[Suggestion] Skillless kills

One thing that I enjoy doing is looking for a big fight, sneaking to a good roost and start picking of ONLY snipers.
Try it, it's really satisfying.

I have 1000s of kills with a BASR so I must know how it is more than you?

Like anything else, it's possible to dumb down sniping to cheesy bs. Usually that involves getting into the unit's ideal range and engaging targets who can't retaliate effectively, which is exactly what shotguns, cyclone, snipers, and infantry AV do.

If you like fighting "outside," then choose a unit that fights effectively "outside." If I like fighting on rooftops, I'm not going to pull a lightning. I'm going to play LA or pull a turbo flash, because those units get on top of things effectively and have means of escaping when in danger. Similarly, you should expect people to play sniper when it would be effective.

This is some ironic *** post coming from 90% VS HA player.

Agreed, it's a matter of mindset. For me, there's a limit to how much I'm willing to blame my own failings for, when I'm required to obey the rules of this artificial environment. Where I can say that the environment unfairly disadvantaged me, I think it's important to bring that to attention so it can be addressed.

Ex. "I stood still too long".... what about the game mechanics that require you to stand still long enough to get killed, like vterms and sundy terms?

How about needing to operate game controls like the minimap, which I need to zoom out and hit H every time I get into a vehicle, and then reverse the process when I am infantry again? I can sorta do that on the run, but I'm very likely to run into something I didn't want to. (It totally would help if the dumb zoom controls worked when you hit them, I could memorize the amount of keypresses each way and no more problem. But not as it is.)

Or punching a quick sundy sighting into chat because the platoon and squad leaders are reserving general voice for orders - don't have a choice there, but it still needs to be done, 'cause just spotting it doesn't necessarily call it to the PL/SL's attention enough.

Here's an important distinction - "Being pinned by enemy fire and taking like 3-4 seconds to look around and figure out where to move to?" isn't actually in-bounds for complaints. Direct combat situations like that are where I am completely fine with being sniped / grenaded / outflanked, because direct combat. (Side note, in those situations, I'm not sure anyone could plausibly say "there was a definite way I could have countered that, so it's my fault".)

So yeah, mindset. I'm fine with losing a fight where I lose the fight, or the enemy won because they won the tactical battle first. But in any case where I can point to the game environment and say "you failed to give me the tools to try / set me up to lose there", I think that needs to be communicated loud and clear to the developers.

Perhaps those mechanics are an unfair disadvantage, but you spend a ridiculously minuscule amount of time at risk while doing that. If you switch loadouts or spawn a vehicle once every five minutes and it takes something like three seconds to do that, that means you spend a mere 1% of your time unfairly vulnerable to snipers, and only in a fraction of that 1% will a sniper actually be there to make the kill. Is 1% such a big deal?

(There is a sort of half-measure solution, which is to not use a terminal unless you're well within friendly protection, where a sniper is unlikely to be).

See, people keep saying that, but it's just not true in my experience. I spend a lot of time outside, and altogether I die maybe one in ten times to a sniper, with that being largely while sniping/countersniping. Maybe I have sniper repellant on me or something, but I just never die to a sniper, outside or not.

One thing to do is make sure you have load outs setup so can spawn the vehicle quicker (not that it helps in a lot of cases) But you don't want to be changing the vehicle setup out in the open. Snipers/LA tend to lurk for cheap kills.

It would be nice that if once you accessed the terminal you became invincible while in the selection or waiting in the vehicle queue. Sometimes it can be a while before spawn in the vehicle.

Oh it's very clear that you despise the milsim experience, that's why your name is ironic.

What you seem to be missing is that you ARE getting a chance to play against the other player in a milsim. It's just a different kind of play, one that extends beyond the few moments you spend holding down the left mouse button.

You're playing against them for the chance to get that first shot, to get the high ground advantage, to get to the better cover first. It's a game of maneuver, positioning, and long-term planning that is largely absent in games where you can just shrug off half a magazine and bunny-hop your way to victory.

It also meshes much more smoothly with large maps and high player counts, because you're encouraged to use the whole map to your advantage instead of having to bum-rush the little shack with the A point in it because your weapon has an effective range of less than 50 meters.

To me I don't really care too much about how many hits it takes to kill me, if I'm getting hit in the first place I've already screwed up. What frustrates me is when my weapon's bullets seem to be healthy and nutritious, because my enemies can eat them all day. To me, a weapon that takes forever to kill someone is simply unsatisfying.

But hey, if you have some buddies that know how to code and think making the "Quake: MLG edition" game I suggested would be a good idea, feel free to use that open source engine I linked.

There's an important point there. No weapon in PS1 was a one-shot kill except for the Vanguard main cannon. The point is that (besides the Vanguard) there were two ways you could die to another player:

1. They outfought you after you had a chance to react to their first shot.
2. You were already hurt when they hit you with the first shot.


In neither case could you honestly claim "I was killed unfairly".

By way of example, the worst infantry weapon to be hit by was a sniper rifle, bc you couldn't effectively shoot back. But you had 10% health left to run away with, and the way the sniper earned their kill was by hitting you with their second shot while you were on the run. Not a fair duel, but still a contest, and that took a lot of the sting out of losing in that situation. (And you could definitely win out too - did it many times myself).

Now the COD / BF gameplay is all about making players feel uber powerful n'stuff by giving them flashy, splashy ways to own other players. This is because it's easy to get people to open their wallets when you're jerking their epeens. The problem with PS2 trying to do the same thing is that CoD / BF is like getting your epeen action by hooking up with a hot girl at a party with an up-front cover charge, and knowing that party is going to come around again. PS2 is like the somewhat-attractive daughter of a corporate executive telling you she wants to do the same, but she's new at this and wants a relationship so she can be sure she's getting what she needs out of it.

(*This doesn't mean there isn't a market for PS2, but it does mean it's a different market.)

wait, I "despise the milsim experience" despite my name, and that's why I am wrong? sorry dude you are offsides. You want to promote how cool hardcore milsims are, fine and dandy. I was talking about PS2 this whole time though.

I wasn't just talking about snipers alone. With the way weapons are and the headshot multiplier, snipers have a lot of company in being able to kill you before you can react. Add in all the other OHK toys like knives, grenades, C4, rockets, and vehicle runovers, and suddenly any time you are forced by the game to hold still or even not be fully situationally aware, there's a high chance you're going to die feeling like you were set up for failure by the game.

Edit: and I think this is what the OP was targeting with his post, even though he did pick vterm sniping as the example.

Didn't we go over this in your other thread? That's one thing we're not going to agree on.

Vterm sniping - valid tactic of denying the enemy vehicles. Added benefit of demoralizing enemy pilots, potentially to the point of ragequitting. I approve wholeheartedly, didn't know it's that effective, I'll have to dust off my RAMS.

If you find yourself overwhelmed by this, you can surrender at win+r -> appwiz.cpl

Planetside is not tennis. Planetside is WAR.

Oh boy, this thread again.

If you get sniped while trying to spawn at or near a contested base, fall back a base or two and spawn there. It's a known tactic. Adapt.

If you didn't check the vehicle pad right in front of the vehicle terminal and then die to tank mines, it's your own fault. If you spawned and died to tank mines at a base where the pad is a distance away from the terminal, it's still your own fault. You can easily see on the map where the terminal and pad is located. Tank mines near the pad is a valid tactic. It's a known tactic. If you fail to adapt to that tactic, you're bad.

If you haven't experienced either of these tactics and you die once, that's a shame. However, unknown tactics become known once you've experienced it. I have no sympathy for people who can't be bothered to adapt.

I would suggest a "Skill-less kill" directive, it could include

Sniper-Headshots at vehicle terminals
Tank mines at vehicle spawns
Anti Infantry mines behind turrets
HE-Infantry Kills
AP-Flash Kills

possibilities are endless

... Planetside is a video game. Get a grip, willya? And "valid tactics" are meaningless if an enjoyable game experience isn't being presented to both combatants. Welcome to game development.

Welp then we disagree. 07

uhh don't aggro the ai mines behind turrets, these are the best kills ever

I've used the Flare, and both NS15Ms. One has NC damage, the other has a .75x strafe but also extremely low DPS. Go spew your vitriol somewhere else.

How precious, you're a ******** sniper LMFAO.