VS underpowered when it comes to infantry?

[Knightwyvern]

Originally Posted by rTekku

You must be new to FPS games.

"Quick scoping" is a term used for aggressive play with a Sniper Rifle in close quarters. This play style is extremely popular due to it being a potential one shot, one kill at close range.

That's not "sniping."

[Sephirex]

Originally Posted by rTekku

You must be new to FPS games.

"Quick scoping" is a term used for aggressive play with a Sniper Rifle in close quarters. This play style is extremely popular due to it being a potential one shot, one kill at close range.

That tends to be used in games where the action of pulling up the scope isn't properly balanced. You don't tend to see quick-scoping in most FPS's.

[rTekku]

Originally Posted by Knightwyvern

That's not "sniping."

I know that isn't sniping. The weapons themselves are a game changer. They are still Sniper Rifles regardless of which distance you're using them.

Actual "snipers"? Forget them.

[Mr DeCastellac]

Logically, the sniper rifles wouldn't lose damage over distance, since any sniper rifle's appeal is shooting from a long range.

I think people are really exaggerating the damage drop-off. It's just something they put in to make up for the fact that they fire straight.

As with anything, it'll get balanced and tweaked in the beta. We'll see.

[Knightwyvern]

Originally Posted by rTekku

I know that isn't sniping. The weapons themselves are a game changer. They are still Sniper Rifles regardless of which distance you're using them.

Actual "snipers"? Forget them.

Only if there actually is "quickscoping," and only if you immediately gain pinpoint accuracy when you look through your scope. If you can't raise your scope fast enough, or there is still a (movement based?) CoF when you use your scope, then this won't be a very viable tactic. Also, I believe that high powered rifles in PS2 won't be OSOK unless you get a headshot; they may be OSOK on an enemy infiltrator as well, I don't know. But this means that you will be hard pressed to one shot a very large percent of the player population, would need to get headshots every time, and have a very fast scope with no cone of fire. Seems unlikely to me.

Did you play the original PS? Several competent enemy snipers could wreak havoc on your defending base, stoping infantry from using their AV on tanks, AA on aircraft, nab them before they grabbed vehicles from the terminal.

[GarryPotter]

Originally Posted by Flaropri

Lessened but not removed. You can get (via experience) a better sense of where bullet drop will go but it's still not going to have the accuracy that VS has.

Yes, and this could be a problem, but in the opposite direction you are going with it. The guns are balance such that one is accurate but does less damage, the others do more damage but are harder to hit with. That's all fine and dandy, but if you can be good enough with the NC/TR sniper to lessen their accuracy penalty, it could throw the balance off since their is no way to increase the damage of the VS sniper using skill/experience with the gun.

However, this is all theorycrafting right now. We have no idea how these weapons will feel and perform in relation to each other at the moment, and won't be able to realistically judge the balance until we get our hands on beta.

[Sephirex]

Originally Posted by Knightwyvern

Only if there actually is "quickscoping," and only if you immediately gain pinpoint accuracy when you look through your scope. If you can't raise your scope fast enough, or there is still a (movement based?) CoF when you use your scope, then this won't be a very viable tactic. Also, I believe that high powered rifles in PS2 won't be OSOK unless you get a headshot; they may be OSOK on an enemy infiltrator as well, I don't know. But this means that you will be hard pressed to one shot a very large percent of the player population, would need to get headshots every time, and have a very fast scope with no cone of fire. Seems unlikely to me.

QFT
COD has a very unique set of game rules that make quickscoping even possible as a strategy. They tried to fix it in Black Ops, but it was already such a strong part of the game culture, it was re-implemented for MW3. In most FPS's it's not a viable strategy, and PS2 seems like it's going to be the same.

[Zalmoxis]

Well actually in pretty much all FPS using a sniper rifle at close range is a viable strategy, because of the TTK basically.


And I did also think about the fact that the other factions can compensate bullet drop via skill, and thus getting a bonus over the VS faction. I also thought about the fact that VS will basically have the best accuracy ingame at medium to long range, and in a way it's becoming a bit more balanced.

Well, for one, no player can compensate bulletdrop for each shot, unless he's an actual sniper/soldier and there's a rangefinder for every gun. And even though he will have the upper hand in terms of damage, the accuracy might make the DPM even for all factions. I guess there is no real way to know this until we get ingame and see for ourselves.

[Knightwyvern]

Originally Posted by Zalmoxis

Well actually in pretty much all FPS using a sniper rifle at close range is a viable strategy, because of the TTK basically.


And I did also think about the fact that the other factions can compensate bullet drop via skill, and thus getting a bonus over the VS faction. I also thought about the fact that VS will basically have the best accuracy ingame at medium to long range, and in a way it's becoming a bit more balanced.

Well, for one, no player can compensate bulletdrop for each shot, unless he's an actual sniper/soldier and there's a rangefinder for every gun. And even though he will have the upper hand in terms of damage, the accuracy might make the DPM even for all factions. I guess there is no real way to know this until we get ingame and see for ourselves.

Good post. It's true that high powered rifles can be used at close range somewhat effectively, but it's almost always extreme close range due to the hipfire CoF they should have. I used to use my bolt driver in PS as my "ghetto shotgun" in very close range tower/hallway fights, and did quite well. On the other hand, I could have been even more effective with a sweeper, and MUCH more so with an HA weapon. Seems to me that as long as our sidearms are decent in PS2, they will still be the go-to close range weapons for infils. Those machine pistols in the E3 footage were beastly. On top of that we have nice standard semi autos and even scattershot pistols. I'll take hand sized shotgun any day!

[Ratstomper]

Originally Posted by Zalmoxis

Well actually in pretty much all FPS using a sniper rifle at close range is a viable strategy, because of the TTK basically.

I used to bring my bolt driver into tower fights. not because it was super effective, but just because it was all I had besides AV. I rarely killed anyone with it (no 1-shot kills), but would give one person a bad day.

Well, for one, no player can compensate bulletdrop for each shot, unless he's an actual sniper/soldier and there's a rangefinder for every gun. And even though he will have the upper hand in terms of damage, the accuracy might make the DPM even for all factions. I guess there is no real way to know this until we get ingame and see for ourselves.

Yep. Pretty much.

[Zalmoxis]

Well if they do the sidearms as good as BF3 did, it should be perfect. Good enough to be used as an alternative, but not as good as the main weapon.

And yeah, when facing multiple opponents a shotgun is the go to gun in close battles, but it takes more skill with the laser cannon to do well in that situation. That's the fun in it: the challange ( and luck )

I don't know how it was in PS1 with sniper rifles, but in BF3 they did a good thing, making a shot to the chest or head with a bolt action a ohk in close battle. I think this would be the best approach to it in PS2.

[Ratstomper]

Originally Posted by Zalmoxis

I don't know how it was in PS1 with sniper rifles, but in BF3 they did a good thing, making a shot to the chest or head with a bolt action a ohk in close battle. I think this would be the best approach to it in PS2.

There were no hit boxes in PS1, so a shot from a sniper rifle was never a ohk from full health and armor. It made sniping a pain in the ass, because 90% of the people you shot walked away and healed.

Quick-scoping isn't an issue if they implement sniping mechanics correctly. That means taking some time to actually bring up the scope and line up a shot making rifles fairly innaccurate when firing from the hip (that's fair AND realistic). Chest and head shot ohk is fine, so long as its difficult to hit them when you're within 15 ft of the guy you're shooting. Snipers would be able to get some lucky hip shots, but will bite the dust in very close quarters 90% of the time.

The problem lies in CoF vs recoil, though. I MUCH prefer recoil on automatic weapons, as it feels better. Sniper rifles would almost have to use CoF disturbances to encourage smooth leading of targets and inability to have pinpoint accuracy from the hip while moving, though.

[WorldOfForms]

I'm sure it wouldn't be annoying at all to have infiltrators turning invisible to hide in corners inside bases and then one-shotting people with sniper rifles at close range.

[Zalmoxis]

Well if it is easy to quickscope the guy 15 feet away then he's a complete noob and it's not really the game's fault

[Haro]

Still way too early to judge these things. Hypothetically, anything could be imbalanced at this point, since we have no numbers. However, I think there are plenty of advantages that could balance out the Vanu weapons. Lack of bullet drop, and I would guess a faster travel time, if not instant, VS weapons could be pretty precise at ranges, and often that can just be as good as a powerful rifle.

These discussions can wait for the next few weeks until most people get into beta, and we can actually get data to base our assumptions on. Everything before that is pure speculation, and not really helpful.