I agree for the most part, but I understand their splash damage decision...they didn't want to make it overpowered, though AT is underpowered as it stands. The way I see it, 2-3 shots should take out a tank always, as opposed to the 3-5 now. 1-2 for an APC or armored flying vehicle, and one shot for everything else GUARANTEED. Firing an antiTANK rocket at a damn vodnik or hummer should ALWAYS kill it. Not leave it severely damaged, not set it on fire so it EVENTUALLY explodes. It's just absolutely, inexcusably fucking retarded that a weapon meant for heavily armored terrestrial vehicles can't take out a simple transport or flyer with a direct hit...I don't know how anyone EVER thought that was a REMOTELY good idea.[BBF]Snake wrote:
Yeah I agree tanks aren't overpowered, the AT weapons are underpowered. You get either the SRAW or ERYX, which IMO suck, and can take anything up to 4 or 5 hits to destroy armour if you are really unlucky or it is next to a supply crate. I think the power of the AT rockets should either be powered up in a patch or give the option of having a newer, better AT unlock (like the AT-4 which is actually useful against tanks). I also think the splash damage on the AT rockets suck as well, but these are just my humble opinions.
Search
Search results: 134 found, showing up to 50
24%? Ouch. Even I think that's pretty damn bad.Simon wrote:
Well 24% of your kills are from guns..James-m wrote:
Ok, it sais it in the title, im not going to repeat it. Quite a few peoples stats, like mine, are,
1. medic
2. tank
3. karkand as their favorite map
4. and weapon usually assault rifle
people complain at this? im not so sure why, its a good way to earn points no?
I'm with Mr. 158 here, and Jester as well. It wasn't soon after I started playing Battlefield 2 that I realized that tanks are the biggest pussies in the game. Everytime I hop in the mounted gunner seat of a tank, or take up the role of commander, all I ever see the tanks doing is sitting as far away as possible from where they can ACTUALLY be of use, crowding around spawnpoints just mowing people down...not even taking the damn flag nearby. if you're going to roll in armor, then listen up to your commander and pay attention to the map...seek out and destroy enemy armor or at LEAST make an ATTEMPT at weakening it. I don't even hop in the gunner seat anymore because I can't remember the last time a tank drove in to anywhere actually vital to the battle. You're invulnerable to half the kits in the game, and it's sickening how willingly and how often this kind of cowardice occurs.
I certainly agree with all of that...Linebackers are my favorite vehicles in the game. I think if more maps had mobile AA then air superiority would be much less of a factor. Also...it'd be nice if Mobile AA had more than 3 reloads.
Hard to kill other tanks? Yes. Hard to kill ANY other ground vehicle or swarms of infantry? No.
I dunno, I think we're still going to have to agree to disagree. I still see pilots getting dozens up dozens of kills and MAYBE 1 or 2 deaths. Nothing in a game should give anyone that much of an edge. And again, stationary AA can still be completely and easily avoided or outfought.MajorHoulahan_MASH wrote:
@PCshooternoob: air is not overpowered anymore in patch 1.3
The only exception being the J10 maybe.
The real problem is/was most fighter pilots have their mind set on bomb points and K-D ratios too much, and dont put enough effort in taking out enemy fighters AND bombers AND choppers (!) as 1st priority !
If all jets were really engaged in chasing each other/dogfights all the time, they would not have much time left to pound the ground troops.
A friendly tank is certainly always a welcome sight in my book. Like I said, I have no problem with tanks in the game, but I certainly understand why people do, and no one, anywhere, at ANYtime, should ever brag or feel accomplished about getting kills with a tank.James-m wrote:
i enjoy the sound of the Abrams.... the thought of bringing the power and might to the battlefield.... helping out the ground pounders, i enjoy doing it. they might like seeing me in the abrams, especially if enemy armor is about
Well, when you say you get whooped when you go out on the ground, it certainly lends to the assumption that you suck...but if you say you don't, whatever...I don't know one way or the other. As or realism? Uh, yeah...a real SRAW rocket can shatter just about any tank in the world like glass, and even the ones that don't completely shatter are permanently disabled. No matter where they're hit. So we shouldn't start on about realism.
I think that's a big part of what burns people...no one wants to lose to a guy who's clearly a crappier player than they are simply because they got into a vehicle.James-m wrote:
if i go on the ground, i get my ass whooped. i only use a tank because i have a half more chance of survival. i hate going on the ground like as an infantryman
Uh...that you're even beginning to compare terrorist bombings of civilian targets and a form of antitank in a video game is...wow. I don't even have a word for it. And what's the twisted, ass backwards logic that comes to the conclusion that taking out the armor which is mercilessly slaughtering your team is NOT helping your team? Armor is my favorite vehicle, but I'm sorry, but we're in an armored tank invincible to everything but high powered explosives who is nigh invincible when suppoted by an engineer or supply crate. And AntiTANK, the kit made to take us out, takes like...a third of the damage out in a shot IF they're lucky. And again, if there's an engineer or supply crate around, we're back to full health before they're reloaded. Armor drivers have no room to bitch, dude. C4 jeeping is a perfectly fine way of tanking them out, and if you have trouble taking out an approaching vehicle you can kill in an instant...then you deserve to die, and I applaud people as soon as they ram me with their C4 laced vehicle...it's pretty funny to watch.cpt._crust wrote:
I don't use armor very often, so I don't have the C4-Jihad problem. On the surface, it's unsettling to me seeing players emulate the tactics of real-world Iraqi insurgents and cowardly terrorists. Maybe it's just me, but it sickens me seeing players emulate such tactics.
Of course, younger (or ignorant) players won't consider this, which is fine. To each his own.
Further, when someone suicides himself just for a kill, not only is that NOT going to help the player committing suicide, it annoys the victim, proving that suicide C4 players don't want to score points or help their team, they want to annoy players and be shitheads, and they should be kicked immediately.
They're out there. They might not be on this thread, but they're out there.
Anyway, about bunnyhopping, say what you want about it, but it is a cheap tactic. No, it's not the worst thing in the world, and it's not comparable to wall glitching or anything, but it doesmake you harder to hit than just tracking the movement...the game has shoddy collision detection at times...I can't tell you how often I've killed someone right after they pass behind a corner because the game hadn't yet determined whether or not my shot was a hit until after they were clear. I mean, dolphin diving was only a problem because people charging straight at you were somehow invulnerable because they were jumping. It's a fairly minor and certainly defeatable tactic, yes, but still annoying and cowardly.
I'd say that the reason people hate medics on Karkand is because it's easy, meaningless points while everyone else has to actually work for it. Not only that, but I'm sure we've all had those times where the cowardly medic charges in and revives us while hiding or running away while the person who kills us just guns us down. I remember the first few days I played Battlefield I hated medics like crazy...I never, EVER got revived when I actually wanted to be. Medics, take note...if you can't take care of the guy whol killed someone, don't go for the revive score and get the person killed again...it's just dick.Noop-Ni wrote:
People get pissed off at tanks because they can't beat them. Nobody likes a fight that they can't possibly win, and if a tank is facing a medic the medic is going to die. They don't have a chance at all, and that's annoying.
Can't really see why people complain about medics on Karkand though. I mean, if someone has fun doing that, then what's the problem? I dunno. Crazy people.
And, uh, on a totally different note, you might want to try just playing to have fun. Forget about points, just for fun. If you don't care about your score, you'll be a lot more relaxed, and it'll be more enjoyable. At least, it is for me.
I once played on a server with a guy named Smoke_Manmuscle.
He sucked like hell, but I laughed everytime I saw that name.
He sucked like hell, but I laughed everytime I saw that name.
People see that the jets rack up tons of kills and almost no deaths so now everyone hops right on and tries to mimic top gun. I don't know why more people don't practice flying on single player so only competent pilots are in the sky. Besides that, as people have mentioned, a good jet pilot won't get TOUCHED by stationary AA guns. Maybe the Essex, and Mobile AA is pretty good, but, stationary AA is worthless...Jets can drop countermeasures and fly out of range before lock on can be re-established, and both jets and attack copters can just take a stationary AA head on, blow it up, take one shot worth of damage, then go back and get repaired and refitted like nothing ever happened. Air is overpowered, so there's no reason NOT to to have every idiot run straight for them and give it a shot.
Why're points so important? Okay, so you get the 3 or 4 unlocks you actually use, and then what? You have a better fake ranking? Oooh, big deal...you're a higher e-rank. Okay, so you get to be commander more...still...big goddamn whoop. Play the game to have some good ol' team based fun, not for points.
It's part of the game, what're ya gonna do? I have no problem with tanks, so long as it's acknowledged, as stryyker said, it takes zero skill. Just don't brag about how OMG awesome you are with your 1337 tank skills, or how you pwn so many nubs with your one shot splash cannon and heavy machine gun...and it's all good. I think most people just hate tanks because Antitank is so underpowered as a kit that tanks get way more kills than even they deserve, especially when the have a supply crate nearby, or even worse, when engineers roll as a convoy in vehicles.
Yes, if we went to war with China, we'd be in some deep water. What people seem no to think about, but what a lot of people in this thread have pointed out...our relations with China are nowhere near the point we should worry. They're actually quite good, since our economies are highly symbiotic.
I dunno...with the constant nerfing of assault and the 1.2 upgrade support got...I'd have to say support is an overall better class...and assault if my favorite far and away. Since the grenade launcher nerf, frag grenades are now infinitely more useful, and if a support guy just dives and fires in bursts, his shots are just as accurate as assault, just more powerful, and with a higher firing rate and ammo count. Not to mention the packs for infinite ammo in the long run. Flashbangs are nice, but you have to use the F2000 to get them, as opposed to the more powerful and balanced AK-101 or the more accurate M16. Not saying that it's a fight assault couldn't win. Overall, I think it'd be at least somewhat balanced, much more so than Medics Vs Snipers, but support would have a definite leg up. As far as I can tell now, assault is the class just after Engineer and AT for least reasons to play as besides fun and challenge.Delphy wrote:
How about Assault vs Support? They're both mainly attacking types, both have body armour and good guns. The supports would have a bit of an advantage with grenade spamming, also the PKM. Assault would have flashbangs and grenade launchers as an advantage.
That sounds like the best idea I've heard in a long time...besides everything they already need to do to fix the damn game.Harmor wrote:
Download 1.40 BETA 2 and play a couple of rounds of IO...you'll see that these two ranked map options would be vastly superior:
'Vehicle-lite' ranked map option:
o Replace Tank/APC spawns with Heavy Jeeps
o Replace AA vehicle spawns with Light Jeeps
o Remove Jets
o Replace Littlebird and Attack Helicopters with Transport Helicopters
AND/OR 'Vehicle-neutered' ranked map option:
Same as above except all transport vehicles have their guns removed.
ALL kits on ALL maps for ALL sizes will be playable. As it stands now IO is only bareable on Karkand, Sharqi and Mastuur. Any other map its 16 or 32 size and even then any water map sucks.
I can't believe people are actually defending bunny hopping as a legit skill now. That's just depressingly pathetic.Papa Smurf 314 wrote:
O Rly? You think all bunny hoppers use macros? LOL. It's too easy to bunny hop, why should we need a macro?HaywoodJablowme wrote:
Thank you.usmarine2005 wrote:
His words may be a bit strong, but why is it contributing nothing? If he said "Best vid ever," you wouldn't have said shit. I can't watch it because I can't watch .rar files, but if he saw a bunch of idiots hopping around, then he is correct, they look like queers when they are hopping and prone spamming. And judging from my experience in the sniper competition, that wouldn't surprise me at all.
And to Papa Smurf, I find it amusing that you think a jump-prone-land-repeat is skill. I don't really see it, cuz I smoke about 90% of toolboxes like you when I play. From what I see, it's a bunch of macros, which doesn't sound like skill to me.
Eh...just try to keep in mind that my name is truthful, Battelfield 2 is my first PC first person shooter. First real PC game at all, really.
Wow, that whole story just makes me sad. You should've taken screenshots and sent that into EA...I'm pretty sure that server would've lost its ranked standing.
Yeah, I gotta say, the video is cool and kudos for putting it together, and for putting the whole match together, but...this whole thing was kind of a silly idea...the most overpowered kit in the game versus the only kit in the game the developers went out of their way to underpower from the start? Hmn...big mystery and lots of suspense there. Snipers have the advantages of ranged weapons and claymores, medics have the best assault rifles in the game, the power to heal themselves or each other, and the power to bring each other back from the dead. Hell, a medic in a vehicle is a magical health fountain which snipers have no efficient means of taking out. Honestly, I don't think Medics Vs Anyone would be a terribly fair fight, but least of all snipers. Well, scratch that...least of all AT. Hell...that's what it should be...the battle of the martyr classes...Antitank VS Engineer.genius_man16 wrote:
i think it would be cooler to have Support vs. Medics.. i mean, Medics/Snipers was just really lame
"i wonder who will win?"
AK's vs. pistols
full auto vs. bolt action
hmmm....
it would actually be fun to watch then, IMO anyway
So then...should single parent not be allowed to have their kids because they don't have both a mom and a dad? I mean...show me the legitimate, published, recent medical study that shows that homosexual couples are less capable at raising kids than straight ones.PRiMACORD wrote:
Agree.fierce wrote:
They should be able to marry, but not to be able to adopt kids.
Children need a mom and a dad, not 2 moms or 2 dads
Okay, while it is POSSIBLE to get a level 60 character in 4 days, don't try to present that as the norm, because that's just complete bullshit. Most people don't know the exact means of achieving that kind of level that quickly and you know it. I know 9 people with the game, and only 3 of them have level 60 characters, and they've all had the game around about a year. if you get a level 60 character in 4 days, you're playing WAY too fucking much in those days, and/or following a precise line of quests and techniques to achieve that.aqempty wrote:
to get a wow char to max lvl is only required 4 days and u have 960 hours(40 days)doing always the same so who is sick?Longbow wrote:
Most of MMORPG players are sick ppl ...
It's been suggested that infantry only maps might still have gun-less vehicles, as maps with carriers and large maps would be absolutely unplayable otherwise. As to someone making the "human are overpowered" comment...that may very wel be the stupidest thing I've ever heard. I mean, you could say certain kits are overpowered, but dude...shooting yourself in the leg to have gimps? The point of what I was saying, if you read the entire post, is that regardless of skill level, armor and air can give people ridiculously unfair advantages. The only things that can give infantry drastic leg ups over each other are, as I said...teamwork, tactics, and just being a better shot, things which there should be more of in every game.
As to getting more points for capturing harder points? Nah. The reward for that is earning your team a more valuable base and crippling the enemy. As for more points for killing higher level players? Hell no. It's so hard to decide what makes a player better. Rank means virtually nothing, as many have pointed out. And even individual stats are hard to discern. Good Kill Death raios could be the result of excellent piloting, but then the person can't groundpound for shit. People could have high SPM, but mostly as a result of statpadding or command time. It's far too difficult to actually determine the quality of players, so the idea is inherently flawed.
More points for certain strategic objects and adding more destructable assets? I'm kind of a fan of that. Mostly because medics and support get easy bullshit points for just tossing packs around, and medics get two points for reviving...while Assault, Antitank, and Snipers(though they do have guaranteed-kill claymores now) can't even get team points, engineers have to sit there and twist a wrench around for an hour for a CHANCE to get one measly point, and special forces have to hoof it across the level, sneak behind enemy lines, and use 2 C4 to blow up assets, when you only get 5 to begin with and there are at least 4 assets to destroy, often times 5. Though at least Spec-Ops can take both vehicles and infantry with a fair amount of proficiency.
What I really think you should get extra points for is destroying vehicles...or at least air and armor. It takes infinitely more effort than taking out an infanty foot soldier, but gets the same amount of points. Come on now...taking out a jet, gunship, tank, or APC is NOT equal to taking out a foot soldier running around like a chicken with his head cut off, and the game should reflect that.
More points for certain strategic objects and adding more destructable assets? I'm kind of a fan of that. Mostly because medics and support get easy bullshit points for just tossing packs around, and medics get two points for reviving...while Assault, Antitank, and Snipers(though they do have guaranteed-kill claymores now) can't even get team points, engineers have to sit there and twist a wrench around for an hour for a CHANCE to get one measly point, and special forces have to hoof it across the level, sneak behind enemy lines, and use 2 C4 to blow up assets, when you only get 5 to begin with and there are at least 4 assets to destroy, often times 5. Though at least Spec-Ops can take both vehicles and infantry with a fair amount of proficiency.
What I really think you should get extra points for is destroying vehicles...or at least air and armor. It takes infinitely more effort than taking out an infanty foot soldier, but gets the same amount of points. Come on now...taking out a jet, gunship, tank, or APC is NOT equal to taking out a foot soldier running around like a chicken with his head cut off, and the game should reflect that.
I honestly don't think it's a bad idea. I know, half of the idea behind Battlefield is vehicles, but they are a bit overpowered. Or at least all of the ANTI-Vehicle countermeasures are underpowered. SRAW rockets in real life could shatter most tanks like glass in a single shot, as opposed to 3-5 for a tank. Hell, they're not even guaranteed to take out hummers and Vodniks in a single hit. Not to mention we now have more advanced infantry weapons, such as predator missiles, which home in on vehicles, fly above them, and detonate downwards, where most tanks are least armored. And many anti air rockets, American ones specifically, lock onto electronic signatures, not heat, when tracking a target, and have many, MANY more than 2 shots before they need to be refitted.
And don't bother, I know the next argument...Battlefield 2 isn't about realism, blah blah blah. The point is that it's a fun, arcade style shooter where the kits are balanced to produce the best gameplay. But it seems that with each patch, the balance of weapons gets more and more screwed up, and some weapons and vehicles are upgraded or left with their real life attributes, while others are horrifically nerfed and purposely underpowered. Vehicles are not the difference between Battlefield and Counterstrike. If you believe that, then you haven't played either very extensively. Whether you like vehicles or not, it makes sense to at least include an OPTION where things could be settled based entirely on precise aim, teamwork, and superior tactics, which, in this game, are all too often overshadowed by the near invincibility of overwhelming air and armor dominance.
And don't bother, I know the next argument...Battlefield 2 isn't about realism, blah blah blah. The point is that it's a fun, arcade style shooter where the kits are balanced to produce the best gameplay. But it seems that with each patch, the balance of weapons gets more and more screwed up, and some weapons and vehicles are upgraded or left with their real life attributes, while others are horrifically nerfed and purposely underpowered. Vehicles are not the difference between Battlefield and Counterstrike. If you believe that, then you haven't played either very extensively. Whether you like vehicles or not, it makes sense to at least include an OPTION where things could be settled based entirely on precise aim, teamwork, and superior tactics, which, in this game, are all too often overshadowed by the near invincibility of overwhelming air and armor dominance.
Hmn, ya got me there. Maybe there's some secret technique...a hidden art of kit fusion. Sniper rifles with underslung grenade launchers...defribulators that can destroy UAV, Artillery, and Scanners...Wrenches that resupply ammunition! Antitank rockets...that...actually take out tanks...? Who knows?J=MAN wrote:
7 kits x 60 hours = 420 hours, which is more than 400. Nope, still no good.PCShooterNoob wrote:
wasn't the requirement for expert kit badges a long time ago only 60 hours? That may explain it.
Well, yeah, but come on...Sephiroth and those other white haired chicks from Advent Children were totally hot!Sarrk wrote:
I know kids who probably beat off to the FF series
Wait...wha?
They were guys?
HA! You almost had me there, I...
I...
Oh god...I think I'm gonna be sick...
How do you know it's his friend? What if it's an asshole roommate? Or that girl's jackass little brother who filmed them having sex? Who knows what the fuck went on here? And if he's really upset, justice will be served when/if he sues them for all of the laws broken and damage by posting a video like that on the internet. Not our place to judge the facts we don't know....only the ones we do know. Mainly...that motherfucker was jacking off to World of Warcraft. Christ.ericcartmanisbest wrote:
oh what a nice friend or whoever, caught his mate (obviously a lonely nerd) wanking off to a video game on camera, then to make it worse, posts it on the fucking internet, jeez who needs friends like that
Haha, this was a big issune in an ethics class I had. In the end...there's not really an logical or reasonable argument against it that can't be shot down in all of two seconds, so I'm all for it. It in no way affects anyone but them, so why the hell not, right? I believe the government should legally honor it as they do any other marriage, but individual churches, of course, should have every right to decide whether or not they want to marry gay couples.
Haha. Well, I do know quite a few people that say no to social events and being with people in real life so they can go play WoW for extended periods of time. It does strike me as some kind of social maladjustment at that point. And to use it as fodder for masturbation? That's pretty fucked up. It's amazing how much negative press violent games like Doom, Resident Evil, and Grand Theft Auto get when WoW seems to drive people insane by the thousands.
The pistol really is a surprisingly good weapon. Not saying it can REPLACE an actual rifle, but you will get up in kills with it through regular usage. While it doesn't have much power, it does have the advantage of having almost no recoil, which is why it's so obscenely accurate. Like most people have said, use it to pick off damaged enemies. And use the fact that it has less recoil than other guns to your advantage; other guns work better when the enemy is crouched or prone. With the pistol, the accuracy difference is negligible, so stay on the move when using it on combat...the enemy's accuracy will suffer a lot more than yours...assuming you can shoot straight, of course.
I actually went back to playing older versions of the game. A lot less servers, yeah, but a lot less bullshit, too, once you get used to the old combat again.
Some of the requirements change frequently. I could have imagined this...but wasn't the requirement for expert kit badges a long time ago only 60 hours? That may explain it.
Yeeeeeah...looks a lot like BF2 but with a lot more special effects and futuristic crap. Nothing particularly exciting about it. If they were trying to showcase new things, they should have gone out of their way to actually showcase what was different about the way things worked, instead of just tacking on a few new skins and effects to the same tanks and aircraft. I mean, the mechs looked kinda different, but still had many of the same weapons...vulcan cannons and what not. Given that they can't even seem to get BF2 to play properly, why move onto a new game so soon...especially when it looks remarkably similar once you get past the bells and whistles.puckmercury wrote:
wait, I'm confused. That was supposed to make us WANT to buy it? Ya know, I thought BF2142 was nothing more than a skin mod to begin with, now I'm confident. The physics appear identical, and for every vehicle I saw, I am aware of an equally performing and simliarly appearing object in bf2. The only exception to this is the mechs, but those are probably just jacked up tanks. Tank whoring gives way to mech whoring. If you want mechs in a game get mechwarrier or mechcommander. I don't see any effort to recreate mechs as yielding anything better than that universe already bears.
Anyway, this isn't anything other than a skin pack w/ new T&L affects. Sad.
It's happening with a disturbing frequency, actually. I think we both just got a little too passionate about this one issue to see any sort of bigger picture. But all it takes is one genuinely stupid person to remind us that the real enemies are idiots and those who ARE genuinely out to ruin the game for solely their own benefit. Well, them...and anyone whose name appears in red above their head...those are the REAL enemies...DSRTurtle wrote:
Comet agreeing with PCShoorter?? what's the world coming too. lol.
Teamwork is the way to win though.
A lot of hate for Karkand here, and I can certainly understand why...it's my most played map but I'm very, VERY tired of it and I haven't played it much for a long while. Still, it's the most popular map in the game, and that's because it's one of the few maps where vehicles don't dominate all things. Armor's contained in relatively small spaces, and there's no air assets. So just remembern, not EVERYone plays there to point whore, although that's getting harder and harder to say...many people, myself included, just play there because it's the most infantry friendly map in the standard game, followed by levels like Mashtuur City and Sharqi Penninsula.
It appears I have to agree with you again here. The problem is, when there's a good admin, the game plays smoothly and no one even thinks about it, because they're too busy with the game to think about the admin that may or may not be keeping it cheater free and fun. But when the admin sucks, it's right there in your face...the game is horrible because of an obnoxious action by the admin or a disturbing amount of inaction, so it sticks out in people's heads more and gives them more reason to gripe.comet241 wrote:
this is the worst poll ive seen in a while. how many servers are posted about here that have horrible admins? a lot, thats right. but, how many are posted that have awesome admins? none, thats right. why? because of the vocal minority as well as the fact that bad news makes great gossip. of course we are going to remember the horrible admins, but it's the great ones, a lot of them too, that we sadly forget about.
What I ask is for people to think long and hard...how many times has an admin ACTUALLY been responsible for ruining your game? And how many games have you played that went exactly how the game's supposed to run? If most admins are idiots, then most games would suck, and then you wouldn't have much incentive to play the game, now would you? The fact that you play at all means that SOMEthing's being done right. And that's SOMEthing we should all be a little more thankful for.
I don't think most admins suck, the majority of the games I'm in run without bullshit admin interference. It's just that you hear more about the shitty admin experience, and they're much more memorable.
Wake Island. Horribly unbalanced right from the start, followed by Dalian Plant for pretty much the same reasons. If both teams are equal in skill, China just has the advantage and will likely win anyway.
Okay Rambo...whatever you say. I've never heard of a medic or support who wasn't MORE than willing to toss me a pack or get a revive point, whether or not I actually need it. I'm sure you're also the guy that bugs the commander for all kinds of crap but doesn't follow a single order given to you. Regaedless of how good you are, you could ALWAYS be better with a team.
Realistcally and SRAW missle could shatter a tank like glass? I get the point you're trying to make...this game isn't about realism, the weapons are made to be balanced. But given that Antitank can't get any team points just from the kit, it doesn't make sense to me that they're also ineffectual against infantry(AT is easily mowed down from a distance) AND against vehicles ( 1-2 shots for a simple Vodnik/Hummer? 2-3 for an APC? Fucking 3-5 for a TANK?! That's absurd.). Even after you waste half your rockets taking out a vehicle that could've easily killed you in one hit...you get 2 points...same as anybody else gets for taking out infantry. This doesn't make sense. AT is a kit for martyrs, it's easily infinitely more difficult than say Medic or Support, and you get a small fraction of the points, as they can kill infantry much more effectively than you AND get team points from their kit special abilities. No, they can't take out vehicles, but AT can't do it all that well either. Hell, Spec Ops is just as effective at taking out vehicles, if not MORE so for the ability to lay traps. And thet get the carbine rifles, which are amazing guns with little to no recoil. For AT to be a worthwhile kit, something needs to change. The rockets need to be stronger to take out more vehicles, or they need better guns or grenades to be able to take out infantry a little more effectively, or more points should be given to those who take out armor, as it's obviously mush more difficult than taking down simple little infantry.Longbow wrote:
Realisticaly MP5 should kill in 1-3 bullets in CQC . Realistically medics can't do anything with soldier shoot in his head . Realistically SVD have same damage & accuracy as M24 at range not more then 600m . Realistically russian army AT is armed with AK-74 (AK-101 = AK-74 with NATO .223 caliber) List is going on... do you want it ?|-LoNgHiLL-| wrote:
Realistically thier primary weapon would be an M4...uk-anubis-uk wrote:
How is an anti tank supposed to carry an M16/M4 and a SRAW/Eryx???????? One of the reasons they carry compact weapons is because THE GOT A BIG F\_/CKIN ROCKET WITH EM!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!
I had actually stopped responding to this thread because everyone had more or less been making the same backwards ass points and throwing out the same villifying bullshit, but I'm actually gonna pretty much go ahead and agree with everything comet has said here. specialist, I'm all for baserape, but everything you said there was fucking stupid. All of those things ARE facets of teamwork, and would be easier to get if you let people into your SQUAD to give it to you. Not to mention, teamwork is the best, if not only way to both carry out AND fight back against an effective raid on a base. Also, if you're so damn good, your team could really use you as a team player, acting as a mobile spawnpoint for your team and backup for those crappy players you speak of. Nothing you said makes any logical sense, and it all sounds horribly counter productive.comet241 wrote:
specialist:
hypocritical noob. I would LOVE to see your stats and see if they back up your claims of superiority. Guess what? getting health, ammo, and being revived takes teamwork!!!!!! playing alone defeats the entire purpose of the entire game.
Bell:
in response to your comment about the rapers having high points, just to play devils advocate, I do believe I have the most points of anyone who has posted here.... by far. and I am completely against baseraping. not to disuade your argument, just playing devils advocate. and not trying to look like im conceited.... i just play the game way too damn much. maybe another hobby or two besides this one.... eh?
oh, and the parachute idea on wake would not only be perfect, it would make sense too, i mean, you have a flippin carrier right there, theoretically you could do it......
Also, yes...Wake Island suffers from horrible unbalance. Assuming that both teams are EQUAL in skill, China will come out on top, since they start off with every advantage possible. In order to the US to win, they have to be decidedly better. Whether you believe in baserape or not, it's going to happen on this level, so EA really DOES need to do something to give the US an edge. Not sure about the paratrooper idea, but something certainly needs to be changed. Even just spawning a few more vehicles on the carrier would make a world of difference. Until that time, I'm going to tell people what I always tell people...don't play Wake Fucking Island Two Thousand and fucking Seven. It sucks. We know.
I know I am.
You can't always be on the winning team. I stick with them most of the time, but not always. If I'm on a team where everyone's teamkilling for jets, there isn't a single damn squad, our commander's flying around, and I'm the ONLY one who can take or defend spawnpoints, then yeah, I'm disconnecting or switching teams after the round is over and there's NO sign of improvement.
Oof...what a nightmare that would be. HOPEfully the admin would realize the situation there, but I can imagine something like that going horribly, horribly awry.OpsChief wrote:
a noob by any other name is not the shooterPCShooterNoob wrote:
Aha, well, noob is in my name. But that's because before Battlefield 2, I'd never really played a PC shooter. I don't mind when the word noob is actually applicable...noob = newbie = someone who's new to something and thus probably not that good at it. But you're right, it's obnoxious as shit that people now use it to describe any and everything they don't like.
lol thats what I call a self-inflicted wound m8 - if someone tries to talk to you on that server that kicks for "use of noob" they will get kicked lmao and you will be banned for hindering team efforts by forcing the noob tk language kick "hey noob get the tank quick!!..." [ADMIN] KICKED: OpsChief you have been kicked for using the word noob...
This actually sounds pretty awesome...I'd love to see it. Just...not have to experience it in battle. Though...it might be kinda fun to see someone breakdancing aroind firing off rounds into people as he spun.
Uh...kay. I'm still not sure if I get the Butler thing...is he some asshole that used to come around or something? Whatever. In any case, we've gone through all the arguments as to why one should or shouldn't get the tank and leave, as it were...I'm not going to go through them again. Just go through the comments from OpsChief, comet241, DSRTurtle, or myself. Then make a decision for yourself based on personal ethics, intelligent strategy, and your own point count and rank. That simple.
I believe spawnraping is sitting behind an exact spawnpoint killing everyone who pops up before they can even react. Baseraping, as far as I execute it, is moving into the area around an enemy base that cannot be captured, destroying commander assets if you can, stealing or destroying all enemy vehicles, all while defending yourself from attack. So no, not really the same thing. And for the record, I'm 21. What does "new BUTLER" mean anyway?