snipers ruining game

Comments

  • WetFishDB
    2329 postsMember, Battlefield 4, Battlefield, Battlefield 1, Battlefield V Member
    GerocK- said:
    WetFishDB said:
    GerocK- said:
    GerocK- said:
    GerocK- said:
    GerocK- said:
    GerocK- said:
    opsis_1 said:
    Been playing quite a bit for the last two months and see no issue with snipers. The more snipers the less cappers.
    You don't see an issue with less players not PTFO because they'd rather be pitching a tent in the back forty and racking up easy kills?
    I always believe the amount of useless players are somewhat equal on both teams. Also I have never seen a camping sniper with more than 15 kills in a game. It still sucks they exist, but because they exist in both teams I believe games are still "even".
    In my experience this is rarely the case. People tend to "go sniper" when their side starts losing and CQC feels tough, which then makes it worse and causes a potential momentary imbalance to become unrecoverable.  Then the team is definitely losing and finding CQC hard and even more people go sniper.  An imbalance becomes a landslide.

    Games where there are too many snipers on both sides do happen, though, but are still very painful.  Neither side can PTFO properly and the match is slow and irritating.

    Too many snipers is bad no matter why.

    The part about switching to sniper when your side is losing is true, I didn't think about that one.
    But I didn't just mean snipers as useless players. There are plenty of players who play other classes who are just as useless as a hilltop sniper, but they don't draw as much negative attention to themselves.

    Just calling out snipers as useless players based on how many are on your team doesn't give a proper representation. There are plenty of snipers who PTFO properly.

    Just look at the scoreboard at the end of a game and look at the bottom 10-15 players of each team. They exist of all 4 classes and both teams will have equal scores.
    There are players who camp and suck no matter the class, yes, but there's only one loadout that is *designed* to camp and makes it hard to PTFO and that's the sniper. It is what bad players choose when trying to actually win a match feels too tough.

    The reason they are singled out is because 95% of them *are* sucking the life out of a match.  This is not the case for any other sub-class (sniper, not scout/recon).

    There are good snipers. They are very rare. Sorry to those good snipers, but you guys don't make it worthwhile. Even with good snipers, more than a few is too many. A team just doesn't need that much overwatch and can't handle the lack of PTFO power.

    The sniper should be an elite kit or a limited spawn like cavalry.

    I'm a bit confused whether or not you're talking about everyone who chooses Sniper/Scout class or if you solely mean people who prone at the back of the map with a Sniper Rifle?

    But I am convinced rounds are won by the top 5 or sometimes top 10 players of a team. Not lost by the players on the bottom of the scoreboard.
    Players always manage to score only 2k-5k points in a full round of Conquest, I don't really think it matters what class they played or where they were on the map.

    The player who prones at the back of the map with a sniper rifle is obviously the most useless player in the team. But the player who I despise even more is the mouthy Medic on the middle of the scoreboard with 5 kills and 17 deaths who justifies his low score by saying "I'm Medic" and then he's not even the top reviver or healer of the game.


    It's sniper that's the problem. The rifles and the behaviour they encourage. Not scout, though scout is a difficult class to PTFO with. I love playing scout (SMLE Carbine and flares) but don't get to do it often, because it is so rarely actually needed and other classes are almost always a better choice if you want to win the match.

    As far the top 5 getting the win? Yes, kinda, but their job is *much* harder if a lot of their team is sniping. If those noobs were on the objectives they at least are providing targets for the enemy. If they are sniping, the enemy are all focused on those on the objectives. You will be getting much more enemy fire if your team is sniping.

    I'd rather have that medic. At least he knows he should be helping the team and he took at least 17 bullets that might, potentially, have been mine.

    Those are valid arguments and I agree with them. But I feel it's more theoretical / hypothetical which only prove true in very close games.
    The majority of games end with a difference of at least 200 points. I don't believe 1-3 camping snipers (who are bad at the game) will make up for that if they choose to be cannonfodder inside a flag zone instead of camping outside.
    -
    Suez is the prime example where people switch to sniping over time. But that happens when one team is steamrolling the other. Even the winning team switches to sniping.
    So yes, turning the game around is impossible after too many people switch to sniping, but chances of turning it around were already very small to begin with.
    -
    About PTFO snipers: I think the flare gun is by far the best gadget to aid in capturing a flag. And a good sniper is perfect for defending a flag. I don't agree that any other class is almost always a better choice than Scout. I PTFO regardless of what class I play and I base my class on what's needed most for the team. My SPM on Scout is almost the same as Assault, which is the standard PTFO class on paper (1300 spm vs 1400 spm). 

    1 to 3 snipers? No. 5 to 8 snipers? Yeah. 8 to 12? Definitely.

    It's only when you get more than a few snipers that you're team's PTFO power is screwed. The thing is, this is not the case for any other class or sub-class. There is pretty much no such thing as having a problem because of too many medics, assault or support, no matter their chosen weapon. Even telescopic LMGs can still work well hip-fired. Sniper rifles are aweful at anything other then long range.

    Suez is a prime example, yes, but pretty sure that "going sniper" isn't just what happens *after* a team starts losing. It can also *cause* the team to start losing and can certainly take a slightly uneven match and totally screw it.
    And when the winning team switches to sniping, it's not as big a deal, because sniping isn't too bad when defending. If you're team is winning, then sniping isn't a disaster. If you need to take flags, it is.

    As for PTFO 'snipers' - there is no such thing hehe. PTFO Scout? Yeah. The point I try to make in these threads is "Scout" is not bad (harder than other classes to PTFO with, but useful - I am rank 50 several times over - it's great fun), but "Sniper" is almost impossible to PTFO with. Yes, Scout is useful for PTFO when there is a handful with iron sights or carbines so that they are actually within flare range of objectives. To try and do the same thing but pick a sniper rifle is to just gimp yourself. Sniper rifles are for sniping and sniping is not for PTFO. It's that simple.

    I think our main disagreement is that you say a bad Medic is still better than a bad Sniper, I don't really see a difference other than min-max tinkering on the edges.

    PTFO = PTFO, regardless of class or weapon. PTFO sniping definitely is a thing.
    A bad player who doesn't PTFO is useless for the team. The prime example is indeed the hilltop camping Sniper, but there's players on every class that stay outside capture zones and/or don't use their gadgets for the benefit of the team. 
    A "bad" player who does PTFO will have an impact on the game, but mostly by having his body inside a capture zone and aiding in the actual capture. I say "bad" for lack of a better word; but I mean that his aim is not good and/or he neglects to use his gadgets properly.
    A good/great player will greatly impact the game regardless of class or weapon. He is good at the game and can make any class/weapon work with great effect

    Because I feel that we've been talking about the "bad" player in this thread I don't think it matters which class they are. Other than being inside the capture zone, his actions are situational and will have minimal effect. Sometimes I'd rather have a revive, sometimes I'd rather have a flare gun being used.

    I think the nuance here is that ‘Sniper’ isn’t a class in BF1.  Scout is.  By calling someone a Sniper it is indirectly implying that they aren’t playing the objective, instead humping a hill somewhere.  In this context a PTFO Sniper is a bit of an oxymoron.  A PTFO Scout, is simply someone playing that class and playing objectives and thus not humping a hill.

    Personally, I would take a bad medic over a bad sniper every day of the week.  At least the bad medic might revive a good player occasionally, and acts as a potential distraction on an objective.  Even a bad Assault would act as a distraction on a flag allowing the better players to return fire.  And even a bad support who doesn’t give out ammo does the same, and has the added benefit of when they die allowing the better players to swap kit, put down ammo, and swap back - and then maybe revive them ;).  All of that contributes way more to objective play than someone who is just arbitrarily laying on their belly so far from an objective that any kill or death they get makes little to no difference.  That’s why having too many snipers is a bad thing.

    Yeah, this whole discussion became a bit messy due to different understandings of certain terms. To make my previous post more clear: I only see a difference between PTFO and Non-PTFO. So my PTFO Sniper is your PTFO Scout. I chose to say Sniper because @disposalist specifically said a Scout can only PTFO with iron sights or carbines, while I think you can still perfectly PTFO with an actual Sniper Rifle equipped.
    You can't say a Sniper is always worse than a different class just because the most useless player in the game happens to be a Sniper too.
    And I agree with your reasoning to prefer a bad player choosing a different class than Scout, but like I said I think that's really min-max influence and really situational. A revive and a resupply is always welcome, especially if they revive/resupply a good player. But personally I look at the minimap every two seconds, so for me a flare often does me more good than an occassional extra revive.
    Agree to the most part.  Even a not very good Scout, but one who PTFO’s with flares is still pretty useful, alongside not very good Supports/Medic/Assaults who play the objectives. 

    The real nuance is PTFO and non-PTFO, like you say.  It’s unfortunate that not very good Scouts tend to become ‘Snipers’ as they can’t cut it playing the objective.  Whereas not very good Support/Assault/Medics still tend to play objectives.  That’s why, IMHO, I’d rather not very good players generally picked a class other than Scout, and came and helped with the objective play.
  • GerocK-
    691 postsMember, Battlefield 3, Battlefield 4, Battlefield, Battlefield 1 Member
    WetFishDB said:
    GerocK- said:
    WetFishDB said:
    GerocK- said:
    GerocK- said:
    GerocK- said:
    GerocK- said:
    GerocK- said:
    opsis_1 said:
    Been playing quite a bit for the last two months and see no issue with snipers. The more snipers the less cappers.
    You don't see an issue with less players not PTFO because they'd rather be pitching a tent in the back forty and racking up easy kills?
    I always believe the amount of useless players are somewhat equal on both teams. Also I have never seen a camping sniper with more than 15 kills in a game. It still sucks they exist, but because they exist in both teams I believe games are still "even".
    In my experience this is rarely the case. People tend to "go sniper" when their side starts losing and CQC feels tough, which then makes it worse and causes a potential momentary imbalance to become unrecoverable.  Then the team is definitely losing and finding CQC hard and even more people go sniper.  An imbalance becomes a landslide.

    Games where there are too many snipers on both sides do happen, though, but are still very painful.  Neither side can PTFO properly and the match is slow and irritating.

    Too many snipers is bad no matter why.

    The part about switching to sniper when your side is losing is true, I didn't think about that one.
    But I didn't just mean snipers as useless players. There are plenty of players who play other classes who are just as useless as a hilltop sniper, but they don't draw as much negative attention to themselves.

    Just calling out snipers as useless players based on how many are on your team doesn't give a proper representation. There are plenty of snipers who PTFO properly.

    Just look at the scoreboard at the end of a game and look at the bottom 10-15 players of each team. They exist of all 4 classes and both teams will have equal scores.
    There are players who camp and suck no matter the class, yes, but there's only one loadout that is *designed* to camp and makes it hard to PTFO and that's the sniper. It is what bad players choose when trying to actually win a match feels too tough.

    The reason they are singled out is because 95% of them *are* sucking the life out of a match.  This is not the case for any other sub-class (sniper, not scout/recon).

    There are good snipers. They are very rare. Sorry to those good snipers, but you guys don't make it worthwhile. Even with good snipers, more than a few is too many. A team just doesn't need that much overwatch and can't handle the lack of PTFO power.

    The sniper should be an elite kit or a limited spawn like cavalry.

    I'm a bit confused whether or not you're talking about everyone who chooses Sniper/Scout class or if you solely mean people who prone at the back of the map with a Sniper Rifle?

    But I am convinced rounds are won by the top 5 or sometimes top 10 players of a team. Not lost by the players on the bottom of the scoreboard.
    Players always manage to score only 2k-5k points in a full round of Conquest, I don't really think it matters what class they played or where they were on the map.

    The player who prones at the back of the map with a sniper rifle is obviously the most useless player in the team. But the player who I despise even more is the mouthy Medic on the middle of the scoreboard with 5 kills and 17 deaths who justifies his low score by saying "I'm Medic" and then he's not even the top reviver or healer of the game.


    It's sniper that's the problem. The rifles and the behaviour they encourage. Not scout, though scout is a difficult class to PTFO with. I love playing scout (SMLE Carbine and flares) but don't get to do it often, because it is so rarely actually needed and other classes are almost always a better choice if you want to win the match.

    As far the top 5 getting the win? Yes, kinda, but their job is *much* harder if a lot of their team is sniping. If those noobs were on the objectives they at least are providing targets for the enemy. If they are sniping, the enemy are all focused on those on the objectives. You will be getting much more enemy fire if your team is sniping.

    I'd rather have that medic. At least he knows he should be helping the team and he took at least 17 bullets that might, potentially, have been mine.

    Those are valid arguments and I agree with them. But I feel it's more theoretical / hypothetical which only prove true in very close games.
    The majority of games end with a difference of at least 200 points. I don't believe 1-3 camping snipers (who are bad at the game) will make up for that if they choose to be cannonfodder inside a flag zone instead of camping outside.
    -
    Suez is the prime example where people switch to sniping over time. But that happens when one team is steamrolling the other. Even the winning team switches to sniping.
    So yes, turning the game around is impossible after too many people switch to sniping, but chances of turning it around were already very small to begin with.
    -
    About PTFO snipers: I think the flare gun is by far the best gadget to aid in capturing a flag. And a good sniper is perfect for defending a flag. I don't agree that any other class is almost always a better choice than Scout. I PTFO regardless of what class I play and I base my class on what's needed most for the team. My SPM on Scout is almost the same as Assault, which is the standard PTFO class on paper (1300 spm vs 1400 spm). 

    1 to 3 snipers? No. 5 to 8 snipers? Yeah. 8 to 12? Definitely.

    It's only when you get more than a few snipers that you're team's PTFO power is screwed. The thing is, this is not the case for any other class or sub-class. There is pretty much no such thing as having a problem because of too many medics, assault or support, no matter their chosen weapon. Even telescopic LMGs can still work well hip-fired. Sniper rifles are aweful at anything other then long range.

    Suez is a prime example, yes, but pretty sure that "going sniper" isn't just what happens *after* a team starts losing. It can also *cause* the team to start losing and can certainly take a slightly uneven match and totally screw it.
    And when the winning team switches to sniping, it's not as big a deal, because sniping isn't too bad when defending. If you're team is winning, then sniping isn't a disaster. If you need to take flags, it is.

    As for PTFO 'snipers' - there is no such thing hehe. PTFO Scout? Yeah. The point I try to make in these threads is "Scout" is not bad (harder than other classes to PTFO with, but useful - I am rank 50 several times over - it's great fun), but "Sniper" is almost impossible to PTFO with. Yes, Scout is useful for PTFO when there is a handful with iron sights or carbines so that they are actually within flare range of objectives. To try and do the same thing but pick a sniper rifle is to just gimp yourself. Sniper rifles are for sniping and sniping is not for PTFO. It's that simple.

    I think our main disagreement is that you say a bad Medic is still better than a bad Sniper, I don't really see a difference other than min-max tinkering on the edges.

    PTFO = PTFO, regardless of class or weapon. PTFO sniping definitely is a thing.
    A bad player who doesn't PTFO is useless for the team. The prime example is indeed the hilltop camping Sniper, but there's players on every class that stay outside capture zones and/or don't use their gadgets for the benefit of the team. 
    A "bad" player who does PTFO will have an impact on the game, but mostly by having his body inside a capture zone and aiding in the actual capture. I say "bad" for lack of a better word; but I mean that his aim is not good and/or he neglects to use his gadgets properly.
    A good/great player will greatly impact the game regardless of class or weapon. He is good at the game and can make any class/weapon work with great effect

    Because I feel that we've been talking about the "bad" player in this thread I don't think it matters which class they are. Other than being inside the capture zone, his actions are situational and will have minimal effect. Sometimes I'd rather have a revive, sometimes I'd rather have a flare gun being used.

    I think the nuance here is that ‘Sniper’ isn’t a class in BF1.  Scout is.  By calling someone a Sniper it is indirectly implying that they aren’t playing the objective, instead humping a hill somewhere.  In this context a PTFO Sniper is a bit of an oxymoron.  A PTFO Scout, is simply someone playing that class and playing objectives and thus not humping a hill.

    Personally, I would take a bad medic over a bad sniper every day of the week.  At least the bad medic might revive a good player occasionally, and acts as a potential distraction on an objective.  Even a bad Assault would act as a distraction on a flag allowing the better players to return fire.  And even a bad support who doesn’t give out ammo does the same, and has the added benefit of when they die allowing the better players to swap kit, put down ammo, and swap back - and then maybe revive them ;).  All of that contributes way more to objective play than someone who is just arbitrarily laying on their belly so far from an objective that any kill or death they get makes little to no difference.  That’s why having too many snipers is a bad thing.

    Yeah, this whole discussion became a bit messy due to different understandings of certain terms. To make my previous post more clear: I only see a difference between PTFO and Non-PTFO. So my PTFO Sniper is your PTFO Scout. I chose to say Sniper because @disposalist specifically said a Scout can only PTFO with iron sights or carbines, while I think you can still perfectly PTFO with an actual Sniper Rifle equipped.
    You can't say a Sniper is always worse than a different class just because the most useless player in the game happens to be a Sniper too.
    And I agree with your reasoning to prefer a bad player choosing a different class than Scout, but like I said I think that's really min-max influence and really situational. A revive and a resupply is always welcome, especially if they revive/resupply a good player. But personally I look at the minimap every two seconds, so for me a flare often does me more good than an occassional extra revive.
    Agree to the most part.  Even a not very good Scout, but one who PTFO’s with flares is still pretty useful, alongside not very good Supports/Medic/Assaults who play the objectives. 

    The real nuance is PTFO and non-PTFO, like you say.  It’s unfortunate that not very good Scouts tend to become ‘Snipers’ as they can’t cut it playing the objective.  Whereas not very good Support/Assault/Medics still tend to play objectives.  That’s why, IMHO, I’d rather not very good players generally picked a class other than Scout, and came and helped with the objective play.

    Makes perfect sense!
  • MogwaiWarrior
    967 postsMember, Battlefield 3, Battlefield 4, Battlefield Hardline, Battlefield, Battlefield 1, CTE, Battlefield V Member
    I play nothing but Operations and honestly I rarely get killed by Recons. Maybe because I'm always on the move?
  • Skill4Reel
    383 postsMember, Battlefield 3, Battlefield 4, Battlefield Hardline, Battlefield, Battlefield 1, CTE, Battlefield V Member
    Snipers only ruin the game if you are unlucky enough to be on a team with multiple squads of them.  Most of them can't defend objectives and won't make any effort to get into the capture/defend area to reclaim them after they are lost.  Which means no matter how hard you play yo win, you are going down on the ship with them and a whole bunch of red objective icons all over the screen. 
  • disposalist
    8956 postsMember, Battlefield 3, Battlefield 4, Battlefield, Battlefield 1, CTE, BF1IncursionsAlpha Member
    I play nothing but Operations and honestly I rarely get killed by Recons. Maybe because I'm always on the move?
    The problem isn't getting killed by them. The problem is your own team having greatly reduced PTFO ability because you have too many snipers. I guarantee you've lost games in Ops when attacking because more than a few of your team are snipers and your attacks fail again and again because you don't have enough PTFO power. Ops is especially prone to losses due to sniper-glut. The more objectives-heavy a game is, the worse the problem is.

    It's a statistical fact they are the least effective at killing. Checking the numbers for time used against kills BAs are the worst and I would say that this is not due to iron-sight and carbine users, either. The sniper rifles are especially bad to bring down the stats for BA users in general. Add to that that they are horrible to use when close (ie. during objectives capture or defence) and you have a sub-class that is, in general, a net loss to the team.

    The usual response is "players camp and are bad with other classes". The answer to that is "only the sniper rifle and gadgets are *designed* in a way that they are bad for PTFO". No other weapon/loadout/class has a problem where too many of them makes it harder for their own team to win.

    They just aren't suited to this kind of game, no matter that devs never have the guts to exclude them. They aren't good in team/squad/co-op/objectives-based gameplay.

    Don't get me wrong. I enjoyed playing Scout in BF1. I got to rank 50+ and got at least 100 kills with every rifle, including sniper, just to make sure I'd experienced everything. It took a long time, though, because I wasn't willing to let down my team to do it. If I saw we already had a handful of snipers, I didn't spawn another.

    With the SMLE Carbine, flares and trip wires I could actually be useful on objectives, though. But it was much more challenging than any other class, because, guess what, the tools aren't as effective as any others.
  • MarxistDictator
    5249 postsMember, Battlefield 3, Battlefield 4, Battlefield Hardline, Battlefield, Battlefield 1, CTE, Battlefield V Member
    Most player lives are measured in seconds when they play the other classes that force them to commit to close range to be effective (outside few outliers like the browning MG and Liu bolt mode nobody uses). Most snipers sit in place for minutes on end sometimes never getting a well deserved bullet/bomb/shell/hoof or pointy stick and very rarely get more than a few kills at the end of CQ games. I've seen some scouts go a sector in Operations getting 1 kill. Mystery solved. 

    The problem in designating effectiveness as 'CQB only' is that you get garbage gunplay like BF V where 30m is considered 'long range' and guns are losing 1 hit to kill every 10m for like 5 additional drop off stages beyond that. Plus Scout as always has had a variety of close range options, far more than scouts in previous games honestly. Even pre nerf .44 Deagle or the BF3 M93r do not compare to the sidearm options of this game and flares are real-time target tracking instead of being on the blip refresh that made them more of a perimeter alarm. There is also a lot of medium range dominance within the scout class, where you can easily take out players approaching an objective or while approaching one yourself. Also close range, since the Vetterli and Martini are like better ranged slug shotguns. But I guess because 0-10m is assault territory all of the rest of the classes in the game are terrible. ok
  • TEKNOCODE
    11592 postsMember, Battlefield 4, Battlefield Hardline, Battlefield, Battlefield 1, CTE, Battlefield V Member
    I just started using the martini sniper. Quite fun, especially in operations.
  • disposalist
    8956 postsMember, Battlefield 3, Battlefield 4, Battlefield, Battlefield 1, CTE, BF1IncursionsAlpha Member
    Most player lives are measured in seconds when they play the other classes that force them to commit to close range to be effective (outside few outliers like the browning MG and Liu bolt mode nobody uses). Most snipers sit in place for minutes on end sometimes never getting a well deserved bullet/bomb/shell/hoof or pointy stick and very rarely get more than a few kills at the end of CQ games. I've seen some scouts go a sector in Operations getting 1 kill. Mystery solved. 

    The problem in designating effectiveness as 'CQB only' is that you get garbage gunplay like BF V where 30m is considered 'long range' and guns are losing 1 hit to kill every 10m for like 5 additional drop off stages beyond that. Plus Scout as always has had a variety of close range options, far more than scouts in previous games honestly. Even pre nerf .44 Deagle or the BF3 M93r do not compare to the sidearm options of this game and flares are real-time target tracking instead of being on the blip refresh that made them more of a perimeter alarm. There is also a lot of medium range dominance within the scout class, where you can easily take out players approaching an objective or while approaching one yourself. Also close range, since the Vetterli and Martini are like better ranged slug shotguns. But I guess because 0-10m is assault territory all of the rest of the classes in the game are terrible. ok
    No, objectives play is not just CQB, but it certainly is not long range sniping. No, assault class in extreme close range is not all objectives play is about. Didn't say it was.

    Medics do excellent supporting assault from mid to close range.  Assault do fine beyond close range with several of their weapons.  Support can do fine mid to close.

    Yes, scouts can do well in medium range with carbines and other variants. Yes scouts are not helpless at close range.  Pick a sniper rifle, though, and you are pushing yourself out or, if you stay in, you are unecessarily gimping yourself.

    It is not impossible to be useful in PTFO as a scout, but it is much more difficult than other classes and doubly so if you pick a sniper rifle.  Good thing for people who pick up a sniper rifle that they almost always have no intention to PTFO.  Not a good thing for their team though.
  • disposalist
    8956 postsMember, Battlefield 3, Battlefield 4, Battlefield, Battlefield 1, CTE, BF1IncursionsAlpha Member
    TEKNOCODE said:
    I just started using the martini sniper. Quite fun, especially in operations.
    Lol well yeah, if you're going to use a sniper rifle, why not the worst one I guess. I would be 'fun' if you are a super-pro player and need an extreme challenge, I suppose. For most people, the Martini Sniper is a long way from 'fun'.
  • TEKNOCODE
    11592 postsMember, Battlefield 4, Battlefield Hardline, Battlefield, Battlefield 1, CTE, Battlefield V Member
    (Quote)
    Lol well yeah, if you're going to use a sniper rifle, why not the worst one I guess. I would be 'fun' if you are a super-pro player and need an extreme challenge, I suppose. For most people, the Martini Sniper is a long way from 'fun'.

    Martini is very fun. It’s definitely not the worst sniper.
  • MarxistDictator
    5249 postsMember, Battlefield 3, Battlefield 4, Battlefield Hardline, Battlefield, Battlefield 1, CTE, Battlefield V Member
    By that logic its really hard to PTFO with the repair tool. You might say it is not an effective weapon but I am choosing to use it there and it is quite possibly the hardest weapon to be effective with in the entire game.

    This is the same as grabbing a sniper rifle and running around in close range, expecting to run over the classes designed for that distance. Pretty dumb right. For some reason we were supposed to cater to this, its not an FPS game without people running around quickscoping or whatever you expected the sniping gameplay to be. 
  • MogwaiWarrior
    967 postsMember, Battlefield 3, Battlefield 4, Battlefield Hardline, Battlefield, Battlefield 1, CTE, Battlefield V Member
    TEKNOCODE wrote: »
    (Quote)
    Lol well yeah, if you're going to use a sniper rifle, why not the worst one I guess. I would be 'fun' if you are a super-pro player and need an extreme challenge, I suppose. For most people, the Martini Sniper is a long way from 'fun'.

    Martini is very fun. It’s definitely not the worst sniper.

    No doubt. When I first started playing BF1 Rush was the only game mode I played and I could be very aggressive with the Martini/SMLE. Granted that’s a smaller game mode than Ops so you don’t have as many people possibly shooting at you.
  • Tip_the_Cap
    420 postsMember, Battlefield 4, Battlefield Hardline, Battlefield, Battlefield 1, Battlefield V Member
    Stick to cqc in areas where it is favorable to play that style.

    Also, in war there are snipers. Just wanted to make sure that you knew that.
  • eggfarts1220
    124 postsMember, Battlefield 3, Battlefield 4, Battlefield, Battlefield 1 Member
    Yeah what's new!  So are tank extremists, Muromets and horses. You know what has truly killed this game?  In game Balance! Too many one sided rounds. After awhile those getting placed on the losing side all the time lose interest.  
  • bfloo11111111111
    224 postsMember, Battlefield, Battlefield 1, CTE Member
    Snipers are easy enough to avoid in this game, occasionally there is one that is a real threat.

    I play scout a lot, just to use a bolt action rifle, and can still get most flags captured.

    I've tried just sitting in one spot sniping, or will do it for challenges, but I get bored right away.
  • disposalist
    8956 postsMember, Battlefield 3, Battlefield 4, Battlefield, Battlefield 1, CTE, BF1IncursionsAlpha Member
    Stick to cqc in areas where it is favorable to play that style.

    Also, in war there are snipers. Just wanted to make sure that you knew that.
    Yes, I knew that. In real war there are not snipers for 1 in 4 soldiers, though. More like 1 in 100 or less. If there were 1 in 4 snipers, no army would ever get anywhere. Just like a BF game with too many snipers, it would be awful.
  • disposalist
    8956 postsMember, Battlefield 3, Battlefield 4, Battlefield, Battlefield 1, CTE, BF1IncursionsAlpha Member
    Yeah what's new!  So are tank extremists, Muromets and horses. You know what has truly killed this game?  In game Balance! Too many one sided rounds. After awhile those getting placed on the losing side all the time lose interest.  
    Yes, and the tank, muromets and horse spawns are limited. Just like the sniper should be a limited spawn or elite kit or something.
  • Greeny_Huwjarz
    4351 postsMember, Battlefield 4, Battlefield, Battlefield 1, CTE, Battlefield V Member
    TEKNOCODE said:
    (Quote)
    Lol well yeah, if you're going to use a sniper rifle, why not the worst one I guess. I would be 'fun' if you are a super-pro player and need an extreme challenge, I suppose. For most people, the Martini Sniper is a long way from 'fun'.

    Martini is very fun. It’s definitely not the worst sniper

    Martini sniper is for me the least fun gun in the game.  I recently went in mission to service star every gun in the game, and the martini sniper was the least fun gun for me across all classes.    I would prefer even to use the pilot or tanker guns......
  • TEKNOCODE
    11592 postsMember, Battlefield 4, Battlefield Hardline, Battlefield, Battlefield 1, CTE, Battlefield V Member
    HuwJarz wrote: »
    (Quote)

    Same reason that I am using it. Quite fun.
  • MogwaiWarrior
    967 postsMember, Battlefield 3, Battlefield 4, Battlefield Hardline, Battlefield, Battlefield 1, CTE, Battlefield V Member
    TEKNOCODE wrote: »
    HuwJarz wrote: »
    (Quote)

    Same reason that I am using it. Quite fun.

    I love using the Martini. 2000 kills and counting. Nothing better than its BOOM when firing.
Sign In or Register to comment.