How do people feel about ADADA and bullet travel

Perhaps modern CS iterations have removed the hitscan weapons and made it a deeper game? Because when it comes to how weapons work, you basically have:

• CS
  • Aiming skill
• PS2 and other trajectory-based games like Tribes, Quake, etc
  • Aiming skill
  • Trajectory skill (knowing where to aim based on your opponent's probable motion)
  • Evasion skill (being able to juke your opponent and in games with slower projectiles potentially dodge shots)

So there are just more ways to be skilled in these other games, and the aiming skill is just as necessary.
That's without getting into the much deeper additional layers of PS2's tactics/strategy which go well above and beyond CS.

I still think that ADADA is a major and basic component of every engagement in PS2, regardless of distance(Where there is any that matters in fact, meaning almost NOWHERE), if you're even half serious about Infantry VS Infantry- And I still think it shouldn't be... Not to that degree in any case... But for that to change, Base design needs to change first.

Since I brought that up let me digress; Wrel may be correct that altering Base design won't fix Spawn Camp/Spawn Warriors but it can help PS2 move away from a glorified Arena FPS, in which instead of Loading Screens, you have... Well. REDEPLOADING SCREENS?! Genius... Pure genius, SOE... And by moving away from that style, ADADA might be indirectly affected to a point where actual tactical approaches could be possible and not easily countered by rabid bunnies with guns and SkillHoses and where ADS could therefore be a viable alternative or option.

Because right now, it's kind of OP and I'm not saying that just because I can't bother to learn how to do it perfectly 24/7, it's not Rocket Science for sure! I just think it's excessive right now and solves too many problems IE you'll come on top if your ADADA is stronger than the other person's ADADA regardless of who's more skilled or who can aim better or has the right weapons on them.

The question is: do we really need evasion of dog slow bullets as something that constitutes "skill". Imho the answer is no.
Trigger discipline and familiarity with the recoil patterns are enough given the existence of all the teamwork related/meta layers that count as skill too, i really don't need shooting 1m in front of the guy at 30m as something i need to master.
"Dodging shot"? This even sounds like nonsense and should not happen in close/mid. We are not medieval peasants with slingshots, there is no reason why modern or pseudoscifi weaponry should be meaningfully dodgeable outside of very long range.

You're so incredibly misinformed or delusional I'm just not gonna bother arguing, good lord.

Like how can you even use strategy as PS2's forte when everyone's crying about redeployside?

Well depth is agnostic of aesthetic preference. So I'm mostly just describing the amount of skill required, not whether people object to things like being able to dodge bullets.

Even I draw the line at certain aesthetics: I prefer LoL over DOTA's "kill my own units" gameplay. But DOTA's system is objectively deeper in that particular.

Recoil/CoF skill is indeed another type of skill CS reward....and PS2 does to, so it basically breaks even.

Dodging shots is pretty minor, and mostly relevant to vehicle/rocket gameplay in PS2. I agree that specifically dodging bullets in PS2 doesn't really happen.

That's your argument? Some people cry about redeployside, and firstly we accept that minority's opinion as fact, and secondly we pretend that redeploy being common automatically makes PS2's strategy game shallower than...the nothingness that CS has.

Yes, it truly is in your best interest to avoid discussing this. There isn't a shred of logic behind your opinions.

If internet was faster than the speed of light at all times, then the current ADAD would be no problem at all.

And there isn't a shred of credibility behind yours. Yours aren't even logically sound for that matter. Ignoring the drivel about PS2's "layered strategy and tactics" (rofl), you exclaim that Aiming, evading and calculating trajectories is a skill... So why is ADAD there to make all of that obsolete? As an advocate of ADAD, doesn't that fact alone discredit what you are saying?

Would it were that the combined skill ceiling wasn't offset by one shallow mechanic which is further compounded by latency issues.

What do you think strafing is? It doesn't make those skills obsolete. Strafing is evasion skill. Strafing increases the importance of aiming/trajectory skill! Logically, strafing is doing the exact opposite of what you're claiming it does.

Strafing isn't the only aspect to evasion skill, which also includes things like knowing when strafing is viable and other movement/flanking techniques, but it is a part of it.

The layered strategy of PS2 isn't "drivel". PS2 extends several meta layers above anything CS provides. CS is just singular arena battles with a light purchasing system. PS2 takes place over bases which can be approached from several directions with many vehicles, across continents with key choke points and bases which provide specific benefits. The benefits may be lacking currently (except during alerts where every territory matters, which should be made the norm again like it used to be) but they're there and way beyond and strategic considerations you find in CS.

A fellow arrow key enthusiast

Also, it doesn't seem as if ADAD spam is a problem for everyone. On my (crappy) machine lots of times it seems as if the person spamming ADAD is warping, while on many streams I watch of people with high end gaming rigs, ADAD spamming looks like normal movement. I have noticed that they (people with high end rigs) say others are lagging when they are moving almost as fast as people always move on my machine as well. With that being said, I think ADAD does add an unfair, unintended advantage but only due to how it isn't and can't be consistent for everyone. It is also cheesy and yeah, I have used it lots. I can remember a few times where I would spam ADAD and whole groups of enemies weren't able to track me while peaking, but I never thought of it as skill, but simply me abusing latency to benefit my solo420swag.

ITT lots of people who can't track targets whining about their lack of hand-eye-coordination instead of getting good.

What the hell are you people doing playing an FPS game if all you can hit are stationary targets?

CS requires these things as well. CS punishes you heavily for not being in the best firing position and managing recoil, and then being in the best firing position leaves you very very open to death. This means you can always take that perfect shot to get a victory but you also have to protect yourself from taking that shot as well.

You constantly have to think about how to manage this. It's why CS is a top competitive game and PS2 never will be.

PS2 leans on full auto spray and pray cause you are always just guessing where you enemy will be while you both strafe back and forth. You can't predict when someone will change direction instantly and a perfect shots is now a miss as the bullets travel to their target. Quite often spraying the body is more effective then controlled fire to the head. Semi auto weapons are much weaker because you can't count on a perfect shot landed a head shot.

I guess it's all personally preference. I prefer controlled being reward for controlled accurate shots over just hosing and trying to track as best I can.

Ofcourse that's the reason people have concerns, because they are all awful at this game. Ever think that perhaps you aren't the greatest and others might actually be capable of playing on your level but not have the same opinions as yourself?

Oh man my sides hurt from these people saying that adad is a serious tactic in this game
Did you know this same discussion came up when they were making this game? Yeah, because in planetside (the original) adad was an actual legitimate tactic, especially I'd you were using light armor and a sweeper. In fact, us vets had it down to a science and actually held trainings where we became better at it.
This game has no adad problem, only a problem of the getguds. If you disagree, post a video on here and prove me wrong. I'll be waiting.


TLDR there is no "effective" adad in this game and this thread is full of fail and aids

If you can "play at my level" (whatever the hell that is supposed to mean) you should have no problem with people strafing left and right. All it requires you to do is to move your crosshair with them.

1. PS2 rewards positional skill just like CS, so that cancels out.
2. Same with recoil management, with PS2 having less brutal recoil but the CoF system as well.
3. But PS2 involves significantly more trajectory skill since bullets have a velocity and aren't insta-hit, which creates a lot more opportunity to use evasion skill.
4. I'm not sure what sort of results you get going "full auto spray", but you do realize you'd be much better off with smart recoil/CoF control, right? I hope this isn't simply more Duning-Kruger Effect where a player with objectively mediocre stats is acting like they've "solved" combat and understand how to do well, and offering terrible advice on how to do so.

PS2 will never be a competitive game for completely different reasons.

1. Team Size. PS2 is about massive warfare. By design. This fundamentally prevents it from being a competitive game or having an interesting competitive scene. With a 5-man-team game any 5 newcomers who happen to be casual friends can come in and disrupt the scene. But with 36+ players per team that's simply not possible: it's harder to get a team set up in the first place, hard for allstar players to shine, and basically impossible to throw together a casual team, which results in a very stagnant competitive scene where a couple teams (or just one) constantly dominate as they eat up all the best players.
2. Long session length. PS2 isn't built around short-session base captures -- losing a single base doesn't really capture the back-and-forth that can happen across multiple bases along a lattice, or the longer-term strategy related to it.

The pacing to vehicle combat doesn't help, but many competitive games have awkward pacing and do just fine (LoL laning, World of Tanks even maintains a respectable competitive scene with a slowish pace.) So I imagine this is a very minor negative compared with the other two.

You spray in planetside 2. How many people bring a semi auto into closer ranges or a bolt action?? The reason it's so hard to do in this game is because you can't count on your shot to hit.

Everyone uses full auto guns for a reason. You let off the trigger for the shortest period of time in effective combat range. The reason is you can't count on a shot to hit it's mark. So it's better to hammer bullets into your enemy body then take a controlled shot to the head. Letting of the trigger to press it again an instant latter is still spraying.

We're talking burst-first vs. full auto. Why are you bringing semi-auto weapons into it?

Perhaps this will make things clearer of what's being discussed:

• In CS you burst-fire to control for recoil. Unless you're close enough that full auto is worth the inaccuracy, you don't fire full-auto.
• In PS2 you burst-fire to control for recoil and CoF. Unless you're close enough that full auto is worth the inaccuracy, you don't fire full-auto.

So now hopefully you understand that the two games have basically the same trigger discipline involved.

For what it's worth I'm seeing 15-30% higher KPH out of the burst variants. I guess those probably don't technically count as semiauto, but they act similarly. Those options actually are viable in short range, even if I'd agree that things like battle rifles and the semiauto sniper/scout rifles significantly underperform at close range. But should we brin

Nerf ADS strafe in general if you buff VS weapons slightly to compensate.

CS guns don't force you into close range combat where they spray is effective. A burst to the head from 500 will still devastate you instead of tickling you while you heal to full health.

The burst is much different. You fire 2 rounds then stop in CS then wait and fire again unless you are damn close. In PS2 you fire burst of 5 or 6 and fire against almost instantly. Then burst guns are all spam the trigger guns. Their is no delay between bursts you shoot as fast as you can.

Heck the games even all have shot shot recoil which helps punishes you for bursting for some reason.

There are no top FPS players talking about how tight PS2 gun play is or asking to setup maps for competitiveplay.....cause no one cares