Two words, BUNNY HOPPING! I hate, hate, HATE hoppers!!!
Is this real world? Heck NO!
Is it an effective tactic in game? Must be because so many players use it.
When repeated jumping is removed then I'll think about these other issues.
(Like what I think or say means anything...)
I've consistently been playing AAPG over the past couple months, there are certainly things that I feel need to change to make this game great. However, I'm going to just list three things that I find to be the most annoying about this game. These are the three things that most make me not want to play the game at times.
1. Grenades -
Grenades are tossed all over the place without care. CQB maps are loaded with spam. Grenades have a kill range of 5 meters. Flashes have an unavoidable blinding range of 5 meters. Here's a picture of what a room with a 5 meter radius looks like:
If a player lands a grenade directly in the middle of this room, everyone who doesn't have something to hide behind will die or be flashed no matter if they turn away or not. This is a decently large area. From there, with a grenade, the damage distance tapers off up to 13 meters (if you're within 12 meters you will get hurt). Here's what that looks like:
With flash bangs, once you are outside of that 5 meter radius, turning away greatly dampens the effect.
Why it's bad: The kill and injury radius are both huge. A grenade has an injury area of 374 square meters and a kill area of 78 square meters (total impact area = 452 square meters). The kill radius allows for easy flashes and grenade kills from poorly thrown grenades. A grenade that lands 5 meters away from an enemy should not reward a kill on a 100% health enemy. It rewards spam and not taking care to cook and place grenades well. Also with the injury radius being so large, injured players are easily taken out by a grenade that lands extremely far away. Again, rewarding spam and poorly thrown grenades.
Flashbangs are similar in that many interior rooms can be quite small. If a player doesn't cook a flash and have it blow up with the enemy having no time to turn away then they shouldn't get rewarded unless the flash lands pretty much dead on the guy. Currently grenades reward low skill play.
How it should change:
Frags: Cut the kill radius for frag grenades by half. Cut the injury radius by half. Reward players who land good frags and not poorly thrown spam grenades. Players will also spam less since the chances of getting a blindly thrown uncooked/partly cooked grenade to land a kill or seriously hurt an enemy will greatly decrease.
Flashes: Increase the full blind radius for flashes that land in front of a player. Decrease the radius to 2 or 2.5 meters for if a player turns away. This lower radius will reward players who land a perfect flash, but give players who are being flashed a chance to turn away if the flash is poorly thrown. Looking at a flash should have a bigger effect no matter where it lands.
2-Lack of Penalties
Currently you have no penalties for movement or leaning with ADS.
Why it's bad: Movement penalties have more to do with skill curve. Making it harder to shoot on the move makes it more difficult to learn how to hit shots well. Players either need to learn how to overcome the penalty or stop and fire without penalty. No penalty in leaning is a worse issue. The game is pretty much lean wars. Everyone leans out from cover exposing as little of their body as possible (sometimes even just the very tip of their head) and fires away. There's no reason not to use this tactic because there's no penalty. A player who exposes their full body when they can easily just lean around cover is putting themselves at a big disadvantage.
What should change: There are really only two types of penalties you can add for both of these things that make sense in the game. One is an accuracy cone that makes you inaccurate. This game typically has never had accuracy cones with ADS, so it would be a very tough change, but one I'd be interested to see how it would work (basically standing still gives no penalty, moving and leaning gives a penalty). Another option is to increase sway when you lean or move. You can even do both and find the right balance somewhere. Another point here is that if you were to implement a movement penalty and not a leaning penalty then you'd create a huge advantage for defenders. Defends should have to make a choice of suffering a penalty or exposing more of their body to incoming fire. For the realism guys, these penalties also make sense. Moving and leaning both create a less stable firing position and would make it more difficult to fire with perfect accuracy.
3- Suppression + Aim Punch
We've discussed this a million times. Personally, I hate both. I'm not going to even bother writing a big paragraph about it.
Honorable mention to snipers and DM rifles being a joke to use (i.e. too easy). Easy solution: The higher the zoom the greater the sway (this is how AA2 did it). AAPG currently has identical sway for higher zoom sights vs. 1x sights.
There are obviously more things that I think can change (I've made other threads), but I'd rather just focus on those things for now.
1. Grenades and flashes are fine as is.
2. The game is punishing enough as is. I don't see the need to implement any penalties/drawbacks for any current features/aspects/content in the game. Only thing I'd consider is nerfing the SCAR to require 2 hits to the head instead of one, at full health (but even that's debatable).
3. Suppression and scope-wobble is fine are fine as is
. I, along with others, have already stated numerous reasons why this is in other threads - so I'll avoid writing a "big paragraph about it" here.
If nothing else, Whiplash clearly demonstrated, with visuals, that nades and flashes are not fine as-is. They're a low-skill, and often no-skill, part of the game. The video of the flash I posted above is another example. If his intent was to force me to move to my left, it's a good flash, but it doesn't need to blind me to do so. That flash shouldn't have blinded me at all. Incidentally, the grenade that killed me was perfect, but I wouldn't have been in that spot if not for the flash inexplicably blinding me. Grenades and flashes can be cooked and placed exactly where you want them in this game. Why are you so set on rewarding bad play? What reward is there for me to put a flash right on someone when I can just lob it behind them and get the same effect? I just can't figure out why you want a dumbed down game.
I think some sort of limitations on leaning are worth talking about. I'd be more in favor of further reducing the speed or possibly reducing the frequency. I'm not in favor of adding in more RNG. I'm not sure what you're referring to when you say the game is punishing enough as is.
As far as suppression goes, many of us have again made detailed posts about the topic with alternatative suggestions with well-supported arguments. Why don't you comment on those? What would be wrong with an initial aim punch followed by a period of invulnerability from further aim punch? What would be wrong with having some blurring at the edge of the screen combined with a sound effect to represent suppression? Why do you insist that a blinding effect is the way to go?
Your post basically says nothing at all. Contribute something.
Here we go again
It seems as if every game has its whiners who want to complain about features that they don't like and argue for a complete make-over to their liking from the ground-up, as is the case here.
Whiplash didn't demonstrate that nade and flashes "are not fine as-is". Yes, he claimed that the current stats for nades and flashes are OP, that the radius rewards even "poorly thrown" grenades. Yet if a grenade is truly "poorly thrown" than it will have little to no effect against its target(s). If grenades and flashes were truly over-powered they would've been nerfed by now...
Looking at your flash-vid post, if you look carefully you'll see that the flash-grenade was thrown to your right and (judging by the speed and direction) landed on the right side of the room behind the couch/line-of-chairs you took cover at. In other words, the flash itself was solid. Flashes are meant for tight-spaces like that anyway.
I'm not surprised you think I'm rewarding "bad-play" when you fail to see just how good these plays are. Your arguments are one-sided, not taking into account the people who use the flashes and grenades you want nerfed, or why they use them. Flashes are used for campers, where they typically already have the LOS advantage (line-of-sight) and can shoot first before the attacker can establish-said LOS. Grenades also help combat-campers. These both contribute to an aggressive, and therefore more active style of gameplay. Cutting the range in half means the attacker has to try even harder against the camper.
Leaning is solid, reason it's being used is b/c it's helping players peak around corners -- serving the purpose it was meant to serve. Negating the qualities of a feature with a penalty will only serve to degrade said feature and defeat the purpose of it being added in the first place. The game is "punishing enough as is" b/c it already penalizes players on numerous aspects of game-play.
Viewing the large map, throwing grenades, and reloading all leave you extremely vulnerable for a large period of time. Running around the map makes you much easier to hear vs. prone or crouch-walk.
Regarding the suppresion argument, I quote myself and say
"The flaw I see in the anti-suppression argument is that y'all think skill is being able to aim and shoot without any other variables/distractions. That is not skill at all, that is simply point and click and anyone can do that.
There needs to be things like suppression to keep players in check, and cause them to require more effort and thinking when getting a kill. This is exactly what suppression does.
Skill isn't reacting to what you can already control (aim, movement) but what you can't (suppression, recoil, bleeding, damage being taken, chance/random encounters, enemy movements/actions)."
Your credibility is largely gone off the bat when you dismiss people trying to better the game as "whiners." These aren't people trying to make the game easier because it's too hard for them. These are some of the best players in the game making good suggestions.
I saw exactly where the flash went. That's why I moved and turned away from it. You obviously know that. Quit being a condescending [TOS Violation]. It was a terrible flash if the intent was to blind me, but, like I said, if the goal was to clear that side of the room, it was good. It should not have blinded me. It would have been easy for the person to cook it so it went off in my line of sight or to blow it up on top of me like the grenade that followed. The person didn't even come close to that, but they were rewarded as if they did.
Again, why do you want to promote low/no-skill "features" such as flashes and grenades in their current state? Wouldn't it be a good thing to reward people for throwing good flashes and grenades instead of making it so anyone can do it despite a terrible throw or zero thought put in? Again, this isn't about making the game easier for me. I get a ton of grenade kills. It's about making it harder and more rewarding for everyone.
Really? Pulling up the map is the game punishing you? Examples of the game punishing you are things like suppression/aim punch, increased recoil with low HP and sway; not reloading (if you couldn't still sprint around while reloading, you might have a point). As far as leaning specifically, if the devs didn't think there was a problem, they wouldn't have slowed lean speed to begin with. We're simply suggesting that didn't do enough to fix the problem.
Players should primarily be playing against other players. They shouldn't have to fight the game itself through silly "features" like suppression. There's just no need for it. It can't be learned. It's not skillful in any way. If you get hit with aim punch, at least you can correct from that, and a player with faster reflexes will stand a better chance. Whiplash's suggestion for a sort of tunnel vision would be better. It wouldn't make it impossible for players to return fire, but it would still offer the player a choice of fight and risk being shot by an enemy outside his vision or flee.
Levente, were playing a video game, nor is this a simulator, real life arguments dont hold value when trying to achieve the best gameplay possible... and again its not about totally eliminating features but have them make sense.
That real life thing was a quick sidenote to my post. As I wrote in the same lines: I understand your points regarding suppression. I'm not a real fan of it either, I was just giving my 50 cents, why suppression in gunfights is not as big of a deal as some think it is. Once again, just an opinion, but I tried to back it up with something. I believe that suppression isn't really a reward to a miss, compared to what you could do with a hit. Also, Arma 3 is just fine without any additional suppression visual effects, so it's not like a simulator NEEDS to have this kind of suppression. And I never wanted AAPG to be a simulator, "just" a tactical shooter.
Levente, you're argument only works if we assume the target remains stationary.
Sorry, I don't really understand. Which argument? I'm saying that in close quarters double vision / screen shake is not really limiting your ability to kill someone. You just have to forget that your gun is visually moving left and right, concentrate on the center, see how the shaking gun moves compared to the also shaking target and you are good to go. Don't try to fight screenshake, because it is only visual, it won't actually move your gun. Well, at least I feel like I'm not limited by screenshake most of the time. If somebody is close enough to throw a nade at me, I feel like I can retaliate effectively despite the screenshake.
Theory and reality are not that different. In theory.
Hey I Have A Gun, I don't see where anyone voted you to be the arbiter of 'Credibility Quotient.' Everyone has a right to their reasonably stated opinion without being put down for it. We're all passionate about this game and there's been a lot of great commentary. In fact, I can say while carefully stepping on the very edge of my NDA that this thread has been noticed for having some civil, constructive dialogue. Let's keep it that way.
______
This has been a test of the emergency flame-fest system. Please do not adjust your set.
Hey I Have A Gun, I don't see where anyone voted you to be the arbiter of 'Credibility Quotient.' Everyone has a right to their reasonably stated opinion without being put down for it. We're all passionate about this game and there's been a lot of great commentary. In fact, I can say while carefully stepping on the very edge of my NDA that this thread has been noticed for having some civil, constructive dialogue. Let's keep it that way.
All I'm doing is responding to his posts. If he wants to be deliberately condescending to me without cause, I'll go ahead and call him out on it.
Two words, BUNNY HOPPING! I hate, hate, HATE hoppers!!!
Is this real world? Heck NO!
Is it an effective tactic in game? Must be because so many players use it.
When repeated jumping is removed then I'll think about these other issues.
(Like what I think or say means anything...)
I've consistently been playing AAPG over the past couple months, there are certainly things that I feel need to change to make this game great. However, I'm going to just list three things that I find to be the most annoying about this game. These are the three things that most make me not want to play the game at times.
1. Grenades -
Grenades are tossed all over the place without care. CQB maps are loaded with spam. Grenades have a kill range of 5 meters. Flashes have an unavoidable blinding range of 5 meters. Here's a picture of what a room with a 5 meter radius looks like:
If a player lands a grenade directly in the middle of this room, everyone who doesn't have something to hide behind will die or be flashed no matter if they turn away or not. This is a decently large area. From there, with a grenade, the damage distance tapers off up to 13 meters (if you're within 12 meters you will get hurt). Here's what that looks like:
With flash bangs, once you are outside of that 5 meter radius, turning away greatly dampens the effect.
Why it's bad: The kill and injury radius are both huge. A grenade has an injury area of 374 square meters and a kill area of 78 square meters (total impact area = 452 square meters). The kill radius allows for easy flashes and grenade kills from poorly thrown grenades. A grenade that lands 5 meters away from an enemy should not reward a kill on a 100% health enemy. It rewards spam and not taking care to cook and place grenades well. Also with the injury radius being so large, injured players are easily taken out by a grenade that lands extremely far away. Again, rewarding spam and poorly thrown grenades.
Flashbangs are similar in that many interior rooms can be quite small. If a player doesn't cook a flash and have it blow up with the enemy having no time to turn away then they shouldn't get rewarded unless the flash lands pretty much dead on the guy. Currently grenades reward low skill play.
How it should change:
Frags: Cut the kill radius for frag grenades by half. Cut the injury radius by half. Reward players who land good frags and not poorly thrown spam grenades. Players will also spam less since the chances of getting a blindly thrown uncooked/partly cooked grenade to land a kill or seriously hurt an enemy will greatly decrease.
Flashes: Increase the full blind radius for flashes that land in front of a player. Decrease the radius to 2 or 2.5 meters for if a player turns away. This lower radius will reward players who land a perfect flash, but give players who are being flashed a chance to turn away if the flash is poorly thrown. Looking at a flash should have a bigger effect no matter where it lands.
2-Lack of Penalties
Currently you have no penalties for movement or leaning with ADS.
Why it's bad: Movement penalties have more to do with skill curve. Making it harder to shoot on the move makes it more difficult to learn how to hit shots well. Players either need to learn how to overcome the penalty or stop and fire without penalty. No penalty in leaning is a worse issue. The game is pretty much lean wars. Everyone leans out from cover exposing as little of their body as possible (sometimes even just the very tip of their head) and fires away. There's no reason not to use this tactic because there's no penalty. A player who exposes their full body when they can easily just lean around cover is putting themselves at a big disadvantage.
What should change: There are really only two types of penalties you can add for both of these things that make sense in the game. One is an accuracy cone that makes you inaccurate. This game typically has never had accuracy cones with ADS, so it would be a very tough change, but one I'd be interested to see how it would work (basically standing still gives no penalty, moving and leaning gives a penalty). Another option is to increase sway when you lean or move. You can even do both and find the right balance somewhere. Another point here is that if you were to implement a movement penalty and not a leaning penalty then you'd create a huge advantage for defenders. Defends should have to make a choice of suffering a penalty or exposing more of their body to incoming fire. For the realism guys, these penalties also make sense. Moving and leaning both create a less stable firing position and would make it more difficult to fire with perfect accuracy.
3- Suppression + Aim Punch
We've discussed this a million times. Personally, I hate both. I'm not going to even bother writing a big paragraph about it.
Honorable mention to snipers and DM rifles being a joke to use (i.e. too easy). Easy solution: The higher the zoom the greater the sway (this is how AA2 did it). AAPG currently has identical sway for higher zoom sights vs. 1x sights.
There are obviously more things that I think can change (I've made other threads), but I'd rather just focus on those things for now.
1. Grenades and flashes are fine as is.
2. The game is punishing enough as is. I don't see the need to implement any penalties/drawbacks for any current features/aspects/content in the game. Only thing I'd consider is nerfing the SCAR to require 2 hits to the head instead of one, at full health (but even that's debatable).
3. Suppression and scope-wobble is fine are fine as is
. I, along with others, have already stated numerous reasons why this is in other threads - so I'll avoid writing a "big paragraph about it" here.
If nothing else, Whiplash clearly demonstrated, with visuals, that nades and flashes are not fine as-is. They're a low-skill, and often no-skill, part of the game. The video of the flash I posted above is another example. If his intent was to force me to move to my left, it's a good flash, but it doesn't need to blind me to do so. That flash shouldn't have blinded me at all. Incidentally, the grenade that killed me was perfect, but I wouldn't have been in that spot if not for the flash inexplicably blinding me. Grenades and flashes can be cooked and placed exactly where you want them in this game. Why are you so set on rewarding bad play? What reward is there for me to put a flash right on someone when I can just lob it behind them and get the same effect? I just can't figure out why you want a dumbed down game.
I think some sort of limitations on leaning are worth talking about. I'd be more in favor of further reducing the speed or possibly reducing the frequency. I'm not in favor of adding in more RNG. I'm not sure what you're referring to when you say the game is punishing enough as is.
As far as suppression goes, many of us have again made detailed posts about the topic with alternatative suggestions with well-supported arguments. Why don't you comment on those? What would be wrong with an initial aim punch followed by a period of invulnerability from further aim punch? What would be wrong with having some blurring at the edge of the screen combined with a sound effect to represent suppression? Why do you insist that a blinding effect is the way to go?
Your post basically says nothing at all. Contribute something.
Here we go again
It seems as if every game has its whiners who want to complain about features that they don't like and argue for a complete make-over to their liking from the ground-up, as is the case here.
Whiplash didn't demonstrate that nade and flashes "are not fine as-is". Yes, he claimed that the current stats for nades and flashes are OP, that the radius rewards even "poorly thrown" grenades. Yet if a grenade is truly "poorly thrown" than it will have little to no effect against its target(s). If grenades and flashes were truly over-powered they would've been nerfed by now...
Looking at your flash-vid post, if you look carefully you'll see that the flash-grenade was thrown to your right and (judging by the speed and direction) landed on the right side of the room behind the couch/line-of-chairs you took cover at. In other words, the flash itself was solid. Flashes are meant for tight-spaces like that anyway.
I'm not surprised you think I'm rewarding "bad-play" when you fail to see just how good these plays are. Your arguments are one-sided, not taking into account the people who use the flashes and grenades you want nerfed, or why they use them. Flashes are used for campers, where they typically already have the LOS advantage (line-of-sight) and can shoot first before the attacker can establish-said LOS. Grenades also help combat-campers. These both contribute to an aggressive, and therefore more active style of gameplay. Cutting the range in half means the attacker has to try even harder against the camper.
Leaning is solid, reason it's being used is b/c it's helping players peak around corners -- serving the purpose it was meant to serve. Negating the qualities of a feature with a penalty will only serve to degrade said feature and defeat the purpose of it being added in the first place. The game is "punishing enough as is" b/c it already penalizes players on numerous aspects of game-play.
Viewing the large map, throwing grenades, and reloading all leave you extremely vulnerable for a large period of time. Running around the map makes you much easier to hear vs. prone or crouch-walk.
Regarding the suppresion argument, I quote myself and say
"The flaw I see in the anti-suppression argument is that y'all think skill is being able to aim and shoot without any other variables/distractions. That is not skill at all, that is simply point and click and anyone can do that.
There needs to be things like suppression to keep players in check, and cause them to require more effort and thinking when getting a kill. This is exactly what suppression does.
Skill isn't reacting to what you can already control (aim, movement) but what you can't (suppression, recoil, bleeding, damage being taken, chance/random encounters, enemy movements/actions)."
Your credibility is largely gone off the bat when you dismiss people trying to better the game as "whiners." These aren't people trying to make the game easier because it's too hard for them. These are some of the best players in the game making good suggestions.
I saw exactly where the flash went. That's why I moved and turned away from it. You obviously know that. Quit being a condescending [TOS Violation]. It was a terrible flash if the intent was to blind me, but, like I said, if the goal was to clear that side of the room, it was good. It should not have blinded me. It would have been easy for the person to cook it so it went off in my line of sight or to blow it up on top of me like the grenade that followed. The person didn't even come close to that, but they were rewarded as if they did.
Again, why do you want to promote low/no-skill "features" such as flashes and grenades in their current state? Wouldn't it be a good thing to reward people for throwing good flashes and grenades instead of making it so anyone can do it despite a terrible throw or zero thought put in? Again, this isn't about making the game easier for me. I get a ton of grenade kills. It's about making it harder and more rewarding for everyone.
Really? Pulling up the map is the game punishing you? Examples of the game punishing you are things like suppression/aim punch, increased recoil with low HP and sway; not reloading (if you couldn't still sprint around while reloading, you might have a point). As far as leaning specifically, if the devs didn't think there was a problem, they wouldn't have slowed lean speed to begin with. We're simply suggesting that didn't do enough to fix the problem.
Players should primarily be playing against other players. They shouldn't have to fight the game itself through silly "features" like suppression. There's just no need for it. It can't be learned. It's not skillful in any way. If you get hit with aim punch, at least you can correct from that, and a player with faster reflexes will stand a better chance. Whiplash's suggestion for a sort of tunnel vision would be better. It wouldn't make it impossible for players to return fire, but it would still offer the player a choice of fight and risk being shot by an enemy outside his vision or flee.
I'm not calling those who are trying to better the game as "whiners" per se, just those whose suggestions only pertain to self-interest and gain instead of what's best for the game and its community as a whole. Aim-punch, Suppression, Lean, Grenades, Flashes -- all of these things have contributed to this game's survival. People need to grow-up and stop wailing for the devs to remove the critical components of the game that they don't like.
It's no different from a bunch of kids who don't like vegetables. If AA:PG were a deluxe hamburger, y'all would remove all the lettuce, tomato, pickles, onions, ect, until all that's left is a dry patty between two slices of bread -- and that's just basic and dull. If you're having trouble accepting AA:PG for what it is - there are other fish in the sea, but there's no reason to downgrade the game for the rest of us.
Fyi, the game rewards good flashes and grenades b/c they're effective in blinding and killing their their target respectively. Poor flashes and grenades won't accomplish that.
It's amazing how the game itself brings in features such as suppression and aim-punch to lessen point-and-click engagements and provide something which players can use to their advantage (if they're advanced enough). Instead of seeking the destruction of this feature, might I suggest actually trying to learn a way to deal with it as many already have?
Condescending [TOS Violation] eh? If you think I'm feeling a sense of superiority in my responses I am -- I've no reason to feel inferior (or on the same-level) to someone who's obviously enveloped in a self-created sphere of arrogance and intolerance.
Be considerate of others; Show netiquette; and I won't feel a need to retaliate every time you rudely confront me "without cause"
Two words, BUNNY HOPPING! I hate, hate, HATE hoppers!!!
Is this real world? Heck NO!
Is it an effective tactic in game? Must be because so many players use it.
When repeated jumping is removed then I'll think about these other issues.
(Like what I think or say means anything...)
1. Grenades and flashes are fine as is.
2. The game is punishing enough as is. I don't see the need to implement any penalties/drawbacks for any current features/aspects/content in the game. Only thing I'd consider is nerfing the SCAR to require 2 hits to the head instead of one, at full health (but even that's debatable).
3. Suppression and scope-wobble is fine are fine as is
. I, along with others, have already stated numerous reasons why this is in other threads - so I'll avoid writing a "big paragraph about it" here.
If nothing else, Whiplash clearly demonstrated, with visuals, that nades and flashes are not fine as-is. They're a low-skill, and often no-skill, part of the game. The video of the flash I posted above is another example. If his intent was to force me to move to my left, it's a good flash, but it doesn't need to blind me to do so. That flash shouldn't have blinded me at all. Incidentally, the grenade that killed me was perfect, but I wouldn't have been in that spot if not for the flash inexplicably blinding me. Grenades and flashes can be cooked and placed exactly where you want them in this game. Why are you so set on rewarding bad play? What reward is there for me to put a flash right on someone when I can just lob it behind them and get the same effect? I just can't figure out why you want a dumbed down game.
I think some sort of limitations on leaning are worth talking about. I'd be more in favor of further reducing the speed or possibly reducing the frequency. I'm not in favor of adding in more RNG. I'm not sure what you're referring to when you say the game is punishing enough as is.
As far as suppression goes, many of us have again made detailed posts about the topic with alternatative suggestions with well-supported arguments. Why don't you comment on those? What would be wrong with an initial aim punch followed by a period of invulnerability from further aim punch? What would be wrong with having some blurring at the edge of the screen combined with a sound effect to represent suppression? Why do you insist that a blinding effect is the way to go?
Your post basically says nothing at all. Contribute something.
Here we go again
It seems as if every game has its whiners who want to complain about features that they don't like and argue for a complete make-over to their liking from the ground-up, as is the case here.
Whiplash didn't demonstrate that nade and flashes "are not fine as-is". Yes, he claimed that the current stats for nades and flashes are OP, that the radius rewards even "poorly thrown" grenades. Yet if a grenade is truly "poorly thrown" than it will have little to no effect against its target(s). If grenades and flashes were truly over-powered they would've been nerfed by now...
Looking at your flash-vid post, if you look carefully you'll see that the flash-grenade was thrown to your right and (judging by the speed and direction) landed on the right side of the room behind the couch/line-of-chairs you took cover at. In other words, the flash itself was solid. Flashes are meant for tight-spaces like that anyway.
I'm not surprised you think I'm rewarding "bad-play" when you fail to see just how good these plays are. Your arguments are one-sided, not taking into account the people who use the flashes and grenades you want nerfed, or why they use them. Flashes are used for campers, where they typically already have the LOS advantage (line-of-sight) and can shoot first before the attacker can establish-said LOS. Grenades also help combat-campers. These both contribute to an aggressive, and therefore more active style of gameplay. Cutting the range in half means the attacker has to try even harder against the camper.
Leaning is solid, reason it's being used is b/c it's helping players peak around corners -- serving the purpose it was meant to serve. Negating the qualities of a feature with a penalty will only serve to degrade said feature and defeat the purpose of it being added in the first place. The game is "punishing enough as is" b/c it already penalizes players on numerous aspects of game-play.
Viewing the large map, throwing grenades, and reloading all leave you extremely vulnerable for a large period of time. Running around the map makes you much easier to hear vs. prone or crouch-walk.
Regarding the suppresion argument, I quote myself and say
"The flaw I see in the anti-suppression argument is that y'all think skill is being able to aim and shoot without any other variables/distractions. That is not skill at all, that is simply point and click and anyone can do that.
There needs to be things like suppression to keep players in check, and cause them to require more effort and thinking when getting a kill. This is exactly what suppression does.
Skill isn't reacting to what you can already control (aim, movement) but what you can't (suppression, recoil, bleeding, damage being taken, chance/random encounters, enemy movements/actions)."
Your credibility is largely gone off the bat when you dismiss people trying to better the game as "whiners." These aren't people trying to make the game easier because it's too hard for them. These are some of the best players in the game making good suggestions.
I saw exactly where the flash went. That's why I moved and turned away from it. You obviously know that. Quit being a condescending [TOS Violation]. It was a terrible flash if the intent was to blind me, but, like I said, if the goal was to clear that side of the room, it was good. It should not have blinded me. It would have been easy for the person to cook it so it went off in my line of sight or to blow it up on top of me like the grenade that followed. The person didn't even come close to that, but they were rewarded as if they did.
Again, why do you want to promote low/no-skill "features" such as flashes and grenades in their current state? Wouldn't it be a good thing to reward people for throwing good flashes and grenades instead of making it so anyone can do it despite a terrible throw or zero thought put in? Again, this isn't about making the game easier for me. I get a ton of grenade kills. It's about making it harder and more rewarding for everyone.
Really? Pulling up the map is the game punishing you? Examples of the game punishing you are things like suppression/aim punch, increased recoil with low HP and sway; not reloading (if you couldn't still sprint around while reloading, you might have a point). As far as leaning specifically, if the devs didn't think there was a problem, they wouldn't have slowed lean speed to begin with. We're simply suggesting that didn't do enough to fix the problem.
Players should primarily be playing against other players. They shouldn't have to fight the game itself through silly "features" like suppression. There's just no need for it. It can't be learned. It's not skillful in any way. If you get hit with aim punch, at least you can correct from that, and a player with faster reflexes will stand a better chance. Whiplash's suggestion for a sort of tunnel vision would be better. It wouldn't make it impossible for players to return fire, but it would still offer the player a choice of fight and risk being shot by an enemy outside his vision or flee.
I'm not calling those who are trying to better the game as "whiners" per se, just those whose suggestions only pertain to self-interest and gain instead of what's best for the game and its community as a whole. Aim-punch, Suppression, Lean, Grenades, Flashes -- all of these things have contributed to this game's survival. People need to grow-up and stop wailing for the devs to remove the critical components of the game that they don't like.
It's no different from a bunch of kids who don't like vegetables. If AA:PG were a deluxe hamburger, y'all would remove all the lettuce, tomato, pickles, onions, ect, until all that's left is a dry patty between two slices of bread -- and that's just basic and dull. If you're having trouble accepting AA:PG for what it is - there are other fish in the sea, but there's no reason to downgrade the game for the rest of us.
Fyi, the game rewards good flashes and grenades b/c they're effective in blinding and killing their their target respectively. Poor flashes and grenades won't accomplish that.
It's amazing how the game itself brings in features such as suppression and aim-punch to lessen point-and-click engagements and provide something which players can use to their advantage (if they're advanced enough). Instead of seeking the destruction of this feature, might I suggest actually trying to learn a way to deal with it as many already have?
Condescending [TOS Violation] eh? If you think I'm feeling a sense of superiority in my responses I am -- I've no reason to feel inferior (or on the same-level) to someone who's obviously enveloped in a self-created sphere of arrogance and intolerance.
Be considerate of others; Show netiquette; and I won't feel a need to retaliate every time you rudely confront me "without cause"
I think the reality is that those "features" and others like it have contributed to the demise of the game. Not the lean so much. I think lean is a good feature overall, but there's room for improvement.
What you don't seem to get is that these changes are being proposed to better the game for everyone. It's not me trying to make it easier for me. The changes I've proposed would largely make it harder for me and everyone else.
Yes, the game rewards good flashes and grenades. The problem is that it rewards a lot of bad ones as well. I've posted several on this forum including the one in this thread, which is, despite your claims, a terrible flash if the goal is to blind me. As I've said, it's a good area denial flash he can use to push up, but it's laughable that it blinded me. I had all day to see it and react to it. You know that. That's why I accurately described your post as condescending. You're still doing it, by the way.
Perhaps instead of dismissing the people who have been around this franchise for years, including time as top competitive players, as "whiners" or picky children, perhaps you should consider that we know what we're talking about. What's been done in AAPG has not worked. We're making good suggestions that will improve the game as a whole, making it more competitive and skill-based which gives people more to play for.
You still haven't told me why you're against increasing the skill ceiling of grenades and flashes. The proposed changes would increase the skill required. That is an objective fact. Why do you want to stick with a low-skill system?
Why do you think these proposals are self-serving and not for the betterment of the game as a whole?
Why are you seemingly opposed to change because it's change? You seem to dismiss solid proposals solely on the basis that it's different from the way things are now.
I'm calling you out because you're stating your opinion without offering anything substantive to support it. That's not being rude.
Two words, BUNNY HOPPING! I hate, hate, HATE hoppers!!!
Is this real world? Heck NO!
Is it an effective tactic in game? Must be because so many players use it.
When repeated jumping is removed then I'll think about these other issues.
(Like what I think or say means anything...)
1. Grenades and flashes are fine as is.
2. The game is punishing enough as is. I don't see the need to implement any penalties/drawbacks for any current features/aspects/content in the game. Only thing I'd consider is nerfing the SCAR to require 2 hits to the head instead of one, at full health (but even that's debatable).
3. Suppression and scope-wobble is fine are fine as is
. I, along with others, have already stated numerous reasons why this is in other threads - so I'll avoid writing a "big paragraph about it" here.
If nothing else, Whiplash clearly demonstrated, with visuals, that nades and flashes are not fine as-is. They're a low-skill, and often no-skill, part of the game. The video of the flash I posted above is another example. If his intent was to force me to move to my left, it's a good flash, but it doesn't need to blind me to do so. That flash shouldn't have blinded me at all. Incidentally, the grenade that killed me was perfect, but I wouldn't have been in that spot if not for the flash inexplicably blinding me. Grenades and flashes can be cooked and placed exactly where you want them in this game. Why are you so set on rewarding bad play? What reward is there for me to put a flash right on someone when I can just lob it behind them and get the same effect? I just can't figure out why you want a dumbed down game.
I think some sort of limitations on leaning are worth talking about. I'd be more in favor of further reducing the speed or possibly reducing the frequency. I'm not in favor of adding in more RNG. I'm not sure what you're referring to when you say the game is punishing enough as is.
As far as suppression goes, many of us have again made detailed posts about the topic with alternatative suggestions with well-supported arguments. Why don't you comment on those? What would be wrong with an initial aim punch followed by a period of invulnerability from further aim punch? What would be wrong with having some blurring at the edge of the screen combined with a sound effect to represent suppression? Why do you insist that a blinding effect is the way to go?
Your post basically says nothing at all. Contribute something.
Here we go again
It seems as if every game has its whiners who want to complain about features that they don't like and argue for a complete make-over to their liking from the ground-up, as is the case here.
Whiplash didn't demonstrate that nade and flashes "are not fine as-is". Yes, he claimed that the current stats for nades and flashes are OP, that the radius rewards even "poorly thrown" grenades. Yet if a grenade is truly "poorly thrown" than it will have little to no effect against its target(s). If grenades and flashes were truly over-powered they would've been nerfed by now...
Looking at your flash-vid post, if you look carefully you'll see that the flash-grenade was thrown to your right and (judging by the speed and direction) landed on the right side of the room behind the couch/line-of-chairs you took cover at. In other words, the flash itself was solid. Flashes are meant for tight-spaces like that anyway.
I'm not surprised you think I'm rewarding "bad-play" when you fail to see just how good these plays are. Your arguments are one-sided, not taking into account the people who use the flashes and grenades you want nerfed, or why they use them. Flashes are used for campers, where they typically already have the LOS advantage (line-of-sight) and can shoot first before the attacker can establish-said LOS. Grenades also help combat-campers. These both contribute to an aggressive, and therefore more active style of gameplay. Cutting the range in half means the attacker has to try even harder against the camper.
Leaning is solid, reason it's being used is b/c it's helping players peak around corners -- serving the purpose it was meant to serve. Negating the qualities of a feature with a penalty will only serve to degrade said feature and defeat the purpose of it being added in the first place. The game is "punishing enough as is" b/c it already penalizes players on numerous aspects of game-play.
Viewing the large map, throwing grenades, and reloading all leave you extremely vulnerable for a large period of time. Running around the map makes you much easier to hear vs. prone or crouch-walk.
Regarding the suppresion argument, I quote myself and say
"The flaw I see in the anti-suppression argument is that y'all think skill is being able to aim and shoot without any other variables/distractions. That is not skill at all, that is simply point and click and anyone can do that.
There needs to be things like suppression to keep players in check, and cause them to require more effort and thinking when getting a kill. This is exactly what suppression does.
Skill isn't reacting to what you can already control (aim, movement) but what you can't (suppression, recoil, bleeding, damage being taken, chance/random encounters, enemy movements/actions)."
Your credibility is largely gone off the bat when you dismiss people trying to better the game as "whiners." These aren't people trying to make the game easier because it's too hard for them. These are some of the best players in the game making good suggestions.
I saw exactly where the flash went. That's why I moved and turned away from it. You obviously know that. Quit being a condescending [TOS Violation]. It was a terrible flash if the intent was to blind me, but, like I said, if the goal was to clear that side of the room, it was good. It should not have blinded me. It would have been easy for the person to cook it so it went off in my line of sight or to blow it up on top of me like the grenade that followed. The person didn't even come close to that, but they were rewarded as if they did.
Again, why do you want to promote low/no-skill "features" such as flashes and grenades in their current state? Wouldn't it be a good thing to reward people for throwing good flashes and grenades instead of making it so anyone can do it despite a terrible throw or zero thought put in? Again, this isn't about making the game easier for me. I get a ton of grenade kills. It's about making it harder and more rewarding for everyone.
Really? Pulling up the map is the game punishing you? Examples of the game punishing you are things like suppression/aim punch, increased recoil with low HP and sway; not reloading (if you couldn't still sprint around while reloading, you might have a point). As far as leaning specifically, if the devs didn't think there was a problem, they wouldn't have slowed lean speed to begin with. We're simply suggesting that didn't do enough to fix the problem.
Players should primarily be playing against other players. They shouldn't have to fight the game itself through silly "features" like suppression. There's just no need for it. It can't be learned. It's not skillful in any way. If you get hit with aim punch, at least you can correct from that, and a player with faster reflexes will stand a better chance. Whiplash's suggestion for a sort of tunnel vision would be better. It wouldn't make it impossible for players to return fire, but it would still offer the player a choice of fight and risk being shot by an enemy outside his vision or flee.
I'm not calling those who are trying to better the game as "whiners" per se, just those whose suggestions only pertain to self-interest and gain instead of what's best for the game and its community as a whole. Aim-punch, Suppression, Lean, Grenades, Flashes -- all of these things have contributed to this game's survival. People need to grow-up and stop wailing for the devs to remove the critical components of the game that they don't like.
It's no different from a bunch of kids who don't like vegetables. If AA:PG were a deluxe hamburger, y'all would remove all the lettuce, tomato, pickles, onions, ect, until all that's left is a dry patty between two slices of bread -- and that's just basic and dull. If you're having trouble accepting AA:PG for what it is - there are other fish in the sea, but there's no reason to downgrade the game for the rest of us.
Fyi, the game rewards good flashes and grenades b/c they're effective in blinding and killing their their target respectively. Poor flashes and grenades won't accomplish that.
It's amazing how the game itself brings in features such as suppression and aim-punch to lessen point-and-click engagements and provide something which players can use to their advantage (if they're advanced enough). Instead of seeking the destruction of this feature, might I suggest actually trying to learn a way to deal with it as many already have?
Condescending [TOS Violation] eh? If you think I'm feeling a sense of superiority in my responses I am -- I've no reason to feel inferior (or on the same-level) to someone who's obviously enveloped in a self-created sphere of arrogance and intolerance.
Be considerate of others; Show netiquette; and I won't feel a need to retaliate every time you rudely confront me "without cause"
I think the reality is that those "features" and others like it have contributed to the demise of the game. Not the lean so much. I think lean is a good feature overall, but there's room for improvement.
What you don't seem to get is that these changes are being proposed to better the game for everyone. It's not me trying to make it easier for me. The changes I've proposed would largely make it harder for me and everyone else.
Yes, the game rewards good flashes and grenades. The problem is that it rewards a lot of bad ones as well. I've posted several on this forum including the one in this thread, which is, despite your claims, a terrible flash if the goal is to blind me. As I've said, it's a good area denial flash he can use to push up, but it's laughable that it blinded me. I had all day to see it and react to it. You know that. That's why I accurately described your post as condescending. You're still doing it, by the way.
Perhaps instead of dismissing the people who have been around this franchise for years, including time as top competitive players, as "whiners" or picky children, perhaps you should consider that we know what we're talking about. What's been done in AAPG has not worked. We're making good suggestions that will improve the game as a whole, making it more competitive and skill-based which gives people more to play for.
You still haven't told me why you're against increasing the skill ceiling of grenades and flashes. The proposed changes would increase the skill required. That is an objective fact. Why do you want to stick with a low-skill system?
Why do you think these proposals are self-serving and not for the betterment of the game as a whole?
Why are you seemingly opposed to change because it's change? You seem to dismiss solid proposals solely on the basis that it's different from the way things are now.
I'm calling you out because you're stating your opinion without offering anything substantive to support it. That's not being rude.
It most certainly is you trying to make the game easier for yourself. That's why you posted the clip of you getting flashed (by a well-thrown flash), and calling it "terrible" and saying that it shouldn't have flashed you. I'm sure if the guy's good flash had no effect, you'd be happy - but b/c you got flashed you feel the need to rant about it on the forums and severely limit the effectiveness of flashes (along with other grenades). It's so childish. You want flashes to be harder to use so you rarely get flashed, not b/c they'll make the game better.
I'm not against increasing the skill ceiling of grenades and flashes at all -- provided there's a reason for it. This is something you've failed to show. Provide an actual reason (a logical one), an actual need for an increase in the "skill ceiling", and (seeing as how I only want the game to improve) I will have no choice but to agree.
I'm not opposed to change, just change for the sake-of-change; unnecessary change. What this game needs is better match-making, more content, and in-game leaderboards. Not nerfs on throwables; penalties on solid features; or removal of special-features. I'm surprised the former weren't in the OP
You have several valid points Arrow, but as Whiplash mentioned earlier in the thread (or was it another? Not bothered to look)..there's a difference between outside factors that make the game more "difficult" (pixel shooting, screen shake from grenade through the wall) [which aren't necessarily good...and wanting them removed doesn't necessarily mean I want the game easier for myself]...and things like increased sway with a sniper rifle, movement penalties, etc.
It seems as if every game has its whiners who want to complain about features that they don't like and argue for a complete make-over to their liking from the ground-up, as is the case here.
Whiplash didn't demonstrate that nade and flashes "are not fine as-is". Yes, he claimed that the current stats for nades and flashes are OP, that the radius rewards even "poorly thrown" grenades. Yet if a grenade is truly "poorly thrown" than it will have little to no effect against its target(s). If grenades and flashes were truly over-powered they would've been nerfed by now...
Looking at your flash-vid post, if you look carefully you'll see that the flash-grenade was thrown to your right and (judging by the speed and direction) landed on the right side of the room behind the couch/line-of-chairs you took cover at. In other words, the flash itself was solid. Flashes are meant for tight-spaces like that anyway.
I'm not surprised you think I'm rewarding "bad-play" when you fail to see just how good these plays are. Your arguments are one-sided, not taking into account the people who use the flashes and grenades you want nerfed, or why they use them. Flashes are used for campers, where they typically already have the LOS advantage (line-of-sight) and can shoot first before the attacker can establish-said LOS. Grenades also help combat-campers. These both contribute to an aggressive, and therefore more active style of gameplay. Cutting the range in half means the attacker has to try even harder against the camper.
Leaning is solid, reason it's being used is b/c it's helping players peak around corners -- serving the purpose it was meant to serve. Negating the qualities of a feature with a penalty will only serve to degrade said feature and defeat the purpose of it being added in the first place. The game is "punishing enough as is" b/c it already penalizes players on numerous aspects of game-play.
Viewing the large map, throwing grenades, and reloading all leave you extremely vulnerable for a large period of time. Running around the map makes you much easier to hear vs. prone or crouch-walk.
Regarding the suppresion argument, I quote myself and say
"The flaw I see in the anti-suppression argument is that y'all think skill is being able to aim and shoot without any other variables/distractions. That is not skill at all, that is simply point and click and anyone can do that.
There needs to be things like suppression to keep players in check, and cause them to require more effort and thinking when getting a kill. This is exactly what suppression does.
Skill isn't reacting to what you can already control (aim, movement) but what you can't (suppression, recoil, bleeding, damage being taken, chance/random encounters, enemy movements/actions)."
Your credibility is largely gone off the bat when you dismiss people trying to better the game as "whiners." These aren't people trying to make the game easier because it's too hard for them. These are some of the best players in the game making good suggestions.
I saw exactly where the flash went. That's why I moved and turned away from it. You obviously know that. Quit being a condescending [TOS Violation]. It was a terrible flash if the intent was to blind me, but, like I said, if the goal was to clear that side of the room, it was good. It should not have blinded me. It would have been easy for the person to cook it so it went off in my line of sight or to blow it up on top of me like the grenade that followed. The person didn't even come close to that, but they were rewarded as if they did.
Again, why do you want to promote low/no-skill "features" such as flashes and grenades in their current state? Wouldn't it be a good thing to reward people for throwing good flashes and grenades instead of making it so anyone can do it despite a terrible throw or zero thought put in? Again, this isn't about making the game easier for me. I get a ton of grenade kills. It's about making it harder and more rewarding for everyone.
Really? Pulling up the map is the game punishing you? Examples of the game punishing you are things like suppression/aim punch, increased recoil with low HP and sway; not reloading (if you couldn't still sprint around while reloading, you might have a point). As far as leaning specifically, if the devs didn't think there was a problem, they wouldn't have slowed lean speed to begin with. We're simply suggesting that didn't do enough to fix the problem.
Players should primarily be playing against other players. They shouldn't have to fight the game itself through silly "features" like suppression. There's just no need for it. It can't be learned. It's not skillful in any way. If you get hit with aim punch, at least you can correct from that, and a player with faster reflexes will stand a better chance. Whiplash's suggestion for a sort of tunnel vision would be better. It wouldn't make it impossible for players to return fire, but it would still offer the player a choice of fight and risk being shot by an enemy outside his vision or flee.
I'm not calling those who are trying to better the game as "whiners" per se, just those whose suggestions only pertain to self-interest and gain instead of what's best for the game and its community as a whole. Aim-punch, Suppression, Lean, Grenades, Flashes -- all of these things have contributed to this game's survival. People need to grow-up and stop wailing for the devs to remove the critical components of the game that they don't like.
It's no different from a bunch of kids who don't like vegetables. If AA:PG were a deluxe hamburger, y'all would remove all the lettuce, tomato, pickles, onions, ect, until all that's left is a dry patty between two slices of bread -- and that's just basic and dull. If you're having trouble accepting AA:PG for what it is - there are other fish in the sea, but there's no reason to downgrade the game for the rest of us.
Fyi, the game rewards good flashes and grenades b/c they're effective in blinding and killing their their target respectively. Poor flashes and grenades won't accomplish that.
It's amazing how the game itself brings in features such as suppression and aim-punch to lessen point-and-click engagements and provide something which players can use to their advantage (if they're advanced enough). Instead of seeking the destruction of this feature, might I suggest actually trying to learn a way to deal with it as many already have?
Condescending [TOS Violation] eh? If you think I'm feeling a sense of superiority in my responses I am -- I've no reason to feel inferior (or on the same-level) to someone who's obviously enveloped in a self-created sphere of arrogance and intolerance.
Be considerate of others; Show netiquette; and I won't feel a need to retaliate every time you rudely confront me "without cause"
I think the reality is that those "features" and others like it have contributed to the demise of the game. Not the lean so much. I think lean is a good feature overall, but there's room for improvement.
What you don't seem to get is that these changes are being proposed to better the game for everyone. It's not me trying to make it easier for me. The changes I've proposed would largely make it harder for me and everyone else.
Yes, the game rewards good flashes and grenades. The problem is that it rewards a lot of bad ones as well. I've posted several on this forum including the one in this thread, which is, despite your claims, a terrible flash if the goal is to blind me. As I've said, it's a good area denial flash he can use to push up, but it's laughable that it blinded me. I had all day to see it and react to it. You know that. That's why I accurately described your post as condescending. You're still doing it, by the way.
Perhaps instead of dismissing the people who have been around this franchise for years, including time as top competitive players, as "whiners" or picky children, perhaps you should consider that we know what we're talking about. What's been done in AAPG has not worked. We're making good suggestions that will improve the game as a whole, making it more competitive and skill-based which gives people more to play for.
You still haven't told me why you're against increasing the skill ceiling of grenades and flashes. The proposed changes would increase the skill required. That is an objective fact. Why do you want to stick with a low-skill system?
Why do you think these proposals are self-serving and not for the betterment of the game as a whole?
Why are you seemingly opposed to change because it's change? You seem to dismiss solid proposals solely on the basis that it's different from the way things are now.
I'm calling you out because you're stating your opinion without offering anything substantive to support it. That's not being rude.
It most certainly is you trying to make the game easier for yourself. That's why you posted the clip of you getting flashed (by a well-thrown flash), and calling it "terrible" and saying that it shouldn't have flashed you. I'm sure if the guy's good flash had no effect, you'd be happy - but b/c you got flashed you feel the need to rant about it on the forums and severely limit the effectiveness of flashes (along with other grenades). It's so childish. You want flashes to be harder to use so you rarely get flashed, not b/c they'll make the game better.
I'm not against increasing the skill ceiling of grenades and flashes at all -- provided there's a reason for it. This is something you've failed to show. Provide an actual reason (a logical one), an actual need for an increase in the "skill ceiling", and (seeing as how I only want the game to improve) I will have no choice but to agree.
I'm not opposed to change, just change for the sake-of-change; unnecessary change. What this game needs is better match-making, more content, and in-game leaderboards. Not nerfs on throwables; penalties on solid features; or removal of special-features. I'm surprised the former weren't in the OP
The part you're missing is that if the goal was to blind me, it wasn't well thrown at all. I watched it come in and both moved and turned away from it with plenty of time. It was horrible if blinding me was the goal. He could have easily cooked it and had it go off in my line of sight. Again, if his goal was to clear that side of the room so he could adjust his own position, accomplish a revive, etc, it was a good flash, but I don't need to be blind for that goal to be accomplished, and I shouldn't have been blinded by that flash. Keep in mind this works both ways. I'm sure I've blinded people with bad flashes myself. I know I've benefited from the extreme grenade radius. These changes would make it harder for me the same as anyone else. These changes would make the game better. That doesn't fit your narrative, so you opt for calling me childish while you're the one with your fingers in your ears, ignorantly proclaiming everything to be "fine."
You're clearly against raising the skill ceiling. Raising the skill ceiling is a reason in itself to make these changes. Make skill matter more. Give players more to work towards. Grenades and flashes can be cooked. You can place them EXACTLY where you want to, so why should the game reward lazy or unskilled nade throws? This feigned open-mindedness is pretty sad.
I don't disagree that there are other things the game needs, but things like better match-making, more content and in-game leaderboards don't mean much if the game itself isn't up-to-par and attracting and retaining players. Build the game first, then work on extra content.
Wow the multi quotes in this thread burn into my retinas.
Back in the old days before DLC.. digital distribution etc.. game developers got one chance to release a game without bugs.. with all its intended content in one foul swoop.. gamers today are suffering the consequences of developers having sooo many options when they release games. They literally get away with supplying unfinished.. frankly often poor products that gamers have to suffer with for months even years. Yes there are positives to early access.. beta tests.. experimental releases allowing feedback to shape a game to change it for the better.. I know.. but honestly I'd go back 10 years in a heartbeat. Are devs taking advantage of today's methodry when they are pushing out unfinished messes? Are they even caring as much since they know they can get away with it?
AA is free .. so does that excuse it from being not perfect? Has anyone even experienced a perfect game? doubtful. Asking for game changing changes to 5+ year old games is pointless not to [TOS Violation] on anyone's cornflakes. Ya feel me?
If my trollery drives you crazy, you'd better put on your seatbelt.
It seems as if every game has its whiners who want to complain about features that they don't like and argue for a complete make-over to their liking from the ground-up, as is the case here.
Whiplash didn't demonstrate that nade and flashes "are not fine as-is". Yes, he claimed that the current stats for nades and flashes are OP, that the radius rewards even "poorly thrown" grenades. Yet if a grenade is truly "poorly thrown" than it will have little to no effect against its target(s). If grenades and flashes were truly over-powered they would've been nerfed by now...
Looking at your flash-vid post, if you look carefully you'll see that the flash-grenade was thrown to your right and (judging by the speed and direction) landed on the right side of the room behind the couch/line-of-chairs you took cover at. In other words, the flash itself was solid. Flashes are meant for tight-spaces like that anyway.
I'm not surprised you think I'm rewarding "bad-play" when you fail to see just how good these plays are. Your arguments are one-sided, not taking into account the people who use the flashes and grenades you want nerfed, or why they use them. Flashes are used for campers, where they typically already have the LOS advantage (line-of-sight) and can shoot first before the attacker can establish-said LOS. Grenades also help combat-campers. These both contribute to an aggressive, and therefore more active style of gameplay. Cutting the range in half means the attacker has to try even harder against the camper.
Leaning is solid, reason it's being used is b/c it's helping players peak around corners -- serving the purpose it was meant to serve. Negating the qualities of a feature with a penalty will only serve to degrade said feature and defeat the purpose of it being added in the first place. The game is "punishing enough as is" b/c it already penalizes players on numerous aspects of game-play.
Viewing the large map, throwing grenades, and reloading all leave you extremely vulnerable for a large period of time. Running around the map makes you much easier to hear vs. prone or crouch-walk.
Regarding the suppresion argument, I quote myself and say
"The flaw I see in the anti-suppression argument is that y'all think skill is being able to aim and shoot without any other variables/distractions. That is not skill at all, that is simply point and click and anyone can do that.
There needs to be things like suppression to keep players in check, and cause them to require more effort and thinking when getting a kill. This is exactly what suppression does.
Skill isn't reacting to what you can already control (aim, movement) but what you can't (suppression, recoil, bleeding, damage being taken, chance/random encounters, enemy movements/actions)."
Your credibility is largely gone off the bat when you dismiss people trying to better the game as "whiners." These aren't people trying to make the game easier because it's too hard for them. These are some of the best players in the game making good suggestions.
I saw exactly where the flash went. That's why I moved and turned away from it. You obviously know that. Quit being a condescending [TOS Violation]. It was a terrible flash if the intent was to blind me, but, like I said, if the goal was to clear that side of the room, it was good. It should not have blinded me. It would have been easy for the person to cook it so it went off in my line of sight or to blow it up on top of me like the grenade that followed. The person didn't even come close to that, but they were rewarded as if they did.
Again, why do you want to promote low/no-skill "features" such as flashes and grenades in their current state? Wouldn't it be a good thing to reward people for throwing good flashes and grenades instead of making it so anyone can do it despite a terrible throw or zero thought put in? Again, this isn't about making the game easier for me. I get a ton of grenade kills. It's about making it harder and more rewarding for everyone.
Really? Pulling up the map is the game punishing you? Examples of the game punishing you are things like suppression/aim punch, increased recoil with low HP and sway; not reloading (if you couldn't still sprint around while reloading, you might have a point). As far as leaning specifically, if the devs didn't think there was a problem, they wouldn't have slowed lean speed to begin with. We're simply suggesting that didn't do enough to fix the problem.
Players should primarily be playing against other players. They shouldn't have to fight the game itself through silly "features" like suppression. There's just no need for it. It can't be learned. It's not skillful in any way. If you get hit with aim punch, at least you can correct from that, and a player with faster reflexes will stand a better chance. Whiplash's suggestion for a sort of tunnel vision would be better. It wouldn't make it impossible for players to return fire, but it would still offer the player a choice of fight and risk being shot by an enemy outside his vision or flee.
I'm not calling those who are trying to better the game as "whiners" per se, just those whose suggestions only pertain to self-interest and gain instead of what's best for the game and its community as a whole. Aim-punch, Suppression, Lean, Grenades, Flashes -- all of these things have contributed to this game's survival. People need to grow-up and stop wailing for the devs to remove the critical components of the game that they don't like.
It's no different from a bunch of kids who don't like vegetables. If AA:PG were a deluxe hamburger, y'all would remove all the lettuce, tomato, pickles, onions, ect, until all that's left is a dry patty between two slices of bread -- and that's just basic and dull. If you're having trouble accepting AA:PG for what it is - there are other fish in the sea, but there's no reason to downgrade the game for the rest of us.
Fyi, the game rewards good flashes and grenades b/c they're effective in blinding and killing their their target respectively. Poor flashes and grenades won't accomplish that.
It's amazing how the game itself brings in features such as suppression and aim-punch to lessen point-and-click engagements and provide something which players can use to their advantage (if they're advanced enough). Instead of seeking the destruction of this feature, might I suggest actually trying to learn a way to deal with it as many already have?
Condescending [TOS Violation] eh? If you think I'm feeling a sense of superiority in my responses I am -- I've no reason to feel inferior (or on the same-level) to someone who's obviously enveloped in a self-created sphere of arrogance and intolerance.
Be considerate of others; Show netiquette; and I won't feel a need to retaliate every time you rudely confront me "without cause"
I think the reality is that those "features" and others like it have contributed to the demise of the game. Not the lean so much. I think lean is a good feature overall, but there's room for improvement.
What you don't seem to get is that these changes are being proposed to better the game for everyone. It's not me trying to make it easier for me. The changes I've proposed would largely make it harder for me and everyone else.
Yes, the game rewards good flashes and grenades. The problem is that it rewards a lot of bad ones as well. I've posted several on this forum including the one in this thread, which is, despite your claims, a terrible flash if the goal is to blind me. As I've said, it's a good area denial flash he can use to push up, but it's laughable that it blinded me. I had all day to see it and react to it. You know that. That's why I accurately described your post as condescending. You're still doing it, by the way.
Perhaps instead of dismissing the people who have been around this franchise for years, including time as top competitive players, as "whiners" or picky children, perhaps you should consider that we know what we're talking about. What's been done in AAPG has not worked. We're making good suggestions that will improve the game as a whole, making it more competitive and skill-based which gives people more to play for.
You still haven't told me why you're against increasing the skill ceiling of grenades and flashes. The proposed changes would increase the skill required. That is an objective fact. Why do you want to stick with a low-skill system?
Why do you think these proposals are self-serving and not for the betterment of the game as a whole?
Why are you seemingly opposed to change because it's change? You seem to dismiss solid proposals solely on the basis that it's different from the way things are now.
I'm calling you out because you're stating your opinion without offering anything substantive to support it. That's not being rude.
It most certainly is you trying to make the game easier for yourself. That's why you posted the clip of you getting flashed (by a well-thrown flash), and calling it "terrible" and saying that it shouldn't have flashed you. I'm sure if the guy's good flash had no effect, you'd be happy - but b/c you got flashed you feel the need to rant about it on the forums and severely limit the effectiveness of flashes (along with other grenades). It's so childish. You want flashes to be harder to use so you rarely get flashed, not b/c they'll make the game better.
I'm not against increasing the skill ceiling of grenades and flashes at all -- provided there's a reason for it. This is something you've failed to show. Provide an actual reason (a logical one), an actual need for an increase in the "skill ceiling", and (seeing as how I only want the game to improve) I will have no choice but to agree.
I'm not opposed to change, just change for the sake-of-change; unnecessary change. What this game needs is better match-making, more content, and in-game leaderboards. Not nerfs on throwables; penalties on solid features; or removal of special-features. I'm surprised the former weren't in the OP
The part you're missing is that if the goal was to blind me, it wasn't well thrown at all. I watched it come in and both moved and turned away from it with plenty of time. It was horrible if blinding me was the goal. He could have easily cooked it and had it go off in my line of sight. Again, if his goal was to clear that side of the room so he could adjust his own position, accomplish a revive, etc, it was a good flash, but I don't need to be blind for that goal to be accomplished, and I shouldn't have been blinded by that flash. Keep in mind this works both ways. I'm sure I've blinded people with bad flashes myself. I know I've benefited from the extreme grenade radius. These changes would make it harder for me the same as anyone else. These changes would make the game better. That doesn't fit your narrative, so you opt for calling me childish while you're the one with your fingers in your ears, ignorantly proclaiming everything to be "fine."
You're clearly against raising the skill ceiling. Raising the skill ceiling is a reason in itself to make these changes. Make skill matter more. Give players more to work towards. Grenades and flashes can be cooked. You can place them EXACTLY where you want to, so why should the game reward lazy or unskilled nade throws? This feigned open-mindedness is pretty sad.
I don't disagree that there are other things the game needs, but things like better match-making, more content and in-game leaderboards don't mean much if the game itself isn't up-to-par and attracting and retaining players. Build the game first, then work on extra content.
Yes, you saw the flash but you failed to protect yourself from the flash b/c: Your cover was inadequate as the flash still had a LOS (it was behind the cover position). By saying you had "plenty of time" to take avoid the flash you indirectly imply that you were only flashed b/c you were inept in your ability to take the necessary steps to prevent being flashed.
Bad flashes and grenades only prove effective when the target his/herself is clumsy or unaware of what's going on around them. The only way to counter ignorance is with knowledge. It's not that hard to learn how to properly avoid flashes and grenades -- especially when you have "plenty of time" to avoid them. The only time the game ever rewards "lazy or unskilled nade throws" is when they're being thrown at "lazy or unskilled" people.
This game is meant to be casual and fun for all -- not hardcore. The ceiling is high enough as is, anymore and you'll make it unsatisfactory for the average player. A skilled player will perform better than an average or below basic player -- that's true in this game.
At this point, not knowing what TYPE of game AA5 will be, I'd say it's a great time to be offering the kind of feedback a Dev will be willing to listen to, IE ....unemotional, constructive, well-reasoned and respectful. Best way to be ignored is to post like a nine year old. Just sayin'
______
This has been a test of the emergency flame-fest system. Please do not adjust your set.
It seems as if every game has its whiners who want to complain about features that they don't like and argue for a complete make-over to their liking from the ground-up, as is the case here.
Whiplash didn't demonstrate that nade and flashes "are not fine as-is". Yes, he claimed that the current stats for nades and flashes are OP, that the radius rewards even "poorly thrown" grenades. Yet if a grenade is truly "poorly thrown" than it will have little to no effect against its target(s). If grenades and flashes were truly over-powered they would've been nerfed by now...
Looking at your flash-vid post, if you look carefully you'll see that the flash-grenade was thrown to your right and (judging by the speed and direction) landed on the right side of the room behind the couch/line-of-chairs you took cover at. In other words, the flash itself was solid. Flashes are meant for tight-spaces like that anyway.
I'm not surprised you think I'm rewarding "bad-play" when you fail to see just how good these plays are. Your arguments are one-sided, not taking into account the people who use the flashes and grenades you want nerfed, or why they use them. Flashes are used for campers, where they typically already have the LOS advantage (line-of-sight) and can shoot first before the attacker can establish-said LOS. Grenades also help combat-campers. These both contribute to an aggressive, and therefore more active style of gameplay. Cutting the range in half means the attacker has to try even harder against the camper.
Leaning is solid, reason it's being used is b/c it's helping players peak around corners -- serving the purpose it was meant to serve. Negating the qualities of a feature with a penalty will only serve to degrade said feature and defeat the purpose of it being added in the first place. The game is "punishing enough as is" b/c it already penalizes players on numerous aspects of game-play.
Viewing the large map, throwing grenades, and reloading all leave you extremely vulnerable for a large period of time. Running around the map makes you much easier to hear vs. prone or crouch-walk.
Regarding the suppresion argument, I quote myself and say
"The flaw I see in the anti-suppression argument is that y'all think skill is being able to aim and shoot without any other variables/distractions. That is not skill at all, that is simply point and click and anyone can do that.
There needs to be things like suppression to keep players in check, and cause them to require more effort and thinking when getting a kill. This is exactly what suppression does.
Skill isn't reacting to what you can already control (aim, movement) but what you can't (suppression, recoil, bleeding, damage being taken, chance/random encounters, enemy movements/actions)."
Your credibility is largely gone off the bat when you dismiss people trying to better the game as "whiners." These aren't people trying to make the game easier because it's too hard for them. These are some of the best players in the game making good suggestions.
I saw exactly where the flash went. That's why I moved and turned away from it. You obviously know that. Quit being a condescending [TOS Violation]. It was a terrible flash if the intent was to blind me, but, like I said, if the goal was to clear that side of the room, it was good. It should not have blinded me. It would have been easy for the person to cook it so it went off in my line of sight or to blow it up on top of me like the grenade that followed. The person didn't even come close to that, but they were rewarded as if they did.
Again, why do you want to promote low/no-skill "features" such as flashes and grenades in their current state? Wouldn't it be a good thing to reward people for throwing good flashes and grenades instead of making it so anyone can do it despite a terrible throw or zero thought put in? Again, this isn't about making the game easier for me. I get a ton of grenade kills. It's about making it harder and more rewarding for everyone.
Really? Pulling up the map is the game punishing you? Examples of the game punishing you are things like suppression/aim punch, increased recoil with low HP and sway; not reloading (if you couldn't still sprint around while reloading, you might have a point). As far as leaning specifically, if the devs didn't think there was a problem, they wouldn't have slowed lean speed to begin with. We're simply suggesting that didn't do enough to fix the problem.
Players should primarily be playing against other players. They shouldn't have to fight the game itself through silly "features" like suppression. There's just no need for it. It can't be learned. It's not skillful in any way. If you get hit with aim punch, at least you can correct from that, and a player with faster reflexes will stand a better chance. Whiplash's suggestion for a sort of tunnel vision would be better. It wouldn't make it impossible for players to return fire, but it would still offer the player a choice of fight and risk being shot by an enemy outside his vision or flee.
I'm not calling those who are trying to better the game as "whiners" per se, just those whose suggestions only pertain to self-interest and gain instead of what's best for the game and its community as a whole. Aim-punch, Suppression, Lean, Grenades, Flashes -- all of these things have contributed to this game's survival. People need to grow-up and stop wailing for the devs to remove the critical components of the game that they don't like.
It's no different from a bunch of kids who don't like vegetables. If AA:PG were a deluxe hamburger, y'all would remove all the lettuce, tomato, pickles, onions, ect, until all that's left is a dry patty between two slices of bread -- and that's just basic and dull. If you're having trouble accepting AA:PG for what it is - there are other fish in the sea, but there's no reason to downgrade the game for the rest of us.
Fyi, the game rewards good flashes and grenades b/c they're effective in blinding and killing their their target respectively. Poor flashes and grenades won't accomplish that.
It's amazing how the game itself brings in features such as suppression and aim-punch to lessen point-and-click engagements and provide something which players can use to their advantage (if they're advanced enough). Instead of seeking the destruction of this feature, might I suggest actually trying to learn a way to deal with it as many already have?
Condescending [TOS Violation] eh? If you think I'm feeling a sense of superiority in my responses I am -- I've no reason to feel inferior (or on the same-level) to someone who's obviously enveloped in a self-created sphere of arrogance and intolerance.
Be considerate of others; Show netiquette; and I won't feel a need to retaliate every time you rudely confront me "without cause"
I think the reality is that those "features" and others like it have contributed to the demise of the game. Not the lean so much. I think lean is a good feature overall, but there's room for improvement.
What you don't seem to get is that these changes are being proposed to better the game for everyone. It's not me trying to make it easier for me. The changes I've proposed would largely make it harder for me and everyone else.
Yes, the game rewards good flashes and grenades. The problem is that it rewards a lot of bad ones as well. I've posted several on this forum including the one in this thread, which is, despite your claims, a terrible flash if the goal is to blind me. As I've said, it's a good area denial flash he can use to push up, but it's laughable that it blinded me. I had all day to see it and react to it. You know that. That's why I accurately described your post as condescending. You're still doing it, by the way.
Perhaps instead of dismissing the people who have been around this franchise for years, including time as top competitive players, as "whiners" or picky children, perhaps you should consider that we know what we're talking about. What's been done in AAPG has not worked. We're making good suggestions that will improve the game as a whole, making it more competitive and skill-based which gives people more to play for.
You still haven't told me why you're against increasing the skill ceiling of grenades and flashes. The proposed changes would increase the skill required. That is an objective fact. Why do you want to stick with a low-skill system?
Why do you think these proposals are self-serving and not for the betterment of the game as a whole?
Why are you seemingly opposed to change because it's change? You seem to dismiss solid proposals solely on the basis that it's different from the way things are now.
I'm calling you out because you're stating your opinion without offering anything substantive to support it. That's not being rude.
It most certainly is you trying to make the game easier for yourself. That's why you posted the clip of you getting flashed (by a well-thrown flash), and calling it "terrible" and saying that it shouldn't have flashed you. I'm sure if the guy's good flash had no effect, you'd be happy - but b/c you got flashed you feel the need to rant about it on the forums and severely limit the effectiveness of flashes (along with other grenades). It's so childish. You want flashes to be harder to use so you rarely get flashed, not b/c they'll make the game better.
I'm not against increasing the skill ceiling of grenades and flashes at all -- provided there's a reason for it. This is something you've failed to show. Provide an actual reason (a logical one), an actual need for an increase in the "skill ceiling", and (seeing as how I only want the game to improve) I will have no choice but to agree.
I'm not opposed to change, just change for the sake-of-change; unnecessary change. What this game needs is better match-making, more content, and in-game leaderboards. Not nerfs on throwables; penalties on solid features; or removal of special-features. I'm surprised the former weren't in the OP
The part you're missing is that if the goal was to blind me, it wasn't well thrown at all. I watched it come in and both moved and turned away from it with plenty of time. It was horrible if blinding me was the goal. He could have easily cooked it and had it go off in my line of sight. Again, if his goal was to clear that side of the room so he could adjust his own position, accomplish a revive, etc, it was a good flash, but I don't need to be blind for that goal to be accomplished, and I shouldn't have been blinded by that flash. Keep in mind this works both ways. I'm sure I've blinded people with bad flashes myself. I know I've benefited from the extreme grenade radius. These changes would make it harder for me the same as anyone else. These changes would make the game better. That doesn't fit your narrative, so you opt for calling me childish while you're the one with your fingers in your ears, ignorantly proclaiming everything to be "fine."
You're clearly against raising the skill ceiling. Raising the skill ceiling is a reason in itself to make these changes. Make skill matter more. Give players more to work towards. Grenades and flashes can be cooked. You can place them EXACTLY where you want to, so why should the game reward lazy or unskilled nade throws? This feigned open-mindedness is pretty sad.
I don't disagree that there are other things the game needs, but things like better match-making, more content and in-game leaderboards don't mean much if the game itself isn't up-to-par and attracting and retaining players. Build the game first, then work on extra content.
Yes, you saw the flash but you failed to protect yourself from the flash b/c: You're cover was inadequate as the flash still had a LOS (it was behind the cover position). By saying you had "plenty of time" to take avoid the flash you indirectly imply that you were only flashed b/c you were inept in your ability to take the necessary steps to prevent being flashed.
Bad flashes and grenades only prove effective when the target his/herself is clumsy or unaware of what's going on around them. The only way to counter ignorance is with knowledge. It's not that hard to learn how to properly avoid flashes and grenades -- especially when you have "plenty of time" to avoid them. The only time the game ever rewards "lazy or unskilled nade throws" is when they're being thrown at "lazy or unskilled" people.
This game is meant to be casual and fun for all -- not hardcore. The ceiling is high enough as is, anymore and you'll make it unsatisfactory for the average player. A skilled player will perform better than an average or below basic player -- that's true in this game.
I moved and turned away from it. That's all it should take. Anything else is just rewarding bad play. Period. Again, he could have cooked it and had it go off in my line of sight. Again, it was a good flash for area denial. It was not a good flash for blinding me. Obviously it works in the game in its current state, but that's what we're proposing be fixed. It's way too easy as it currently is.
The only time the game ever rewards "lazy or unskilled nade throws" is when they're being thrown at "lazy or unskilled" people.
This is one of the stupidest things I've read on here. The person who gets hit by a frag that goes off 12 meters away is "lazy or unskilled"? You know how far away that is? The grenade likely wasn't even thrown at him. Just lobbing an uncooked flash in behind someone is lazy and is undeserving of the reward the game currently provides. Simply cook the flash and put it on or right in front of the enemy. Then he should be blind.
The game is incredibly easy. There is a lot of room to increase the skill ceiling. Yes, a skilled player will perform better in any game unless it's totally RNG, but this game makes it way too easy for any random to get kills.
You still have yet to really articulate a reason why you're opposed to taking a low-skill mechanic and make it harder. You're fighting change because it's change, not because of anything having to do with what the change is. You're dismissing good suggestions from players who have been around long enough and have the experience playing competitively to fully understand them, and you're not even giving them a chance. Frankly, the people on the opposing side of your argument, which really isn't even an argument, are far more qualified to judge the game, having been around it forever and having seen its progression.
This game is meant to be casual and fun for all -- not hardcore. The ceiling is high enough as is, anymore and you'll make it unsatisfactory for the average player. A skilled player will perform better than an average or below basic player -- that's true in this game.
I'm not going to bother getting into the arguments, I just wanted to talk about this point. That question is a major one that should be answered. Does the development team want a casual or competitive game? If they want a competitive game then certain changes need to be made to accommodate for that. If they want a casual game, maybe you're right. I can tell you that the Army is investing heavily in eSports. Now that can obviously mean more highly visible/popular eSports games such as Counter-Strike, however, that can also mean their own game as well. Additionally when AAPG first came out there was a certain Dev who wanted to push this game competitively, but unfortunately that didn't work out.
In terms of the skill ceiling. I think you confuse ceiling with natural skill gaps. An FPS game will have a natural skill gap between players who have better aim vs. those who don't. Players who play tactically better vs. those who don't. However, a skill ceiling can't be considered high if a player who has never played the game can play for the first time and immediately or extremely quickly come to dominate. That's a low skill ceiling game. Same goes for if a player gets to that point and the only thing that separates them from higher end players is reflexes.
If you want to see what skill ceiling is about, check out counter-strike from an FPS perspective. If you want to see it from another perspective check out Dota 2. Dota 2 can take hundreds of hours just to become decent. That's an extremely high skill ceiling. In CS an above average FPS player can become decent somewhat quickly, but to master the game takes a lot of time. High skill ceiling.
You joined the world's greatest army to become a graphic artist? Outstanding!
I feel like good cooked nades are rewarded too much. I can throw a cooked nade top Y stone ruins and let it explode in the middle taking out anyone on top of the whole object site. If the grenade would have a 4 metre radius it still would be very good.
Movement penalties are ingame.
Moving
Moving and turning
"Near a teammate you had better accuracy"
AAPG: In 5.5 metre range of an ally you"ll recover from suppression effects twice as fast.
Unrelated to your stamina penalty/regain.
I feel like good cooked nades are rewarded too much. I can throw a cooked nade top Y stone ruins and let it explode in the middle taking out anyone on top of the whole object site. If the grenade would have a 4 metre radius it still would be very good.
Movement penalties are ingame.
Moving
Moving and turning
"Near a teammate you had better accuracy"
AAPG: In 5.5 metre range of an ally you"ll recover from suppression effects twice as fast.
Unrelated to your stamina penalty/regain.
Here's the movement penalty with sway (I will note that there is a bit of a horizontal penalty as well, but that's hard to measure when you're actually moving).
I measured the top and bottom of the sway movement. Red = stationary, blue = while strafing back and forth.
This is a range that most would consider a medium range firefight. The penalty is negligible. If you were actually trying to aim at a target you probably wouldn't even notice it. Of course, I've always maintained the rifle sway is a joke in this game compared to AA2 (AA 1.x was even more harsh, I've tested).
You joined the world's greatest army to become a graphic artist? Outstanding!
"Currently you have no penalties for movement"
So thought i'd say something.
Turning plus movement is twice as impactful.
I don't really mind the small 8 form sway. you should be pretty accurate slowly approaching a target. Enough games have this differently and i dont care how hard/soft sway is mostly.
"Currently you have no penalties for movement"
So thought i'd say something.
Turning plus movement is twice as impactful.
I don't really mind the small 8 form sway. you should be pretty accurate slowly approaching a target. Enough games have this differently and i dont care how hard/soft sway is mostly.
Here's another idea... How about a non-tactical fast movement while ADS? Bumps up the sway considerably, but you can move faster while aiming down sights? Perfect for CQB, maybe not so good for long range. Another instance where the player can choose that trade-off.
You joined the world's greatest army to become a graphic artist? Outstanding!
The game is incredibly easy. There is a lot of room to increase the skill ceiling. Yes, a skilled player will perform better in any game unless it's totally RNG, but this game makes it way too easy for any random to get kills.
I personally think the easiest way to get kills is to go up against unskilled opponents, and the only way for 'randoms' to get kills is if their target isn't thinking too clearly about getting shot. So, if someone doesn't understand weapon parameters or corner geometry, sure.
In what way specifically do you think it's easy that can't be defended against?
______
This has been a test of the emergency flame-fest system. Please do not adjust your set.
Comments
Your credibility is largely gone off the bat when you dismiss people trying to better the game as "whiners." These aren't people trying to make the game easier because it's too hard for them. These are some of the best players in the game making good suggestions.
I saw exactly where the flash went. That's why I moved and turned away from it. You obviously know that. Quit being a condescending [TOS Violation]. It was a terrible flash if the intent was to blind me, but, like I said, if the goal was to clear that side of the room, it was good. It should not have blinded me. It would have been easy for the person to cook it so it went off in my line of sight or to blow it up on top of me like the grenade that followed. The person didn't even come close to that, but they were rewarded as if they did.
Again, why do you want to promote low/no-skill "features" such as flashes and grenades in their current state? Wouldn't it be a good thing to reward people for throwing good flashes and grenades instead of making it so anyone can do it despite a terrible throw or zero thought put in? Again, this isn't about making the game easier for me. I get a ton of grenade kills. It's about making it harder and more rewarding for everyone.
Really? Pulling up the map is the game punishing you? Examples of the game punishing you are things like suppression/aim punch, increased recoil with low HP and sway; not reloading (if you couldn't still sprint around while reloading, you might have a point). As far as leaning specifically, if the devs didn't think there was a problem, they wouldn't have slowed lean speed to begin with. We're simply suggesting that didn't do enough to fix the problem.
Players should primarily be playing against other players. They shouldn't have to fight the game itself through silly "features" like suppression. There's just no need for it. It can't be learned. It's not skillful in any way. If you get hit with aim punch, at least you can correct from that, and a player with faster reflexes will stand a better chance. Whiplash's suggestion for a sort of tunnel vision would be better. It wouldn't make it impossible for players to return fire, but it would still offer the player a choice of fight and risk being shot by an enemy outside his vision or flee.
That real life thing was a quick sidenote to my post. As I wrote in the same lines: I understand your points regarding suppression. I'm not a real fan of it either, I was just giving my 50 cents, why suppression in gunfights is not as big of a deal as some think it is. Once again, just an opinion, but I tried to back it up with something. I believe that suppression isn't really a reward to a miss, compared to what you could do with a hit.
Sorry, I don't really understand. Which argument? I'm saying that in close quarters double vision / screen shake is not really limiting your ability to kill someone. You just have to forget that your gun is visually moving left and right, concentrate on the center, see how the shaking gun moves compared to the also shaking target and you are good to go. Don't try to fight screenshake, because it is only visual, it won't actually move your gun. Well, at least I feel like I'm not limited by screenshake most of the time. If somebody is close enough to throw a nade at me, I feel like I can retaliate effectively despite the screenshake.
This has been a test of the emergency flame-fest system. Please do not adjust your set.
All I'm doing is responding to his posts. If he wants to be deliberately condescending to me without cause, I'll go ahead and call him out on it.
I'm not calling those who are trying to better the game as "whiners" per se, just those whose suggestions only pertain to self-interest and gain instead of what's best for the game and its community as a whole. Aim-punch, Suppression, Lean, Grenades, Flashes -- all of these things have contributed to this game's survival. People need to grow-up and stop wailing for the devs to remove the critical components of the game that they don't like.
It's no different from a bunch of kids who don't like vegetables. If AA:PG were a deluxe hamburger, y'all would remove all the lettuce, tomato, pickles, onions, ect, until all that's left is a dry patty between two slices of bread -- and that's just basic and dull. If you're having trouble accepting AA:PG for what it is - there are other fish in the sea, but there's no reason to downgrade the game for the rest of us.
Fyi, the game rewards good flashes and grenades b/c they're effective in blinding and killing their their target respectively. Poor flashes and grenades won't accomplish that.
It's amazing how the game itself brings in features such as suppression and aim-punch to lessen point-and-click engagements and provide something which players can use to their advantage (if they're advanced enough). Instead of seeking the destruction of this feature, might I suggest actually trying to learn a way to deal with it as many already have?
Condescending [TOS Violation] eh? If you think I'm feeling a sense of superiority in my responses I am -- I've no reason to feel inferior (or on the same-level) to someone who's obviously enveloped in a self-created sphere of arrogance and intolerance.
Be considerate of others; Show netiquette; and I won't feel a need to retaliate every time you rudely confront me "without cause"
I think the reality is that those "features" and others like it have contributed to the demise of the game. Not the lean so much. I think lean is a good feature overall, but there's room for improvement.
What you don't seem to get is that these changes are being proposed to better the game for everyone. It's not me trying to make it easier for me. The changes I've proposed would largely make it harder for me and everyone else.
Yes, the game rewards good flashes and grenades. The problem is that it rewards a lot of bad ones as well. I've posted several on this forum including the one in this thread, which is, despite your claims, a terrible flash if the goal is to blind me. As I've said, it's a good area denial flash he can use to push up, but it's laughable that it blinded me. I had all day to see it and react to it. You know that. That's why I accurately described your post as condescending. You're still doing it, by the way.
Perhaps instead of dismissing the people who have been around this franchise for years, including time as top competitive players, as "whiners" or picky children, perhaps you should consider that we know what we're talking about. What's been done in AAPG has not worked. We're making good suggestions that will improve the game as a whole, making it more competitive and skill-based which gives people more to play for.
You still haven't told me why you're against increasing the skill ceiling of grenades and flashes. The proposed changes would increase the skill required. That is an objective fact. Why do you want to stick with a low-skill system?
Why do you think these proposals are self-serving and not for the betterment of the game as a whole?
Why are you seemingly opposed to change because it's change? You seem to dismiss solid proposals solely on the basis that it's different from the way things are now.
I'm calling you out because you're stating your opinion without offering anything substantive to support it. That's not being rude.
It most certainly is you trying to make the game easier for yourself. That's why you posted the clip of you getting flashed (by a well-thrown flash), and calling it "terrible" and saying that it shouldn't have flashed you. I'm sure if the guy's good flash had no effect, you'd be happy - but b/c you got flashed you feel the need to rant about it on the forums and severely limit the effectiveness of flashes (along with other grenades). It's so childish. You want flashes to be harder to use so you rarely get flashed, not b/c they'll make the game better.
I'm not against increasing the skill ceiling of grenades and flashes at all -- provided there's a reason for it. This is something you've failed to show. Provide an actual reason (a logical one), an actual need for an increase in the "skill ceiling", and (seeing as how I only want the game to improve) I will have no choice but to agree.
I'm not opposed to change, just change for the sake-of-change; unnecessary change. What this game needs is better match-making, more content, and in-game leaderboards. Not nerfs on throwables; penalties on solid features; or removal of special-features. I'm surprised the former weren't in the OP
The part you're missing is that if the goal was to blind me, it wasn't well thrown at all. I watched it come in and both moved and turned away from it with plenty of time. It was horrible if blinding me was the goal. He could have easily cooked it and had it go off in my line of sight. Again, if his goal was to clear that side of the room so he could adjust his own position, accomplish a revive, etc, it was a good flash, but I don't need to be blind for that goal to be accomplished, and I shouldn't have been blinded by that flash. Keep in mind this works both ways. I'm sure I've blinded people with bad flashes myself. I know I've benefited from the extreme grenade radius. These changes would make it harder for me the same as anyone else. These changes would make the game better. That doesn't fit your narrative, so you opt for calling me childish while you're the one with your fingers in your ears, ignorantly proclaiming everything to be "fine."
You're clearly against raising the skill ceiling. Raising the skill ceiling is a reason in itself to make these changes. Make skill matter more. Give players more to work towards. Grenades and flashes can be cooked. You can place them EXACTLY where you want to, so why should the game reward lazy or unskilled nade throws? This feigned open-mindedness is pretty sad.
I don't disagree that there are other things the game needs, but things like better match-making, more content and in-game leaderboards don't mean much if the game itself isn't up-to-par and attracting and retaining players. Build the game first, then work on extra content.
Back in the old days before DLC.. digital distribution etc.. game developers got one chance to release a game without bugs.. with all its intended content in one foul swoop.. gamers today are suffering the consequences of developers having sooo many options when they release games. They literally get away with supplying unfinished.. frankly often poor products that gamers have to suffer with for months even years. Yes there are positives to early access.. beta tests.. experimental releases allowing feedback to shape a game to change it for the better.. I know.. but honestly I'd go back 10 years in a heartbeat. Are devs taking advantage of today's methodry when they are pushing out unfinished messes? Are they even caring as much since they know they can get away with it?
AA is free .. so does that excuse it from being not perfect? Has anyone even experienced a perfect game? doubtful. Asking for game changing changes to 5+ year old games is pointless not to [TOS Violation] on anyone's cornflakes. Ya feel me?
Yes, you saw the flash but you failed to protect yourself from the flash b/c: Your cover was inadequate as the flash still had a LOS (it was behind the cover position). By saying you had "plenty of time" to take avoid the flash you indirectly imply that you were only flashed b/c you were inept in your ability to take the necessary steps to prevent being flashed.
Bad flashes and grenades only prove effective when the target his/herself is clumsy or unaware of what's going on around them. The only way to counter ignorance is with knowledge. It's not that hard to learn how to properly avoid flashes and grenades -- especially when you have "plenty of time" to avoid them. The only time the game ever rewards "lazy or unskilled nade throws" is when they're being thrown at "lazy or unskilled" people.
This game is meant to be casual and fun for all -- not hardcore. The ceiling is high enough as is, anymore and you'll make it unsatisfactory for the average player. A skilled player will perform better than an average or below basic player -- that's true in this game.
This has been a test of the emergency flame-fest system. Please do not adjust your set.
I moved and turned away from it. That's all it should take. Anything else is just rewarding bad play. Period. Again, he could have cooked it and had it go off in my line of sight. Again, it was a good flash for area denial. It was not a good flash for blinding me. Obviously it works in the game in its current state, but that's what we're proposing be fixed. It's way too easy as it currently is.
This is one of the stupidest things I've read on here. The person who gets hit by a frag that goes off 12 meters away is "lazy or unskilled"? You know how far away that is? The grenade likely wasn't even thrown at him. Just lobbing an uncooked flash in behind someone is lazy and is undeserving of the reward the game currently provides. Simply cook the flash and put it on or right in front of the enemy. Then he should be blind.
The game is incredibly easy. There is a lot of room to increase the skill ceiling. Yes, a skilled player will perform better in any game unless it's totally RNG, but this game makes it way too easy for any random to get kills.
You still have yet to really articulate a reason why you're opposed to taking a low-skill mechanic and make it harder. You're fighting change because it's change, not because of anything having to do with what the change is. You're dismissing good suggestions from players who have been around long enough and have the experience playing competitively to fully understand them, and you're not even giving them a chance. Frankly, the people on the opposing side of your argument, which really isn't even an argument, are far more qualified to judge the game, having been around it forever and having seen its progression.
I'm not going to bother getting into the arguments, I just wanted to talk about this point. That question is a major one that should be answered. Does the development team want a casual or competitive game? If they want a competitive game then certain changes need to be made to accommodate for that. If they want a casual game, maybe you're right. I can tell you that the Army is investing heavily in eSports. Now that can obviously mean more highly visible/popular eSports games such as Counter-Strike, however, that can also mean their own game as well. Additionally when AAPG first came out there was a certain Dev who wanted to push this game competitively, but unfortunately that didn't work out.
In terms of the skill ceiling. I think you confuse ceiling with natural skill gaps. An FPS game will have a natural skill gap between players who have better aim vs. those who don't. Players who play tactically better vs. those who don't. However, a skill ceiling can't be considered high if a player who has never played the game can play for the first time and immediately or extremely quickly come to dominate. That's a low skill ceiling game. Same goes for if a player gets to that point and the only thing that separates them from higher end players is reflexes.
If you want to see what skill ceiling is about, check out counter-strike from an FPS perspective. If you want to see it from another perspective check out Dota 2. Dota 2 can take hundreds of hours just to become decent. That's an extremely high skill ceiling. In CS an above average FPS player can become decent somewhat quickly, but to master the game takes a lot of time. High skill ceiling.
Movement penalties are ingame.
Moving
Moving and turning
"Near a teammate you had better accuracy"
AAPG: In 5.5 metre range of an ally you"ll recover from suppression effects twice as fast.
Unrelated to your stamina penalty/regain.
Here's the movement penalty with sway (I will note that there is a bit of a horizontal penalty as well, but that's hard to measure when you're actually moving).
I measured the top and bottom of the sway movement. Red = stationary, blue = while strafing back and forth.
This is a range that most would consider a medium range firefight. The penalty is negligible. If you were actually trying to aim at a target you probably wouldn't even notice it. Of course, I've always maintained the rifle sway is a joke in this game compared to AA2 (AA 1.x was even more harsh, I've tested).
So thought i'd say something.
Turning plus movement is twice as impactful.
I don't really mind the small 8 form sway. you should be pretty accurate slowly approaching a target. Enough games have this differently and i dont care how hard/soft sway is mostly.
Here's another idea... How about a non-tactical fast movement while ADS? Bumps up the sway considerably, but you can move faster while aiming down sights? Perfect for CQB, maybe not so good for long range. Another instance where the player can choose that trade-off.
I personally think the easiest way to get kills is to go up against unskilled opponents, and the only way for 'randoms' to get kills is if their target isn't thinking too clearly about getting shot. So, if someone doesn't understand weapon parameters or corner geometry, sure.
In what way specifically do you think it's easy that can't be defended against?
This has been a test of the emergency flame-fest system. Please do not adjust your set.