1 29 30 31 32 33 Previous Next 494 Replies Latest reply: Nov 5, 2013 1:36 PM by BruteXL Go to original post Branched to a new discussion. RSS
      • 300. Re: Ghosts MP details from the reveal event

        What is wrong with what I said?  Aim assist pulls your crosshairs onto your target.  This is followed by a one shot kill.  If you practice this, you can do it quite regularly.  I used to do it for fun and then realized that I was breaking the game balance and ruining the game for everyone else.   

         

        And yes, movement based mechanics are irrelevant as all weapons have to deal with it and sniper rifles only need to deal with it for one shot.  Aim-assist makes that first shot easy. 

         

        There are a lot of people who aren't that good at cod.  Saying that most people in the quickscoping community aren't good enough to be effective doesn't excuse the ones who are.  In the skilled quickscoper's hands, a sniper rifle is the best weapon in the game in any situation.  An equally skilled SMG player can't even compare unless he gets the drop on him.  Shotgun users have to be close enough to actually deal damage.  AR/LMG users just get sniped unless they are within quickscope range. 

        • 301. Re: Ghosts MP details from the reveal event
          iivrruummii

          Anyone can use a sniper in any situation and get a kill.

          Anyone can use a SMG in any situation and get a kill.
          Anyone can use a AR in any situation and get a kill.

          Anyone can use a pistol in any situation and get a kill.

          Anyone can use a LMG in any situation and get a kill.

           

          So what are you trying to prove.  The only weapon that is controlled to close range is the Shotgun because it does more than 100 damage with each shot, closer to the 400 damage mark(8 pellets doing 60 damage a piece).  The strongest sniper in BO2 was the DSR50 and that was only in the 90s.  You cannot take one part of a weapon and compare it to another.  YOU NEED to compare the entire list of stats against one another which you FAIL to every time.  This is why your arguments have no substance because they don't contain facts.

          • 302. Re: Ghosts MP details from the reveal event
            maccabi

            bejebus can we stop with the freaking gun debate how about we wait till we KNOW what the guns do or dont do as atm everyone is debating hypotheticals

            • 303. Re: Ghosts MP details from the reveal event
              Seph009

              Well, I have based what I have said off the previous IW game and I'm saying something now since I don't want them to be craptastic again.

              • 304. Re: Ghosts MP details from the reveal event
                Foxhound-Pro

                maccabi wrote:

                 

                bejebus can we stop with the freaking gun debate how about we wait till we KNOW what the guns do or dont do as atm everyone is debating hypotheticals

                It's a very tricky situation as this thread has been designated for feedback. What we have right now though are two thought processes and ideas arguing it out. This content is better suited for a second thread, in my opinion, where the discussion can evolve. For thread health I think it's best for them to simply present their final piece of why they believe the opposing view is wrong and then simply stop addressing each other. It's hard to deny their argument presence here though. I'm not a developer and I can't really make that call.

                • 305. Re: Ghosts MP details from the reveal event

                  Will all the content be provided for Wii U?

                  • 306. Re: Ghosts MP details from the reveal event

                    Well, since you suggested it, I hope you don't mind if I stick it here.

                     

                    I will start with a little background on COD and game design. 

                     

                    COD is an arcade shooter based on real life.  Most of the weapons in COD are real guns.  The factions are real or at least believable.  The world in which COD takes place is nothing more than an alternate reality in which the world is at war.  There are no laser rifles or magic spells or fictional creatures.  COD plays its hand very close to reality in this sense. 

                     

                    This is called the game's "universe".  When deciding what to put in a movie/videogame/book, you generally consult what fits in the universe of said item.  If it doesn't fit, the item needs another reason to exist in the universe.  Videogames are a special case as the player "writes" the "story".  To keep players interested and engaged, a videogame needs to be fun.  As is such, certain mechanics are introduced to make the game playable at the expense of violating the rules of the game's universe.  Such things in COD are regenerating health(to let us have a chance to play without getting randomly killed) and aim assist(because apparently consoles "need" it).  To keep players from "hogging the spotlight" or "taking a backseat", game developers implement balance.  In a perfect world, this would make all weapons, equipment, perks, etc. have upsides and downsides that, on average, would give any setup an equal amount of advantages and disadvantages.  This ensure no logical setup results in never doing well or always doing well.


                    So, just to recap:  Any mechanic/item in a game needs to fit one of three criteria to be in there.

                     

                    1)  It fits the universe.  This can be over written if it affects game balance or playability. 

                    2)  It cause the game to become more playable.
                    3)  It makes the game balanced.

                     

                    The first argument I will make against quickscoping is that it does not fit the universe of COD.  Sniper rifles in real life are not used at close range because they are at a great disadvantage.  Now, I'm sure we can all assume that a 7.62x51 to the chest would ruin your day at any range, but so would a 5.56 or a 9mm or a .22.  In a special about snipers on the History Channel, "Sniper: Inside the Crosshairs", a sniper revealed that the fast moving rounds used in sniper rifles were LESS effective at close range.  This is because the round is moving so quickly, that it passes straight through without causing much damage.  The ability of an AR or SMG to fire successive shots that are designed to drop targets at closer ranges makes them more effective at stopping infantry.  As such, a sniper would NEVER willingly engage in CQB with a sniper rifle.  He would definitely NOT "quickscope" as doing so is highly inaccurate and potentially hazardous to civilians or himself. 

                     

                    Now, I know what you my be thinking.  Realism isn't everything!  You are right, but it is a factor that needs to be dispelled if I want to make a case against quickscoping. 

                     

                    My next argument I will make against quickscoping is that quickscoping adds little to nothing to the game and actually takes enjoyment out of the game.  Quickscoping allows a player to use a sniper rifle effectively at close range.  This niche is already filled by shotguns and SMGs.  Therefore, it does not need to be filled by the sniper rifle.  Furthermore, a player who selects a SMG or shotgun expects to be able to out perform other weapon classes.  When the sniper rifle, that is designed for long range combat, also, becomes a viable option, that takes away from the shotgun and the SMG.  It also upsets those players by removing another advantage they were supposed to have.  This coupled with the unbelievability of being killed by a weapon whose domain is the opposite end of the spectrum causes these players to have less fun.  While a competitive game lends itself towards a "I just gotta win" mentality, keep in mind that the purpose of a game is to have fun.  When you play with other people, you are partially responsible for their entertainment as well.  This doesn't mean let them win occasionally, it means don't be a jerk.  Don't do things that cause reasonable players to become upset such as glitching, hacking or exploiting.  Quickscoping is definitely an exploit as the intent of the auto-aim mechanic was to help with aiming on consoles, not to turn sniper rifles into accurate auto one shot cannons. 

                     

                    My final argument is that quickscoping breaks the game balance.  The ability to have a single weapon out-class all other weapon classes is game breaking as it causes anyone who uses that weapon effectively to have an advantage over all other players.  Quickscoping allows players to, with practice, one shot any other player reliably.  I will now explain how it out preforms each weapon class.

                    Shotguns:  These weapons have a one shot capability at close range.  However, outside of this range, the shotguns do little to no damage.  A sniper rifle can snipe them outside of their range (as it should), but they can also one shot the shotgunner inside its domain.  This makes both players play "fastest-gun-in-the-west" to see who gets the first hit.  A shotgun should have a complete advantage in this situation as it's domain is extreme close quarters, but with quickscoping, it becomes completely based of lag and reaction times.  Given equal skill, a shotgun should almost always win this confrontation, but that just isn't the case.

                     

                    SMGs:  These weapons have very high damage and rates of fire, but low range.  This makes them slightly less effective than shotguns at close range, but useful at ranges outside of the shotgun's range.  When it comes to a sniper rifle vs a SMG, the expected out comes are similar to those for a shotgun.  At range, the SMG needs to aim and land shots whilst dealing with recoil, but the sniper rifle needs only one hit.  The closer the SMG gets to the sniper, the easier it becomes to overcome the sniper, but the the quickscope happens.  Even though the occasional hit from the SMG causes flinch, the auto-aim mechanic causes the crosshairs to lock onto the SMG user's chest for just an instant when the scope appears.  At this time, all it takes is a trigger pull.  Timing is what it comes down to.  The SMG who only fears the shotgun at close range just got quickscoped by a weapon that can already out distance it. 

                     

                    ARs/LMGs:  The weapons are similar in that they are fairly effective at all ranges.  At long range, they have just enough power to out preform an SMG and shotguns can't touch them, but the sniper rifle needs only one shot.  This is fine as sniper rifles are long range weapons.  Unfortunately, even when the distance shrinks down, the sniper still only needs one hit to kill.  It comes down to the same story as the SMG.  These weapons need multiple hits to kill the sniper, but he only needs one well timed shot. 

                     

                    Essentially, this boils down to a weapon that, as designed, out preforms all weapons at long range and then, via an exploit of the auto-aim and a little practice, can out preform any weapon at close range. 

                     

                    My suggestions for repairing this exploit are as follows:

                     

                    1)  Remove auto aim from sniper rifles.  I have heard part of the community express interest in removing auto-aim completely.  This would definitely make quickscoping very luck based and give the advantage back to shotguns and SMGs.


                    2)  Take a point from real life and make the damage for a sniper rifle at close range less effective.  A shotgun can't damage you well at long range, so shouldn't a sniper rifle have difficulty at close range?  I suggest having a damage scaling for sniper rifles similar to the inverse of SMGs (obviously capping out at a standard sniper rifle damage output).  This gives CQB weapons a chance to react to a sniper and win their gunfight. 


                    3) Make a playlist for quickscopers where all mechanics that make quickscoping possible are still intact.  They do have fun quickscoping, so let them have their fun in a place where they won't upset other players. 

                     

                    4) Reduce ADS times for sniper rifles and do not include any mechanics to reduce this time.  This can hurt long range snipers as well so it should be applied lightly.  Long range snipers do need to be able to acquire a target and shoot them quickly enough to catch someone running across their sight line before they reach cover.

                     

                    I thank anyone for their time spent reading this post as it is a lengthy one.  I hope my suggestions and concerns are given due consideration.

                    • 307. Re: Ghosts MP details from the reveal event
                      teanah

                      RunAndGun1 wrote:

                       

                      I like what's coming in Ghosts. My main concern is with the current points per perk. As long as the points are delegated in such a way that we can create perk combos that will prevent OP combos. Keep the game balanced.

                       

                      I can't wait to get an XBone. I'm really curious about COD on dedicated servers. I hope its a noticeable difference, which I'm betting it will be.

                      We are still in the process of balancing the perks and how much each one is worth

                      • 308. Re: Ghosts MP details from the reveal event
                        Seph009

                        Speaking of that, dead eye seems to cost a bit much for what is essentially a randomized stopping power you need a 5-10 KS for to actually work a decent amount of the time. Especially considering that no other perk costs 5 points. If it's going to cost over half my normal perk slots it better actually be worth it.

                        • 309. Re: Ghosts MP details from the reveal event

                          Foxhound-Pro wrote:

                           

                          maccabi wrote:

                           

                          bejebus can we stop with the freaking gun debate how about we wait till we KNOW what the guns do or dont do as atm everyone is debating hypotheticals

                          It's a very tricky situation as this thread has been designated for feedback. What we have right now though are two thought processes and ideas arguing it out. This content is better suited for a second thread, in my opinion, where the discussion can evolve. For thread health I think it's best for them to simply present their final piece of why they believe the opposing view is wrong and then simply stop addressing each other. It's hard to deny their argument presence here though. I'm not a developer and I can't really make that call.

                           

                          I think the biggest issue with separate threads is the problem we had in the MW3 forums, where nobody felt like their view was being viewed by the IW Staff. That's why it always crept back up in the Patch Notes thread. Everyone knew that IW was reading that thread, and even replying to the feedback sometimes.. where as in separate threads, that just didn't seem like the case.

                           

                          If we can get some IW Devs to participate in the alternative threads, I'm sure people will be more than happy to split the discussion there and leave this thread for other types of feedback.

                          1 29 30 31 32 33 Previous Next