Fortress Forever

Fortress Forever (https://forums.fortress-forever.com/index.php)
-   General Discussion (https://forums.fortress-forever.com/forumdisplay.php?f=10)
-   -   Snipers! They don't belong. (https://forums.fortress-forever.com/showthread.php?t=21345)

Green Mushy 02-02-2010 09:58 PM

Cloaking is also a broken mechanic if thats any consolation. There are a lot of things in FF that are a little askew. Some are imbalanced on some levels. I guess we just look at whichever one stands out the most and fix it, then move on to the next in queue.

It is true that we do want classes with inherent strengths, that other classes dont have, so TheKing is right in that regard. I think, in any game that you try to make every class different but equal, u run into that conundrum. Anything that is different has some scientific explanation as to why it is more or less powerful. Maybe its up to us as players to see how something feels and assess it over time to see if its balanced and fair or not? If something stands out to a lot of people as being unfair in some ways, or irritating, surely it has some merit. If you ignore everything in this thread so far, there still has to be a reason that sniper is at the top of the list of things people suspect to be broken. If sniper isnt broken, why do so many people feel that it is? What is the core reason your opposition is not understanding?

Bridget 02-02-2010 10:04 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Gwarsbane (Post 464197)
You can still dodge a sniper. You just have to dodge before the trigger is pulled. You can still interact with the sniper because of the laser and the dot. You actually see it, make decisions to improve your odds of survival, receive feed back on whether or not your doing good. You should be able to know what you did right or wrong and how you did it. And the reason you will know if you did right or wrong is because you're still alive and undamaged. Its the same kind of feed back you get when you successfully dodged a rocket or pipes, or a knife or a railgun or shot gun or any other weapon.

That would make some sense if the laser actually showed up. You have to be at the perfect angle for it to show up. You never see it from the side or from behind. It shows you when you're looking in the Sniper's direction, and by the time it shows up; <kenshiro> You're already dead. </kenshiro>

That is no feedback. That is only a conclusion. You know you got past and you know if you got slugged, but those are only end results. How did you get to those end results? Well, did that jump to the left help me? What about the right one? Did I die 'cause I didn't jump to the left as often? You don't know. If you dodge a rocket, you get feedback. You know what you did to successfully avoid it. Think of it like this:

You're playing a game of foosball. You close your eyes and wildly spin the little characters and hear the ball pocket. You know you pocketed the ball but you have no idea how it happened. Trying to juke and break the Sniper's aim is a lot like playing foosball blindfolded. You can tell when you sink the ball or not, but you have no clue how the fuck you did it. This is a poor analogy, but I think you'll get my point (then miss it like always.)

Quote:

Originally Posted by Gwarsbane (Post 464197)
You'll find all the exact same things with any other class. Single soldiers who can keep you up in the air and juggle you, even hit you in mid air. Groups of soldiers who you can just skip past and you only take a tiny bit of damage from splash cause they can't seem to hit anything other then the floor where you have been. And everything else in between.

Alright? What are you getting at?

Quote:

Originally Posted by Gwarsbane (Post 464197)
The argument that good snipers scare off noobs is stupid because ANY good player in ANY class can scare off noobs.

Good players of any class can scare off beginners. You're correct, but that doesn't negate the fact that good sniper scare off beginners too nor does it make the argument stupid. Your argument here sounds like 'okay by comparison'. It's like "Breaking your arm can't be painful, because it's nothing like having cancer!" Hurrrr.

TheKing 02-02-2010 11:04 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Green Mushy (Post 464203)
Cloaking is also a broken mechanic if thats any consolation. There are a lot of things in FF that are a little askew. Some are imbalanced on some levels. I guess we just look at whichever one stands out the most and fix it, then move on to the next in queue.

It is true that we do want classes with inherent strengths, that other classes dont have, so TheKing is right in that regard. I think, in any game that you try to make every class different but equal, u run into that conundrum. Anything that is different has some scientific explanation as to why it is more or less powerful.

Holy crap, a post that brought up a valid argument and didn't just repeat itself!

I agree with that entire second paragraph, though I will say if you continue through the queue that you mentioned in the way that you mentioned you will eventually reach a game with a single class. As long as people play this game someone will have a problem with a class' situational advantages.

Quote:

Originally Posted by Green Mushy (Post 464203)
Maybe its up to us as players to see how something feels and assess it over time to see if its balanced and fair or not? If something stands out to a lot of people as being unfair in some ways, or irritating, surely it has some merit. If you ignore everything in this thread so far, there still has to be a reason that sniper is at the top of the list of things people suspect to be broken. If sniper isnt broken, why do so many people feel that it is? What is the core reason your opposition is not understanding?

There are a lot of things in FF that frustrate people, and while the sniper is up there I'm not entirely sure it's at the top. There are certainly a few vocal people calling for it's removal though, so let's address them... in a nutshell:

- If we removed everything that annoys people this game would be a shell of what it is right now. The goal shouldn't be to remove all sources of frustration nor should it be to balance the classes out over all situations. The game can be frustrating but there's no such thing as a game that's both fun and isn't frustrating.

- Every class has situations where they have an advantage and situations where they are disadvantaged. Bridget keeps pointing out that the sniper more effective over range than other classes and that for some reason range is the only factor as to why a class doesn't fit. The engineer is the only class that can build stuff, the spy the only class that can be invisible, etc. You can't say that range is the issue and then turn around and say that all of the other things that set each class apart from the rest is ok. Each of the classes break a mold that is set by every other class. The heart of TF is a game with different classes, each with a particular skill set.

Quote:

Originally Posted by Bridget (Post 464204)
That is no feedback. That is only a conclusion. You know you got past and you know if you got slugged, but those are only end results. How did you get to those end results? Well, did that jump to the left help me? What about the right one? Did I die 'cause I didn't jump to the left as often? You don't know. If you dodge a rocket, you get feedback. You know what you did to successfully avoid it.

Funny then, that so many offensive players have effectively figured out what they did wrong and are insanely good at getting around snipers.

Quote:

Originally Posted by Bridget (Post 464199)
You don't even understand the point Green Mushy is making. Green Mushy was implying that the Sniper doesn't make sense in Fortress Forever even though it is a skillful class within its own by using the analogy of throwing your pawns across the board to knock your opponent's pieces down in a game of Chess.

No I got that, hence the appropriate response.

Quote:

Originally Posted by Bridget (Post 464199)
This is the key problem with you. You miss points and argue about stuff out of scope. You argue with comparisons that make absolutely no sense to other people. You make false comparisons.

Honestly, I feel like sometimes I'm going over your head - but that doesn't make my points invalid. The points that I'm arguing are very much in context, though sometimes I'm sarcastic and I often draw perfectly understandable parallels between your argument and other bad arguments (I'm not sure you're getting that though).

Quote:

Originally Posted by Bridget (Post 464199)
You have this assumption that we think the Sniper is problematic because he's unique, so you think pointing out that other classes are unique as well is a counter argument. It's not that he's unique. It's that he doesn't FIT.

When you keep bringing up that he's unique as an argument as to why he doesn't fit what else am I to assume? Other than reminding me that the sniper is mostly effective at long range, you have yet to tell me why he doesn't FIT. Please don't point out that he's the most effective class at range again, I get that.

Bridget 02-02-2010 11:11 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by TheKing (Post 464207)
Other than reminding me that the sniper is mostly effective at long range, you have yet to tell me why he doesn't FIT.

Lol

TheKing 02-02-2010 11:36 PM

The entire rest of the post puts that sentence in context, but since you're not the best reader we'll go ahead and summarize a little for you:

Quote:

Originally Posted by Bridget (Post 464199)
You have this assumption that we think the Sniper is problematic because he's unique, so you think pointing out that other classes are unique as well is a counter argument. It's not that he's unique. It's that he doesn't FIT.

Yes, you've pointed out that the sniper is unique because he has an advantage at range. You've also pointed out that the problem isn't that he's unique, it's that he doesn't fit. You've never told us why he doesn't fit other than pointing out his unique ability. Now read your quote above and tell us why he doesn't fit without just saying "he's different than all of the other classes". We know that already.

Bridget 02-02-2010 11:37 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Bridget (Post 464209)
Lol


Agent Buckshot Moose 02-02-2010 11:39 PM

Man, now I want to start up FF and do some sniping. Of course my aim would be stupidly off since I haven't played in awhile...

squeek. 02-03-2010 12:17 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by TheKing (Post 464207)
I will say if you continue through the queue that you mentioned in the way that you mentioned you will eventually reach a game with a single class. As long as people play this game someone will have a problem with a class' situational advantages.

This, to me, is an intriguing direction for discussion.

Is that true? Assuming killing is not the only objective (CTF would be the standard example), is a medic vs. soldier battle frustrating for either player (due to mechanics)? Is a scout vs. soldier battle frustrating for either player (due to mechanics)?

I'd say no, and would label something like a medic vs. soldier matchup with a flag involved as the pinnacle of what FF should strive to achieve (in terms of interactivity of mechanics, movement vs DM, strength/weakness balancing, etc).

Bridget 02-03-2010 12:22 AM

I worded the unique bit strangely; I can't describe what I mean. When you compare one aspect of the Spy with the entire mechanic by which the Sniper plays, you are making a false comparison. This argument has been about or was intended to be on balance through range. It's an objective fact that the Sniper is the only class that plays his best at long range while the other nine are limited to close or medium range. This is broken.

End of argument. I'm done posting here. This is a solved problem anyway. The development team realizes it's a problem. I said this a few pages back, but I feel like I have to get the last word in or persuade people to see how out of place the Sniper is. Here's a silly analogy for you. I love making them.

Bridget: Hey guys! I noticed we have nine fruits here and a potato. That potato isn't a fruit. It doesn't belong.
TheKing: Why doesn't it belong?
Bridget: Well, it's different you see. It's a vegetable and the rest, all coincidentally, fruits!
TheKing: Well, don't the fruits have differences? The apple has a taste that is sweeter than the potato.
Bridget: Yeah, but I'm not talking about that. I meant different in another sense.
TheKing: HA! The mango might have more seeds than the apple! Every food item is different here, Bridget. If difference were a problem, every food item would be a problem, right?
Bridget: I know, but we're talking about fruit vs vegetable here.
TheKing: No, no, no. You said the potato was different, so it didn't belong. Ha! Every food item is different.
Bridget: I know, but we're speaking generally. They're fruits, it's a potato. . . a vegetable. It's just general. A general comparison. I mean, there's a pattern here. Fruit fruit fruit fruit fruit fruit fruit fruit fruit VEGETABLE. Seems broken, right? Broken, yeah?
TheKing: No. Nope. LaLaLALALA. I can't hear you.
Bridget: Would you agree that a potato in a group of fruits is the odd one out? It's a simple yes/no.
TheKing: NOPE. NOT AT ALL. EVERY FOOD ITEM IS DIFFERENT. THEY'D ALL HAVE TO BE THE SAME TO BE 'EVEN'. SILLY!
Bridget: No? Because we're talking on a grand scal-
TheKing: LLALALALALALALA
Bridget: Uh?
TheKing: LALALALALALALALA
Bridget: ...

Yep. That about sums it up! Well, it was fun. I have nothing against you. G'day!

TheKing 02-03-2010 12:37 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Bridget (Post 464219)
This argument has been about or was intended to be on balance through range. It's an objective fact that the Sniper is the only class that plays his best at long range while the other nine are limited to close or medium range. This is broken.

This same argument can be made about any class' advantages or special abilities though.

It's an objective fact that the spy is the only class that plays his best when cloaked while the other nine are limited to 100% opacity.

It's also an objective fact that the engineer plays his best when he builds an SG and the other nine are limited without that ability.

Quote:

Originally Posted by Bridget (Post 464219)
Imagine that we have nine fruit and a potato. I am arguing that because the potato is not a fruit, it doesn't belong. You come along and say "Well, so what if that potato is different? It has a brown skin, the apple has a red skin, the pear has a green skin. Every food item here is different." then I say "Oh no, it's not about that. It's about the fact that the potato is a vegetable and doesn't belong with the other nine fruit." then you keep cranking out the same nonsense: "No no! It does belong. Just because it's different doesn't mean it doesn't belong. I mean, the apple has a sour taste, the mango is sweet, the pineapple is in the middle. See? They have their differences too!" and then "NO! IT'S NOT ABOUT THAT. IT'S NOT ABOUT TRAITS OR CHARACTERISTICS, IT'S ABOUT THE FACT THAT IT'S A VEGETABLE IN A GROUP OF FRUITS. RAHRAGRAHRAGH."

Are we talking about the spy here, or the engineer? In some way, every class is the potato.

Quote:

Originally Posted by squeek.
Is that true? Assuming killing is not the only objective (CTF would be the standard example), is a medic vs. soldier battle frustrating for either player (due to mechanics)? Is a scout vs. soldier battle frustrating for either player (due to mechanics)?

In certain situations, I'd say yes. A solider on spiral in 2fort is very frustrating and has a clear advantage over both the medic and scout (probably more so than a sniper in a big yard).

I would also say that one of the things that makes TF awesome is that there is a wide variety of diverse classes and so a wide variety of situations that you can get yourself into. I don't think that we should say that one situation is the 'ideal', and if that is the situation that you would label as ideal and we want to pursue as the experience every time - let's just limit the game to the medic and soldier. The game's still fun after 10+ years because of the variety of classes, let's not take that away by removing the frustrating (and unique) features of each class one by one.

squeek. 02-03-2010 12:45 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by TheKing (Post 464223)
I don't think that we should say that one situation is the 'ideal', and if that is the situation that you would label as ideal and we want to pursue as the experience every time - let's just limit the game to the medic and soldier. The game's still fun after 10+ years because of the variety of classes, let's not take that away by removing the frustrating (and unique) features of each class one by one.

So then you're saying that there are no non-frustrating mechanics? Everything is equally frustrating? That can't be the case, can it?

As long as mechanics can be more or less frustrating than others, then FF should strive to remove the more frustrating and replace them with the less or least frustrating. That doesn't require things to no longer be unique, does it?

Green Mushy 02-03-2010 12:49 AM

Thats actually a very good analogy Bridget.

It is a valid concern that as we address each mechanic as being imbalanced, and we try to repair it, the end result down the road would be a homologous game. Each player would be the same, and none would have a unique advantage over another. But, i think there are things in FF that will always remain. Scout will be a movement class and not good at dm. Soldier will shoot rockets. Is it easier to shoot a scout or dodge a rocket? Drawing the comparisons, will be hard, or impossible to do. So i dont think its a slippery slope to all the same classes, i think its a slippery slope to all classes being unclear if they have advantages or not, which is balance i suppose. I guess thats what is the essence of what we are tryign to achieve in the long run. Each class has unique abilities that are ambiguous if they are unfair advantages or not. No class or ability stands out to any player as being unfair.

There is also room for us to add some new abilities, or even new classes, in the future. If the game doesnt have enough variation from class to class, im sure wed address that as a problem if we got to that point.(if we even let it get to that point). Its not automatically set in stone whatever direction we go. I think the FF development process will always be moving.

SSCUJO 02-03-2010 01:01 AM

interesting.... so if the sniper kept his weapon but he only played flagrooms yet he was fully spy cloaked when charging his shot and firing. would this be ok? he no longer has range, and like the spy he has to take a risk/reward to get into position, but like the spy you cannot see where the attack is coming from. the sniper could hide anywhere in the flagroom and never be seen until a shot is fired, well he's no longer at range, he's now mid range. problem solved right? just give the sniper cloak, i mean as bridgets definitions pointed out one of the key factors to the sniper is being hidden. i wouldn't mind blowing people away at mid range while invisible. it seems fair in terms of what bridget is arguing.

squeek. 02-03-2010 01:09 AM

Why did you choose mid-range? The spy (with cloak/backstab) is only balanced because of his very, very specific range. It's not even "melee", it's "melee AND from behind".

The risk of backstabbing is that if you fail, you don't (or shouldn't) get a chance to do it again. With mid-range, you'd have the chance to retry without the player really being able to stop you.

This isn't to say that backstabbing and cloaking are perfect (they aren't). But, there is a difference between mechanics being good and being balanced.

SSCUJO 02-03-2010 01:15 AM

well you can't just take away range and expect the class to work, you have to give something when you take something. and since the biggest problem is range, then making the sniper mid range would mean he would need a huge buff or he would be dominated in litterally every situation he faced. and bridgets definitions all stated being hidden as a defing point, it really makes perfect sense. you have another way of making the sniper hidden? or making him in anyway shape or form useful midrange, consistancy won't work (multiple shots) because of the fast paced nature of the game. the class would be gone or killed by another class before the second shot. so how exactly do you make a sniper work when in close?

the sniper is only a problem in a very specific set of conditions. don't change the sniper, simply remove the conditions.

squeek. 02-03-2010 01:24 AM

Being hidden without requiring risk to deal damage would just emulate the problem of the sniper. Range itself might not be the problem. It's something else that is more difficult to pinpoint. It might have to do with some relationship between risk and reliable damage.

As an aside, would it be okay to put a hard-limit on the sniper rifle's range to the distance between the two battlements on 2fort?

Sidd 02-03-2010 01:26 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Bridget (Post 464219)
Bridget:Hey guys! I noticed we have nine fruits here and a potato. That potato isn't a fruit. It doesn't belong.
TheKing: Why doesn't it belong?
Bridget: Well, it's different you see. It's a vegetable and the rest, all coincidentally, fruits!

It's a better analogy than you realise. You didn't identify why a potato is not a fruit. Instead you brought in a description of it which isn't conclusive. (vegetables can be fruits).

SSCUJO 02-03-2010 01:28 AM

@squeeks post

would that make the class more effective or more vulnerable? what are we trying to do exactly? if that hard limit is put on then the sniper would need increased health and armour to move to a distance where they are of use. not only this but most maps don't exactly have hiding spots for snipers, so they would be sitting ducks anywhere in the mid map, very weak sitting ducks. and then the argument would just switch around why the sniper is the same as every class and has no advantage.

oh and lol sidd jsut wrecked bridget rofl.

squeek. 02-03-2010 01:34 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by SSCUJO (Post 464235)
@squeeks post

would that make the class more effective or more vulnerable? what are we trying to do exactly? if that hard limit is put on then the sniper would need increased health and armour to move to a distance where they are of use. not only this but most maps don't exactly have hiding spots for snipers, so they would be sitting ducks anywhere in the mid map, very weak sitting ducks. and then the argument would just switch around why the sniper is the same as every class and has no advantage.

Quote:

Originally Posted by SSCUJO (Post 463382)
i would say 2fort battlements are medium range as are the battlements for several maps, all classes can fight and interact with the sniper on those maps. change arddvark and change other large yard maps to medium range 2fort style yards.


SSCUJO 02-03-2010 01:48 AM

yea that solves 2fort, and any other map where the battlements are close. now that i've had a second to think about it that actually is a great idea, because in maps like arddvark the player would get closer and thus when they are killed it's more effective becasue they have wasted more time. the only issue would be if a class stays out of range and just uses a hitscan shotgun, then all of a sudden the shotgun dominates over the sniper rifle. if the shotgun and railgun or even rockets where given the same range as the sniper rifle (2fort battlements). then yea that would work. i could still blow people away once they where in range. and it would b more benifical for the sniper. i could get used to that idea. aslong as all classes where only effective mid to close range. which shouldn't be a problem changing since bridget and many others seem to think that no class can fire at an enemy at a distance.

i would actually lol at arddvark, 2 snipers on different teams not being able to shoot eachother focus 100% attention on other units in the yard, lol complete domination.


All times are GMT. The time now is 09:42 AM.

Powered by vBulletin® Version 3.8.7
Copyright ©2000 - 2022, vBulletin Solutions, Inc.