Team Fortress 2 and snipers

[ultimateownage]

So Valve made a dick move here with the new gear. A full kit that prevents you being killed by a headshot and a sniper that kills with just one body shot (but you cant get a headshot with it) and it takes less time for it to charge up a shot. So basicaly you can kill a heavy with just one charged body shot.

Whoever thought all of this would be a good idea should be burned alive because now scrub snipers are made into descent ones because they dont have to aim for the head to get a kill nore do they have to worry about getting killed by a headshot. Great...

So what do you guys think?

*facepalm*
I just... I just don't know what to say. This is one of the stupidest things I've seen here in a LONG time.
The Sniper pack is terrible, but for pretty much the opposite reasons that you said. It's not OP, it's useless. It's for people who can't headshot, but if you can't headshot then you have no use playing Sniper. The knife and hat are the only good things in the pack.

 

[archvile93]

"Wah, bodyshots are for noobs! Snipers should only headshot!"

A kill is a kill. Find ways to avoid them, adapt and fight back, or stop playin'.

Your opinion my good man. Valve are just impowering the weak imo.

No they're empowering the skilled. You have to play alot to unlock that new gear remember, or at least pay about $30 for it.

 

[jonnosferatu]

-TL;DR-
The SS does more damage than the default rifle in the hands of a newbie, but much less in the hands of a pro. It gives newbies something to learn with (and thanks to the Jarate effect, help their team) before progressing to the more difficult and thus more powerful (default) Sniper Rifle.
Good snipers will still beat bad Snipers, they just have to aim a few pixels lower when they see the full SS set.

As indicated in my above post, I actually disagree with the idea that the Sleeper will be an effective practice tool.

The reason we have so many terrible-to-poor snipers playing in general is that practice with the skills they use at the lower levels doesn't have much carryover to the skills used at the higher levels.

I'd also nitpick and say that the strategy used by good snipers won't have to change at all - the enemy sniper is only modified if he's got the full set on, in which case he's equivalent to an overhealed sniper (and therefore something a good sniper will already have experience dealing with).

 

[jonnosferatu]

"Wah, bodyshots are for noobs! Snipers should only headshot!"

A kill is a kill. Find ways to avoid them, adapt and fight back, or stop playin'.

Your opinion my good man. Valve are just impowering the weak imo.

No they're empowering the skilled. You have to play alot to unlock that new gear remember, or at least pay about $30 for it.

Drop rates are pretty high now, and none of the new weapons are much better than a sidegrade (at least, now that they've fixed the DBanner charging from fall damage). I exclude the Degreaser from this because, while it is a very obvious upgrade over the flamethrower, it's a necessary upgrade because as of the engie update the Pyro was the only class that could be considered underpowered.

 

[jonnosferatu]

All the new items I think are stupid, the new pistol for the scout is stupidly overpowered, and don't even get me started on that dam spy knife.

I disagree. The Black Box is a pretty decent sidegrade from the rocket launcher - you gain longevity but have to be more careful with your timing, and are dramatically less useful as an uber target for a medigun medic - and so forth.

I have yet to observe the Shortstop making any difference - the slow effect doesn't last that long and the damage reduction renders it pretty balanced next to the scattergun - and the Eternal Reward is only a problem if your team doesn't communicate or spycheck. Eternal Reward + Dead Ringer is pretty annoying in the hands of a good spy, but that's more an artifact of the Dead Ringer's attributes than the ER's.

 

[jonnosferatu]

"Wah, bodyshots are for noobs! Snipers should only headshot!"

A kill is a kill. Find ways to avoid them, adapt and fight back, or stop playin'.

Agreed, although I will admit it's a little cheap until they update EVERY character (so far I believe the sniper and engineer have the biggest updates)

With the inclusion of the Degreaser and Powerjack for the Pyro, the game's pretty balanced right now. Natascha still needs to be nerfed, but besides that...

EDIT: I'm done talking now.

*will try to get everything in one post next time*

 

[Crystal Cuckoo]

Oh no, Valve has stopped snipers from engaging in headshot duels instead of helping their teammates during team matches!

What a horrible concept.

 

[DustyDrB]

"Wah, bodyshots are for noobs! Snipers should only headshot!"

A kill is a kill. Find ways to avoid them, adapt and fight back, or stop playin'.

Agreed, although I will admit it's a little cheap until they update EVERY character (so far I believe the sniper and engineer have the biggest updates)

Yes, I really want an alternative to the Grenade Launcher for the Demoman.

 

[BonsaiK]

So Valve made a dick move here with the new gear. A full kit that prevents you being killed by a headshot and a sniper that kills with just one body shot (but you cant get a headshot with it) and it takes less time for it to charge up a shot. So basicaly you can kill a heavy with just one charged body shot.

Whoever thought all of this would be a good idea should be burned alive because now scrub snipers are made into descent ones because they dont have to aim for the head to get a kill nore do they have to worry about getting killed by a headshot. Great...

So what do you guys think?

1. You're wrong, that's not how it works at all.

2. Levelling the playing field between skilled players and noob players is something that I wholeheartedly support, in all games.

 

[jonnosferatu]

2. Levelling the playing field between skilled players and noob players is something that I wholeheartedly support, in all games.

So you're saying that being better at something should not make you better at it?

Even ignoring the impossibility of ever actually implementing this, I find this mindset somewhat hard to take seriously.

"Wah, bodyshots are for noobs! Snipers should only headshot!"

A kill is a kill. Find ways to avoid them, adapt and fight back, or stop playin'.

Agreed, although I will admit it's a little cheap until they update EVERY character (so far I believe the sniper and engineer have the biggest updates)

Yes, I really want an alternative to the Grenade Launcher for the Demoman.

I wouldn't mind seeing this either, actually, but I (and apparently Valve) can't think of anything that works for the Demoman as a class and would be a consistent and distinct sidegrade for all levels of play. The Grenade Launcher is extremely versatile as-is, so it's hard to come up with another explosion-based weapon that works*.

*Within the limitations imposed by needing to keep the Demoman balanced with everyone else, that is. You can't give him a direct fire weapon, you can't give him a means of healing himself...etc..

 

[smithy_2045]

"Wah, bodyshots are for noobs! Snipers should only headshot!"

A kill is a kill. Find ways to avoid them, adapt and fight back, or stop playin'.

Agreed, although I will admit it's a little cheap until they update EVERY character (so far I believe the sniper and engineer have the biggest updates)

With the inclusion of the Degreaser and Powerjack for the Pyro, the game's pretty balanced right now. Natascha still needs to be nerfed, but besides that...

EDIT: I'm done talking now.

*will try to get everything in one post next time*

Sasha > Natascha. If I'm killed by a heavy using Natascha, I would've died faster against a heavy using Sasha if they're any good.

2. Levelling the playing field between skilled players and noob players is something that I wholeheartedly support, in all games.

Enjoy playing your games that are 0% skill, 100% random. Personally, I'd find that rather boring.

 

[jonnosferatu]

Schnip

Sasha > Natascha. If I'm killed by a heavy using Natascha, I would've died faster against a heavy using Sasha if they're any good.[/quote]

I'd need to talk with some of my Heavy-main friends on this one, but my experience playing and talking with others has been that while Sasha will knock you back and does more damage, Natascha is more dangerous overall because it reduces your speed to a constant rate regardless of class and thereby completely negates all chance of escape unless you were already essentially safe. I agree that it takes longer to kill, but in the hands of someone who knows how to use it, the first bullet is essentially a death sentence (versus Sasha, where you can reasonably expect to retreat from anything other than close range).

 

[BonsaiK]

2. Levelling the playing field between skilled players and noob players is something that I wholeheartedly support, in all games.

So you're saying that being better at something should not make you better at it?

Even ignoring the impossibility of ever actually implementing this, I find this mindset somewhat hard to take seriously.

They have this concept in golf. It's called a "handicap".

When I start playing a game, I strangely don't enjoy being pounded into a pulp by people who have already been playing it for years. I also am a busy person and don't necessarily have the time available to sit there and learn how to be as awesome at a game as an unemployed 18 year old who gets to play for 14 hours a day. If I spend money on a game, I actually want to enjoy myself when playing with others, and getting repeatedly headshotted by someone way better than me with skills I can never hope to match is something that eventually gets old and will inevitably force me to put down the game and play something a bit more noob-friendly.

 

[Serenegoose]

2. Levelling the playing field between skilled players and noob players is something that I wholeheartedly support, in all games.

So you're saying that being better at something should not make you better at it?

Even ignoring the impossibility of ever actually implementing this, I find this mindset somewhat hard to take seriously.

They have this concept in golf. It's called a "handicap".

When I start playing a game, I strangely don't enjoy being pounded into a pulp by people who have already been playing it for years. I also am a busy person and don't necessarily have the time available to sit there and learn how to be as awesome at a game as an unemployed 18 year old who gets to play for 14 hours a day. If I spend money on a game, I actually want to enjoy myself when playing with others, and getting repeatedly headshotted by someone way better than me with skills I can never hope to match is something that eventually gets old and will inevitably force me to put down the game and play something a bit more noob-friendly.

I think the problem is that it can be very difficult to match player skill, or balance the field, in a way that can't be easily exploited by good players to further increase their advantage, or punish poorer players. If someone who wasn't very good played for ages, and due to their time played was treated like a veteran and so got say, less HP or did less damage, they're being punished for their lack of skill. If you give 'newbie friendly' weapons, there's nothing stopping skilled players using them to become nigh unstoppable. If you based it on stat performance (kill/death ratio) or whatever then you'd see idle servers popping up where people could just join to get killed over and over and receive buffs.

I'm all in favour of balancing the playing field, but I'm not entirely sure how it's possible. A simple 'handicap' system like in golf won't cut it, because it's easy to deceive.

 

[smithy_2045]

Sasha > Natascha. If I'm killed by a heavy using Natascha, I would've died faster against a heavy using Sasha if they're any good.

I'd need to talk with some of my Heavy-main friends on this one, but my experience playing and talking with others has been that while Sasha will knock you back and does more damage, Natascha is more dangerous overall because it reduces your speed to a constant rate regardless of class and thereby completely negates all chance of escape unless you were already essentially safe. I agree that it takes longer to kill, but in the hands of someone who knows how to use it, the first bullet is essentially a death sentence (versus Sasha, where you can reasonably expect to retreat from anything other than close range).

The only time Natascha really helps is against scouts, who aren't a serious threat to heavies in the first place IMO.

 

[BonsaiK]

2. Levelling the playing field between skilled players and noob players is something that I wholeheartedly support, in all games.

So you're saying that being better at something should not make you better at it?

Even ignoring the impossibility of ever actually implementing this, I find this mindset somewhat hard to take seriously.

They have this concept in golf. It's called a "handicap".

When I start playing a game, I strangely don't enjoy being pounded into a pulp by people who have already been playing it for years. I also am a busy person and don't necessarily have the time available to sit there and learn how to be as awesome at a game as an unemployed 18 year old who gets to play for 14 hours a day. If I spend money on a game, I actually want to enjoy myself when playing with others, and getting repeatedly headshotted by someone way better than me with skills I can never hope to match is something that eventually gets old and will inevitably force me to put down the game and play something a bit more noob-friendly.

I think the problem is that it can be very difficult to match player skill, or balance the field, in a way that can't be easily exploited by good players to further increase their advantage, or punish poorer players. If someone who wasn't very good played for ages, and due to their time played was treated like a veteran and so got say, less HP or did less damage, they're being punished for their lack of skill. If you give 'newbie friendly' weapons, there's nothing stopping skilled players using them to become nigh unstoppable. If you based it on stat performance (kill/death ratio) or whatever then you'd see idle servers popping up where people could just join to get killed over and over and receive buffs.

I'm all in favour of balancing the playing field, but I'm not entirely sure how it's possible. A simple 'handicap' system like in golf won't cut it, because it's easy to deceive.

One of Counter-Strike's many variants is the "gungame" where you have to get a kill with each gun - once you get a kill with one weapon, it swaps you to the next weapon and you win when you get a kill with each one. In normal order where you progress up the weapon tree it's boring, but in the "reverse gungame" you start off with the good weapons and every time you get a kill, you then have to get a kill with another weapon that is harder to use. By the end of the game if you're in the lead you have to get pistol, nade and knife kills to win, this gives a chance for the noob players who are still on assault rifles to catch up with you.

The levelling system that most RPGs have is something that makes it easier for experienced players and harder for noobs. Implement a system like that in reverse and you basically have the equivalent of a golf handicap.

 

[jonnosferatu]

They have this concept in golf. It's called a "handicap".

When I start playing a game, I strangely don't enjoy being pounded into a pulp by people who have already been playing it for years. I also am a busy person and don't necessarily have the time available to sit there and learn how to be as awesome at a game as an unemployed 18 year old who gets to play for 14 hours a day. If I spend money on a game, I actually want to enjoy myself when playing with others, and getting repeatedly headshotted by someone way better than me with skills I can never hope to match is something that eventually gets old and will inevitably force me to put down the game and play something a bit more noob-friendly.

It's relatively simple to implement such a concept in golf, though, because everyone's playing (effectively) independently towards the same objective, with a clear and universal metric of how close they are to reaching that objective - you can even the playing field in such instances simply by setting the "win" criteria on that measure at different levels for different people. This is not viable in a game where such progress is based on the interactions between all of the players - particularly when the number and skill distribution of those players varies wildly with time.

For practical terms in TF2, the quickest of the practical solutions is to simply leave the server and find one in which you are not so outmatched.

I won't comment on the "I'm a busy person and don't have time to get as good as a not-busy person with an extensive play background" argument here beyond noting that as a competitive athlete and an engineering student at a university known for its academic rigor (working a part-time job on the side), I'm a busy person too.

I would also like to point out that your emphasis on making everything fair for everyone makes any investment in the game utterly meaningless. Many players, myself included, found that they were being outmatched and decided to take advantage of the resources at their disposal to learn how to change the situation in the context of the game, practiced for a given period to internalize what they'd read, and then returned to standard play able to perform more effectively. Punishing players for their decision to improve themselves rather than forcibly deprive others of their advantages seems extraordinarily selfish. If those other players voluntarily accept handicaps, that's their decision, but such a scenario should not be the default.

 

[Purple Shrimp]

the sydney sleeper is terrible

 

[Lord Krunk]

"Wah, bodyshots are for noobs! Snipers should only headshot!"

A kill is a kill. Find ways to avoid them, adapt and fight back, or stop playin'.

Never a truer thing said.