47 Replies Latest reply: Oct 17, 2013 9:34 PM by frequentbanger2 Branched to a new discussion. RSS

Encouraging Accuracy?

WKMMS

Spraying people in the legs and getting a kill.  We all do it and it happens to us all too.  Yes, this is a video game and there's a certain amount of suspension of disbelief that should be applied, but I've always found this to be a bit silly.  In order to kill someone shouldn't we at least be required to hit them from the waist up? 

 

In CoD Ghosts we now have a sniper rifle getting in on the act, with the L115 being a OHK to the thigh and up.  This seems to me to be a backwards step, especially since it seems to handle faster then the Ballista from BO2 (which is my own personal favourite gun btw). 

 

CoD has always been a straightforward and simple shooter, but isn't it about time that there was a bit more emphasis placed on being precise and accurate?  What are your thoughts?

  • Re: Encouraging Accuracy?
    rankismet

    While I get your perspective to a point... I don't agree with it.

     

    If you remove scoring a kill with hits to extremities then you must also change the affect those shots have. People should limp... be unablle to raise a weapon... and what about the health fairy?

     

    Perhaps the game needs to emphasize not being shot.

    • Re: Encouraging Accuracy?
      trialstardragon

      I think that if you get hit in the arms or legs is should be proportional to the number of hits on the effects. 1 hit decreases accuracy/run speed by 25%. 2 hits decreases it by 50%. 3 hits and you cant use a two handed weapon or sprint anymore. No health regen either. so no running to hide and wait until its back to normal.

      • Re: Encouraging Accuracy?
        rankismet

        trialstardragon wrote:

         

        I think that if you get hit in the arms or legs is should be proportional to the number of hits on the effects. 1 hit decreases accuracy/run speed by 25%. 2 hits decreases it by 50%. 3 hits and you cant use a two handed weapon or sprint anymore. No health regen either. so no running to hide and wait until its back to normal.

         

        IMO, the health fairy is the cause of a lot of issues.

      • Re: Encouraging Accuracy?
        Run_N_Gunning_Camper

        It would be nice if they get shot by a sniper on the arms or legs, the victim will drop to the ground in Last Stand position, lose his weapon, be defenseless and he have to crawl a minimum of two meters to get his weapon back. He will be on this position for ten seconds before regeneration triggers.

  • Re: Encouraging Accuracy?
    Izjar11

    Spraying people in the legs and getting a kill.  We all do it and it happens to us all too.  Yes, this is a video game and there's a certain amount of suspension of disbelief that should be applied, but I've always found this to be a bit silly.  In order to kill someone shouldn't we at least be required to hit them from the waist up?

    what your asking for is more realism and that is not what COD should be.

    CoD has always been a straightforward and simple shooter, but isn't it about time that there was a bit more emphasis placed on being precise and accurate?  What are your thoughts?

    BO2 had its emphasizes on accuracy (the huge aim assist) was to help with aiming for a reason. I do not think more realism is the answer to COD or how to make it better.

     

    Not a bad post but I would not suggest it.

  • Re: Encouraging Accuracy?
    brsox

    I think the damage is fine, but I wish they would make aiming worth something. I constantly get killed by wild sprays in BO2. It's ridiculous. Most of the time I feel like I would be better off hip spraying over aiming. That is probably the most frustrating thing for me. I HATE when I ADS and shoot someone (on target) but I die... then watching the killcam I see a wild uncontrolled hipspray. Hate it. Makes no sense at all.

    • Re: Encouraging Accuracy?
      rlbl

      it makes perfect sense to me:

       

      If I drop a gun on the ground and it fires, and the stray bullet ricochets off of two walls, and then off a steal drum to find its resting place in the back of someone's head who was aiming at me... I expect they will die.

       

      I am being facetious... but it can happen nonetheless

  • Re: Encouraging Accuracy?
    Old__Tymer

    Maybe they should just lower the damage a little more for limb shots.

  • Re: Encouraging Accuracy?
    ghamorra

    Depending on the weapon, a sniper can cleanly blow of body parts. I don't expect much fight out of that person, assuming they're still conscious after the shock of be torn apart.

  • Re: Encouraging Accuracy?
    Hobeinator

    I don't think requiring a waist up shot for a kill is the way to go, but I wouldn't be against lowering the damage value on extremity hits.  That would put more emphasis on accuracy.

  • Re: Encouraging Accuracy?
    Adam1234567893

    Lol seriously this post was just funny they haven't encouraged accuracy since MW2 that was the last accuracy based Call of Duty games after that game either had to much aim assist or to many 3D animations errors or they had broken camera angles as well. You say encouraging accuracy I say what accuracy? If they only use sticky aim that would even encourage sticky aim. And if you are an anti-quickscoper I haven't seen a quickscoper post in awhile so there is no need to keep bashing them. Games after MW2 have been spray and pray games more then accuracy based games.

    • Re: Encouraging Accuracy?
      WKMMS

      That's exactly my point, there isn't a whole lot of focus on needing to be accurate when you can fire an SMG at 1200rpm into someone's leg and they'll die in a split second.  Don't get me wrong, I've no problem with how the game plays, just had a notion in my head and wanted to see what the community at large felt.  Not sure why you think I'm bashing quickscoping though - check out some of my posts in the many QS threads and you'll see nothing could be further from the truth

      • Re: Encouraging Accuracy?
        Adam1234567893

        Nah I was just saying the anti-quickscopers haven't given it a rest yet they just keep going I bet if they ended quickscoping they would target another play style until that got removed lol. As for accuracy I miss MW2 because every gun had a chest shot damage multiplier rather then just a head shot one it encouraged people to aim for the chest. Now it's only the snipers that have chest damage multipliers you don't even have to aim let alone flank with a shotgun anymore because how easy they have become. No gun is accuracy dependent let alone encouraging accuracy so it's become a huge problem.

  • Re: Encouraging Accuracy?
    SRPhoenix

    I posted a previous post "Realism" along the same line of reasoning. A head shot (excepting range and/or weapon type - e.g. long range pistol) should be one shot kill; limb shots should slow/deter movement; while torso shots should result in slowing and result in gradual "bleed out". I got pretty much the same type of response. Most people appear to be happy with a run-and-gun arcade game.

    • Re: Encouraging Accuracy?
      WKMMS

      I'm more than happy with the run n gun style and not looking to make the game super-realistic - there are other games out there that fit that bill more closely and, though I enjoy playing those games too, it's the fast, simple fun of CoD that keeps me coming back for more.  Just thought there might be a way to reward and encourage players to develop their accuracy

  • Re: Encouraging Accuracy?
    T-boss

    none chest/head shots should do less damadge then normal shots.

     

    if htere is a sniper that OHK's from the theigh up, then there is a issue, and it sounds like a preview to MW3/MW2 quickscoping issues. recent news has not been good for htis game.

  • Re: Encouraging Accuracy?
    surridge1990

    Best way to encourage accuracy over spraying is to make the hip fire spread larger. currently you can hipfire just as accurately as you can ADS, in fact in some cases more accurately because the recoil is less noticable when hipfirng.

     

    Just add a larger area that hipfired bullets can spread to, therefore less bullets will hit the target.

  • Re: Encouraging Accuracy?
    mickilla

    Perhaps the more effective way to encourage more deliberate player input would be to make the weapons behave with real consequences. As things stand now, most weapons have such low recoil that you may as well just hold down that trigger and let loose fully automatic fire for as long as you feel like, regardless of range to target. Hipfiring in close combat is just as mindless, probably even more so.

     

    For sighted fire, my suggestion is to use a variable recoil system. As you fire rounds in succession, each one will have more recoil than the one before. The first few consecutive rounds will be extraordinarily precise, but then afterward the recoil will start to add up in a hurry. The exact values will probably have to be adjusted per weapon type.

     

    For hipfire, there isn't much that can be done. The only possible solution is just to make these spastic close range spray-fests less of the norm. The problem isn't the size of the maps, rather just how cluttered they are. Every time you turn a corner, there's a close-range encounter waiting for you. That, in a nutshell, is the problem.

    • Re: Encouraging Accuracy?
      SRPhoenix

      The problem isn't the clutter, in fact the clutter can be used effectively for cover, allowing you to move through the map more stealthily. The problem is that the game is not zonal. If the maps were broken up along enemy lines, and advancement into enemy territory were more strategic and team oriented then the random blind corners would be negated.

       

      I know I am likely to get flamed, because it's going to be said that that is not the way the game was designed or intended, and a new spawn scenario would be required. But, I have never understood why the game has a team death match with no impetus to play as a team. Run-and-gun types can always play FFA. The way it is now most people play team death match using their teammates as cover (and I am as guilty as the next).

       

      I am just saying, add a team mode that can be played as such.

      • Re: Encouraging Accuracy?
        mickilla

        The larger point to make is that nearly all combat occurs at short range, even on the large maps. Open space often is completely avoided, so regardless to how big the map is everyone just huddles together in yet one more close range spray-fest. And I stand by what I said about clutter rather than cover. Most map objects exist to completely conceal the enemy, rather than give them a strong position from which to fire their weapon. That's the reason we simply don't get any ranged combat, and why marksmanship is a skill that has been completely lost on the COD franchise.

        • Re: Encouraging Accuracy?
          SRPhoenix

          I was just assuming "clutter" was being used idiomatically. But you are right about the way they lay it out in this game. If the maps had high vantage sight lines over "open" areas containing strategic cover, then long range players (campers) could use sniper or suppressing LMG fire to provide cover for the mobile players (run-and-gunners). This would require better map design (allowing for defensible positions) and "protected" or selectable (but not strategically offensive) spawn sites. One idea would to have "out of bounds" spawn sites behind certain areas that allow players a certain amount of limited time to enter the map.

           

          [I wrote the above before I saw the trailer for squads. From what I see, I am hoping the squad mode play will promote a more strategic type of game play.]

          • Re: Encouraging Accuracy?
            mickilla

            It tends to be the case that there are a few nice vantage points in each map, but they aren't defensible. And what's worse, they're easily flanked. Even more troublesome, the enemy could just respawn behind your position at any time. Add all that up, and its suicidal to play defensively.

             

            The irony is that camping is often said to be a major problem. This happens because defensive players can't use vantage points, so their only practical option is to back into a corner and just guard themselves. A major device that each map should have is a pair of defensible vantage points that face one-another. Let defensive players try to outgun the enemy team's defensive players. Suddenly the aggressive flankers have a purpose in getting to the opposing side's position to tip the fight to their team's favor.

            • Re: Encouraging Accuracy?
              SRPhoenix

              It seems we are pretty much in agreement on the subject.

               

              It really hoses me off to weed my way to a nice vantage point, lay claymore and a couple of shock grenades, only to have somebody charge through a door or window and mow me down before I can even get off a shot.

               

              As to the camper thing - I usually have to turn off chat, because every time I stop for a couple of seconds, get the lay of the land, and get a kill or two I get called a "bleeping" camper. Seeking cover and trying to get kills without getting killed is common sense. But as the game does no really penalize you for deaths (which I think it should), you are going to have a preponderance of players going 25 and 20 (or so). It makes more sense personally to me to go 15 and 3, get 5 to 10 assists, and take down a few aircraft - and have fun doing it.

  • Re: Encouraging Accuracy?
    trialstardragon

    Yes but if they tried that the casual gamer would have it too hard, would not like the game and not buy the next one because of it. All that would be left would be diehard fans that stayed.

    • Re: Encouraging Accuracy?
      WKMMS

      Possibly, but I'm not entirely sure.  I think a lot of the kiddies would stay.  They tend to stick around even when they're going 3-20.  I think they're just happy to be in the game at all - they certainly don't seem to be too bothered about winning or getting a decent score

  • Re: Encouraging Accuracy?
    OPStealthRecon

    I know I hate it when I get hit markers. if you hit someone with a bullet they shouldn't be able to move back into cover and wait for you with a shotgun. a hit marker should indicate that you have a kill not that an enemy is eating bullets. I feel like they should either make the bullet damage higher (which is what I recommend) or make it so that their is less cover to move to after you are hit. and seriously I am tired of getting shotgunned or quickscoped after I shoot an enemy in the face.

    • Re: Encouraging Accuracy?
      WKMMS

      Have you thought about playing some hardcore?  You'd never have to worry about shotgunners or snipers taking you out in one shot if you're putting bullets on target.  All the guns almost instantly at most ranges so its a much more level playing field weapon wise. 

    • Re: Encouraging Accuracy?
      Run_N_Gunning_Camper

      The problem here is you can't hold your aim long enough to get the kill. Core isn't just about who fired the first shot. It's about who can hold his aim more accurately to get the kill. You can fire first, get a hitmarker, lose your aim and get killed. I killed so many players even though they fired first. I'm a hard target. I strafe, I jump, I dropshot, and I'm pretty accurate. If your accuracy isn't so good, rest assured I will take you down even if you managed to fire first.

      • Re: Encouraging Accuracy?
        trialstardragon

        Yep, fire first kill first, is not how core was ever meant to play.

        • Re: Encouraging Accuracy?
          Run_N_Gunning_Camper

          A lot of complaints on BO2 says they fired first yet they died first. I suspect they can't hold their aim and their target strafed out of their line of fire. They get owned and they take to the forums and complain the game is broken.

        • Re: Encouraging Accuracy?
          rankismet

          trialstardragon wrote:

           

          Yep, fire first kill first, is not how core was ever meant to play.

           

          Yes, It was designed for corner jumping, bunny hopping, drop shotting health fairy shenanigans.

          • Re: Encouraging Accuracy?
            trialstardragon

            No, it was designed for people who used tactics to move about and cause the attacker to loose aim and thus not do enough damage for the kill because they could not keep their target in their sights.

             

            Aim first, fire first, kill first was never how Cod was meant until HC came about where guns killed in as little as 1-2 rounds. And that is the difference between core and hc. HC takes a greater level of accuracy and ability to remain on target than hc. Which is why most hc diehards cannot play core and do well and then cry it is broke. When really it is them that is broke because they lack decent aiming skills to follow the target as it moves.

            • Re: Encouraging Accuracy?
              curse_terror

              first off all hc exists since call of duty 2 or even 1 so it was always there so its not correct to say since it came ... i wanted to correct this misconception...  and then HC is a far more realist game mod than Core ever was or will be so please stop ******** about ppl crying they are not all crying i own both hc and core you just have to adapt to the gamemode.

              • Re: Encouraging Accuracy?
                trialstardragon

                It was not always in the game. It was an added in feature in one of the earlier games. So yes it is right to say since it was added.

                 

                HC is not more realistic at all. For people can survive multiple gun shot wounds and live in real life. Getting shot in the foot with one round and dieing is not more realistic.

                 

                Soldiers in real life have been shot several times in arms or legs and lived to be healed and then sent back to battle.

  • Re: Encouraging Accuracy?
    dieStrafe

    I do believe aim assist has been removed all together as well as crosshairs for the sniper rifle class. This does add significant emphasis on aiming for those who will be sniping. Hopefully they've also considered spray patterns and movement, like how the jump shot in BOII has ridiculous effect on the weapons pattern, and taken into consideration each weapons unique spray.

  • Re: Encouraging Accuracy?
    frequentbanger2

    totally agree with you