Kill cam.. again..

[Stardouser]

Originally Posted by Mechzz

Camping has always been a derogatory in my experience of its usage amongst gamers, as well as among caravanners

It refers to the act of sitting in one position performing the same action repeatedly with little or no skill to farm easy kills.

Examples:
Defending a base door is not camping.
Sitting with a sniper rifle on a hill a mile away with a 20x scope OSOKing the defenders with no intention of entering the base yourself is camping and deserves the contempt it gets.
Spawn camping players in their pj's is lame and deserves the contempt it gets.

Complaints about camping of any kind are Deathmatch concerns. In a game like Planetside, you need snipers, skill or no, suppressing base defenders so other guys can move in. The key is that if your whole team is doing it, you're in trouble. And even moreso in a game like Planetside, where overall victory is the goal, finding the enemy's spawn and putting them into panic mode by raping it, thus, cutting off reinforcements to wherever they would have gone after spawning, is a legitimate tactic and strategy. And besides, sneaking into a place where you can do that means you earned the opportunity.

Also, it will be a dark day indeed if there are one hit kills with sniper rifles other than headshots. If you can get one hit kills to the chest, it will be elite quickscoping montages everywhere.

[Immigrant]

Originally Posted by Mechzz

Sitting with a sniper rifle on a hill a mile away with a 20x scope OSOKing the defenders with no intention of entering the base yourself is camping and deserves the contempt it gets.

I beg to differ. If his team is attacking that base why would a long distance combatant need to enter the base himself? He's doing heck of a job distracting and weakening defenders for the close combat strike force imo. That's their purpose. Anyway defending sniper will be able to counter him.

We will of course have those snipers who'll go around lurking on their own for easy targets too but those won't have the privilege to camp (sit in place) since they'll be spotted soon and forced to move if they want to stay alive. And if they play hit and run good well, that's legit imho. Annoying for the victims but legit.

[Mechzz]

Originally Posted by Immigrant

I beg to differ. If his team is attacking that base why would a long distance combatant need to enter the base himself? He's doing heck of a job distracting and weakening defenders for the close combat strike force imo. That's their purpose. Anyway defending sniper will be able to counter him.

We will of course have those snipers who'll go around lurking on their own for easy targets too but those won't have the privilege to camp (sit in place) since they'll be spotted soon and forced to move if they want to stay alive. And if they play hit and run good well, that's legit imho. Annoying for the victims but legit.

If the sniper needs active support from his team to stay alive then I agree there's a place for sniping. However, it pains me to say that I have seen my own Vanu brethren cravenly lining the hill ridge closest to a base pinging away with the pitiful PS1 sniper rifles rather than enter the base and fight. And with OSOK sniper rifles (headshots) the numbers doing it will increase. I guess it's the thought the sniper takes the easy kills, then moves on to the next base for the next load of easy kills without exposing themselves to risk that annoys me. As long as there is risk for the sniper it's not really camping imo.

[Immigrant]

Originally Posted by Mechzz

If the sniper needs active support from his team to stay alive then I agree there's a place for sniping. However, it pains me to say that I have seen my own Vanu brethren cravenly lining the hill ridge closest to a base pinging away with the pitiful PS1 sniper rifles rather than enter the base and fight. And with OSOK sniper rifles (headshots) the numbers doing it will increase. I guess it's the thought the sniper takes the easy kills, then moves on to the next base for the next load of easy kills without exposing themselves to risk that annoys me. As long as there is risk for the sniper it's not really camping imo.

It may be different. I played Sentinel which is sniper (defending light) in Tribes for awhile and it was a pain in the ass. I've killed more people with mines in one match than with with rifle in 3 matches on average. OSOK is bad but Tribes model of 2 shot per light class, 4 per medium and like 6 per heavy to kill them is also very very annoying especially when targets there are very fast and thus hard to hit. Anyway I think PS2 should make aiming harder almost borderline simulation style but to retain ability to head-shot and severely hurt the enemy when he's shot in chest (even the medium class).

To sum it up my recipe is: make sniping more challenging (harder) but leave the damage high enough for it to be enjoyable. For instance one aspect (read: solution for nerfing) of sniping I liked in Tribes and would like transferred to PS2 is having to wait for your shots to charge to achieve max damage.

[Vancha]

Originally Posted by Rumblepit

it wont tell you were they are your right... but if hes by a tree next to a rock and the shot came from the south, yea hes dead. 1 + 1 =2 i think. my math mite be off a bit.not hard to figure it out. like i said it will be a rather annoying feature that seasoned gamers will want to turn off.

Right, you haven't read the thread.

You see a 3D model of the person that killed you. That's it. No scenery. No trees. No rocks. No bushes. No grass. No hills. No ridges. Nadda. There is no annoying feature. There is no replay of the kill.

I'm running out of ways to say this.

Originally Posted by Synical

Based on the horribly flawed logic that helping people avoid misconceptions leads to increased paranoia

That's strange, I could have sworn my logic was that entertaining someone's paranoia leads to increased paranoia. Oh well, I suppose if anyone know my logical processes better than I do, it's you!

[Kipper]

Originally Posted by Mechzz

Sitting with a sniper rifle on a hill a mile away with a 20x scope OSOKing the defenders with no intention of entering the base yourself is camping and deserves the contempt it gets.

I disagree. Why should assisting the attack/defense of a base by sniping targets deserve contempt? Its a perfectly valid thing to do.

If the way the game is set up makes it unbalanced and farmable, then that's the fault with game balance, not player behavior.

[Mechzz]

Originally Posted by Kipper

I disagree. Why should assisting the attack/defense of a base by sniping targets deserve contempt? Its a perfectly valid thing to do.

If the way the game is set up makes it unbalanced and farmable, then that's the fault with game balance, not player behavior.

I understand the point and accept that IRL this sort of suppressive fire has a valuable role to play. And who knows, with the hex system then if I'm getting repeatedly OSOK'd trying to defend a door then I can spawn at the next hex up and come as a cloaker with my shotty and rumble up the line of snipers on the ridge. And it will be a line of snipers. PS1 with its poor sniper rifles and its low pops has exactly that. Put a more powerful sniper rifle in PS2 and the problem will multiply without an effective counter. My hope is therefore that with the possible escape from the very linear (lattice driven) PS1 play flow, that more effective counter strategies can be employed.

[Kipper]

Originally Posted by Mechzz

My hope is therefore that with the possible escape from the very linear (lattice driven) PS1 play flow, that more effective counter strategies can be employed.

Yup, the new map system will add much more variety.

I don't think snipers will clean up. Bullet drop and OSOK only on headshots will make it more skilled - hitting a moving target at range should be reasonably difficult.

I think there'll be limitations on their ability to re-arm, I guess there'll be ammo boxes but someone will have to provide them, and not everyone will want to do that when they can't get into the fight themselves.

They'll also be easy meat for tank shells, AI turrets and support gunners, and aircav with AOE stuff like flamethrowers if they just line up on a hillside, not to mention cloaked infil.

[Sledgecrushr]

I dont like the idea of just seeing a 3d avatar of the guy that killed you. That kinda sucks.

[Hamma]

3D Avatar with stats I suspect.

We haven't seen their planned implementation of this yet.

[NCLynx]

Originally Posted by Sledgecrushr

I dont like the idea of just seeing a 3d avatar of the guy that killed you. That kinda sucks.

Originally Posted by Hamma

3D Avatar with stats I suspect.

We haven't seen their planned implementation of this yet.

Like Hamma said, it's not going to be just a 3d model of the character that killed you. It'll likely show his stats, the gun he killed you with, maybe even the health that he had left.

[Striker KOJ]

You people with the "Outline Cam" are thinking about it all wrong.

This is clearly a COSTUME Cam. SOE wants to make money. They are going to have a bunch of shit for sale in their store. A bunch of different costumes.

Personally, I think the "stats" that the cam gives you is secondary, but they MUST be able to show off the costume of the guy that killed you. It's a selling point.

Everytime you die, whether or not you saw the person before they killed you, you will be forced to see his threads. Everytime you die, it will be an advertisement for the cash shop. And it will work. You will see some guy wtfpizzahuttpizzown you, and you'll think "damn, that guy looked good in those sun glasses while he kicked my ass. I should buy some sun glasses."

It's also an avenue for you to show off all the widgets and forbleschwangles you spent your money on. Why buy a new hat if you are so awesome that your enemies never even get to see your hat before you fuck them up? This way, you get to fuck people up, AND show off your hat. "Fuck you, look at my hat bitch!!!"

As much hard game as we talk in these forums, FPS players aren't that much different from RPG players. Everyone likes to play dress up. Everyone likes to tinker. Everyone likes options. What better way to introduce players to those options than forcing them to see the options everytime they die.

So yeah, I say NAY to "outline cam" because it sounds chessey, and doesn't really capture the intent. Killer cam sounds better, because it refers to the killer, the guy who just did the killing, and not the actual situation of the kill. And you could go all mortal kombat and call it the Killer Kam, and then we can be fancy and shorten it to KK when we refer to it on the forums.

But as far as what it actually represents, Costume Cam sounds the best to me.

[Stardouser]

Originally Posted by Striker KOJ

You people with the "Outline Cam" are thinking about it all wrong.

This is clearly a COSTUME Cam. SOE wants to make money. They are going to have a bunch of shit for sale in their store. A bunch of different costumes.

Ooh, interesting theory. And I bet you're right, because frankly, if your killcam ISN'T going to show the enemy's positional data, there's really no reason for it not to simply show either your body, or your body's view facing up in the air as you wait for a revive. Seeing the enemy's appearance means they will want to customize it to suit themselves.

As long as the game is properly done and they don't have the Robin Hood killcam, I don't mind this. They do need to make a profit off this game so that it can succeed for those of us who have been dreaming of a large scale persistent shooter.

Call it costume cam!

[Xyntech]

Face Cam

As in "In yo' face, I just killed da shit outta you, dawg!"

FACE!

[ArmedZealot]

Originally Posted by Striker KOJ

Costume Cam

Echoes my thoughts on the matter. This is how I've imagined it to be like and how it will be used in conjuntion with skins.

Otherwise you run into issues that Tribes: Ascend has with its skins. Where a skin can only be seen by other people as a small man shaped dot with crosshairs over it.