Poll

What should Battlefield 3 be more like?

Battlefield 293%93% - 93
Bad Company 27%7% - 7
Total: 100
NooBesT
Pizzahitler
+873|6681

-Sh1fty- wrote:

So to compensate for this, the snipers are about 75% transparent or so. This makes this a lot harder to see but they are still visible. All sniper rifles are 1-shot-kills at any range on any body part, the firing delay is pretty long. There's also bullet drop you need to adjust your scope for. It's a brilliant game, really.
Sounds really shitty to me.
https://i.imgur.com/S9bg2.png
FloppY_
­
+1,010|6498|Denmark aka Automotive Hell

NooBesT wrote:

-Sh1fty- wrote:

So to compensate for this, the snipers are about 75% transparent or so. This makes this a lot harder to see but they are still visible. All sniper rifles are 1-shot-kills at any range on any body part, the firing delay is pretty long. There's also bullet drop you need to adjust your scope for. It's a brilliant game, really.
Sounds really shitty to me.
­ Your thoughts, insights, and musings on this matter intrigue me
AussieReaper
( ͡° ͜ʖ ͡°)
+5,761|6365|what

FloppY_ wrote:

NooBesT wrote:

-Sh1tty- wrote:

So to compensate for this, the snipers are about 75% transparent or so. This makes this a lot harder to see but they are still visible. All sniper rifles are 1-shot-kills at any range on any body part, the firing delay is pretty long. There's also bullet drop you need to adjust your scope for. It's a brilliant game, really.
Sounds really -Sh1fty- to me.
https://i.imgur.com/maVpUMN.png
-Sh1fty-
plundering yee booty
+510|5686|Ventura, California

NooBesT wrote:

-Sh1fty- wrote:

So to compensate for this, the snipers are about 75% transparent or so. This makes this a lot harder to see but they are still visible. All sniper rifles are 1-shot-kills at any range on any body part, the firing delay is pretty long. There's also bullet drop you need to adjust your scope for. It's a brilliant game, really.
Sounds really shitty to me.
Would you prefer finding a great position with plenty of concealment and some guy with his graphics on low spots you from a mile away and pumps you full of lead?

If you say yes you're retarded and that's a big game-breaker.

If you say no then joint ops did it right.
And above your tomb, the stars will belong to us.
FloppY_
­
+1,010|6498|Denmark aka Automotive Hell

-Sh1fty- wrote:

NooBesT wrote:

-Sh1fty- wrote:

So to compensate for this, the snipers are about 75% transparent or so. This makes this a lot harder to see but they are still visible. All sniper rifles are 1-shot-kills at any range on any body part, the firing delay is pretty long. There's also bullet drop you need to adjust your scope for. It's a brilliant game, really.
Sounds really shitty to me.
Would you prefer finding a great position with plenty of concealment and some guy with his graphics on low spots you from a mile away and pumps you full of lead?

If you say yes you're retarded and that's a big game-breaker.

If you say no then joint ops did it right.
1shot1kill semi-invisible snipers are a game breaker tbh
­ Your thoughts, insights, and musings on this matter intrigue me
unnamednewbie13
Moderator
+2,053|6984|PNW

Any game with snipers should have vast maps where even if you're standing out like a rock, you'd still need a sharp eye to immediately tell what you're looking at or even if you should be looking at all. Snipers should also rely on moving to new locations to not be spotted, if that's their game, not on artificial rendering crap.

HaiBai wrote:

hey guess what.  67 people want the game to be like bf2, not bc2.

that means you're all wrong and working hard towards and achievement is the right answer

/thread
more like =/= same as
Jaekus
I'm the matchstick that you'll never lose
+957|5391|Sydney

-Sh1fty- wrote:

Jaekus wrote:

-Sh1fty- wrote:

Well, the ghuilie suits in COD4 would work fine once the grass is drawn but it was ruined by those red name tags. The ghuilie suits in Joint Operation Typhoon Rising worked great at long range though, the person becomes nearly entirely transparent.
Transparent?? Don't you mean camouflaged?
Most games don't render grass beyond x meters. In Typhoon Rising, the guillie is nearly the same color as the grass, so up until x meters you can hid pretty well. Beyond x meters, the grass doesn't render anymore so you see a nice big green lump in the ground with a rifle sticking out despite the player being in tall grass.

So to compensate for this, the snipers are about 75% transparent or so. This makes this a lot harder to see but they are still visible. All sniper rifles are 1-shot-kills at any range on any body part, the firing delay is pretty long. There's also bullet drop you need to adjust your scope for. It's a brilliant game, really.

Anyway, so snipers are transparent when the grass is gone and rifles produce enough smoke to notice if you're looking at them.

Great system, great game that came out in '04 and it had 150 player MP, huge maps, weapon selection, character selection, uniform selection, etc. One of the best games in my book.
Do you even know what the word transparent means?

They're camouflaged, not transparent. They aren't made from glass.

Also, they're ghillie suits, not ghuillie suits.

Last edited by Jaekus (2011-02-14 19:20:00)

unnamednewbie13
Moderator
+2,053|6984|PNW

He's talking about draw distance fade to compensate for grass derezzing.
Jaekus
I'm the matchstick that you'll never lose
+957|5391|Sydney
That doesn't make for them being see through. It means the snipers aren't drawn either or they're blending with the environment.
unnamednewbie13
Moderator
+2,053|6984|PNW

Not completely see-through, no, but increasing...yes. If you want to be technical about it, you could call it entity opacity level.
Jaekus
I'm the matchstick that you'll never lose
+957|5391|Sydney
Hmmm, I see your point. However in saying that, with Shifty discussing a game that came out in '04 as an example isn't a good yardstick when considering graphics and a game that is to be released late '11.
unnamednewbie13
Moderator
+2,053|6984|PNW

Typhoon Rising is an old game, but it's still not that bad of a model to borrow features from. The maps were big and it had a lot of players to fill them. But the Battlefield series is more of an arcadey experience than a Novalogic game. I just don't think giving snipers opacity shift will be necessary with BF3's graphics engine and, hopefully, map design.
Jaekus
I'm the matchstick that you'll never lose
+957|5391|Sydney
Yeah, neither do I. I haven't noticed it in BC2 at any rate.
NooBesT
Pizzahitler
+873|6681

-Sh1fty- wrote:

NooBesT wrote:

-Sh1fty- wrote:

So to compensate for this, the snipers are about 75% transparent or so. This makes this a lot harder to see but they are still visible. All sniper rifles are 1-shot-kills at any range on any body part, the firing delay is pretty long. There's also bullet drop you need to adjust your scope for. It's a brilliant game, really.
Sounds really shitty to me.
Would you prefer finding a great position with plenty of concealment and some guy with his graphics on low spots you from a mile away and pumps you full of lead?

If you say yes you're retarded and that's a big game-breaker.

If you say no then joint ops did it right.
I would prefer not being a sniper who does fuck all all round.
https://i.imgur.com/S9bg2.png
-Sh1fty-
plundering yee booty
+510|5686|Ventura, California
Well NooBest, not every sniper is a useless moron. Whenever I played as a sniper in BC2 I would be extremely helpful for the team. If they're attacking an M-Com I would assist them with long range fire support. I would neutralize defenders, and M-Com defusers. Not to mention you can drop mortars on the cover the enemy is using to defend M-Coms from.

Whenever I played as a sniper, it was always for the benefit of the team, and not myself.

However, engineers are the most useful M-Com attackers in the game. Most stations can easily be destroyed with RPGs, extra RPG ammo and extra RPG damage perks. Thanks to the RPG-7s, you can easily use the gradients on the scope to hit the M-Com with every shot from far behind cover. Not to mention fire-and-forget saves your life a lot.

I have won so many games for my team doing that.
And above your tomb, the stars will belong to us.
Jaekus
I'm the matchstick that you'll never lose
+957|5391|Sydney

-Sh1fty- wrote:

I have won so many games for my team doing that.
https://images2.memegenerator.net/ImageMacro/4765797/Excuse-Me-While-I-call-Bullshit.jpg?imageSize=Medium&generatorName=Phone-Baby
Ultrafunkula
Hector: Ding, ding, ding, ding...
+1,975|6686|6 6 4 oh, I forget

Jaekus wrote:

-Sh1fty- wrote:

I have won so many games for my team doing that.
http://images2.memegenerator.net/ImageM … Phone-Baby
We demand a link to your stats.
Jaekus
I'm the matchstick that you'll never lose
+957|5391|Sydney
He hasn't "won" a whole heap of games, at best he's contributed to a team effort in winning the round. Or is that a bit obvious?
jord
Member
+2,382|6890|The North, beyond the wall.
Why would you play for the team and not yourself?
Doctor Strangelove
Real Battlefield Veterinarian.
+1,758|6680
I played that Joint Ops game.

I remember lag, and shit tons of camping. The huge maps ensured that everyone was a sniper. It was also just to much of a pain in the ass to go after the objectives (as you really needed a vehicle to do that, and an air/water one most of the time).

Basically the game was designed around two pillars: put in as much crap that would look good on the box blurb and try to jack off realism-fags, like -Sh1fty-.
-Sh1fty-
plundering yee booty
+510|5686|Ventura, California

Jaekus wrote:

He hasn't "won" a whole heap of games, at best he's contributed to a team effort in winning the round. Or is that a bit obvious?
Lies, very very big lies.

I'll give you a really good example. I'd take the SCAR-L, 1911, RPG-7, extra ammo, extra RPG damage.

Lets take a really popular map, Islas Innocentes

So I'd go to the hill where the sniper fags are and fire off all my RPG rounds from behind the safety of a rock. First M-com is down. I kill myself or go get myself killed, and do that again for the second M-Com, takes about a minute of shooting/reloading.

Then I grab an AT-4 with the same setup and destroy the next two M-coms from afar. I would have to shoot up then bring the cursor down, those M-coms were harder

Then an  RPG 7 and I'd do the same for the last set. I could do all this pretty quickly. It's as easy as it sounds.
And above your tomb, the stars will belong to us.
FloppY_
­
+1,010|6498|Denmark aka Automotive Hell

-Sh1fty- wrote:

Jaekus wrote:

He hasn't "won" a whole heap of games, at best he's contributed to a team effort in winning the round. Or is that a bit obvious?
Lies, very very big lies.

I'll give you a really good example. I'd take the SCAR-L, 1911, RPG-7, extra ammo, extra RPG damage.

Lets take a really popular map, Islas Innocentes

So I'd go to the hill where the sniper fags are and fire off all my RPG rounds from behind the safety of a rock. First M-com is down. I kill myself or go get myself killed, and do that again for the second M-Com, takes about a minute of shooting/reloading.

Then I grab an AT-4 with the same setup and destroy the next two M-coms from afar. I would have to shoot up then bring the cursor down, those M-coms were harder

Then an  RPG 7 and I'd do the same for the last set. I could do all this pretty quickly. It's as easy as it sounds.
Maybe before they patched Mcom health...

now it takes far over 12 rockets to take one down
­ Your thoughts, insights, and musings on this matter intrigue me
Jaekus
I'm the matchstick that you'll never lose
+957|5391|Sydney
Well, yeah, I was gonna say 8 rockets don't do the trick, even with extra damage on.
FloppY_
­
+1,010|6498|Denmark aka Automotive Hell
And tbh if everyone went engineer and only shot rockets at the Mcom, you would win every game... but fuck it'd be boring....
­ Your thoughts, insights, and musings on this matter intrigue me
Jaekus
I'm the matchstick that you'll never lose
+957|5391|Sydney
According to this it's a lot more than 8 rockets:

Each MCOM Station has 1000 health.

According to Materials, a C4 explosion has a 0.15x multiplier against the "Objective" material.
290 becomes 43.5. Twenty-three C4 stuck to the objective will destroy it.

Given the base damage of the rockets, all three match up with a 0.1x multiplier.
23 hits from the RPG-7, AT-4 and Tank Shells.
29 hits from the Carl Gustav.
32 direct hits from 40mm grenades to destroy the MCOM.
http://denkirson.xanga.com/722757523/bad-company-2/

Board footer

Privacy Policy - © 2024 Jeff Minard