IDF have too few scopes!

[Conman51]

Last night i played Beruit for the first time in 1.0 and IDF got their *** kicked. The main fighting was across the bridge near the IDF main, and i have a feeling this is why the IDF lost, that combat is too long range for them to fight in.

I kind of like how they are mainly a CQB faction, but being good in CQB has more variables than just who has a red dot and who doesn't.

The IDF just get raped in many AAS maps i see now. Its ok if the machine gun and rifleman dont have scopes. But maybe the IDF can do something a different way.

(Suggestion related to feedback here)

Maybe the IDF limited kits can have scopes, while the unlimited kits (ie rifleman) dont get scopes. Maybe for example the breacher and the medic and LAT can get scopes. Mix stuff up a bit.

I dont really care if its realistic or not. I think this needs to be changed for balance purposes.

Any one else notice IDF inf getting beat in inf vs inf combat?

[ghostfool84]

On Gaza its just fine i think, but yeah their only advantage now are their assets. On Iron Eagle (Bijiar Canyons) it just doesnt fit and scopes would fit better. Fighting on a Map like Bijiar with fighting ranges 400+ without any type of scope is just ridiculus. A solution when only Special kits have scopes is not useful i think. But id like to see where all the "no scopes are nice so dont complain" people are that posted in the Medic thread^^

Personally i think atleast the Rifleman should have a Scope, SQL already has one, but i wouldnt mind a regular Scope Layout like the most other factions have

[ComradeHX]

Maybe now BlooFor players will learn how it feels to play Militia.

Scope is not really representing scope, it represents a way to alleviate for lack of detail(compared to real life where you can see, with naked eye, way further than in-game) due to pixels on monitor.

I know there is solid evidence that IDF does not use much scope; just need to add a "zoom in" modeless scope(like old pkm in RusFed) in addition to regular ironsights as buis, and it would be fine. Not sure why anyone would be against it since Arma2 had it and I do not see anyone b**ching about it.

I kind of like how they are mainly a CQB faction, but being good in CQB has more variables than just who has a red dot and who doesn't.

Not sure how Tavor is now; but I was sure it did way better than any other gun in full auto back in 0.98.

[MuffinMunchies]

Even in a semi-urban environment, like Beirut, the IDF can be beaten badly. Not just by fighting across the bridge either. I was playing as a Russian (so I'm not angry because I lost, I felt sorry for them. xD) and we were in the complex at the south of the map where it's 4 corner buildings (L shaped) around a plaza. Well the Russians were in the southern two and the IDF in the northern two. Nearly equal footing. Well, the IDF got creamed. Why? Because they could barely, if at all, see us from across the plaza and shoot us through the windows. Meanwhile, we could see them clearly and were killing each guy with 1-2 shots if they even tried to shoot us. So they changed tactics to CQB mode. Problem is, it's a 25-30 meter run between the buildings and few entrances. They got mowed down easily, well before reaching us. If they engaged at range, they died. If they tried to engage at short range, they died. Pretty much, they just died, and had no way of beating us. The only ones who did were the IDF squad leaders. That's 1-2 guys with a scope against 16 Russians with scopes. Even with a tank to support them they couldn't dislodge us.

The lack of scopes is a game-killing disadvantage to the IDF on many maps, and removes from them an advantage other factions gain both on AAS and Insurgency maps. On AAS, they can't compete at anything except interior CQB and vehicle warfare, because they don't have the range (Red dot is good to have, but only when combined with Optics as well, a squad of nothing but red dot users will always lose to a squad with half-and-half, optics-and-dot/irons). Then they lack the advantage others have when fighting Militia or Insurgents. Militia and Insurgents have no optics, but that is made up for by having increased mobility in their hideout mechanics, and, in the insurgents case, having the huge bonus of not losing tickets on death. Most factions make up for this by having optics to fight the insurgents and militia with. The IDF don't. Combat-wise, they are almost equal to their opponent, while at the same time having the disadvantage of having a normal logistical and FOB system, while their opponent has hideouts. A Striker or two doesn't even that out (Talking Gaza here, where I've never seen the IDF win, even if they are trashing Hamas).

The lack of scopes on the IDF is a much more serious problem than I think people realize. I've played on Beirut, Gaza, and Bijar on both sides multiple times. I've seen IDF win only rarely, and that on Beirut only once, the rest on Bijar and won on the backs of their vehicles, not infantry.

They need to get their magnified red dots back. I don't care if it's less magnification than traditional optics, SOME magnification is necessary to make them a viable faction again.

[matty1053]

Last night i played Beruit for the first time in 1.0 and IDF got their *** kicked. The main fighting was across the bridge near the IDF main, and i have a feeling this is why the IDF lost, that combat is too long range for them to fight in.

I kind of like how they are mainly a CQB faction, but being good in CQB has more variables than just who has a red dot and who doesn't.

The IDF just get raped in many AAS maps i see now. Its ok if the machine gun and rifleman dont have scopes. But maybe the IDF can do something a different way.

(Suggestion related to feedback here)

Maybe the IDF limited kits can have scopes, while the unlimited kits (ie rifleman) dont get scopes. Maybe for example the breacher and the medic and LAT can get scopes. Mix stuff up a bit.

I dont really care if its realistic or not. I think this needs to be changed for balance purposes.

Any one else notice IDF inf getting beat in inf vs inf combat?

Gaza it's perfect.

Now Bijar Canyons it's a pain in the booty. Especially fighting over the mountains and such. But it's decent in the city Bijar when it's in play.

Asad Khal is same though. I thought the scopes would be there for the IDF to use.

[risegold8929]

I laughed when I saw IDF vs MEC on Asad Khal. No scopes made it very difficult for me and my team vs enemy team w/ scopes.

[Conman51]

I used to like Beruit as IDF. It was fun.


But not anymore. That map is fucked and one main reason is because the IDF need to try to fight without scopes. They just cant lean on their shitty M113s to fight and the tank will just get raped ny TOWS, HATS, and the Havok. Its dumb.

I would like to see the Russians scopes removed maybe just for that map just to see how it plays out. But right now its just stupid and unplayable as IDF.


Not fun.



And it just gets worse....


This shouldnt be the scores on an AAS map...The KDR says it all.
And i wish i got a shot of the final KDRs

22-0
10-0
12-0
For russians
The IDF just started leaving. The Deaths were higher but those players left.

[ComradeHX]

Their Tavor have faster rate of fire than AK-74m as well as better fullauto handling at least in 0.98.

[Kerryburgerking]

Any one else notice IDF inf getting beat in inf vs inf combat?

IDF absolutely kicks *** in CQB

[FuzzySquirrel]

IDF absolutely kicks *** in CQB

Right, and that's great for Gaza, but they get steam rolled on Bijar and Beruit.

[SANGUE-RUIM]

for some maps like gaza beach and asad khal its ok... but playing bijar w/o scope is just ridiculous

[Kerryburgerking]

Right, and that's great for Gaza, but they get steam rolled on Bijar and Beruit.

Played Bijar 2 times since the release. IDF have won both times. Everything doesnt have to do with the optics.

[Kevokpo]

adding scopes is not the solution at all, does people complain that the militia in black gold needs scopes? I haven't seen any posts about that or heard people complaining either and it is a 4km map.

[MuffinMunchies]

IDF absolutely kicks *** in CQB

Assuming there isn't a road they have to cross. If there is, there is a disproportionately high probability of them getting mowed down. They don't have the ability to see enemies at long range. The enemy, who likely have an AR somewhere, do. It's an unfair advantage.

The argument (Which has been made here) about "well the insurgents and militia don't have it", keep in mind that those insurgents don't have to worry about ticket loss from deaths (and have you looked at the K/D ratios in militia/insurgent matches? The Insurgents and Militia don't equal the Blufor, so your argument doesn't add up at all). Furthermore, they also have added benefit of mobility in hideouts over FOBs, and the maps are generally set up to favor them being on defense, whereas Blufor is on offense. With the IDF you have equal-footing maps, equal ticket counts, and the same logistics and FOB system. The lack of optics, even in an urban environment, is a serious liability that is not evened out by another feature given to them.

[Brooklyn-Tech]

or you can take the kit's strengths and weaknesses into consideration and adapt your playing style.

each faction "play's" differently, so just because IDF is Bluefor (on most maps) doesn't mean you should play the same way you would with other Bluefor factions.

EDIT: please tell me more about how militia doesn't have to watch their ticket loss due to deaths

[Ts4EVER]

Jesus imagine if Project Normandy or FH2 players would ***** like that about German not having (many) semi automatic rifles Now I don't know jack about modern weapons, but if the IDF doesn't use scopes, then PR should reflect that.

[MuffinMunchies]

or you can take the kit's strengths and weaknesses into consideration and adapt your playing style.

each faction "play's" differently, so just because IDF is Bluefor (on most maps) doesn't mean you should play the same way you would with other Bluefor factions.

EDIT: please tell me more about how militia doesn't have to watch their ticket loss due to deaths

I said Insurgents, not militia, but if you want to push, how about the extra 200 tickets that the Militia get over Bluefor? Unless we're going to start giving the IDF a ticket bump, something needs to be done.

The argument "each faction play's differently" might sound cool in a post, but stop and actually look at all the factions. The disadvantages are paired with advantages in order to increase the GAMEPLAY of this game. I am not claiming IDF have to be played the same as other factions. No one has said that, nor does that answer our concerns. Our concerns are, the lack of scopes has caused a serious detriment to the IDF faction that is not balanced out with a paired advantage as other factions do. THAT is the problem, and what needs fixed. Whether that is through optics, magnified reflex sights, an advantage in vehicles, whatever the case may be.

[Celestial1]

I said Insurgents, not militia, but if you want to push, how about the extra 200 tickets that the Militia get over Bluefor? Unless we're going to start giving the IDF a ticket bump, something needs to be done.

Not all Militia maps get ticket advantages. Fools Road, Dragon Fly, Mestia, and Iron Ridge all have the same tickets as the opposing BluFor team.

The argument "each faction play's differently" might sound cool in a post, but stop and actually look at all the factions. The disadvantages are paired with advantages in order to increase the GAMEPLAY of this game. I am not claiming IDF have to be played the same as other factions. No one has said that, nor does that answer our concerns. Our concerns are, the lack of scopes has caused a serious detriment to the IDF faction that is not balanced out with a paired advantage as other factions do. THAT is the problem, and what needs fixed. Whether that is through optics, magnified reflex sights, an advantage in vehicles, whatever the case may be.

I think it's pretty obvious that there are exaggerated claims the detrimental effects of this change (I mean, 20-150 team kill/death sounds more like the IDF were playing Lemmings than anything). I'll agree that they might benefit from some balance on Beirut and Bijar, but I don't think re-adding scopes or changing tickets is either necessary or the best way to go.

An unfortunate mishap of altering factions that have existing maps.

[Frontliner]

Scope is not really representing scope, it represents a way to alleviate for lack of detail(compared to real life where you can see, with naked eye, way further than in-game) due to pixels on monitor.

I know there is solid evidence that IDF does not use much scope; just need to add a "zoom in" modeless scope(like old pkm in RusFed) in addition to regular ironsights as buis, and it would be fine. Not sure why anyone would be against it since Arma2 had it and I do not see anyone b**ching about it.

I said that already when we had talks about the binocular removal, a compensation is needed when the player lacks both scope and binocular, and with the BUIS switch at the press of a button, this is more doable than ever - and I just don't understand why it's not done.

[rodrigoma]

this is more doable than ever - and I just don't understand why it's not done.

get to it, don't take too long.

then everyone can see if it is worth it and can be implemented.