Poll: Camping: Whats the big deal?
- Thread starter Mushroomfreak111
- Start date
Recommended Videos
You ogive everything dedicated servers so they can use console commands to ban players although that would never happen invicibility would do it for about 2secs as well as a aim bot for the first 2 two shots to compensate for not having the reflexes of a ninja on E with temperal abilities.The Dr Jack said:
You see I've always thought TF2's system ment that this type of spawn camping was fine. When you spawn in TF2 your safe, at least at first. If someones waiting outside round a corner and you don't see them, you die being you wern't paying attention. These guys get routed out pretty quickly anyway if you have an even half decent team. Plus you can pick any class you want in the safe room with no penalty so you have the advantage over the camper after the first kill.Erana said:
Now this is something I can actually discuss with you.Doctor Glocktor said:
People like you constantly say that camping is cheap, and I really can't understand why. I admit, I hate people that sit in one spot for the entire game, that's pretty fucking stupid. But waiting in a decent ambush spot where enemies don't expect you to be, getting a couple of kills, and then relocating to a different spot is fine. Running and gunning is great, I applaud the guys that can do it well. I can't, unless I'm having a great game. Does that mean I should do it anyway, die over and over again, give the enemy team loads of points and have a generally crappy game? Or should I take the time to learn the map, get to now the usual flow of the games on said map and identify all the high traffic areas? If I do that, it gives me an advantage over the more 'skilled' players who run and gun and would more than likely defeat me in a straight up fight. It's not cheap, it's just a more cautious way of playing, and you can combat it by learning the maps and being more aware of your surroundings.
Camping is not cheap, nor is it stupid.
So it IS a tactic? Because running and gunning is also, but often a bad one. In fact, I think its largely stupid. It may have worked (and was kind of the point) in games like Quake III, but not nowadays. Mechanics in multiplayer nowadays(especially CoDMW2) are made in an attempt to force intelligent play.
And there's that word again, cheap. What is cheap? From what I've gathered, cheap in this context refers to the use of tactic that supplements a "lack" of "skill." The problem here is the definition of "skill." Not everyone is a twitch gamer, and at the end of the day, the "camper" who isn't a Ritalin poppin 15 year old (forgive the stereotype, it's to make a point)
is the one outsmarting said 15 year old. I believe the most reasonable definition of skill is the ability of one the reach the goal of the match being played.
All the above said, I can run and gun. I just don't like to. It hurts my k/d, and it's not intelligent. I play intelligently, even in team death matches, when the only goal is to kill the other team. If this means holding a building that is a strategic boon to the rest of the team, or just so that the other team CAN'T have it, so be it. If it means keeping an eye on an area that the enemy team seems to frequent, I'll do that too. Its up to the other team to notice this and adjust accordingly. If not, then that's their mistake.
Also, whose ass did you pull that "90%" from? Was it a survey? I doubt it. While yes, some people will just one sit at one point for a relatively unreasonable amount of time, getting the occasional kill, you should have the intelligence to realize that they aren't helping themselves or their team. While they're doing this, the rest of their team is one man down in whatever coordination they may try to pull off. Further, like MANY others here have REPEATEDLY pointed out for the benefit of those such as yourself, there are ways to render the rooted camper useless, via outsmarting him or just avoiding where-ever he/she may be, which nowadays is more or less ALWAYS an option. If you can't figure that out, that's YOUR handicap, like your supposition that campers are somehow beneath your ability to run around in the open, presenting your head to whatever sniper may be waiting for the opportunity.
As for justifying it, I don't have to. In these kinds of games, I'm here to kill you, not to play by your definition of "fair." This likewise applies to weapons that are somehow labeled as "noobish." I believe your argument functions on the assumption that the only kind of camping is "corner" camping. That's not so. The "good" kind of camping, the strategically sound one, occurs when the other team doesn't even realize that you ARE camping.
Edit: And please don't misunderstand me. I don't camp the whole game. I do alot of running and gunning from area to area. Like any good strategy, it depends on what the situation calls for. The anger I do feel at the people who sit in one corner for the majority of the game is more often than not misdirected, which should rightfully be pointed at myself for falling for it more than once.
Also edited for the sake of clarification and grammar.
Generally, I don't have a problem with it. In many games, the disadvantages of camping equal the advantages.
In MW2, however, it is a little too easy to camp. I'm not sure why it's so easy, exactly, but I think it has something to do with the fact that so many of the maps are so large. The introduction of the thermal scope also benefits campers. Anyhow, the overwhelming majority of my deaths come from campers, and I find that the team that wins is usually the one that camps the most. But this problem is more related to game design than my frustrations with play style.
In MW2, however, it is a little too easy to camp. I'm not sure why it's so easy, exactly, but I think it has something to do with the fact that so many of the maps are so large. The introduction of the thermal scope also benefits campers. Anyhow, the overwhelming majority of my deaths come from campers, and I find that the team that wins is usually the one that camps the most. But this problem is more related to game design than my frustrations with play style.
Full-round camping and spawn camping are cheap, as easy as the first is to get around.
But sniping? Or staying in a defensible spot, getting one, maybe two kills and moving on? That's how you're supposed to play in modern-day/post-modern shooters. Tactical movement, checking your corners, et cetera.
But sniping? Or staying in a defensible spot, getting one, maybe two kills and moving on? That's how you're supposed to play in modern-day/post-modern shooters. Tactical movement, checking your corners, et cetera.
When I read threads like these, I always get the urge to go buy a 360 and Call of Duty just so I can camp all day long with akimbo shotguns loaded with noobtubes, or whatever makes the terribad players rage the most. The complainers invariably get their clock cleaned by a good player no matter if that player camps or not. The only difference is the content of the whining afterwards.
It's hardly like they have no tactical advantage. They're killing people aren't they?Erana said:
The longer you spend stuck in the safe room the more time they have to defend the flag or control ect. I'd consider that a tactical move.
I'm kinda torn on the issue.
I often run as a sniper, and I'll find a good position to take shots from - but then after a few shots I move (or if it's a large game I'll have an SMG/Shotgun as a back-up weapon to go on the offensive when needed).
In team-games I tend to find a good position to cover a team's flank or something. That way the team isn't left a man-down in the assault (as I prevent them from being flanked themselves when attacking as well as picking off enemy snipers), even though I'm not actually "assaulting".
One of the most epic matches I played in my whole hour of PS3 gameplay was when my mate let me online, and our team had 3 or so snipers dug into various points on the same hill, and a couple of guys assaulting the enemy. We managed to co-ordinate our positioning so that the offensive team always had at least one sniper covering them, and that our own fire-lanes overlapped so we wouldn't be over-run in an offensive, and that we couldn't be flanked very easily.
'Course sniping with a heavy-machine-gun and keen eyesight is a very fun alternative
So I wouldn't say I'd go as far as "loving camping", but I do enjoy a fair bit of sniping (though sometimes, like in say 4-player Halo on a 16-player map, it's just non-viable as the other 3 guys kill each other and end up winning).
I often run as a sniper, and I'll find a good position to take shots from - but then after a few shots I move (or if it's a large game I'll have an SMG/Shotgun as a back-up weapon to go on the offensive when needed).
In team-games I tend to find a good position to cover a team's flank or something. That way the team isn't left a man-down in the assault (as I prevent them from being flanked themselves when attacking as well as picking off enemy snipers), even though I'm not actually "assaulting".
One of the most epic matches I played in my whole hour of PS3 gameplay was when my mate let me online, and our team had 3 or so snipers dug into various points on the same hill, and a couple of guys assaulting the enemy. We managed to co-ordinate our positioning so that the offensive team always had at least one sniper covering them, and that our own fire-lanes overlapped so we wouldn't be over-run in an offensive, and that we couldn't be flanked very easily.
'Course sniping with a heavy-machine-gun and keen eyesight is a very fun alternative
So I wouldn't say I'd go as far as "loving camping", but I do enjoy a fair bit of sniping (though sometimes, like in say 4-player Halo on a 16-player map, it's just non-viable as the other 3 guys kill each other and end up winning).
LMAO!!!! I get so tired trying to explain to children probably not old enough to be playing the game that its totally legitimate to be waiting around a target they want to destroy! They need to get there and I need to stop them, why would I go somewhere else when I know where theyre going?? :'D Theyre also the ones who shout "STOP KILLING ME YOU DOUCHE!!!!!!!" To which I reply "What? You want a hug???"Deofuta said:
Enabling camping is part of the design process of a level. An ideal PvP multiplayer level has design elements that appeal to as many types of gamers as possible. If the level has a design element that makes one playstyle more effective than any other, then there is a problem. A level that makes camping easy and profitable is poorly designed.
If you want players to have the choice to camp, don't make it difficult to dislodge the camper. A single narrow hall with an awesome power-up and space behind it for somebody to sit there and kill everyone going for it = FAIL. Any potential camping spot should have at least one other way in and be arranged such that the camper can't cover both entrances at once. The camping spot could even be open to attack from a distance, so the camper has the threat of death from afar looming over him.
I would fix spawn camping by putting an area trigger around each spawn point and disable spawning at a point if an enemy character is within a certain distance, along with enough spawn points so that an entire team can't camp every point.
If you want players to have the choice to camp, don't make it difficult to dislodge the camper. A single narrow hall with an awesome power-up and space behind it for somebody to sit there and kill everyone going for it = FAIL. Any potential camping spot should have at least one other way in and be arranged such that the camper can't cover both entrances at once. The camping spot could even be open to attack from a distance, so the camper has the threat of death from afar looming over him.
I would fix spawn camping by putting an area trigger around each spawn point and disable spawning at a point if an enemy character is within a certain distance, along with enough spawn points so that an entire team can't camp every point.
Because you are so much of a coward that you're afraid of FAKE dying.
Its not real war. Get over it.
Its not real war. Get over it.
Wait, what? 2 minutes? If after 5 seconds nobody comes round then you know your not being followed.Mushroomfreak111 said:
Most people don't like it 'cos it breaks there streak, think like them ... they have been walking round (probably crouch walking) twitch killing people, spent years developing that reflex, now they carefully creep into a room you have been camping ... shotgun aimed at the door and before they know it there watching the kill cam, they had no chance to defend themselvs.
The whole "have grandes use them" argument, they do and get called noob tubers / they run of nades after 3 corners or rooms / they get abuse (like you get) for using a game imbalance (one man army) to replenish there nades.
Then you say you wait in grass and groups of trees, we have to use nades on them aswell now? We can only carry so many!
This is why campers get grief.
Edit, it is also a free kill. If I am having a pretty bad game and I want a kill streak reward to cheer me up a touch, I will camp to get it ... makes me feel a bit guilty though.
I never understood it either. Especially in objective games. I'm a camper because I stayed near the flag with a shotgun, right.