Poll: What is your definition of camping?

[MetallicaRulez0]

In my mind there are only 2 ways to play a shooter: Camping or Rushing. There is no in between. If you're moving around the map aggressively, you're rushing. Anything else is camping. This includes creeping around a map or "playing defensively". "Playing defensively" is just another term for camping if you ask me.

 

[ElPatron]

2.rushing is pretty much running around that puts you at a huge disadvantage

Nope.

Rushing is advancing trough the terrain to give you a superior position against the enemy. It's not may fault if people suck at it, but it allows:

- Running away from chokepoints
- Flanking
- Surprising "stragglers"

if you are running and im stood still i am going to win that gun fight 99.9% of the time

Nope. Immobile player is dead player.

The only way you win 99% of the time is by using a design failure that allows for a blind spot that allows for unfair control over the entry points.

especially if i have superior position and cover (which i almost always will) A good camper will destroy a good rusher every time, because camping is a very risk free play style

Risk free = no skill involved

If the lottery was "risk free" that would mean that luck was not involved.

3. In combat arms i would be the player hiding behind cover, giving you only afew pixels to shoot at while i destroy you from my position of advantage, like catching fish in a barrel, people shouldnt say the game has a problem when they are not good at it, instead they should learn from the players beating them and become better at the game.

Except the fact that it is known GLITCH that should have been a bannable offense from day one.

Specially when using female characters, who are a little bit shorter but maintain the same line of sight. It's PURE abuse of the game's design to give you an unfair advantage and completely the opposite of sportsmanship.

Image Hosting [http://www.imagecross.com/]

Even found a video example.

 

[Bvenged]

I call snipers in BF3 campers, because they are (but it's okay).

The bad camping is sitting within 10 paces of an enclosed spot/choke-point, trying to remain inconspicuous for as long as possible, and slyly killing anyone who comes by - usually coupled with a powerful trait or close-quarters advantage.

Rinse and repeat at least thrice and you've earned yourself a statutory Campers Medal, honoured only to those who suck so bad they have to ruin everyone else's fun whilst they play.

Doing it as a one-off to fool an enemy is no problem. Continuing to remain there will become an issue, but not as something I'd flip a table over. HOWEVER, when you have already earned the Campers Medal AND been forcefully ceased and desisted (maybe several times), only to go persist in returning to said spot or similar location to continue your infamous "tactic" for the remainder of the match...

What the FUCK are you doing with your life if you can't even fit in socially online in a GAME. Get out of my sight and cancel your internet - you don't deserve it you awkward, self-centred twat.

...and I try not to swear any more.

 

[JoesshittyOs]

Whereas I would consider patrolling one house as camping.

I think it truly depends on the game. It's much less dipshitty to camp in a game like Battlefield (while although it's still possible because fuck Seine Crossing), than a game like Call of Duty. It's taking a small area that gives you an advantage over people who come after you, and proceeding to stay in that small area for extended periods of time. In general, the only reason why the tactic works is because you're just pissing people off to keep coming after you.

It really only bothers me when people of high ranks, or who are clearly good enough at the game to not do it still insist on it.

I personally think I've gotten good enough at multiplayer gaming in general to where I learn to ignore the people doing it, or I can reasonably take my time to take the person out if they're causing too much damage.

 

[HarryScull]

2.rushing is pretty much running around that puts you at a huge disadvantage

Nope.

Rushing is advancing trough the terrain to give you a superior position against the enemy. It's not may fault if people suck at it, but it allows:

- Running away from chokepoints
- Flanking
- Surprising "stragglers"

if you are running and im stood still i am going to win that gun fight 99.9% of the time

Nope. Immobile player is dead player.

The only way you win 99% of the time is by using a design failure that allows for a blind spot that allows for unfair control over the entry points.

especially if i have superior position and cover (which i almost always will) A good camper will destroy a good rusher every time, because camping is a very risk free play style

Risk free = no skill involved

If the lottery was "risk free" that would mean that luck was not involved.

3. In combat arms i would be the player hiding behind cover, giving you only afew pixels to shoot at while i destroy you from my position of advantage, like catching fish in a barrel, people shouldnt say the game has a problem when they are not good at it, instead they should learn from the players beating them and become better at the game.

Except the fact that it is known GLITCH that should have been a bannable offense from day one.

1. a good player will watch his flank and kill you, no problem, as i said camping is waiting for the enemy to come to you and controlling the engagement rushing is moving towards the enemy and hoping they are a noob you can catch of gaurd but against me, my map knollage, my traffic knollage, my spawn knollage and my A40's you are doomed to failure

2. a immobile player from behind cover, with good position aiming down sights ready for that gunfight, vs a player running through a doorway, or dashing across open ground, or trying to move behind inferior cover, what planet do you live on where the rusher is winning that gun fight?

3. playing in a risk free way means you are using good strategy and skill, you should avoid taking unnecessary risks because that is what kills players (even good players) 99% of the time. you could run into the middle of the map, spin in circles and fire of a sniper rifle that is risky, does it take skill? no! taking risks doesn't equal skill in fact it shows the opposite.

4. i apologize, i dint know it was glitch, i fought you were referring to people taking up good cover, this is a problem with the game not one with camping

 

[ElPatron]

snip

My basic points were that moving across the map != finding a site, pitching a tent, lighting a fire, etc.

2. Just because you're crouching and aiming doesn't mean you will win. In fact, aiming down the sights only affects your FOV and makes you an easy target for anyone who hops around you to throw off your aim.

Being immobile in open field gets anyone killed, doing so against a corner isn't much better.

3. If everyone refused from taking unnecessary risks nobody would move the whole game.

4. The problem is that it should be considered a glitch (taking advantage of game design) but it isn't. Why? Because of the "camping is a legitimate strategy" logic.

It's the equivalent of finding aliens and trying not to insult them, so they commit crimes all over the world and nobody wants to arrest them.

 

[HarryScull]

snip

snip

eh camping works for me great, rushing seams to work for you, so we'll keep doing our separate tactics and i'll keep winning.

while i don't doubt that a good rusher is better than a bad camper a good camper can destroy a good rusher 9 times out of 10, i proved this to so many people on COD4, halo 3, battlefield 3, TF2 and a plethora of other FPS games by beating the snot out of rushers sometimes 2 or 3 at a time to bother arguing over a website about it

to put it numerically, i can hold a 5K/D in cod4 whereas my friends that are on my skill level but rush rush can only hold a 2K/D.

just watch WingsofRedemption on youtube for a demonstration, he's put up scores that flat out beat even the best rusher's like sandyravage or fearcrads and he does it on a worse connection and often using worse weapons.

 

[ElPatron]

snip

snip

eh camping works for me great, rushing seams to work for you, so we'll keep doing our separate tactics and i'll keep winning.

The problem is that I don't rush and you don't camp.

And campers don't win. Let's see BF2. So you camping? That's cool, bro. I heard you lost all the other flags.

 

[BishopofAges]

*cough* For playing as many online style games it usually comes down to this.

Camping: In the varieties of Area Camping, Spawn Camping, and CP/Flag Camping. It is that delicate situation you must overcome in order to advance, lest you keep getting killed in exactly the same way over and over. Not to mention look like and idiot for falling for it more than 3 times.

In a fun server/community the word almost never comes up in chat or voice, but instead overcome or played through. In a bad/immature community, arguements will arise from the 'campee' to the 'camper' and admins about this behavior, joined by words like 'unfair' 'cheap' 'bullshit' and 'n00b'.\

To clarify, I am usually on the receiving end of a camping spot, so it's my job to overcome it.

 

[Lilani]

EDIT: NOOOO, NOT THE THING WITH THE FIRE AND THE MARSHMALLOWS AND THE TENTS AND THE AWKWARD SITUATIONS!

Awkward situations? The hell kind of campouts are you having ._.

Anyway, I usually only accuse someone of camping when they're doing it with a class that isn't made to camp. For example, in TF2. Engineers are sort of built to camp, and Snipers are most effective from cover or in obscure spaces and often those are best used when camped in after finding them. However, Heavies are much more effective in the fray and close to people. So I don't mind an engie camping in the intel room or a sniper camping from the roof, but I certainly mind a heavy who's sitting in a corridor with his minigun spun-up mowing down anybody who passes by. 9 times out of 10 they are simply getting cheap kills, and there is no tactical reason to be defending the corridor. So that is what I would call a camper.

Spawncampers, as well. People who only specialize in going to the other team's spawn point and taking out anyone who pops out the door.

 

[HarryScull]

snip

snip

And campers don't win. Let's see BF2. So you camping? That's cool, bro. I heard you lost all the other flags.

*sigh its very possible to camp and defend flags, playing BFBC2 is stupidly easy as you can just spawn trap the shit out of the attackers (or just camp the bomb) and when your on offense you simply move up tactically using the tank and the terrain to destroy them, you have the advantage of being able to spread out over a wide front and pick enemy's off all day and then you can move methodically to the bomb site and tank whore (not rushing, remember camping isnt the absence of movement it is waiting for the enemy to move to you) however BFBC2 is so one sided towards the defender that offense is a joke and you will lose 99% of the time against a good defensive team
(this refers to rush, conquest is basically mw2 domination, you camp the enemy spawn location/s like a mother fucker and win so easily its not even a challenge or fun, so idint even bother playing it after the first few times)

my in BFBC2 i could hold a 3 k/d and my win/loss was a 1.5 which was allot higher than average (for a rush player), because as previously mentioned defense has a HUGE advantage, and know contemplate that BFBC2 wasn't my main game and i never even played it competitively and then contemplate that i sniped 99% of the time (for shits and giggles) and still held a 1.5 win/loss

camping=all powerful, rushing is still a legitimate strategy but will never be better than camping

 

[FoolKiller]

I hate that term with a passion.

If you get at least 2 kills while standing still you are a camper. Apparently people want to be constantly moving regardless of wether it is strategical or not.

When did standing still become such a bad thing? Jesus people need to lighten up.

And if you can't kill a 'camper' then you're terrible. There is no easier target than one that isn't moving. Also, you can get your friends to swarm his location with explosives, so, unless you REALLY SUCK, then 'camping' is a non-issue.

Thankfully I'm not the only one who thinks this way.

IMO, it's a great strategy if you're a good shot. I tend to camp, but only while my shot to kill ratio is 1. I play as the true Ghost, if I miss a shot I disappear now that I've given away my location.

The people that whine don't like "campers" because of two simple reasons:
1. They aren't good enough shots to do it themselves
2. You don't play to their strengths

 

[ElPatron]

camping=all powerful, rushing is still a legitimate strategy but will never be better than camping

The problem is the stalemate that occurs when everyone camps.

You can't camp in BF games because it's ridiculously ineffective. Anywhere you try to camp there are either 270º degrees of unobstructed space from where you can be shot at or you're in such a hidden place nobody will ever think of crossing it.

Plus, capturing flags > defending flags. An effective capture forces the enemy team to become stranded in the place they try to focus on.

And you're still implying that "rushing" is the only alternative to camping, and that it can be used in BF like cod.

The people that whine don't like "campers" because of two simple reasons:
1. They aren't good enough shots to do it themselves

Camping does not require you to be a good shot.

 

[Naeo]

"Camping" has a few elements to it. Hiding in one spot where you are A) incredibly difficult to see and/or B) incredibly difficult to hit. Remaining there for extended periods of time (rather than "oh hey this is cover and people are shooting at me, it makes sense for me to stay here and take some potshots"). Always going back there is you do get hit. Waiting for people to come to you, rather than going anywhere yourself.

It can be a viable strategy--if you're supposed to be able to get there and if you're not unreasonably protected from any sort of damage, then I say it's fair game. If you're going somewhere via some exploit or another, that's crap. Also, having a sniper defend/assault/etc from a vantage point is hardly something I'd consider camping--that's what a sniper does. Find a vantage point where they have a great field of vision and use their weapon's abilities to the max.

 

[CardinalPiggles]

Depends what game/gamemode you are playing.

Assuming you mean Call of Duty, and assuming you mean Team Deathmatch, then I would whole heartedly agree with you.

Also I would like to point out that anyone that calls a sniper a camper is clearly missing the point. Those players can do one, idiots.

 

[HarryScull]

camping=all powerful, rushing is still a legitimate strategy but will never be better than camping

The problem is the stalemate that occurs when everyone camps.

You can't camp in BF games because it's ridiculously ineffective. Anywhere you try to camp there are either 270º degrees of unobstructed space from where you can be shot at or you're in such a hidden place nobody will ever think of crossing it.

Plus, capturing flags > defending flags. An effective capture forces the enemy team to become stranded in the place they try to focus on.

1. yes that is an issue, it turns into a slow paced game of people trying to get the line of sight on each other and get enough kills to break the stalemate or forces the attacking team (or the team with worse map control) forwards into the killing zone of the opposing team, i can see why people get frustrated when games turn into this but it doesn't deter me from camping and i actually enjoy the occasional slow-paced game

2. i just told you that you can camp in battlefield and explained how to do it and gave you my stats which show that it works, what more do you want before you accept that you can camp in battlefield! youtube search battlefield 3 spawn trap and see a demonstration if you must

3. as i said you can camp and capture flags, camping isnt just sitting in a corner it is waiting for the enemy to come to you, so by waiting for the enemy to come to you (or in the scenario were he is camping try and get a superior line of sight to him) then killing him and move to the next position of advantage, repeat until the flag is captured. this is a much better way of doing it than throwing smoke on the flag, running in gung-ho and being shot by some guy on the other side of the map with a thermal scope who you didnt spot.

in terms of flanking, as mentioned earlier while flanking works well on bad players on a good player, with a headset, it will go very badly for you

 

[monkey_man]

Camping is boring, it's waiting in one spot and click whenever someone moves in your 1 feet visibility range. Dynamic camping (making a kill, relocating, repeat) is however completely justifiable, as you are actually playing a game, instead of testing your mouse for functionality.

 

[MammothBlade]

Camping is setting up a defensive strategic position and holding it. A legitimate tactic, as far as I'm concerned. Whenever someone complains about camping I want to slap them one. The only time it becomes a problem is when someone camps the enemy spawn before they can even fight back. Not fair.

 

[Torrasque]

My problem with camping, is that I am a very mobile player (sprinting, dashing, moving around the map) and dealing with a sniper who stays in one spot that I HAVE to go to, is a pain in the fucking ass.

Isn't that the point? Why is this not a legit strategy? Seems like they've found a proper counter to your mobile unit. It is used in actual war, so why not in FPS games (that mimic war)? I don't even like FPS games, but am hard pressed to see the issue with it.

Spawn camping is another story though - that's just fucking cheap.

What do you think is the difference between spawn camping and non-spawn camping?
For me, the only difference is the positioning and the illusion that you can make some progress in a game where they are camping rather than spawn camping. You still die, unable to do anything about the camper, it is just not immediately in your spawn.

I'll admit, there are times when taking cover and "camping" are legitimate strategies, like if three enemies are rushing a choke point and you hide behind cover to take them out. That kind of positioning is tactically sound and only an idiot would say otherwise.
The kind of camping that I hate, is the "I only have one tactic in my bag of tricks, and it is camping". These players will sit in one spot for the entire match, no matter what map or kind of game it is, and camp. If every player played like that, nothing would ever get done. Gameplay would screech to a halt. If every player was extremely mobile, then you get very fast paced energetic gameplay. That is why I am a mobile player (among other reasons) and that is why I hate camping. It is self-destructive towards gameplay.

"but what if only a few players camped and everyone else was mobile?" The argument still stands. If you die to a sniper camping in an unassailable position 3 times in a row, your gameplay slows down (or you keep rushing that spot because you are an idiot). You'll avoid that position, try to slowly peek around corners to kill them, or start camping yourself. "Well what if my team just rushes that position and we overwhelm the camper?" Ignoring the fact that you'd need an intelligent team to do that, and the fact that not all games allow this kind of tactic (range, weapons, etc. factors), you still have to deal with that player when they respawn and go to the exact same fucking spot or they wise up and go camp a different fucking spot.