Dr_Death wrote:wait, dont go, you are right, forget about the sniper kit, remove all vehicles and do infantry fights only, imagine the USMC having to swim all the way from the carrier to the shore and the MEC having the chance to do a replica of the D-day with their own infantry
No, let's imagine there's nothing wrong at all with assets and target minorities that don't have any negative impact on the game at all other than stubborn people who're whining about these minorities.
Let's imagine you can't make/play big maps with light/no vehicles, which will stimulate infantry based gameplay and teamwork in general - instead of having 6 asset claiming squads and 3 infantry squads made of remaining newcomers.
Let's imagine that not all of the server admins are asset whores and only put maps for themselves and kick people that might threaten their jet that they're going to crash in the first 2 minutes.
Nuff said, let's get our hands on the big problems of PR, not on one guy with a sniper kit. That's my whole point.
In fairness that is the logical progression. There are two types of role in PR - Assets and Targets. And as mentioned the experienced players that do want to play Inf will be left babysitting 5 or 6 new guys (targets for the Assets). Although sometimes the Infantry on both sides ends up fighting, in which case the Targets are now the guys with the scopes/longer ranged weaponry.
Don't get me wrong, you can make yourself a hard target (hate that phrase). But at the end of the day 9/10 times you are there for someone elses enjoyment, leading a squad of people that don't respond much to attempts to do anything.
(Take it from me, I am as l33t as they come. I'm a roleplaying, milsim oriented, clan-tagged Sniper Combat Medic).
ASSETS DO RUIN GAMEPLAY, atleast MORE OFTEN THAN ONE GUY WITH A SNIPER KIT.
FFS, I'm out of here
Actually... you are wrong.
A sniper CAN ruin everyones gameplay. Especially if they are sniping teammates.
I can tell you prob about 20 stories where a friendly sniper/enemy sniper ruined my gameplay...
Only on Certain maps do Assets ruin gameplay. Yeah, it seems like PR only has asset maps playing. PRTA does mix it up.
So you are saying, Assets should be eliminated....
If that were to happen....
I bet PR wouldn't be here.
Yeah, there are times where I do wish CERTAIN assets were removed from some maps/gamemodes.... but honestly.
Assets are very fun... It proves how good teamwork you can get.
IMO, the best map for INF and Assets, which is a good combo is Shijia Valley. There aren't a **** load of tanks and apcs and such.
Can we keep this thread on topic? Cause I don't know where assets came into this.
matty1053 wrote:
A sniper CAN ruin everyones gameplay. Especially if they are sniping teammates.
I can tell you prob about 20 stories where a friendly sniper/enemy sniper ruined my gameplay...
May I tell you that I personally have never been sniped by a friendly during 4 years of PR.
May I tell you that I've been killed countless times, if not daily, by assets (who have maps on their HUD, thermals and zoom, which makes a TK by a sniper nothing compared with this one).
Why I started talking about assets?
Because I want to prove that there are much bigger problems in PR than, I repeat, ONE, FREAKING, GUY, WITH, A, SNIPER, KIT.
Dr_Death wrote:Oh, now i know what you mean, i think that i can also blame how instead, most of the new players get assets instead of sticking with infantry roles, also, thermals are not gonna let you IFF, i have killed civilians on al-bashir several times because of that
True.
What I am guessing:
In their P.O.V.
Infantry is boring.
or they just WANT kills.
Honestly, TBH; I don't care about how many kills I get. I just care if I have fun and enjoy the match. I like INF because you have more action then assets. (I have seen COUNTLESS times on huge asset maps where INF squads have more kills then asset squads.
Why? Because you have players that have NO clue how to operate Tanks, APCs, or Jets/CAS. Then they end up wasting them by driving right to enemy Tows or armor.
Sorry Careless, I was kind of mis-reading your posts.
But now, I really understand.
One sniper, can't ruin gameplay. And I was exaggerating a bit about the "20 times" It really was about 5 times.
Well...there is such a concept as the three-man sniper team. A few years back a three-man National Guard sniper team got some medals for an ambush they were in while serving with American SF and la Legion Etrangere. I believe they had at a SAW and M14, don't know about the other guy, but likely he had the SAW because of the situation, it wasn't his standard weapon. There was a four-man team from the 82nd Airborne, two of them got the Distinguished Service Cross, and the other two died. I dunno if that was really a four-man team, or just two two-man teams.
I haven't really considered what could go wrong with this idea, but maybe not letting someone get the officer kit unless they have at least four guys in their squad?
Aside from the teamkilling mentioned (should be kicked/banned for that), snipers and designated marksmen DO ruin a lot of things. That's the point. They observe the enemy, call for fire, and also kill priority targets. Officers, radio operators, machine gunners, etc.
Juba ("irregular faction" sniper, I got corrected by an admin for specifying that they are Muslim) got 37 kills in Iraq, so he claims. Al-Qaeda paid upwards of $5000 per confirmed kill (and they offer health insurance, not kidding).
CPO Chris Kyle (US Navy) had 160 confirmed kills, 255 claimed, spread out between some four deployments.
MCpl Graham Ragsdale (Canadian Forces) got 20 kills in 10 days.
SSG Tim Kellner (US Army) got 78 kills in Iraq and three in Haiti, and he's still in.
SSG Justin Morales (US Army) killed 27 in one year.
Compare that to the Rangers and SF in the Battle of Mogadishu. 160 good guys (various nations) killed around 900 bad guys. So, five or six per person. 20 good guys (not including the guy killed by the stray mortar round several days later) died. There were about 6,000 bad guys.
The sniper fear thing is very real in the real world, it's almost impossible to fight back effectively. I think it's great in PR, it really adds a new dimension and makes you think hard about where to take up a position at.
With thermals...I switch a lot and pay close attention to the radar map. Getting killed by them is just part of the game, but what pisses me off is when they take out an entire friendly squad in one pass, despite all the things available to them (laser guidance, radar map, zoom, text chat, voice chat, and so on), and it's always at a point where if you are gone for one second, that flag is gonna get overrun by dozens of bad guys.
Last edited by Ragnarok1775 on 2014-06-20 03:55, edited 2 times in total.
Reason:Accent marks show as ?s
Ragnarok1775 wrote:I just find it easier to notice something at a distance or camouflaged when using thermals, and then switch to optical sights to confirm target.
"Text"...what are you trying to say? I talk a lot?
No, I do that especially if it's a big chunk of nice text, so web page isn't 2,000,000 pixels long.
i know your being sarcastic
Yeah true that. But it's almost common sense to see if it's enemy or not. It's not that hard to see what is enemy on like Asset maps.
If you are blufor tank gunning/apc.... you can see what is MEC (example on Kashan), they have the uglier vehicles.... meanwhile US has smoother vehicles.
I hate McDonald's. They pulled a Power Rangers toy when the "irregular factions" complained that it APPEARED like the guy was stomping on a symbol of the "irregular factions" "book".
I am not fat.
And I would never just throw weapons in a pile like that, I take good care of my guns.
So I don't understand the purpose of your stereotyping picture. But I hope you enjoy mine.
