Snipers in PS2

[Skitrel]

Sigh, quickscoping isn't a problem, it is the easiest thing to stop in the world with simple inaccuracy until a little after scoping in.

The problem, as has been put by many people here, is and has been a problem in fps games for a long time. People are attracted to the sniper class because of the leet lone wolf retardness of it, and as such you see a vast majority of people playing the class in every game, usually like idiots.

Call of duty, an automatic is vastly superior to a sniper, in every way, you won't see competitive teams running around 1 shot no scopesing everyone, in game however that is consider the measure of "skill" by most of the community. They're a burden to the game in the sense of anyone actually wanting to WIN games as opposed to massaging their K because they would do better with automatics, where a single miss doesn't mean dying.

Bad Company, bush wookies, bush wookies everywhere. Even worse, you couldn't see the fuckers for shit.

Battlefield 3, sniping heavily nerfed, glint makes them very visible. You still get a shit load of them playing the class though on every server. Worse still, with the nerfing they effectively become useless to the team, not only are they not playing the objective but they're not really getting many kills either. They're useless unless playing soflam roles or being frontline snipers with close range scopes holding corridors and medium sight lines, objectively.

The issues to address here are making sure they're not overpoweringly strong at range, but still useful, while not also being impossible to see (issues raised by BC2 and BF3). And giving them a role on the battlefield that helps the team effort.

If they're difficult to find a la BC2 then they need to be gimped in other areas, if they're easy to see and counter then they need strength and accuracy otherwise they become a useless burden to teams like BF3 where the side with the most snipers is almost always the losing side, at least in pure pub play.

[Aurmanite]

This fear about the sniper population is unreal. In every fps in history, the sniper population has bee kept in check by basic things like...chainguns, assault rifles, terrain, and vehicles. For every sniper out there you will have a dedicated sniper hunter. Every time the fight goes inside, the population of sniper will plummet.

In Planetside I could carry a sniper rifle, AV, med/armor tools, med kits, and a pistol, all while wearing the heaviest infantry armor in the game. In #2 they are taking away all of that versatility and potentially adding the ability for an osk. It's clearly a net loss, but yet there's all this fear mongering and bitchfesting about 'fun' and 'balance' in a game we haven't even had our hands on yet.

I can guarantee that there will be a ridiculous gap between the number of kills with rifles vs the number of kills with sniper rifles, even with osk. Every shooter in history has proven that.

If you don't like sniping, and if you think that its not a valid game play choice, shooters aren't your game.

[Kilmoran]

Originally Posted by Aurmanite

This fear about the sniper population is unreal. In every fps in history, the sniper population has bee kept in check by basic things like...chainguns, assault rifles, terrain, and vehicles. For every sniper out there you will have a dedicated sniper hunter. Every time the fight goes inside, the population of sniper will plummet.

In Planetside I could carry a sniper rifle, AV, med/armor tools, med kits, and a pistol, all while wearing the heaviest infantry armor in the game. In #2 they are taking away all of that versatility and potentially adding the ability for an osk. It's clearly a net loss, but yet there's all this fear mongering and bitchfesting about 'fun' and 'balance' in a game we haven't even had our hands on yet.

I can guarantee that there will be a ridiculous gap between the number of kills with rifles vs the number of kills with sniper rifles, even with osk. Every shooter in history has proven that.

If you don't like sniping, and if you think that its not a valid game play choice, shooters aren't your game.

I really thing the issue is when comparing it to games with limited pop like COD or BF or what have you... having 6 snipers on a team of 24 means that 1/4th of that team is snipers. This is why there is the conception of them flooding things. IT is easy to seem like a waste of time when the vast majority of snipers are literally lone wolf wannabe's and not truly people trying to use the kit/class for a role to help the team. This is an MMO however, so i don't see this being the same issue that is being raised.

[Skitrel]

Originally Posted by Kilmoran

I really thing the issue is when comparing it to games with limited pop like COD or BF or what have you... having 6 snipers on a team of 24 means that 1/4th of that team is snipers. This is why there is the conception of them flooding things. IT is easy to seem like a waste of time when the vast majority of snipers are literally lone wolf wannabe's and not truly people trying to use the kit/class for a role to help the team. This is an MMO however, so i don't see this being the same issue that is being raised.

Because fps players are fps players, and a different game doesn't change who fps players are. If you see that kind of ratio in any game there is every chance of seeing that kind of ratio in larger scale games. This is why there's a fear of ensuring that they get it right.

Throw into the equation killstreaks, kdr tracking, and so on, you've got a concoction for sniper many whoring stat padders.

[Kilmoran]

Originally Posted by Skitrel

Because fps players are fps players, and a different game doesn't change who fps players are. If you see that kind of ratio in any game there is every chance of seeing that kind of ratio in larger scale games. This is why there's a fear of ensuring that they get it right.

Throw into the equation killstreaks, kdr tracking, and so on, you've got a concoction for sniper many whoring stat padders.

I suppose but... see the difference here is that i don't really care of indies are all sniping and being useless. Indies are.. alot of the times, not doing anything useful regardless. That is the difference between typical FPS games and this one. There is the opprotunity to organize enmasse and get something done regardless of the hordes of people not doing anything relevant or important.

[Infektion]

Originally Posted by StumpyTheOzzie

I wonder how much of a PITA it would be code it so the rounds are affected by wind, elevation, temperature, planet rotation etc etc and also to not have the bullets be instant travel.

it's too easy to just line up the sights and click. If they work hard enough to be able to do it properly, then they deserve 1 shot kills.

LOL Planet rotation? I think the only way for that too happen is if the planet was turning at an impressive rate.

[Skitrel]

There is absolutely no purpose in actively simulating effects that a player will not see in gameplay. Snipers aren't going to have a myriad of tools to test and check their aim prior to a shot, and a target isn't going to sit around long enough for them to go through these things. The result of that would simply be people taking shots then readjusting based on where that shot went, all on the fly.

There's no point in accurately simulating these things if they're not things a player will see in game, IF you were going to do something like this then simple changes to ballistics gravity would be far simpler, in x region ballistics gravity is ever so slightly right, left, or anything else, to a random degree of power. Rotate these random effects by region periodically with the day and night cycle to cause the effect of it changing like weather. Add a hud element to snipers that shows the direction of the current effect relative to compass directions.

This would be far simpler to do and use 1 metric, a gravitational simulation. I sincerely doubt that there'll even be a gravitational simulation though and without such the above couldn't be done. It's easier and less taxing to use BF3s method of a standard bullet trajectory that every bullet always takes, dependant on ammo type. BF3 doesn't do any calculations at all, it's always the same curves. This is exactly what I expect to see PS2 do.

[Mjolnir]

Originally Posted by Infektion

LOL Planet rotation? I think the only way for that too happen is if the planet was turning at an impressive rate.

Don't mock things you don't understand; you only make yourself look stupid. In real life, long range snipers (as well as artillery) need to take into account the rotation of the earth when doing their targeting calculations. Ever heard of something called the Coriolis effect? I suggest you read this:
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Coriolis_effect

Usually in FPS games the engagement distances are nowhere near large enough for the Coriolis effect to even be relevant, but given the fact that PS2 has maps with dimensions on the order of Kilometers the devs could actually incorporate the Coriolis effect if they wanted to.

[noxious]

Even if you do go to great pains to simulate ballistics accurately, it's still not that hard to hit your mark. In ArmA II, for example, which surely has more 'realistic' sniping than we'll ever see in PlanetSide 2, you do have to zero your scope and worry about things like elevation and wind speed. However, except at extreme ranges, you really just have to zero the scope, and perhaps aim a bit higher or lower than you might otherwise if the target is at a significantly higher or lower elevation than you are. Once you get a feel for the ranges, zeroing the scope becomes automatic, and it doesn't really slow you down.

The real skill requirement from a good ballistics model comes from having to lead moving targets; as long as PlanetSide 2 sniper rifles are not hitscan weapons, it should be easy to reduce the risk of death by sniper by being situationally aware and keeping your transversal relative to the sniper's position high when exposed.

[Bombergob]

I agree with Skitrel on some points but disagree on why people play snipers. Snipers simply put are a weapon so reliant on ones skill and knowledge of the weapon and map that they can be simultaneously underpowered and overpowered based on the player using them.

This often differs from weapons like shotguns, SMGs, ARs, ect, in that no matter how good I become at the game in general and with the weapon I still can't overcome the weapons weaknesses, a shotgunner still hard counters my AR at close range and vice versa for the medium to long range.

This is simply just not the case with snipers in a lot of FPS games out there. A sniper rifle(mechanic wise) is no weaker then any other gun at any range, it's just harder to use. What this means is with enough practice and skill I can become equally effective as my opponents at any given range and never haft to suffer from a disadvantage due to my weapon. This IMHO kills weapon balance, not to mention down sizing the importance of tactical thinking as to where you'll be effective on the battle field and making balanced squads.

I'm on the side that snipers play a important role but need to have mechanics in play to limit their effectiveness outside the intended role. As others have mentioned I think TF2 is a good basis for this in that they managed to balance their sniper in 3 different ways, charge-shots, slow ballistics, and debuffing/rabid fire. Since we have 3 unique empires you could even split up into 3 unique sniping methods.

1. Vanu Beam Rifle - OSK capable, no travel time or drop off. Damage charges up while scoped in, can 1 shot any infantry with a headshot and full charge short of a MAX. Limited firepower(AS), good for picking off priority targets but not for suppression.

2. NC Bolt Driver - OSK capable, high damage, slow projectile speed, moderate fire rate. As suggested bolts must travel a minimum distance to achieve full damage, this keeps it from being abused outside its intended range. Moderately good for assassination and suppression.

3. TR Battle Rifle - Not OSK capable, moderate damage, fast projectile speed, fast fire rate. Tracker bullets upon hitting light up enemies on the radar for X amount of time. Good for support fire and suppression, not so much for taking out prime targets.

[StumpyTheOzzie]

Originally Posted by Infektion

LOL Planet rotation? I think the only way for that too happen is if the planet was turning at an impressive rate.

Which it is... A quick google gave this:
Basic Answer
The circumference of the Earth at the equator is 25,000 miles. The Earth rotates in about 24 hours. Therefore, if you were to hang above the surface of the Earth at the equator without moving, you would see 25,000 miles pass by in 24 hours, at a speed of 25000/24 or just over 1000 miles per hour.

But anyway, that comment of mine was a fragment of a comment I made in another post on this topic that seems to be multiplying that said that all of these things have to be taken into account by REAL snipers.

How do you make that a game mechanic? When you look down your scope, make the crosshairs horribly accurate for 10 seconds, marginally accurate for 10 seconds and "half a head" accurate after that, with the option for a "hold your breath" (sniper upgrade or something)

Move, shoot, un-scope and you reset your accuracy somewhat.

This will allow snipers to be "dialling in" without the un-fun aspects of having to do fairly complex mathematics given the stakes and time requirements.

[Hypevosa]

Originally Posted by Vancha

Sorry, can you define the difference between "ambush sniping" and "lead sniping"?

Ambush sniping is when a sniper sets up an "ambush" which is where they set their crosshairs still, and fire when they know someone is going to cross their bullet's path to end up hitting that person.

Lead sniping is when you actually follow your target and attempt to ACTIVELY lead them, moving the rifle in accordance with their movements until you have a shot.

The first involves no movement of the rifle, as you are only waiting for your target to pass, while the second actually involves actively moving the rifle and following a target until an opportunity arises for a good shot or you are confident enough in your lead to fire and hit. Anyone can ambush snipe with minimal training and experience. Lead sniping takes alot of time to develop as a skill.

Having the reticle bloom when the rifle is rotating means lead sniping is impossible since the act of following your target means you lose enough accuracy to hit them. Instead, you're forced to just jump ambush to ambush. I'd rather have target re-acquisition time due to a high recoil and a narrow FOV due to the scope, than something as gamey as the cone bloom.

[Vancha]

Oh okay, then I think I disagree. How is lead sniping harder than ambush sniping? With ambush sniping, you put your crosshair where you think they're going to be and if you've miscalculated, then you miss your shot. Lead sniping is the same, except without needing to be as good at prediction. If you realize you've miscalculated where they're going to be, you can re-*** as needed...It's far more forgiving.

It's probably worth mentioning I'm thinking of this in a Planetside context. What game are you imagining?

[SkitzoSniper]

Those of you saying sniping actively ruins BF3 and puts a hamper on the team either doesn't know how to play the class, or play with a ton of people who just flat out suck.

The sniper class allows people to do that lone wolf thing if they want, and you know what? That's fine. Let them. If that is how they want to get better, let them get better that way. Me personally, i love my sniper class. Unless it is a large open map(like Operation firestorm), i LOVE to get close. On siene crossing, i just plant myself in position to watch over B and snipe anyone comming out of it, while i have a squadmate on mumble with his on rifle watching for counter snipers and the other area's around so we don't get flanked.

Don't be hating on a class because you don't like playing it. I also love the glint too, as it add's more difficulty in trying to snipe a heavily populated area without being spotted. Snipers bring ALOT to the table. You just have to know how to take advantage of it.

[Hypevosa]

Originally Posted by Vancha

Oh okay, then I think I disagree. How is lead sniping harder than ambush sniping? With ambush sniping, you put your crosshair where you think they're going to be and if you've miscalculated, then you miss your shot. Lead sniping is the same, except without needing to be as good at prediction. If you realize you've miscalculated where they're going to be, you can re-*** as needed...It's far more forgiving.

It's probably worth mentioning I'm thinking of this in a Planetside context. What game are you imagining?

Unless you're going to set up your ambush on a door or a very narrow space where you know someone's going to be (where missing means a miscalculation), it's a guessing game of luck ("oh, I think he'll end up over... here!") vs a demonstration of actual skill. It's building a pattern and rinse recycle repeat rather than adapting to a changing situation. It also necessitates the insane FOV to make sniping actually useful when you have the giant bloom with every movement so they have the ability to set up ambushes and not wait for a player who's no longer running that direction.

Again, I'd rather we have a reasonably restricted FOV, recoil, and have target reacquisition be the problem and get rid of the game-y bloom, so sniping can be a fun game of skill and involve less guessing and waiting.