So basically 2 months later and still the only lame justification that sniping haters can come up with is the heavy cert cost of 11 points.
You and I obviously have different definitions for the term "combat effective." Flinch is just as combat ineffective vs a long range sniper as fire suppression. Just like suppression, flinch only delays the death of the one doing the suppressing. You'll still be able to kill him once he misses a few shots or has to reload. It does nothing to eliminate a sniper as a threat. And @150m most people can't hit the side of a Galaxy much less an infil firing from behind partial cover (you are firing from behind cover, right?). Hell, it's rare to find someone who has the fire discipline to even make single shots with those bullet hose automatics most people run around with. But hey, you want to know a simple maneuver to overcome flinch as a sniper? Do this: Cloak -> move 5 feet to one side -> aim and line up your shot while still cloaked -> uncloak -> hit fire right as the uncloak sound finishes. Your target will be dead before you even render on his screen. If you still need another shot, then rinse, repeat, re-cloaking each time right after you hit fire. This will work against 99% of the PS2 playerbase if they try to use flinch to counter a sniper. I agree that infils should have a range finder built into their sniper scopes. At least for 8x and above. That'd give infils much-needed intel on when they can try for a OHK shot and give people incentive to not just stick with the default scope. But the Suppressor's description does say that "Bullet velocity and effectiveness at range are reduced." In this case "effectiveness" obviously means damage. Is the range too short now? Yes, I agree. But if you extend the range at which unsuppressed shots OHK, then presumably suppressed shots would automatically get a similar range increase. I never said snipers were never at risk from other things in the game. But you can't use generic, unrelated possible risks that might or might not be out there at any given time to try to balance the risk/reward of a weapon when used against its intended target. If you use that logic you could justify all sorts of OPd crap because who knows, there might be a tank shell out there with your name on it. Yeah that's pretty sad. Even Suppressed BASRs should OHK at much farther ranges (that was suppressed BTW). I would shave 3-5 seconds off of your time estimate. It shouldn't take you even close to 7 seconds to line up a 2nd shot. But you're right, targets that are close to cover and react immediately might be able to get away. And outside of OHK range, there is a longer time window for the target to get behind cover from a BASR than what other weapons suffer. But it goes both ways. All other weapons in the game (save OHK PA shotguns, but don't get me started on those monstrosities) always have some sort of time window where the same thing could apply. Even auto-shotguns, which are balanced out by their extremely short range. With an BASR, within OHK range you get NO chance whatsoever to try to dodge or find cover, even if you were already running to cover and were 2 inches from it when the BASR fires. That sounds balanced to me. The target gets a bigger time window outside of OHK range to balance having no time at all within OHK range. Inevitable, no. Possible, yes. If you find SASRs more valuable than BASRs at ranges where any enemy has a chance to return fire, that's your choice. But I know for a fact that many others would continue to use the BASRs for the OHK ability. Maybe they're not as good with the followup shots with a SASR, maybe they're shooting at someone close enough to cover where they won't get a second shot (like an Engie reqpairing their vehicle), maybe they like that OHK makes it that much harder for the victim to pinpoint their location when he dies and go out for a revenge kill or send his buddies out to you. I don't know. But whatever the reason, many people will still use BASRs. That's called balance. SASRs and BASRs are supposed to be sidegrades to one another. Right now that's not really the case IMO, as evidenced by the sheer number of BASRs vs SASRs that are out there despite the fact that 2 out of 3 empires start with SASRs. Pointing out one imbalance in the game as justification for another imbalance doesn't hold any water in my book. The fact that Infils, Medics, and LA (if you don't count C4) can't fight back against vehicles is also a problem, IMO. One that's much bigger than BASR's OHK ability. At minimum, Infils should be allowed to place Anti-Tank mines, and IMO all classes should have PS1-style EMP grenades that disable a vehicles weapons as well as the minimap. And yes, it is a source of huge discontent. Did you not see any of the uproar on these forums during beta and after launch? Infantry's inability to fight back against vehicles has caused many people to actually stop playing PS2. I never said it was comparable. And my point still stands. It is possible to land headshots against moving targets, multiple times. Compared to SASRs and "my" Eidolon (heh it might as well be mine, nobody else seems to use it ) , BASRs - even with the forced zoom out - only increase the time between shots. They do not make the actual shots any harder. And BASRs are the most forgiving weapon in the game against stationary targets because no 2nd shot is needed within OHK range. For every other weapon in the game, the target can start moving after the first shot, causing followup shots to have a smaller chance to hit (yes, even with automatic weapons). Again, that's called balance. If it's outside 150m against a Nano5 target, I guess you wouldn't. But that wouldn't always be the case, obviouslly. Unfortunately that's one of the problems with OHK weapons in general with PS2's damage model and the low STKs present in PS2. They're rather difficult to balance, and a perfect solution is unlikely. Yes, with a 150m OHK limitation they'll be a lot less effective at ranges >150m, against Nano5 targets only. But again, you will not become useless. Given that the 6x sway has guaranteed that the only infantry threat to you at that range is another infil (or Engie w/ an OP AV MANA turret, but that's another issue), I don't see this as a problem. Again, risk/reward against your intended target. There's no risk to you, so the reward should be less. And I don't really care what the HV BASRs were advertised as originally if their abilities led to a potential game balance issue. This is an MMO, changes to weapons for good and bad is inevitable. If it's deemed that uncounterable OHK ability >150m is imbalanced, then it shouldn't exist. And I think it is. That's a balance issue with the other Suit options and a different issue. The other suit options need to be made more valuable so that more people will choose them over Nano. That's one possible way to look at it. I would counter it by saying there is already a sacrifice in that you have to choose between better protection vs small arm fire (Nano) or better protection vs explosive fire (Flak). But I don't think a third anti-BASR option is warranted given that other infantry can't effectively fire back at infils past 150m. No, they shouldn't. Specifically because at the range I'm advocating (150m) a sniper's target can't effectively return fire. "Longest range" doesn't mean "infinite range." With or without OHK ability, past 150m sniper rifles would still be the most effective infantry AI weapons out there. In fact, they'd still be the only effective weapons. The Devs added damage degradation to sniper rifles for a reason. The obviously felt that they needed to, in your words, "reduce the effectiveness beyond predefined ranges" of sniper rifles. So yes, this is a game balance issue. You just don't see the balance issue caused by having only one class of weapon retain their full effectiveness at ranges where no other weapon has any effectiveness at all. First and foremost, this is a game. A contest of skills. A competition. Just because sniper rifles have the longest range in this game doesn't mean that they're supposed to keep 100% of their effectiveness out to the max draw distance, and that the risk vs reward equation which should be at the core of all weapon balance issues should just be thrown out the window. Degradation might just be a slap on the wrist for other weapons, but there are other characteristics (recoil, CoF and CoF bloom, etc) which are not but that BASRs can basically ignore. I guess we're going to have to agree to disagree that running and strafing constitutes a counter to something that can kill you without warning from beyond the range at which you can return fire. I'm trying to come up with a compromise here. there are many people out there who think that OHK snipers shouldn't be in PS2 at all due to its large-scale, persistent, open-ended nature. And believe me, as a PS1 vet I would love to change the imbalances that exist between vehicles and infantry. Yep, I agree. Infils should be given a "Radar Detected" warning when they're being picked up by radar just like aircraft's lock-on warning.
I feel I must weigh in on the issue. It can be fixed by increasing, slightly mind you, the damage multipler for headshots for BOLT ACTION SNIPERS only, the semi-autos should still be able to land the follow up. Nanoweave is supposed to protect from bullet damage, not being blasted in the head. I can understand that some people don't want to be headshot'd for the OHK, you have many options that work well already, I play infiltrator alot, I know you do. Nanoweave still increases your life, even if it doesn't, and shouldn't protect you from the OHK from the sniper rifles. And nanoweave 5 won't protect you from being OHK from pump action shotties which are far easier, and can be fired from the hip for the OHK... so this headshot business is just hate on the infiltrator. Make a new cert for a nanoweave helmet that reduces headshot damage from ALL weapons for those that really don't want to be OHK'd. I'm ok with giving up all other great and nifty benefits for a helmet that makes you unable to be OHK on headshots.
Most of your post can be summarised as "some enemies in some situations at some ranges can not retaliate instantly, thus sniper headshots should not be OHK". This being an opinion, it can't be directly argued with, people can only express their disagreement with you. Personally, I feel like your whole premise is shaky - snipers are not meant to be instantly dealt with by their targets, unless they also happen to snipers. Many other things are meant to deal with snipers at their optimal ranges, but not their targets. The interesting part of sniper and sniper counter-play is the fear of being hit. If you make it very difficult to be hit (in this game anyone who doesn't want to be hit from a long-range sniper is highly likely NOT to be hit due to various reasons), and then also make it require more than one hit - well there is just no fear of snipers which makes it boring for both sides. They become an occasional nuisance rather than a whole strategy paradigm. Lose the fear, lose the interest. I can not see a possible way bolt-action rifles would be balanced if it requires two hits (one of which has to be a highly precise shot). They are just not designed for it. They fire very slowly, have high sway, descope after shot, and have very slow bullet velocity (while being up against targets who have no inertia). You show me a gun that is any less suited to making multiple shots - especially when after the first shot the target moves erratically. If it requires two hits bolt-actions are inferior to semi-autos when it comes to killing. It is as simple as that.
Nano-weave armor is fine... Risk equals Reward! You want to have a guaranteed one-shot-kill, than you need to be close enough in order to do so. At 75~100 meters you still have the upper hand over all weapons that are not a sniper rifle, you have cloak what gives you the element of surprise and if you like challenge slap a silencer on to the gun and reduce your range to 50~75 meters and still you have the upper hand. There are still plenty of players not using nano-weave armor you can still OSK from great distances, were you can sit safely without any risk of being shot let alone be detected. But the trade off is, you can't tell who and who isn't wearing nano-weave armor until you actually shot at them. I like shooting from great distances and scoring a OSK, but know all to well what it feels like to be on the receiving end, to be that soldier who catches the bullet in the brain pan and can do absolutely nothing about it. With nano-weave armor, they have a surviving chance if you're attempting to shoot them from a great distance. Learn to adapt and move on instead of complaining about it. Team up if you want to keep sniping from great distances or get closer to the action.
No, if you must try to summarize my post, it would read like "the majority of infantry out there - in fact, anyone who isn't an Infil carrying a sniper rifle - in ALL situations at greater than a certain range can not effectively retaliate AT ALL, thus sniper headshots only beyond that range and only against the strongest armor DESIGNED to stop small arms fire should not be OHK for the sake of fair gameplay so that sniper rifles at that range have some sort of counter. At any range less than that, and at farther ranges against any target not wearing Nano5, OHK ability is fine." That sounds a lot different, doesn't it? And FWIW, the vast majority of the posts in this forum consist of player opinion, as is the whole discussion of whether or not BASRs should be OHK. So I'm not sure what your point is. Who says snipers aren't meant to be immediately dealt with by anything besides other snipers? That's the same reasoning used by ScatMAXes pre-nerf who kept saying, "It's a MAX. It's a guy sitting inside a huge suit of combat armour with shotguns strapped to his arms. It's meant to plow through many soldiers at a time without fear of dying." Many snipers just want it that way because they've romanticized the concept of the lone sniper. They've watched "Enemy at the Gates" one too many times and picture themselves off in the hills somewhere stalking another sniper, just you and him. Or they see themselves keeping up the "one shot, one kill" mantra by killing helpless bad guys with impunity from afar and then disappearing into the background without a scratch. It may be a seductive vision but it's not very balanced gameplay. If the only immediate counter to a particular weapon or vehicle is another of the same type, that is a terrible balance mechanic and points to an imbalance in that piece of equipment. I can only presume that you've got this idea of sniper immunity in your head from "real life" tales of snipers killing people from beyond your typical Assault rifle's effective range. But this isn't real life. This is a game, and game balance must take precedence over people's preconceptions about how "real life" appears. There is nothing balanced about giving just one weapon type OHK ability at distances beyond the effective range of every other AI infantry weapon in the game. Obviously the Devs agree with me, otherwise they wouldn't have added damage degradation to sniper rifles after launch. You're assuming too much and are jumping to an inaccurate conclusion. I never said to remove OHK ability completely, so the fear will still be there, and IME most people are easy to hit the first time even if they're moving around since they're not expecting it, and even if they try to anticipate a first shot they have no idea where it's going to come from. I agree that fear is a huge part of sniper play, more so than other infantry playstyles. But IMO you don't need OHK ability beyond 150m in order to keep that fear. You never played PS1, did you? The Bolt Driver in that game (which was a BASR then too) took 2 hits minimum to kill anything other than another infil, and most people agreed that it was one of the most balanced weapons in the game. But again, at ranges <150m, and/or against any infantry not wearing Nano5, I'm okay with OHK ability. But it seems you and many other snipers aren't willing to budge at all, are you? You're seeing this issue in black and white, not willing to make any sort of compromise. If my suggestion is implemented, that might be the case, at ranges >150m, against only Nano5. BASRs would still be superior in every other situation you're going to be using sniper rifles. OTOH if BASRs were given OHK ability at any range and against all infantry targets they'd be superior to SASRs in every single sniper situation. Which scenario sounds more balanced to you? At least with my suggestion there might be situations where an SASR is the preferred option.
It doesn't sound that much different at all - it is still of the basis that a [valid target] at [optimal range] carrying a [non-optimal-range weapon], bolt-actions should be [non-optimal] against them. It is the basis of your opinion. Of course they are. My point was (and is), that we can't argue against that itself, but we can look at each detail and state where we disagree - maybe you'll find once it is broken down that you change your mind on some parts. In this case I looked specifically at the idea that because one of the combatants is not in it's optimal setting that the other opponent should be handicapped - I tried to point out why this is bad for gameplay and why people would lose interest in the encounter if so. No one said this - vehicles, and arguably MAXes, can deal with snipers immediately. Are you suggesting that if snipers can OHK with a bolt-action at greater than 150m then snipers are invulnerable? This can be looked at as a fact, since balance is (to some degree) a mathematical fact. Hence, I can say that this is just plain wrong. Firstly, there are many variables that can be tweaked to achieve balance here (I listed some of them in my previous post). Damage is never the only variable that matters, and as long as something else matters balance can be achieved. Secondly, the Devs do not agree with you - the bolt-action does OHK at any range, providing the target does not have nanoweave (which is bugged). The reason for the degradation is obvious and is listed in the Devs own description of these weapons - it is there for Heavies using their shield ability. It also exists for MAXes, due to their innate resistance. Lastly, bodyshots. Think of it this way - why have damage degradation from 8m to 75m if it still OHKs targets at that point? Because it doesn't OHK with a bodyshot, or against a Heavy with shield turned on, or against a MAX. That damage degradation plays a massive part in the game, without needing to even touch OHKs on headshots. Since you seem fine with OHKs at close range (and yet you hate PAS?), so you don't seem like you are against OHKs. You are against against fighting opponents when they are not in your optimal zone. Therefore, you are against snipers - it seems a bit flawed to try to suggest balance changes to something you are fundamentally against; they are always going to be in your favour, and likely lacking proper comprehension of the facts. An example of this is your "ultimatum" with SASR and BASR - once again, BASR do OHK, at any range. Yet, they are not superior to SASRs at any range. There are other variables that can make either type better at certain ranges (rate of fire and bullet velocity for example). However, if you make the BASR require the same number of bullets to kill as the SASR, yet leave rate of fire much superior on the SASR (nevermind not descoping), then there is no longer a balance - SASR wins every time.
tanks cannot retaliate against pixel sized AV turrets 500m away, is it fair? no. BTW, what do you suggest to counter AV turret + lockon launcher camps without effective snipers? Let's say camp is 300m away, owns your team's mech left and right. That scenario should be sniper's bread and butter but no, inf has to entertain himself with a 250m worth of cross-country running in a straight line + hardcore flanking just so he can do measurable dmg to the AV campers from the side but risks dying in a subsecond time when spotted after unsuccessful HS. I have a simple explanation: devs have no idea what they are doing and they came up with totally rtarded numbers. Mech related play is riddled with numbers like 300m, 500m yet suddenly when we speak infantry the numbers shrink ten-fold. That doesn't make any sense. That's not where we are and 150+ is meaningless in a greater scheme of things because it's nothing more than an annoyance and it lacks sustainability. 150+ headshots are neither gamemaking nor gamebreaking. Currently we are at 'HS of weaker bolt actions can be stopped somewhere around 30m mark'. That's so ridiculously far from OHK should not happen beyond 150m it's not funny. Reliable OHK@150m in current shape of the game is nothing more than a fantasy, imo there is simply no point in discussing it. If the deal was NC14, SAS-R, LA80 OHK up to 100m silenced or not, no ifs, no buts, Longshot up to 150 we would have entirely different discussion and talking about fairness at extreme ranges would have a legitimate place in it. Unfortunately we are mostly talking about unfairness of putting your *** in a comfortable full-auto pinpoint spray range and getting nothing in return. More infs would be sympathetic to the NW blocking extreme shots if only we were not pissed on collectively as a class. And TTK was like 5x higher, was it not? Have you seen unsuccessful m44v's SAS-R shot where soon after he got completely obliterated in under 0.5s? in other words there is no comparison.
Just my 2 cents as a non-sniper 99% of the time, The headshot mitigation is silly as it stands, if it is bugged as suggested by the people who've tested it and I'm inclined to agree with them, then fixing this should be fine. But I've been HS by BASR using snipers fairly often over the last few months and I don't think I've been OHK once, this is a farce IMO. Sometimes I've been able to see the target and engage him, hear the headshot noise and drop to 1-2 bars and then drop him, this is beyond stupid. I don't sit around much and some of the shots were legitimately good shots which should have been rewarded, but my certs completely negated all the skill the sniper had in that moment. OHKs happen, Max flak doesn't stop a tank shell melting my face, Nano shouldn't negate a shot that required far more ability and patience.
Using your general terms, it sounds similar. When looking at the actual detailed content of the summary, it sounds very different. Tomato to-mah-to. Yes but you took my idea out of context which changed its meaning, and then refuted the new meaning. I don't want to remove all OHK ability from BASRs so your argument is moot. No, I'm suggesting that arguing that the idea that "snipers are not meant to be instantly dealt with by their targets, unless they also happen to snipers" is a baseless argument. I know of nothing in this game that states that snipers are only meant to be countered by other snipers. It's just a concept you have in your head. Just like MAXes aren't "meant" to plow through many enemy soldiers without danger as some MAX supporters have argued in the past. Very true. Yeah, I didn't add the phrase "against Nano5 at 150m." My bad. I thought it would be self-evident since that's what I've been saying all along. Currently BASR minimum damage is 550, which means OHK against Nano4 but not Nano5 at the minimum damage distance. So in that respect the Devs do agree with me, hich is what I was trying (and failing apparently ) to say. Obviously there is a bug though that brings the "no OHK" range much closer than that so that I agree needs to be fixed. PASs OHK with a body shot while using hipfire, so the wielder can run around jump, even fly (in the case of LA) and still OHK. And they don't have to be very accurate to get a OHK either. They also are used during CQC where lag and clientside hit detection play a greater role than outdoor, long range encounters due to the prevalence of corners and such people can suddenly pop around. OTOH, BASRs OHK only on a headshot, and only either at point blank range during hipfire with a little luck due to the CoF, or during aimed fire, where they have to give up most of their mobility to land a shot. Two very different beasts. I'm against OHK ability that has no counter (and no I don't consider avoidance as a counter). I'm against situations where one opponent can OHK another without warning and with impunity where the only option for the victim to avoid death is to either play a different unit entirely or be somewhere else before engagement starts. So OHK is fine. Snipers are fine. OHK without any way to stop it is outside of precognitive ability is not fine. My "ultimatum" was in direct response to yours when you said "If it requires two hits bolt-actions are inferior to semi-autos when it comes to killing. It is a simple as that." So I guess take what I said with a grain of salt because we both know better.[/quote]
Apologies for the double-post, but it made it easier to compartmentalize my responses to you and to Aimeryan. If you mean AV MANA turrets, you're right, that's not fair either and should be corrected, especially since AV MANA turrets don't even render for the vehicle driver past a certain range. That's why you use 2 snipers on voice comm in tandem to take out the targets (Note, I know the current OHK range for BASRs is broken and needs to be fixed. See below). Or pull your own AV MANA turrets and return fire. Or grab a couple Libs and bomb them fast and low, hugging the ground, before they can lock on. Do a Gal drop from the flight ceiling. Go to a facility behind them, hack the vehicle term, pull vehicles, and hit them from behind. Drive a cloaked Flash as infil or suicide ESF as LA, get close to them and drop a beacon, and have your squad (which is already waiting at the deploy screen) rain drop pods from above. I believe it had to do with the server and/or client load caused by rendering so many infantry over a long range. Shorten the effective range of infantry weapons and you can shorten their render distance without affecting gameplay. At least that's what I think their reasoning was (not that I agree with it). This I believe is the crux of a huge miscommunication in this thread between myself and possibly a few others (including yourself). It sounds like you think my stance is different from what it is, so let me make myself clear: Per the cert description, Nano5 gives 25% extra health, meaning 1125 total damage to be killed Per the game files, minimum BASR damage is 550@100m for HV BASRs and 550@75m for other BASRs If both of these were correct, OHKs would be possible against Nano4 and below at any range, or Nano5 out to just short of the minimum damage distance (~95m for HV BASRs, and ~70m for the others) HOWEVER, this is not correct. In-game testing shows us that even Nano2 protects against OHK at much closer range than that (more like 30m), so to the best of our knowledge this is a BUG This bug should be corrected. I believe that Nano5 (and only Nano5) should protect the wearer against OHKs at ranges >100-125m or so. Anything closer than that and I'm okay with OHK ability because the target has the potential to effectively fire back if they're properly equipped. However, the OP of this thread was complaining about not being able to OHK targets at Vanu Archives from 150m and I took issue with that, hence my original post arguing against OHK's at 150m. In short, if numbers 1-3 were actually true in-game I'd be perfectly happy, but would certainly be open to discussions of extending out the minimum damage range of the BASRs (and hence the OHK range) by an additional 25-30m or so (so, out to 125-150m total). PS1 TTK was generally 2-2.5x higher than PS2, but since Bolt Drivers there were used almost exclusively outside of the effective range (125m) of every other weapon in the game except the Scout Rifle, the TTKs of those weapons is irrelevant. The comparison is valid if you're talking about ranges greater than where your target can effectively return fire, which in PS2 would be about 125m. That's the range I'm talking about, but obviously that's not the case for you.
I don't have a single point in nanoweave and survive snipers quit easily. It's called moving. You never stop moving. Funniest part is, moving is free.
Once again, there are many other things that can deal with snipers - it is not only other snipers. Vehicles (pretty much all of them), MAXes, anyone choosing to flank, drop pods. There seems to be a misconception of what a sniper is here; if infantry in general are able to instantly deal with snipers then the snipers are not snipers. The whole idea of being a sniper is being at a long-distance, beyond the range of common weapons. Perhaps you are instead thinking of the short-distance precision shots made by marksmen? There are many ways to stop it; have your team taking out snipers if you are not planning on doing that role yourself, don't stand still, use cover. The problem with your thinking here is that you are looking at OHKs (which have to be very precise) as being vastly superior to dying in 0.5 seconds from another weapon - it is not, at least in the metagame. Your suggestion is to turn the bolt-action into a weapon that requires a minimum of something like 3 seconds to kill when at long-distance, which in itself is highly unlikely because the target will now be moving erratically which makes sniping them practically impossible, is very much out of place with the TTK of any other weapon. The simple case is, for any target with nanoweave of suitable level the vast majority of the time the target will not be killed by bolt-action users past OHK range. You basically get rid of long-distance sniping with bolt-action sniper rifles if this occurs very often, because they will be frustrating, ineffective, and a lot of people will simply go to other games where they don't have to put up with such a ridiculous system. This is not true. The comparison is always valid, because the game is not simply you vs. the sniper. If a highly skilled sniper can not perform effectively then sniping becomes a dud. Yes, the sniper is obviously at an advantage regarding killing you at long distance to you killing him, but the sniper is at a disadvantage in general killing. This is why infiltrators have the lowest score/hour. All your suggestions are based on your individual battle with the sniper ("I must be able to retaliate or the sniper must be ineffective"), completely dismissing the metagame component. The bolt-action is a very very poor weapon if it can not OHK - because it is balanced around that ideal. This is why there should be no range limit on OHK, or at the very least it should encompass sniping ranges (so at least 200m). If OHK is not possible at sniping ranges then the bolt-actions need rebalancing. I'm against snipers being made ineffective by a suit slot - especially one that is very common place, gives no indication of it being present before taking the time and effort to make the shot, and is far less of a problem for other weapons.
First, suppressors don't affect minimum damage, only the ranges where minimum damage comes into effect. Second, the video showcases both suppressed and unsuppressed firing. Regarding your own personal experience, what BR were your opponents? Did you take the time to ask what rank of Nanoweave they had (if any) when they died, or if they failed to die? I know on my server there are many outfits that run Nanoweave while the zerg usually don't know about this bug. Or, if I've killed the same enemy a few times before, they switch to Nanoweave after, and it's impossible to go for the headshot afterwards. The point is not "BASRs need to OHKO", but that "Nanoweave is not doing what it's supposed to be doing".
lmfao stick to killing Battle rank 1s then , people pay hard earned certs to max nanoweave out so deal with it.
i bet it's extremely painful to them, oh the misery of having 25% more hitpoints. I can only imagine what they are coming through.
How is that even balanced or fair? So your saying I should sneak up on your heavy assault in my infiltrator when your LMG can kill me in less than 1 second when you have THREE shields to save your life. Heavy assault shield ability. (That's going to block 1 shot) Personal shield. (That will block most of the second shot) Nanoweave. (Then derpweave will save your life again) Sniper rifles are designed to kill at extreme ranges not in your face geez I'd love to see a sniper in real life tell his target "One second mind if you stand there and I'll walk within 10 steps from you? Is that fine?" You don't need to risk anything as any other class because you don't have the infiltrators gimped health points and as it stands now any automatic weapon is better than a sniper rifle.
it's always been NW5 that I cannot kill with 1 shot... then again I'm looking at the numbers sheet, and my Longshot does 800 base dmg as opposed to the 750 base of that rifle, which could account for the extra critical damage that is enough to deal with the other nanoweaves, but it doesn't matter to me either way; my kill sheet may not look the greatest when I'm playing sniper, but I get loads of assist EXP for weakening targets that otherwise would have presented a real problem to me mates, and that's really all it's about in the long run; taking out targets of opportunity, and helping keep those LA and heavies from reaching your deployment area by weakening them or at the very least pointing them out.
