Average KDR in shooters

Nah,probably just people with no lives and/or other games.I'm on my Xbox way too much but I do play a lot of different games.The only other game I put more than 200 hours into was TES IV:Oblivion.That was my first game on 360 though,I couldn't afford another for a month or two.

The better question is: Whats your w/l or your K+A/D or A/D?

Forum Pirate wrote:I use the M16, so maybe thats just not an issue for me (1 well aimed trigger pull is always fatal excepting sniper type distances)

You see, I like a weapon similar to M4A1. By that, I mean a powerfull, accurate full auto assault rifle, or carbine, which can be customizable for my purposes. If not, I abbandon medium range and switch to sniper rifles and CQC. However modern shooters focus mostly on medium and short range combat. CQC is simplified to a button mashing contest and long range fights are impossible thanks to the games allowing players to sprint in unrealistic speed, not to mention jumping. While wearing all the heavy gear they got, they should be glad that they can move at all, not run around like Sonic.

Killcams revealing your killers location are also what kills all purpose of snipers.
While most hate on campers, I stay by the fact that sniper is supposed to camp. It is sniper's nature.

Tolvo wrote:I just always hate in shooters these days how if you're sniping, you're supposed to go for headshots.

Military snipers are trained to mostly go for the torso, the heart/lungs. Only in specific conditions are snipers trained to go for headshots. And that's mostly for members of SWAT, not the military.

"Well they're both killshots, but obviously going for the smaller more likely to move target is the way to go!" I just hate the mentality of focusing on headshots unless it is a really gamey-game. Halo I get, Team Fortress 2 I get. CoD? Isn't it trying to be realistic?

Dear Tolvo, if the games like CoD were as realistic as they want their players to think they are, aiming at head would have no purpose. A sniper rifle shot will leave a huge gaping hole in it's targets body, that will incapacitate the target and render it unable to fight, if the target even manages to survive the shot. The reson why snipers in games aim for the head is of course a matter of some inside elitism and other nonesense, but it's also practical.

Snipers have a weapon with slow firing rate so they need to kill with one shot, so that their target can't take cover, or retaliate. However modern shooters usually don't allow a body shot to kill, because people would cry that it is too OP and unfair and instead will leave the victim with a slither of health left and blood gushing from their eyes. Unless you can kill with one torso shot, a sniper has to aim for the head of it's target. Unlike reality, in shooter games, if your target survives your shot, you can be sure that after a brief period of time (a few seconds really), it takes him to recover his health, he will come running for you and kill you. This is even more available thanks to the games telling you where you're being shot at.
Well...the same will probably happen even if you do manage to kill your target. There's either five second delay for him to heal, or to respawn and then you have to face the said player's wrath and eventually get teabagged, get hatemail and other lovely features that FPS players have to offer.

I suppose the games are more realistic than you give them credit for. Snipers in war are usually hated by enemy forces and are tortured or executed while other soldiers may simply be taken as POW's, since they can actually attribute the deaths of friends directly to said sniper.

In games, you can see who killed who and with what.
Gamers usually hate on snipers because they stay in one place and wait for their enemy to show up, which is largely frowned upon by FPS players. It's a perfectly valid any game and it is widely used tactic even in real life. I see no reason to charge onto my enemy and think I'm some sort of Rambo.
Not to mention getting angry after I get killed like this.

The other reason for the hate being that the snipers shoot from large distances and their targets usually can't fight back unless using a sniper rifle themselves. This is considered cowardly and thus frowned upon as well.

It's all some that players created among themselves and force it upon others, to the point where most players consider it perfectly normal and even defend their own little world. :|

Well I'd say it can end up being a balance issue. Because if people want to be realistic, snipers aren't as common as the normal infantry. So there shouldn't be as many snipers, as well in games they should design maps with different ways to approach enemies thus making camping in one spot not a great idea since a grenade can be thrown over to your position.

It's the same issue I see in a lot of Star Wars games. Everyone wants to be a Jedi/Sith, but there should be way less Force-Users than actual soldiers. Enter the game, and everyone has a lightsaber. That's my issue with snipers in games.

KrazykevS10 wrote:I'd be inclined to think so when I'm taking their dogtags.You would have to play a LOT to get that high and now there's at least one in every lobby.

Some guys just play a lot and if you play it right you can get a serious amount of points per game, kills\revives\repairs\squad points, playing for medals\ribbons etc. Best guy in BF2 at 1 stage had a kd ratio of under 1 he just racked up points healing and reviving. On pc you've 64 people on some servers and that just racks up points especially on metro 1000 ticket server conquest, play as medic or support and rack up points resupplying\reviving\healing.

Tolvo wrote:Well I'd say it can end up being a balance issue. Because if people want to be realistic, snipers aren't as common as the normal infantry. So there shouldn't be as many snipers, as well in games they should design maps with different ways to approach enemies thus making camping in one spot not a great idea since a grenade can be thrown over to your position.

It's the same issue I see in a lot of Star Wars games. Everyone wants to be a Jedi/Sith, but there should be way less Force-Users than actual soldiers. Enter the game, and everyone has a lightsaber. That's my issue with snipers in games.

I can't really relate to any Star Wars games like that (I would probably also play a Force based character), but in shooters, camping is usually a bad idea, because, as I already mentioned, killed player can see the exact location of his killer thanks to killcam and other similar features. This forces the sniper to move after every kill, because the killed player will respawn within few seconds and know exactly where to go to find his killer. Not only that, but he can also spawn near the snipers location and even ask friends to spawn onto him, so the poor sniper has only few seconds to prepare himself for a gank of overly aggresive twelve year olds spraying everything in his vicinity.

While I agree that long term camping is a bad idea, being forced to move after every shot is also bad. It effectively kills the purpose of sniper class in shooter games, because as I see it, the sniper shouldn't be forced to move around so much and thus exposing himself to unnecessary danger while moving.

For example, in Halo, the sniper rifle shot left a trail after it that could be used to track down the location of the sniper. However, it still required some work, instead of the game just showing the location and it's surroundings to you. Finding the sniper and hiding as the said sniper was a lot of fun. Something entirely absent in most recent shooters.

I agree (I hate kill cams.) I leave presents (eg claymores) in my previous spot with each kill (i'm not a sniper, but I play like one)

Forum Pirate wrote:I agree (I hate kill cams.) I leave presents (eg claymores) in my previous spot with each kill (i'm not a sniper, but I play like one)

You get a + for fidning a way to use this annoying feature against others.
I do the same, if the game allows it, or I position myself to have the said spot in my sights and wait for the angry mob to arrive, only to get gunned down. Repeat it a few times and bathe in the avalanche of hate mail.

To get an idea, during the game Star Wars TOR, there would be something like one Jedi for every ten thousand soldiers.

Most Republic players were Jedi. Instead of Soldiers or Smugglers.

I really really hate when people have this "This class is cool, I should only play this one" mentality and totally *** over games.

TF2 actually has that issue with the Sniper, you'll go onto a server and see six snipers standing shoulder to shoulder covering a bridge. During this time the enemy will be completing the objective since those people should actually be supporting the team rather than making their perfect kill zone.

That gets me mowed by good teams though (i use rockets for that, the m16 is not suited to gunfights)

I usually just find a different spot each time, so they stop checking for me in the old one (and being blown up by claymores) and then camp for a bit, until they figure out I played them and haven't moved for 3 minutes.

My favorite matches are against opposing stealthers though. We'll both murder the whole field if left unchallenged, so we have to focus on the other stealther and try to out stealth them to stop them killing everyone. Neither side gets a ton of kills, but its usually the actions of the better sneak that decide the match.

@tolvo, that is frustrating. Its party biowares fualt. Anything any class can do, a jedi can do just as well.

I think it isn't just Bioware's fault, I'd say it's also the fault of George Lucas and a lot of Writers and game designers. Basically a lot of them act like if you don't have the Force, you're worthless in that universe.

It does make me miss the original days of Star Wars Galaxy though, where becoming a Jedi was such a long and difficult process you'd only have like ten per server. And typically they could kick anyone's ***.

I need to make a new Star Wars Cynics thread or something.

Thats only in the movies/games though (though I suppose they get the most exposure.) Its not even true in all the games (mission vao will turn most force users into a fine red mist in a hell of a hurry) In the books there are exceedingly dangerous people, more than a match for most jedi. They're not common, to be sure but they're there.

@Forum Pirate
I agree and I try to do the same.
I can relate to the little fights between high DPS and high skilled players that actually determine which team wins, while the rest of the team is totally unaware of this.
There were a few rare cases where the rest of the team figured this out and the said player, me in most cases, gets instantly swarmed by the enemy to cripple his movement.

@Tovlo
If I played a Star Wras online game, like TOR for example, I would choose a Force related character like a Jedi, or Sith.
The "cool" factor of using a Light Saber and Force isn't the deciding factor for me, while it does sounds like a lot of fun. My first concern is "How can I kill a Jedi/Sith with a gun?"
In movies and other SW games you can see Jedis deflecting shots from several sources and cutting their enemies with ease. Throwing their enemies around like ragdolls and destroying vehicles and starships only by moving their hands.
I don't want to be on the receiving end of their Light Sabers and Force tricks. The whole universe tells you that if you don't use Force, you suck and that a commoner has no chance against a Jedi/Sith.

But BioWare does the same in ME3 multiplayer.
Everybody plays high DPS characters, like Geth Infiltrator, N7 Destroyer, or tanks, like Geth Juggernaut, or Alliance Infiltration Unit. As soon as you don't play as one of those on higher difficulty, people will automatically try to kick you.

In the end, ME3 isn't as much fault of BioWare as the community, but the SW case seems to be fault of LucasArts that just promote Force using characters too much and totally ignore the rest of the universe.

I know, I'm really into the EU and they have more characters that get by without the Force, it's actually one of the reasons I really enjoyed the Vong Invasion, it really leveled the playing field in regards to Jedi being about as useful as a normal soldier.

Then again they often go crazy in the other direction then, like Boba Fett. I think he was a cool bounty hunter and everything, but they got incredibly ridiculous with him.

There are ways to reduce the effectiveness of Force Users, another issue is that on average a Jedi could use Push and pull, and enhance their abilities a bit. That's it, a normal Jedi in written stories can die from three people focusing blaster fire on them.

Things like The Force Unleashed though go to that retarded level. What's funny is in the original three films they were strong but Jedi weren't that crazy. It wasn't until George Lucas got a CGI hard on that Jedi became super hero soldiers that could kill hundreds of people effortlessly.

If I would have to fight a Jedi on the level of Luke Skywalker in the first three movies:

Spoiler:

If I would have to fight a Jedi on the level of Obi-Wan in the other three three movies:

Spoiler:

If I would have to fight a Jedi on the level of Starkiller in the Force Unleashed:

Spoiler:

The problem is that when you say "Jedi" I imagine something between Obi-Wan and Starkiller, thanks to the movies and games so far. I haven't read any of the books, comics, or anything else.

So if I were to pick a class in a SW game, of course I would go for a Force related character, because I want to have at least a chance against other Force related characters.

This is why we need an excellently done Thrawn Trilogy in cinema format!

The Jedi go through some rough **** in that.

Or even better, I'll eat my hat if Disney goes for the Yuuzhan Vong invasion.

You didn't want Kiddy Ewoks? Alright, let's go full mature. A race of homocidal xenophobes that sacrifice body parts to their gods, enslave everyone while breaking and remaking their bodies, and bring in the most gore involved race in Star Wars. Ever wanted to see a man explode as a hive of insects erupt from where his torso was seeking out every human nearby and burrowing into their skulls and eating their brains out?

Come on Disney, give me Yuuzhan Vong!

Luke wasn't a jedi until vader died, but thats not the point.


The problem with the force users in the newer games/movies is that its essentially unlimited, when in everything else maintaining form 4 (ataru) or trying to throw someone across a room takes a great deal of focus and often has a startup time, so its tough to do, and it only gets tougher to hold that concentration as the situation intensifies (eg combat, multiple opponents, ect.)

Fights between all but the very best jedi/sith rarely last more than 2 minutes before someone slips and dies.

"Alright it's been two minutes, write the death now. Come on, we have a schedule people."

"Sir, I don't know what to do for the Greivous fight."

"Just have Obi kill him."

"Sir, the General has four *** arms and is lightning fast, should i have Obi just dominate him with the force?"

"No that would be too smart, just have him somehow cut off his hands then shoot him with a blaster or something. Who cares, the kids will eat it up."

He should have ended that right off. Grievous doesn't have the force, its 1v1, and grievous didn't lunge right off (giving obi time to concentrate) so there's nothing stopping obi pulling his limbs off like children do spiders.

Move 1; start spinning sabers
Move 2: rip off arms with force.

Tolvo wrote:I think it isn't just Bioware's fault, I'd say it's also the fault of George Lucas and a lot of Writers and game designers. Basically a lot of them act like if you don't have the Force, you're worthless in that universe.

It does make me miss the original days of Star Wars Galaxy though, where becoming a Jedi was such a long and difficult process you'd only have like ten per server. And typically they could kick anyone's ***.

I need to make a new Star Wars Cynics thread or something.

I feel you probably know this but I'll point it out anyway.Non- force sensitives have killed both plenty of Jedi and Sith.There have been mercenaries that kill or capture them as an entire business,swords that have a special weave that can lock with a lightsaber without being ruined and people that simply kill with well aimed blaster fire.
Jedi and Sith were never one man/woman armies until a certain point where they just said screw it.Sure,they were more than capable of killing a gang of lowlifes but not well trained soldiers.You close the distance,they pull out a vibroblade,you use the force to lift them up,they shoot you in the face while you concentrate.I haven't played The Old Republic but surely soldiers are PVP viable in it.