliterator. There are plenty of ways to guarantee a kill, some of which are as simple as lunging at a disarming engineer and pressing mouse1.

Should we also remove backstabs, because all the fun lies with the person backstabbing, and not with the person disarming/planting/hacking/whatever?

No, because asymmetry is such an endemic part of the game that it exists everywhere outside quickscoping too.

Another thing is that, without it, no sane person would ever bring a sniper to a close quarters fight. It would simply have way too much spread to make it a reliable weapon. This is the way SD balanced the sniper out of the close quarters and back to the longer ranges of engagement. Quickscoping is and will always be a way around of this balancing feature.

So what? I don’t care what SD intended the snipers for. My main concern is what’s balanced and what’s imbalanced. We apparently both agree that indoors sniping is not overpowered, so as far as I’m concerned it’s fine.

To be honest I have no idea. The only reason I played CS was because other people played it as well. It’s way too slow and features too much waiting for my taste.

I played CS for a couple of years when I started the PC gaming thing, though moved onto DoD quite early (beta .31 rawr). Spawn Waves, capture the flag with push/pull, fewer pr0/scrub players, it was great. I’d no doubt have loved RTCW/W:ET even more, but sadly my PC didn’t have the hardware to run it well, and I didn’t have the tweaking knowledge at the time to compensate

[tokamak]

You could say exactly the same thing about the one in the Tormentor shooting repairing engineers behind the MCP, or the one with the backstabs, or the one with the Plasma Arty covering the approach to the EMP on Sewer, or the one with the Obliterator. There are plenty of ways to guarantee a kill, some of which are as simple as lunging at a disarming engineer and pressing mouse1.

Should we also remove backstabs, because all the fun lies with the person backstabbing, and not with the person disarming/planting/hacking/whatever?

No, because asymmetry is such an endemic part of the game that it exists everywhere outside quickscoping too.

Those are all not close quarter combat but mostly outside in which a myriad of other factors enter the equation.

Even the guaranteed back stab comes at a price of having to get into a disguise, not being able to shoot and making sure you’re not getting noticed while you walk around with someone else’s tag.

So what? I don’t care what SD intended the snipers for. My main concern is what’s balanced and what’s imbalanced. We apparently both agree that indoors sniping is not overpowered, so as far as I’m concerned it’s fine.

No it’s not overpowered, it’s just an incredibly lame way to get kills. No matter how you spin it, the quickscope is a way to avoid the spread from shooting the sniper rifle in an unscoped mode. It means it’s an exploit to avoid the way it was balanced namely WITH the huge spread of being unscoped.

[murka]

I’ll share an example of quick-scoping then: link

Now tell me that this isn’t a too good advantage.

[shirosae]

Those are all not close quarter combat but mostly outside in which a myriad of other factors enter the equation.

Wait a minute. The problem with quickscoped railgun headshots is that it puts the outcome of the fight entirely into the hands of one player, and that is a terrible thing… except in every other situation where it happens?

Even the guaranteed back stab comes at a price of having to get into a disguise, not being able to shoot and making sure you’re not getting noticed while you walk around with someone else’s tag.

Why would you go through the hassle of getting a disguise and waiting to backstab a disarming engineer? Just approach from an unusual angle, quarter circle jump and mouse1 into their spine.

No it’s not overpowered, it’s just an incredibly lame way to get kills. No matter how you spin it, the quickscope is a way to avoid the spread from shooting the sniper rifle in an unscoped mode. It means it’s an exploit to avoid the way it was balanced namely WITH the huge spread of being unscoped.

So essentially, after all this, all you have is an appeal to emotion.

You feel that quickscoped sniping is lame. I don’t.

[QUOTE=murka10;197846]I’ll share an example of quick-scoping then: link

Now tell me that this isn’t a too good advantage.[/QUOTE]

We’re talking about the quickscope rightclick, left click thing. Not about the rapid chambering thing (or the macros you use to do it).

The former I’m fine with. The latter is absolutely ridiculous.

[tokamak]

[QUOTE=shirosae;197849]Wait a minute. The problem with quickscoped railgun headshots is that it puts the outcome of the fight entirely into the hands of one player, and that is a terrible thing… except in every other situation where it happens?
[/QUOTE]

Yes, because in every other situation there’s more going on than two people meeting up in close quarters. No undoubtedly there are instances where close quarter combat can be a bit more complicated but it will never come close to an engagement on open ground involving everything the game has to offer.

Why would you go through the hassle of getting a disguise and waiting to backstab a disarming engineer? Just approach from an unusual angle, quarter circle jump and mouse1 into their spine.

You’re right. It still doesn’t take away that A: the target needs to be in melee range, and B: you need to hit him in his back.

Unlike the sniper exploit, this can lead to awesome situations.

So essentially, after all this, all you have is an appeal to emotion.

If you got reading problems. Yes.

[QUOTE=murka10;197846]I’ll share an example of quick-scoping then: link

Now tell me that this isn’t a too good advantage.[/QUOTE]

You should upload that one to Youtube. It’s a great example.

[shirosae]

Yes, because in every other situation there’s more going on than two people meeting up in close quarters. No undoubtedly there are instances where close quarter combat can be a bit more complicated but it will never come close to an engagement on open ground involving everything the game has to offer.

Yes, I’m sure the players being backstabbed and the engineers being Tormented feel much more able to influence the outcome of their death because the rest of the server that magically disappears every time a railgunner starts quickscoping is present.

You’re right. It still doesn’t take away that A: the target needs to be in melee range, and B: you need to hit him in his back.

As opposed to A: the target needs to be close enough that you can accurately hit them unscoped, and B: you need to hit them in their face.

[QUOTE=tokamak;197850]Unlike the sniper exploit, this can lead to awesome situations.

http://img.photobucket.com/albums/v58/Gorkermorker/shot00035copy.jpg[/quote]

It’s a medic train completely negating the presence of an Infiltrator, awesome! If only that Infiltrator had some kind of explosive, maybe a thrown fragmentation device, that could perform AoE kills.

If you got reading problems. Yes.

You: It’s isn’t overpowered, it’s an exploit. And I don’t like exploits because they’re exploits.
Me: So you have nothing more than a feeling that they’re bad?
You: You can’t read!
Me: /facepalm This is what you just wrote.
You: That’s not what I wrote at all!
Me: The discussion is completely recorded on these pages, anyone can read it.
You: They’ll find that I have provided only concrete arguments that prove that exploits are exploits and therefore are exploits!
Me: Urgh.

You should upload that one to Youtube. It’s a great example.

It’s a great example of what we haven’t been talking about:

Clip 1: He misses the first quickscope headshot, and has to use the quick chamber to do a second bodyshot. He gets the next two quickscoped headshots, only because he does the quick chamber.

Clip 2: He doesn’t do any quickscoping.

Clip 3: The first two kills are normal scoping with the quick chamber. The third shot is a quickscope, but is a miss, and the kill happens with the SMP.

[tokamak]

[QUOTE=shirosae;197851]Yes, I’m sure the players being backstabbed and the engineers being Tormented feel much more able to influence the outcome of their death because the rest of the server that magically disappears every time a railgunner starts quickscoping is present.
[/QUOTE]
Definitely. In close quarter combat there’s automatically much less going on than on open ground. Especially open ground surrounding a main objective.

As opposed to A: the target needs to be close enough that you can accurately hit them unscoped, and B: you need to hit them in their face.

Yes, hardly a limitation with zero spread.

It’s a medic train completely negating the presence of an Infiltrator, awesome! If only that Infiltrator had some kind of explosive, maybe a thrown fragmentation device, that could perform AoE kills.

It doesn’t matter. The engineer got killed and we won.

You: It’s isn’t overpowered, it’s an exploit. And I don’t like exploits because they’re exploits.
Me: So you have nothing more than a feeling that they’re bad?
You: You can’t read!
Me: /facepalm This is what you just wrote.
You: That’s not what I wrote at all!
Me: The discussion is completely recorded on these pages, anyone can read it.
You: They’ll find that I have provided only concrete arguments that prove that exploits are exploits and therefore are exploits!
Me: Urgh.

Exploits are bad because they’re not taken into account by the developers while they’re balancing the game. The quickscope is definitely something they’ve missed.

It’s a great example of what we haven’t been talking about:

Clip 1: He misses the first quickscope headshot, and has to use the quick chamber to do a second bodyshot. He gets the next two quickscoped headshots, only because he does the quick chamber.

Clip 2: He doesn’t do any quickscoping.

Clip 3: The first two kills are normal scoping with the quick chamber. The third shot is a quickscope, but is a miss, and the kill happens with the SMP.

Oh I definitely agree that the video showed some awesome proper sniping as well. It actually serves as a nice contrast next to the lame turd that is quickscoping.

[shirosae]

Definitely. In close quarter combat there’s automatically much less going on than on open ground. Especially open ground surrounding a main objective.

Ah, so the other things going on is why Engineers become immune to Strocket Fire outside when they’re repairing a moving MCP. No wait, hang on, they don’t; they’re even more of a sitting duck than someone is against an indoors railgun.

[QUOTE=tokamak;197795]Okay granted, it can be difficult, but that still doesn’t make it balanced. The quick scope tactic makes the combat highly bipolar. The battle can end in one shot, this means that only the quickscoper decides how this battle will end. You can’t kill him before he has made his shot, if he hits, he has won, if he misses, then he’s likely to have lost. This is different for other guys; by using assault rifles or shotguns at least both sides will have a chance, this means that both persons will have an influence on the outcome of the battle depending on both their skills and not just that of one person.

Quickscoping might not be overpowered or anything, but the fun in it certainly only lies by the one wielding the sniper rifle, and not the one at the receiving end who has no control whatsoever.[/quote]

You’re right. It still doesn’t take away that A: the target needs to be in melee range, and B: you need to hit him in his back.

Yes, hardly a limitation with zero spread.

So indoors sniping can be difficult, but that doesn’t matter since your problem isn’t that indoors sniping is easy, it’s that it puts the outcome of a fight into the hands of one player.

And backstabbing isn’t exactly the same, because backstabbing requires that you be within a certain range, and hit a certain target.

Except that it’s not like that, because indoors railgunning is easy with zero spread.

Except that it’s not because it’s easy, it’s because it puts the outcome of a fight into the hands of one player.

And backstabbing isn’t exactly the same, because backstabbing requires that you be within a certain range, and hit a certain target.

Except that it’s not like that, because indoors railgunning is easy with zero spread.

Repeat to taste.

It doesn’t matter. The engineer got killed and we won.

So all a situation has to contain is you winning to qualify as ‘awesome’?

Exploits are bad because they’re not taken into account by the developers while they’re balancing the game. The quickscope is definitely something they’ve missed.

Oh I definitely agree that the video showed some awesome proper sniping as well. It actually serves as a nice contrast next to the lame turd that is quickscoping.

Wait wait wait.

So you think the right click, left click quickscope thing is terrible, and that the rapid chamber thing where you get to bypass the normal sniper refire rate is ‘awesome proper sniping’?

So making an upclose sniper shot is awful, but being able to fire your sniper rifle like a semi auto is fantastic? I think we’re done here.

[timestart]

[quote]As opposed to A: the target needs to be close enough that you can accurately hit them unscoped, and B: you need to hit them in their face.

Yes, hardly a limitation with zero spread.

[/quote]
Read that again.

[tokamak]

So making an upclose sniper shot is awful, but being able to fire your sniper rifle like a semi auto is fantastic? I think we’re done here.

I didn’t mean the exploit, just the sniping on it’s own. I didn’t even realise it was another exploit. I’m as much opposed to that as I am to the quickscope.

The main point still stands. If SD wanted people to fire their snipers with zero spread they would’ve implemented that in the first place. The quickscope is only a way to bypass that and make the gun a more versatile if not stronger weapon than it was intended to be.

[Nail]

seems we all agree, snipers are useless, but the weapon is freakin’ awesome

but for balance, just remove crosshair when unscoped

[tokamak]

Hey, I like that. Though that would cause all the geeks to put blue tag on their screen.

[shirosae]

[QUOTE=Nail;197866]seems we all agree, snipers are useless, but the weapon is freakin’ awesome

but for balance, just remove crosshair when unscoped[/QUOTE]

It appears that you may have misinterpreted my position.

Snipers are anything but useless outdoors, where they can dominate any exposed objective. Snipers are somewhat useful indoors, only because they can quickscope to turn the rifle into a high skill-threshold shotgun. Snipers can be stupidly imba anywhere, if they use the quick-chambering thing (, which I’d rather wasn’t there).

If anything, removing the crosshair when unscoped would do little else but put even more snipers on hills, or put more marker pen dots on monitors. Sounds awesome \o/

Rather, I’d be interested in seeing the damage falloff start earlier, so it works as is up until the end of medium-ish range, and then starts to take more hits at longer range. That way, if snipers want the one shot one kill thing they need to get much closer and start sniping from nearby cover, which will probably require frequent base of fire changes. Pleasingly, this does sound like the pseudo-sniper Rahdo talked about in Brink.

Of course we can’t have that in ETQW, because apparently the imaginary SD Gospel clearly states that snipers were only ever intended to shoot from a mile away on some mountain top, and exploits are exploits and therefore are exploits which are also exploits. Exploits.

[tokamak]

Rather, I’d be interested in seeing the damage falloff start earlier, so it works as is up until the end of medium-ish range, and then starts to take more hits at longer range. That way, if snipers want the one shot one kill thing they need to get much closer and start sniping from nearby cover, which will probably require frequent base of fire changes. Pleasingly, this does sound like the pseudo-sniper Rahdo talked about in Brink.

What the hell?! Dude! Just give infiltrators friggin hyperblasters while you’re at it if you want them to be involved at close ranges so badly.

[shirosae]

What the hell?! Dude! Just give infiltrators friggin hyperblasters while you’re at it if you want them to be involved at close ranges so badly.

I suggest a way of making sniping weapons weaker than they currently are by turning up the damage falloff so snipers can’t just sit on a hill somewhere, but instead are forced to do things like move and have some situational awareness.

You complain that that is so overpowered that I might as well give them Hyperblasters.

…
I’m sorry, but I’m unfamiliar with the imaginary fantasy universe in your head from where these complaints originate.

You argue that quickscoping is a ridiculous huge exploit, stating that Murka’s video is a great example of said exploit. I point out that said exploit isn’t even effective in said video, and that the quick-chambering is the only thing holding it together, even annotating each kill. You say that said quick chambering video is awesome. I question your like for quick chambering, and you respond by claiming that you didn’t notice the rapid fire sniping… even after replying to and quoting a post where I specifically mention that exploit.

We’re done. I’m not wasting any more time on this amorphous nonsense.

[tokamak]

[QUOTE=shirosae;197876]You complain that that is so overpowered that I might as well give them Hyperblasters.
[/QUOTE]

No I’m saying that you’re trying to take the long-range role away from snipers. You’re degrading the different specialisations of the classes this way.

[murka]

[quote=shirosae;197849]We’re talking about the quickscope rightclick, left click thing. Not about the rapid chambering thing (or the macros you use to do it).

The former I’m fine with. The latter is absolutely ridiculous.[/quote]

I’m fine with both because timing is important. I actually played vs bots just practicing it because online i would screw it up too often. I tried using a macro but because it was random and didn’t work as good as button bashing, i just learned it the hard way.

The thread is about sniping in general and quickscope is the same bug as what you call “rapid chambering”.

If something can be learned by everyone(not taking into account weak minds unable to understand it), it’s not unfair. Just as flyers are barely unfair(because the other team mostly has one too).

If you say it’s lame, i agree, but i did spend time learning it, why not get rewarded with easy kills.

And the vid is on u-tube now:link

[shirosae]

[QUOTE=murka10;197888]I’m fine with both because timing is important. I actually played vs bots just practicing it because online i would screw it up too often. I tried using a macro but because it was random and didn’t work as good as button bashing, i just learned it the hard way.

The thread is about sniping in general and quickscope is the same bug as what you call “rapid chambering”.[/quote]

Dude, it’s not the same thing.

Being able to shoot one accurate shot up close is not the same thing as being able to shoot the sniper like a semi-auto. I have no problems with the former, and a problem with the latter. The rapid chambering thing wasn’t even mentioned in the thread until you posted your video.

If something can be learned by everyone(not taking into account weak minds unable to understand it), it’s not unfair. Just as flyers are barely unfair(because the other team mostly has one too).

No wait hang on, you can’t do that with the Railgun - the recharge carries on even if you swap so your second shot doesn’t get full damage. If the Railgun could manage it I’d consider it less h4x, but even then it’s still imba. The only thing holding indoors sniping back is the refire rate, and this destroys that.

If you say it’s lame, i agree, but i did spend time learning it, why not get rewarded with easy kills.

How many times have we played against each other, more than 40? You surely know that I’m not one of those scrubs who runs around moaning all match about how cheap some stupid thing is. As far as I’m concerned the quickchamber thing is an imbalanced bug that I’d rather wasn’t there, but I’m not going to moan at you for using it.

The only reason I talked about the quickchambering at all is because your video was described as an excellent example of what the thread was about… when it isn’t. It’s an excellent example of another bug that hadn’t been mentioned at all.