Someone sucks at Infantry...

[proto]

Re: Someone sucks at Infantry...

On the other hand making weapons perfectly (unrealistially) accurate makes the game easy.

Well...in BF2Pro...you actually have to be able to aim. Rather than aim for the general direction of the player in vanilla, aiming for the head/torso actually does something. Also, the skill level of the people who play the Pro mod is so high(usually) it takes extra thought and speed to play. Rather than running around, you may have to think about who is actually around the corner. I've yet to play a scrim/match inside of Pro, but I am very much so looking forward to it.

If you think it's easy, then go download it, play a round in the Cz8 pub, and post your scores here(screenshot).




^Yeah, Monk got owned by a noob tube. >.<

[Chris_Redfield]

Re: Someone sucks at Infantry...

On the other hand making weapons perfectly (unrealistially) accurate makes the game easy.

Perfectly? Then I would assume UT is easy. But its not. There will be better and worse gamers, always. I play a tactical FPS named SWAT4 where you hit where you aim. People can roll others so bad its not even funny. You have to make the game to reward people for their skill. To make the guns a little less accurate to compensate for bugs and sh!t would be acceptable, aslong as you still feel like using your skill to be successful.

BF2 on the other hand often relies on flipping the coin.

[zipp0r]

Re: Someone sucks at Infantry...

On the other hand making weapons perfectly (unrealistially) accurate makes the game easy.

aha, no it doesnt. and remove the unrealistically, thats nub BS! the guns in the game atm must be less than a 1/4 as good as its real life counterpart.
the effective distance for the ak101 in the game is like 100m, sniper rifles are similar, being effective upto about 150m, after that it becomes far far harder.
i know its possible to kill at further distances, but its 100times harder than it should be.

dont you get tired of having a fight with someone, your both prone and single shotting right at their head and it takes ~15 bullets to get them, then the next time you get headshot doing the same thing, its a flip of the coin wether the bullet will hit.

accurate guns would give us a more skill based game. you will value your life more, you wont be sprinting about in areas under fire and maybe taking 1 bullet, you'll be dead!! you will kill bunny hoppers from a distance more easily. snipers would actually be a threat!

however...... spraying bullets (holding fire down) should ALWAYS be innacurate!

[Chris_Redfield]

Re: Someone sucks at Infantry...

however...... spraying bullets (holding fire down) should ALWAYS be innacurate!

Reasonably inaccurate.

[camper.]

Re: Someone sucks at Infantry...

On the other hand making weapons perfectly (unrealistially) accurate makes the game easy.

That is BOLLOCKS. Please, play Unreal Tournament with super-accurate laser cannons and come back and say that. Or Project Reality 0.4, let's see how far you get with the laser cannon, sorry, M4.

[zipp0r]

Re: Someone sucks at Infantry...

Reasonably inaccurate.

you know what i mean, in that it should recoil when spraying.

anyone played desert combat? rofl at the recoil in that, that shows fictious weapons at their finest. but when u burst fire or single shot they are nice and accuracte, i think i said in the DC forum that this is how the guns should have been in vanilla, bar the excessive recoil.

[-Shifty-]

Re: Someone sucks at Infantry...

"...like the top players do"

Well let me tell you something.

Just because they have the most points doesn't mean they are the "Best".

The best infantry player i know is C-SHôt (sry I donno how to spell his name).

Personelly I bunnyhoped for my first week of playing BF2, then my reflexes started kicking in, and I would kill guys beofre they could get a show at me, which means that I don't need to hop any more, I don't hop much...

[markan dorka]

Re: Someone sucks at Infantry...

I just want to add something to "accurate guns" discussion

Yes, more accurate guns generally reward skill + reactions more, but not necessarily all that much in context of BF2.

You have to remember that movement speed in BF2 is SLOW. In UT, run speed is way, way faster, you can bounce all around the places, and dodge, which makes people much tougher targets even with hitscan guns, and doing a midair 180 while performing a dodge doesn't exactly help your aim either.

Almost anybody with basic motoric skills and some experience in first person shooters can track people in BF2 all the way through their motion. If, magically, all the hitreg problems were gone and guns 100% accurate, fast and true aim wouldn't be as much of an advantage as you think, because everyone would be so #¤%&ing lethal. Winner of combat wouldn't the guy with best aim anymore, but the one who managed to flank and get that extra half a sec to fire at somebody. Which, by the way is the situation now.

Also, in the, let's say, skill games such as CS, UT, Quakes etc. the maps are pipes, caves or whatever, BF2 maps are open. Hitscan gameplay isn't very interesting if people can approach from any direction and have tons of routes to take and places to hide. The most liked maps (and ones favored by people with arguably most skill) in CS are pretty simple, in UT, DM maps are bit more complicated, but can be controlled through powerups / running weapons, so the random guy with enforcer lost in the maze isn't a threat to you, CTF maps are pretty damn straightforward.

I'm not saying that guns shouldn't be more accurate or anything, but it's really not the end-all answer to lack of skill in BF2 (skill isn't required in BF2, I agree, because nubcake like me can do too well when playing against way better ppl). The game setup in BF is just way more different, different skillset is required, it just doesn't play like most of other games at all. With accurate guns, sure, you kill people more easily, but the same goes for everybody else. If you fail to look 360 every single corner you cut and kill everybody under half a sec, that random proning in a radiomast might kill you.

DCon has really accurate guns, but in my experience, people perform about the same. Besides, even if you have 100% accuracy in guns, half of your shots will be lost in bad reg anyway :P

[Monkmonkman]

Re: Someone sucks at Infantry...

I just want to add something to "accurate guns" discussion

Yes, more accurate guns generally reward skill + reactions more, but not necessarily all that much in context of BF2.

You have to remember that movement speed in BF2 is SLOW. In UT, run speed is way, way faster, you can bounce all around the places, and dodge, which makes people much tougher targets even with hitscan guns, and doing a midair 180 while performing a dodge doesn't exactly help your aim either.

Almost anybody with basic motoric skills and some experience in first person shooters can track people in BF2 all the way through their motion. If, magically, all the hitreg problems were gone and guns 100&#37; accurate, fast and true aim wouldn't be as much of an advantage as you think, because everyone would be so #&#164;%&ing lethal. Winner of combat wouldn't the guy with best aim anymore, but the one who managed to flank and get that extra half a sec to fire at somebody. Which, by the way is the situation now.

Also, in the, let's say, skill games such as CS, UT, Quakes etc. the maps are pipes, caves or whatever, BF2 maps are open. Hitscan gameplay isn't very interesting if people can approach from any direction and have tons of routes to take and places to hide. The most liked maps (and ones favored by people with arguably most skill) in CS are pretty simple, in UT, DM maps are bit more complicated, but can be controlled through powerups / running weapons, so the random guy with enforcer lost in the maze isn't a threat to you, CTF maps are pretty damn straightforward.

I'm not saying that guns shouldn't be more accurate or anything, but it's really not the end-all answer to lack of skill in BF2 (skill isn't required in BF2, I agree, because nubcake like me can do too well when playing against way better ppl). The game setup in BF is just way more different, different skillset is required, it just doesn't play like most of other games at all. With accurate guns, sure, you kill people more easily, but the same goes for everybody else. If you fail to look 360 every single corner you cut and kill everybody under half a sec, that random proning in a radiomast might kill you.

DCon has really accurate guns, but in my experience, people perform about the same. Besides, even if you have 100% accuracy in guns, half of your shots will be lost in bad reg anyway :P

Well, right now, there are a lot of times you are "gayed" out of kills, and it happens A LOT in vBF2, and when you play pro, you get "gayed" a lot less, so the better person will win a lot more of the time, unlike in vanilla. Also, you still need to remember about the hitboxes, that usually is the cause of alot of the randomness too, the cone of fire was there to cover it up+make it easier for scrubs.

On the other hand making weapons perfectly (unrealistially) accurate makes the game easy.

:laugh: :laugh: :laugh: :laugh: :laugh: :laugh: :laugh: :laugh: :laugh:

[camper.]

Re: Someone sucks at Infantry...

DCon has really accurate guns, but in my experience, people perform about the same. Besides, even if you have 100% accuracy in guns, half of your shots will be lost in bad reg anyway :P

That 50% is better than the 1% that *might* register when you aim at someone instead of spraying in the nearest 90 degree cone near them.

[zipp0r]

Re: Someone sucks at Infantry...

DCon has really accurate guns, but in my experience, people perform about the same. Besides, even if you have 100% accuracy in guns, half of your shots will be lost in bad reg anyway :P

i did far far better, mowing ppl down left right and centre lol, probably doubling my infantry score on vanilla.
you need the various classes (think sniper is very important now with better accuracy) to attack your enemy. i think everyone had a far better game and the careless players got a few more deaths, but not so many more than usual.
my reg was ok with about a 100ping, bit laggy but on a server in my country with a 15ping it should be better!

[markan dorka]

Re: Someone sucks at Infantry...

Well, right now, there are a lot of times you are "gayed" out of kills, and it happens A LOT in vBF2, and when you play pro, you get "gayed" a lot less, so the better person will win a lot more of the time, unlike in vanilla.

I'm not arguing against accuracy increase (it won't happen though), I'm just basically trying tell that just taking one element from another game into a completely different context doesn't work as intended.

This is what I'm saying, condensed :

- Yes, increased accuracy removes *some* of the gayed out kills.
- Pro is probably very fun and somewhat more skill intense than vanilla (how'd I know, I'm euro).
- (Aim) Skill intense games (such as CS, UT) have entirely different setup than BF2, and aren't good comparison.
- Aiming in BF2 is trivial, player speeds are way too low for it to be hard - you only need to be "fast enough" to get a kill, blindsiding enemies will easily overcome any slow aim and reactions.
- Hiding or blindsiding (or just getting a first shot) is really really easy in open BF2 map design, even for a beginner.

You don't just necessarily notice the last two when playing pro, since you're playing with fully communicating team and competent commander, you're basically looking at this from an ivory tower. You play on well performing servers (low player numbers, small maps) with ppl that you can actually count on, who (including opponents) that don't tend to do very random things - what works for competition, doesn't translate to the pub play. Vanilla however has to be geared to both - reason you have bfpro and people to play with IS that the there's big pubbing mass that competition can draw from.

Also, you still need to remember about the hitboxes, that usually is the cause of alot of the randomness too, the cone of fire was there to cover it up+make it easier for scrubs.

I know .. the guns are actually surprisingly accurate (way more accurate than what ppl think, not cs levels but ..), but horrible online performance makes them perform like crap. I'd take cone of fire over ****ty netcode any day though. With cone, you can still work the numbers for you, bad netcode spares nobody.

[Monkmonkman]

Re: Someone sucks at Infantry...

what works for competition, doesn't translate to the pub play. Vanilla however has to be geared to both - reason you have bfpro and people to play with IS that the there's big pubbing mass that competition can draw from.

I never said add it to vanilla, lol, but there are many pubs for bfpro, and every pubber I brought in there that was semi-good at infantry, liked it much better than the crap we have now.

[imported_Jonthebrit]

Re: Someone sucks at Infantry...

aha, no it doesnt. and remove the unrealistically, thats nub BS! the guns in the game atm must be less than a 1/4 as good as its real life counterpart.

But making the guns perfect is unrealistic .... duh!

The rest of your quote is pure conjecture.

The meat and bones of this topic though is based purely on opinion. Some would like perfect guns and other not ... I'm sure. Of couse the ones voiceing opinion opposite to yours are 'nubs'. That's a given /sigh

[zipp0r]

Re: Someone sucks at Infantry...

But making the guns perfect is unrealistic .... duh!

The rest of your quote is pure conjecture.

The meat and bones of this topic though is based purely on opinion. Some would like perfect guns and other not ... I'm sure. Of couse the ones voiceing opinion opposite to yours are 'nubs'. That's a given /sigh

who said make them perfect