So umm.. someone please explain the logic behind this..? - Page 2 - PlanetSide Universe
PSU Social Facebook Twitter Twitter YouTube Steam TwitchTV
PlanetSide Universe
PSU: PSU is back, as well as the admin's crappy taste in quotes.
Home Forum Chat Wiki Social AGN PS2 Stats
Notices
Go Back   PlanetSide Universe > PlanetSide Discussions > PlanetSide 2 Discussion

Reply
 
Thread Tools Search this Thread Display Modes
Old 2014-03-01, 12:49 PM   [Ignore Me] #16
Mastachief
Contributor
Major
 
Mastachief's Avatar
 
Re: So umm.. someone please explain the logic behind this..?


Originally Posted by camycamera View Post
because balance?
This.

This is not arma/ofp/dayz, effective sniper rifles would have us all hiding in a bush, shitting in a bag for our play sessions.
__________________
Average play time of 2.8hours per day and falling.
Average play time of 2.5hours per day and falling. Need metagame.

Average play time of 2.0hours per day and falling. Need metagame / Continents.
Mastachief is offline  
Reply With Quote
Old 2014-03-01, 02:05 PM   [Ignore Me] #17
Taramafor
Sergeant Major
 
Re: So umm.. someone please explain the logic behind this..?


2 words. Sniper nerf. Was the last straw for me. Stopped caring about the game at that point since it was my play style. Well, that and bases being too close together and constant "oh look, yet another sun defeating all strategic and tactical play because they just keep coming" and such. And bases don't really "do" anything, like say in Renegade X/C&C Renegade where they can be destroyed (with ion cannons/nukes which would be similar to orbital strikes which are in PS1 yet not PS2) and have benifits (weapons factory gives you vehicle access, refinery credits, etc). Oh, and spawn rooms are broken of course, because everyone holds up in them not wanting to be the first to die when they go out, which means not putting up resistance against an invading enemy. Even just fixing 1/4 of these things would bring me back into the game.

In a game THIS big with THIS many people, SOME instant kill weapons aren't a bad thing and a sniper rifle should be one of them. If only because it takes a lot of skill to hit a MOVING target. If you just stand around, frankly, you deserve to die. [/sarcasm] Next thing you know HE rounds will take 2 hits to kill, despite it being a tank shell. I mean, it's not ARMA, right? So let's do that. Yea, makes sense. Sounds tons more fun. Can kill you in cover with splash damage after all. [/sarcasm] Also, SOME realism is appreciated by quite a few gamers. Not saying it should be similar to ARMA or something (too much realism isn't always a good thing after all), but when thinking about balance, one has to keep player numbers into consideration, along with how easily defended a base can be/is (Which is next to none existent right now only adding to my argument) and other such concerns.

Last edited by Taramafor; 2014-03-01 at 02:55 PM.
Taramafor is offline  
Reply With Quote
Old 2014-03-01, 04:45 PM   [Ignore Me] #18
War Barney
Sergeant Major
 
Re: So umm.. someone please explain the logic behind this..?


Originally Posted by Taramafor View Post
2 words. Sniper nerf. Was the last straw for me. Stopped caring about the game at that point since it was my play style. Well, that and bases being too close together and constant "oh look, yet another sun defeating all strategic and tactical play because they just keep coming" and such. And bases don't really "do" anything, like say in Renegade X/C&C Renegade where they can be destroyed (with ion cannons/nukes which would be similar to orbital strikes which are in PS1 yet not PS2) and have benifits (weapons factory gives you vehicle access, refinery credits, etc). Oh, and spawn rooms are broken of course, because everyone holds up in them not wanting to be the first to die when they go out, which means not putting up resistance against an invading enemy. Even just fixing 1/4 of these things would bring me back into the game.

In a game THIS big with THIS many people, SOME instant kill weapons aren't a bad thing and a sniper rifle should be one of them. If only because it takes a lot of skill to hit a MOVING target. If you just stand around, frankly, you deserve to die. [/sarcasm] Next thing you know HE rounds will take 2 hits to kill, despite it being a tank shell. I mean, it's not ARMA, right? So let's do that. Yea, makes sense. Sounds tons more fun. Can kill you in cover with splash damage after all. [/sarcasm] Also, SOME realism is appreciated by quite a few gamers. Not saying it should be similar to ARMA or something (too much realism isn't always a good thing after all), but when thinking about balance, one has to keep player numbers into consideration, along with how easily defended a base can be/is (Which is next to none existent right now only adding to my argument) and other such concerns.

Wait.. are you trying to complain that snipers aren't a OHK from 300m away with stealth on ANY part of the body? if so you are completely and utterly insane, if not I have no idea what your complaining about snipers keep getting buffed, hell the just made them shoot even faster this patch.
War Barney is offline  
Reply With Quote
Old 2014-03-01, 05:22 PM   [Ignore Me] #19
BlaxicanX
Sergeant Major
 
Re: So umm.. someone please explain the logic behind this..?


He's talking about no longer being able to OSK with headshots from beyond 300 meters.

Which is, indeed, bullshit.
BlaxicanX is offline  
Reply With Quote
Old 2014-03-01, 05:30 PM   [Ignore Me] #20
Plaqueis
Staff Sergeant
 
Plaqueis's Avatar
 
Re: So umm.. someone please explain the logic behind this..?


Got to love guys with Vanguards on signatures whining about a OHK's... lolz. I'd love to see the forum meltdown if they'd cap tank OHK's similarily, just to 'balance' things... specially after they already nerfed the HE (something which i equally hated).

I didn't mean this to be a whine at all, i was just questioning the reasons behind the decisions to make all BASR's (and to lesser extenct, all handheld weapons) so freaking weak in the game. BASR's are just the best example of this. Not only are their only advantage (range) capped ridiculously close, but in addition, the dude holding the weapon has no lungs at all so you'll have like a second of aiming time, he can't go prone, has no useful camo (game has metric ton of stuff thats sold as camo, yet none of them actually blends you in the surroundings), and so on.

And please stfu about the cloak; not only does it make a very distinctive sound, on top of that you're hardly any less visible with it or without it, unless you're sitting perfectly still.

Originally Posted by Mastachief View Post
This.

This is not arma/ofp/dayz, effective sniper rifles would have us all hiding in a bush, shitting in a bag for our play sessions.
Geez. You seriously think so? This isn't some retarded COD either, this is combined arms game.

Last edited by Plaqueis; 2014-03-01 at 08:12 PM.
Plaqueis is offline  
Reply With Quote
Old 2014-03-01, 06:38 PM   [Ignore Me] #21
War Barney
Sergeant Major
 
Re: So umm.. someone please explain the logic behind this..?


Uhu.. well first off a picture on a sig means nothing, I have that pic cos I like the look of it, I actually hate vehicles and would be very happy if they made it so they didn't get OHKs as I've always felt anything that does a OHK is utter skill-less bullcrap, it takes no kill to get 1 shot. People might try to say its fine as they fire so slowly they don't push battles but they DO manage to cause more annoyance than pretty much any other class with not only OHKs but doing over half hp with 1 shot meaning its VERY easy 2 hit kills (especially annoying when you get 20-30 of em shooting non stop like at most fights in the open).

And stealth is a distinctive noise sure... which one which sounds pretty similar for all the factions so you never know if its an ally or not and even then hearing a stealth doesn't mean you're safe as they could be anywhere and going anywhere, especially with stalker now available it could easily be a guy sitting perfectly still while almost completely invisible never having to move. Oh and *hardly less visible*.... please tell me your settings cos for me they are almost invisible while moving and pretty much completely invisible when standing still, you must have the PERFECT settings for seeing them while stealthed or just letting people know you're hacking in some way.

Or would you like me to complain about why all my shotguns don't OHK ANY part I shoot when in range? its a shotgun when in a 5-10m range any shot should be a OHK no matter where, I sometimes have to shoot people 3 times with a piston for the kill! They need a buff right? after all I have to get within 10m for it while you sit at 300m with stealth
War Barney is offline  
Reply With Quote
Old 2014-03-01, 07:09 PM   [Ignore Me] #22
Taramafor
Sergeant Major
 
Re: So umm.. someone please explain the logic behind this..?


Originally Posted by War Barney View Post
I actually hate vehicles and would be very happy if they made it so they didn't get OHKs as I've always felt anything that does a OHK is utter skill-less bullcrap
-10 respect points (for tank shells at least). A shell to the face means you deserve to die (splash damage perhaps not so much). Not every weapon should instant kill of course, but some should. Also, you like tank pics yet hate tanks themselves? O.o

Originally Posted by War Barney View Post
it takes no kill to get 1 shot.
-20 respect points. Have you even tried head shooting a moving target at long range? (also ties into vehicles and so on. Point is, one needs skilled reflexes and good aiming). The only no skill part is when people stand still (then they have it coming).

Originally Posted by War Barney View Post
People might try to say its fine as they fire so slowly they don't push battles
So... Make sniper rifles MORE useless in real fights by nerfing them? Christ, no wonder I stopped playing if that's the case.

Last edited by Taramafor; 2014-03-01 at 07:12 PM.
Taramafor is offline  
Reply With Quote
Old 2014-03-01, 07:12 PM   [Ignore Me] #23
Plaqueis
Staff Sergeant
 
Plaqueis's Avatar
 
Re: So umm.. someone please explain the logic behind this..?


Originally Posted by War Barney View Post
Uhu.. well first off a picture on a sig means nothing, I have that pic cos I like the look of it, I actually hate vehicles and would be very happy if they made it so they didn't get OHKs as I've always felt anything that does a OHK is utter skill-less bullcrap
I stopped reading right there, and i doubt i need to explain why.

EDIT: Jebus tapdancing christ.. seriously, you'd be happy if a infantry guy caught a 150mm highexplosive antitank shell from a Vanguard (using as an example just because), and lived thru it?! Ffs...

Last edited by Plaqueis; 2014-03-01 at 07:25 PM.
Plaqueis is offline  
Reply With Quote
Old 2014-03-01, 07:48 PM   [Ignore Me] #24
War Barney
Sergeant Major
 
Re: So umm.. someone please explain the logic behind this..?


With full flak armour and a shield up HA shield up yes.. it seems its incredibly easy for tanks to bulls eye people in this game as it happens almost non stop even while running, more than half my deaths to vehicles are from bullseye hits, if its so incredibly easy to do it shouldn't OHK really.

And yes I've tried to shoot moving targets, its really rather easy especially when you just aim for the body, how am I saying make snipers more useless? I'm just saying they are irritating enough as it is without buffing them, hell they got a buff this patch as it is
War Barney is offline  
Reply With Quote
Old 2014-03-01, 08:07 PM   [Ignore Me] #25
Plaqueis
Staff Sergeant
 
Plaqueis's Avatar
 
Re: So umm.. someone please explain the logic behind this..?


Originally Posted by War Barney View Post
how am I saying make snipers more useless? I'm just saying they are irritating enough as it is without buffing them, hell they got a buff this patch as it is
Snipers got fuck all in this patch.. additions were; a sniper-rifle that was nerfed in about 24 hours after the release, 2 scoutrifles, and whatever piece of shit VS got. Also, a very cool but not very useful crossbow was introduced. And on top, there's an option to give up healthsticks/AP mines, and get yourself a motionsensor.

Not one thing on that list that snipers needed. Infiltrators on the otherhand... i bet those are very useful for that guy shooting you in the back with SMG, hacking turrets and terminals, and maybe setting up AP mines on your base. I'm not one of them.

Last edited by Plaqueis; 2014-03-01 at 08:13 PM.
Plaqueis is offline  
Reply With Quote
Old 2014-03-01, 08:22 PM   [Ignore Me] #26
Taramafor
Sergeant Major
 
Re: So umm.. someone please explain the logic behind this..?


Originally Posted by War Barney View Post
With full flak armour and a shield up HA shield up yes.. it seems its incredibly easy for tanks to bulls eye people in this game as it happens almost non stop even while running, more than half my deaths to vehicles are from bullseye hits, if its so incredibly easy to do it shouldn't OHK really.

And yes I've tried to shoot moving targets, its really rather easy especially when you just aim for the body, how am I saying make snipers more useless? I'm just saying they are irritating enough as it is without buffing them, hell they got a buff this patch as it is
For some reason, I do find it easier to hit targets with tank shells then sniper rifles. Perhaps it's because tank shells are bigger and has a good chance of killing you if it's a near miss.

And i was talking about the devs nerfing sniper rifles, which results in snipers having less of an effect in the larger fights. I'd rather have irritating snipers on both sides that actually SNIPE then more useless ones wasting time to close in, making them even more useless in a big battlefield. I mean, if snipers wern't doing anything before, how are they doing anything now? Following that logic, why not just be done with it and axe sniper rifles? (Not saying they should of course, but this constant nerf after nerf against this play style is driving me and others with this play style INSANE!)

Also, semi auto for long range makes more sense then a bolt because of more then 1 shot. Etc. You get the idea. I don't expect ARMA, but Christ, this is just silly. I mean, people complain about snipers, so NERF. It happened with HE tank shells (something I'm also against), NERF! Striker? NERF! (and now useless) It just seems to me like nerf is the answer to everything.

Last edited by Taramafor; 2014-03-01 at 10:33 PM.
Taramafor is offline  
Reply With Quote
Old 2014-03-01, 08:28 PM   [Ignore Me] #27
War Barney
Sergeant Major
 
Re: So umm.. someone please explain the logic behind this..?


Plaq you should check the notes.. unless I miss read it they made a lot/all the snipers shoot faster in the last patch
War Barney is offline  
Reply With Quote
Old 2014-03-01, 10:43 PM   [Ignore Me] #28
Dougnifico
First Lieutenant
 
Dougnifico's Avatar
 
Re: So umm.. someone please explain the logic behind this..?


I think current snipers are bs. Put more drop on the powerful weapons (perhaps 9.81ms^2...?) and make them headshot lethal at ANY damn range. Maybe a 1,000m limit. That's cool. Still, I like to be able to be able to actually do something with a sniper.

I know there is a lot of BF hate here, but maybe on the really long range rifles, give them scope glint for balance. The current ones don't need it, but have a couple extreme range sniper rifles with it.
Dougnifico is offline  
Reply With Quote
Old 2014-03-02, 03:03 AM   [Ignore Me] #29
Azzzz
Corporal
 
Re: So umm.. someone please explain the logic behind this..?


Originally Posted by Dougnifico View Post
I think current snipers are bs. Put more drop on the powerful weapons (perhaps 9.81ms^2...?) and make them headshot lethal at ANY damn range. Maybe a 1,000m limit. That's cool. Still, I like to be able to be able to actually do something with a sniper.

I know there is a lot of BF hate here, but maybe on the really long range rifles, give them scope glint for balance. The current ones don't need it, but have a couple extreme range sniper rifles with it.
You know as I know and everyone else knows, none of this is going to happen until the game gets more optimized. We can't even get people to render past a certain range (300m no?) as it is much less 1000m

Also, also, also....Loves me some tank sniping with AP shells. I get so many hate tells and hacker accusations it's just too damn funny!

Protip: Heavies with rocket launchers, stop standing still to fire at me. You only make it easier for me

Last edited by Azzzz; 2014-03-02 at 03:12 AM. Reason: Ninjas..Again!
Azzzz is offline  
Reply With Quote
Old 2014-03-03, 09:36 PM   [Ignore Me] #30
Dougnifico
First Lieutenant
 
Dougnifico's Avatar
 
Re: So umm.. someone please explain the logic behind this..?


Originally Posted by Azzzz View Post
You know as I know and everyone else knows, none of this is going to happen until the game gets more optimized. We can't even get people to render past a certain range (300m no?) as it is much less 1000m

Also, also, also....Loves me some tank sniping with AP shells. I get so many hate tells and hacker accusations it's just too damn funny!

Protip: Heavies with rocket launchers, stop standing still to fire at me. You only make it easier for me
I'm not saying they have to render at 1000m, I'm saying that I should be able to OHK them with a bolt action to the head at any distance out to there. If they render shorter, so be it. OHK at render range.
Dougnifico is offline  
Reply With Quote
Reply
  PlanetSide Universe > PlanetSide Discussions > PlanetSide 2 Discussion

Bookmarks

Discord


Posting Rules
You may not post new threads
You may not post replies
You may not post attachments
You may not edit your posts

BB code is On
Smilies are On
[IMG] code is On
HTML code is Off

Forum Jump


All times are GMT -5. The time now is 06:54 AM.

Content © 2002-2013, PlanetSide-Universe.com, All rights reserved.
PlanetSide and the SOE logo are registered trademarks of Sony Online Entertainment Inc. © 2004 Sony Online Entertainment Inc. All rights reserved.
All other trademarks or tradenames are properties of their respective owners.
Powered by vBulletin
Copyright ©2000 - 2024, Jelsoft Enterprises Ltd.