Bad Company 2

Since 5361 Days

Posted by Slabs

This is seriously getting stupid.

EA's master servers, the proliferation of sniping retards and now Punkbuster are all conspiring to kill this game dead.

The sniper tards are horrible.

In reply to

Steam: Doomsong83
Xfire: doomsong83

Since 6880 Days

I don't think the snipers are all that bad

In reply to

Since 5361 Days

Posted by Tinks

I don't think the snipers are all that bad

It is in Rush when they aren't pushing the objective.

In reply to

Steam: Doomsong83
Xfire: doomsong83

Viginti_Tres

Since 6453 Days

Don't play Rush, it's awful with the amount of noobs still in the game.

In reply to

Since 6951 Days

Posted by Slabs

This is seriously getting stupid.

EA's master servers, the proliferation of sniping retards and now Punkbuster are all conspiring to kill this game dead.

It's pretty sad. It's seriously the worst launch I've encountered.. ever? I hope they can fix it before tarnishing their image, sales, or viable long-term playability.

Posted by Tinks

I don't think the snipers are all that bad

90% of Recon players in this game are newbie morons. We've all seen countless snipers hanging around their spawn on attack in Rush, or sitting next to an armed crate on defense doing nothing.

They are all that bad.

Posted by Viginti_Tres

Don't play Rush, it's awful with the amount of noobs still in the game.

On the contrary, Rush is the best mode to play right now if you want to get points and unlock gear. Conquest is broken in its current form. They need to increase the ticket count dramatically. I played a game of Rush this morning where I scored over 7500 combat points, and earned 14k XP after medals without earning any of the 5k badges. It was pretty terrific, it got my my AN94 and my M416.

The AN94 is sooooo badass.

In reply to

[quote=Slabs]This is seriously getting stupid.

EA's master servers, the proliferation of sniping retards and now Punkbuster are all conspiring to kill this game dead.[/quote]

It's pretty sad. It's seriously the worst launch I've encountered.. ever? I hope they can fix it before tarnishing their image, sales, or viable long-term playability.

[quote=Tinks]I don't think the snipers are all that bad[/quote]

90% of Recon players in this game are newbie morons. We've all seen countless snipers hanging around their spawn on attack in Rush, or sitting next to an armed crate on defense doing [i]nothing[/i].

They are all that bad.

[quote=Viginti_Tres]Don't play Rush, it's awful with the amount of noobs still in the game.[/quote]

On the contrary, Rush is the best mode to play right now if you want to get points and unlock gear. Conquest is broken in its current form. They need to increase the ticket count dramatically. I played a game of Rush this morning where I scored over 7500 combat points, and earned 14k XP after medals [i]without[/i] earning any of the 5k badges. It was pretty terrific, it got my my AN94 [i]and[/i] my M416.

The AN94 is sooooo badass.

Slabs

Since 6981 Days

I was just playing on a Swedish server where the game had bugged and nobody could use anything but the starting weapons from each class. It was quite a refreshing match and makes me think that servers with forced loadouts could definitely work.

In reply to

Since 6951 Days

DICE associate producer Barrie Tingle has revealed that at the moment, during the week of the game's retail release, more people are playing the PC version of the game than both the 360 and PS3 editions combined.

http://kotaku.com/5487038/battlefield-bad-company-...

Woot! They're downplaying the size of the MW2 PC community big time though. Sure, it's pretty dead in terms of hardcore played (note: not the mode), but I'm positive there are still tons of people playing it on PC. There are still 100,000+ people playing it daily according to Valve's own stats. On Xfire, 38,000 people are still playing it daily, and while that's trumped by 44k who played BC2 on Xfire yesterday, it's still not even in the realm of COD4 numbers. It is impossible to tell how many people are actually playing the PC version of BC2 without better sources of information, but I seriously doubt it blows MW2's "tiny" PC community away.

Still, nice numbers and a nice implication that the PC version is doing well! Now if the game only worked properly.

Posted by Slabs

I was just playing on a Swedish server where the game had bugged and nobody could use anything but the starting weapons from each class. It was quite a refreshing match and makes me think that servers with forced loadouts could definitely work.

I'm gonna go out on a limb here and say: of course they would. I hope when the competition rules for this game are finally formed that there are serious restrictions put on customization. It's far from my favorite part of the game.

In reply to

[quote]DICE associate producer Barrie Tingle has revealed that at the moment, during the week of the game's retail release, more people are playing the PC version of the game than both the 360 and PS3 editions combined.[/quote]

http://kotaku.com/5487038/battlefield-bad-company-2-players-prefer-pc-to-console

Woot! They're downplaying the size of the MW2 PC community big time though. Sure, it's pretty dead in terms of hardcore played (note: not the mode), but I'm positive there are still tons of people playing it on PC. There are still 100,000+ people playing it daily according to Valve's own stats. On Xfire, 38,000 people are still playing it daily, and while that's trumped by 44k who played BC2 on Xfire yesterday, it's still not even in the realm of COD4 numbers. It is impossible to tell how many people are actually playing the PC version of BC2 without better sources of information, but I seriously doubt it blows MW2's "tiny" PC community away.

Still, nice numbers and a nice implication that the PC version is doing well! Now if the game only worked properly.

[quote=Slabs]I was just playing on a Swedish server where the game had bugged and nobody could use anything but the starting weapons from each class. It was quite a refreshing match and makes me think that servers with forced loadouts could definitely work.[/quote]

I'm gonna go out on a limb here and say: of course they would. I hope when the competition rules for this game are finally formed that there are serious restrictions put on customization. It's far from my favorite part of the game.

Since 6951 Days

AN94 pwnage. Well, mostly S20K pwnage to be honest, but the AN94 is still amazing.

In reply to

Since 6880 Days

A lot of people are playing sniper on Rush probably just to level up though? But yes it can be frustrating. I find Rush to be my favorite mode personally. Conquest is second. I hate the 4 man team game type though because of Recon. That class should just not be in that mode.

In reply to

Slabs

Since 6981 Days

I had a good idea for a three panel comic while I was attempting to play earlier.

A sniper spotting a completely unguarded M-COM box and thinking "I'll be useful for once!", arming the explosives on it, then realising he has just blown up the EA master server!

In reply to

Since 6951 Days

I don't think you need explosives to bring down EA's servers.

In reply to

Since 5361 Days

Posted by Tinks

A lot of people are playing sniper on Rush probably just to level up though? But yes it can be frustrating. I find Rush to be my favorite mode personally. Conquest is second. I hate the 4 man team game type though because of Recon. That class should just not be in that mode.

Rush is my favorite mode as well. I actually thought I would hate the 4 man but I played it for about an hour yesterday and had quite a bit of fun with it.

In reply to

Steam: Doomsong83
Xfire: doomsong83

Since 6880 Days

I guess it depends who you play with maybe, or the map. Recon is a real pain in the ass. They put a tank in most of the maps for the 4 man mode but the tanks are so weak you can't really disrupt camping all that much.

In reply to

Since 6951 Days

Screw camping. Recon + S20K + motion sensors ftw. It's like having your own little wall hack.

In reply to

Since 5361 Days

Posted by GriftGFX

Screw camping. Recon + S20K + motion sensors ftw. It's like having your own little wall hack.

WTF h4x?!

In reply to

Steam: Doomsong83
Xfire: doomsong83

scoobs0688

Since 5585 Days

i went 69-19 with the 50 cal sniper rifle last night lol :) (On PC btw) game is nuts!

In reply to

Currently playing: Uncharted 2, CoDMW2 (PS3), Torchlight (PC)

Nietzsche

Since 6304 Days

Posted by GriftGFX

Screw camping. Recon + S20K + motion sensors ftw. It's like having your own little wall hack.

See I just find those kinds of kills too cheap, not very rewarding IMO. I feel a lot better charging crates than I do getting a ton of kills. I think that is why I get so pissed playing this game. Everyone is still playing in a way that is devoted to unlocking stuff. Once everyone has everything unlocked and people actually rush the objectives like they should it might be a lot better.

This game is very rare in how much it can swing from being a really fun experience to a really annoying pile of crap depending on who is on your team and how they play. The amount of snipers on attack mode in rush is a very good example though.

I also see a lot of people run around the entire map to get behind the other team for cheap kills, even if it's doing nothing to help defend the objective or help the team. Getting a lot of kills doesn't mean shit if the other team still blows up the crates. I see so many players with a ton of points from kills but they don't do shit to rush the objective or defend it.

If this game only gave the player 5 points per kill and much more for defense kills/objectives etc the game would be MUCH MUCH better. A medic doing his job should be worth far more points than a medic shooting another player nowhere near the objective.

I'm starting to get a good list on my friends list who play the game proper, it really does make a world of difference.

In reply to

[quote=GriftGFX]Screw camping. Recon + S20K + motion sensors ftw. It's like having your own little wall hack.[/quote]

See I just find those kinds of kills too cheap, not very rewarding IMO. I feel a lot better charging crates than I do getting a ton of kills. I think that is why I get so pissed playing this game. Everyone is still playing in a way that is devoted to unlocking stuff. Once everyone has everything unlocked and people actually rush the objectives like they should it might be a lot better.

This game is very rare in how much it can swing from being a really fun experience to a really annoying pile of crap depending on who is on your team and how they play. The amount of snipers on attack mode in rush is a very good example though.

I also see a lot of people run around the entire map to get behind the other team for cheap kills, even if it's doing nothing to help defend the objective or help the team. Getting a lot of kills doesn't mean shit if the other team still blows up the crates. I see so many players with a ton of points from kills but they don't do shit to rush the objective or defend it.

If this game only gave the player 5 points per kill and much more for defense kills/objectives etc the game would be MUCH MUCH better. A medic doing his job should be worth far more points than a medic shooting another player nowhere near the objective.

I'm starting to get a good list on my friends list who play the game proper, it really does make a world of difference.

Since 6951 Days

I have to disagree. You get plenty of points for assist and team oriented tasks. I don't like all the complaints I see (mostly on NeoGAF) claiming that KDR doesn't matter. It does. Now that's not to say that I believe that it should be your primary focus, but if you're consistently coming in with a ration below 1:1, you're failing in combat, and combat is still a huge part of this game. Plus, the configuration you're complaining about in my quote is great for rushing objectives. If you have the S20K (autoshotty) and motion sensors, you'll clean up in close quarters around objectives. I don't use it myself, but it is remarkable. Uruk and I were running around the other day and he had the shotty and motion sensors and we were unstoppable when taking (or defending) objectives.

Snipers (or anyone else) who simply ignore the objectives are annoying though. No arguments there.

In reply to

Viginti_Tres

Since 6453 Days

Posted by Nietzsche

If this game only gave the player 5 points per kill and much more for defense kills/objectives etc the game would be MUCH MUCH better. A medic doing his job should be worth far more points than a medic shooting another player nowhere near the objective.

That's using a crutch for bad gameplay design, no one would admit to that. Imo it works fine the way it is, you get tons of points for revives and heals, the Engineer class is the same. If you're not a killing machine like Grift you get more points for support than for kills as long as you deliberately fulfil your role.

I'm loving the M60, the kick of the gun helps me getting headshots, in some games half of my kills are headshots. Also the damage doesn't seem to drop over range, the huge clip makes sure I can kill an entire squad at almost any distance without reloading. Got shot by a few M60s today and realised again just how fast it can drop you.

In reply to

Since 6880 Days

I don't think it's anything to do with unlocking items or weapons. Going off of Bad Company 1, there are just a ton of people who are never going to help your cause in an objective based MP game. Sometimes you get a team of noobs as your allies or you get a team of noobs as your enemies. Sucks but that is how it goes sometimes.

I do have to say, playing these maps on 360, I do wonder how they fair with higher player counts. Especially the Panama level. I think that one may be a bit too big for the 360 max player count.

In reply to

Nietzsche

Since 6304 Days

Posted by GriftGFX

I have to disagree. You get plenty of points for assist and team oriented tasks. I don't like all the complaints I see (mostly on NeoGAF) claiming that KDR doesn't matter. It does. Now that's not to say that I believe that it should be your primary focus, but if you're consistently coming in with a ration below 1:1, you're failing in combat, and combat is still a huge part of this game. Plus, the configuration you're complaining about in my quote is great for rushing objectives. If you have the S20K (autoshotty) and motion sensors, you'll clean up in close quarters around objectives. I don't use it myself, but it is remarkable. Uruk and I were running around the other day and he had the shotty and motion sensors and we were unstoppable when taking (or defending) objectives.

Snipers (or anyone else) who simply ignore the objectives are annoying though. No arguments there.

As long as someone uses that to actually rush the objective, then yes that is a great setup. As for the KDR, of course it's a part of the game, I was talking about the people who worry about their KDR much much more than if their team wins the game. I'll see people camping out all over trying to shoot at people rushing to attack/defend the objective but never put their own ass on the line as long as they can sit back and rack up the easy kills.

I'm confused as to why people are saying the scoring is fine the way it is when all I see all over the net is people griping about how often they are stuck on a team that doesn't play to win. I guess I'm missing something... I just thought a more proper incentive would improve team play frequency. I guess I'm one of the few who is more into the team play aspect of the game.

In reply to

[quote=GriftGFX]I have to disagree. You get plenty of points for assist and team oriented tasks. I don't like all the complaints I see (mostly on NeoGAF) claiming that KDR doesn't matter. It does. Now that's not to say that I believe that it should be your primary focus, but if you're consistently coming in with a ration below 1:1, you're failing in combat, and combat is still a huge part of this game. Plus, the configuration you're complaining about in my quote is [i]great[/i] for rushing objectives. If you have the S20K (autoshotty) and motion sensors, you'll clean up in close quarters around objectives. I don't use it myself, but it is remarkable. Uruk and I were running around the other day and he had the shotty and motion sensors and we were unstoppable when taking (or defending) objectives.

Snipers (or anyone else) who simply ignore the objectives are annoying though. No arguments there.[/quote]

As long as someone uses that to actually rush the objective, then yes that is a great setup. As for the KDR, of course it's a part of the game, I was talking about the people who worry about their KDR much much more than if their team wins the game. I'll see people camping out all over trying to shoot at people rushing to attack/defend the objective but never put their own ass on the line as long as they can sit back and rack up the easy kills.

I'm confused as to why people are saying the scoring is fine the way it is when all I see all over the net is people griping about how often they are stuck on a team that doesn't play to win. I guess I'm missing something... I just thought a more proper incentive would improve team play frequency. I guess I'm one of the few who is more into the team play aspect of the game.

Since 6951 Days

Posted by Nietzsche

As long as someone uses that to actually rush the objective, then yes that is a great setup. As for the KDR, of course it's a part of the game, I was talking about the people who worry about their KDR much much more than if their team wins the game. I'll see people camping out all over trying to shoot at people rushing to attack/defend the objective but never put their own ass on the line as long as they can sit back and rack up the easy kills.

I'm confused as to why people are saying the scoring is fine the way it is when all I see all over the net is people griping about how often they are stuck on a team that doesn't play to win. I guess I'm missing something... I just thought a more proper incentive would improve team play frequency. I guess I'm one of the few who is more into the team play aspect of the game.

But the thing is, playing to win will yield great scores. You can't fix stupid. Some people are just want to camp in a corner, and you can't make those kills worthless because killing in combat is still important.

I'm only disagreeing because there's plenty of scoring for assists and objective oriented tasks already. Most of most peoples points probably don't even come from combat. I've seen people say that there should be more incentive to destroy vehicles too, but that's also ridiculous. You already get 400+ points for killing a full tank! If you really need more incentive to arm the crates, then perhaps that should be worth more in terms of scoring, but I still don't think it's that important. When it comes right down to it, only one person is going to get those points anyway and arming crates and defending them until they blow is usually a team effort.

I think there's plenty of incentive for people to play the game correctly, but some people just won't anyway.

In reply to

[quote=Nietzsche]

As long as someone uses that to actually rush the objective, then yes that is a great setup. As for the KDR, of course it's a part of the game, I was talking about the people who worry about their KDR much much more than if their team wins the game. I'll see people camping out all over trying to shoot at people rushing to attack/defend the objective but never put their own ass on the line as long as they can sit back and rack up the easy kills.

I'm confused as to why people are saying the scoring is fine the way it is when all I see all over the net is people griping about how often they are stuck on a team that doesn't play to win. I guess I'm missing something... I just thought a more proper incentive would improve team play frequency. I guess I'm one of the few who is more into the team play aspect of the game.[/quote]

But the thing is, playing to win [i]will yield great scores.[/i] You can't fix stupid. Some people are just want to camp in a corner, and you can't make those kills worthless because killing in combat is still important.

I'm only disagreeing because there's plenty of scoring for assists and objective oriented tasks already. Most of most peoples points probably don't even come from combat. I've seen people say that there should be more incentive to destroy vehicles too, but that's also ridiculous. You already get 400+ points for killing a full tank! If you really need more incentive to arm the crates, then perhaps that should be worth more in terms of scoring, but I still don't think it's that important. When it comes right down to it, only one person is going to get those points anyway and arming crates and defending them until they blow is usually a team effort.

I think there's plenty of incentive for people to play the game correctly, but some people just won't anyway.

Since 6880 Days

Yeah I think team based games can only go so far. Gears of War does it really well because it's small and sudden death just about every time (also basically forced). But in something as open as BF, people are going to ignore the team based function if they can.

In reply to