camping, am i the only one that has a real problem with campers?
- Thread starter keyton777
- Start date
finding them is the hard bit, but people usually either gang up to kill or shout at them.keyton777 said:
keyton777 said:
but still i like camping when i'm a sniper but i relocate every now and then, i think it's the thrill of timing the perfect kill and knowing you've done significant damage to the other team when they get mad, then hoping that no one finds your secret hideout.
There's a Free For All mode (FFA) in COD. No teams, every man for himself.keyton777 said:
Generally speaking, if you're running around, you might get one or two kills, if you're lucky, before you'll randomly get shot by someone else.
I've found what works best for me is to put my back against something solid, and patrol a small area. In Makin I like to set up residence in the round hut with the double barrel, on Dome I like the bunker on the left side of the map (without the scaffolding) with the Thompson...
Real world infantry combat relies on concealment and cover. Concealment is what makes you unseen (if they don't see you they won't shoot you). Cover is something physical between you and their weapon systems (if they can't hit you, you won't get killed). Movement can also be very important depending on what they are trying to achieve.
Snipers shoot very rarely (but accurrately) and have concealment as absolute number one priority. That's what snipers do. Concealment (not necessarily cover) is what they seek out. Talking about 'sniper' and 'camping' in the same sentence is nonsense.
-
Here's the source of the strife, and anti-camping sentiments:
- Depending on game, the gameplay style of the 'hyper' impatient run and gun crowd is often not wise against the tactically sound (depending on what game) way of using concealment and cover. The faster you move, the harder it is to see, and the easier you are for others to see and hear.
- Since FPS games first developed from large communities playing the only games available at the time - Quake, Duke Nukem 3D, Doom, counterstrike, a kind of 'code of honor' has developed, to favour the gameplay style of the run and gun crowd. "Camper" is used as an insult and has been for well over 10 years. It's become a kind of social norm.
- A psychological phenomena known as "false consesus" is when people wrongly believe others to hold the same views/properties as themselves in larger society. Just read this topic to see how many are in complete disbelief that others would have the patience they don't, and don't get bored by not running constantly. This makes the run and gun crowd even more annoyed/hateful at the 'camper' crowd.
SUMMARY: The impatient run and gun crowd will as a result (their tactic, or lack of, being ineffective) see camping as an unfair, cheaty, unethical advantage and feel that it takes the fun out of it for them. If everyone played run and gun, their preferred tactic would be less vulnerable and be more rewarded. They feel that others play
----
Depending on how the game is designed, it will make different tactics more or less viable and rewarding. Speaking from a complete realistic point of view, the following things make the game more forgiving to lacking/nonexisting tactic and running & charging all the time:
- Faster movement speed (including jumping). This makes the player harder to hit and more able to get away with being caught without cover.
- Ignoring the mass of the weapon and difficulty in the real world of aiming unsupported. If there's no need to support your weapon against something to get perfect aim, and you might as well even be standing up or even running at the same time without penalty.
- Reducing or eliminating recoil.
- Able to withstand more punishment than real life (less consequence from getting hit).
- Respawn.
- No friendly fire.
- Inability to be completely motionless (the eye is attracted to movement).
- Lack of fatigue.
- Disorganized battlefield (people spawning behind you and so forth). Confusing.
- Cover not stopping bullets like it should (i.e. excessive penetration).
- Kill-cam
- No score penalty for dying (and giving the other side advantages), only amount of kills/objectives fulfilled.
- Environment designed to be artifically devoid of places with good cover and concealment. I.e. every spot with a view is incredibly vulnerable from two or more directions.
- Artificial means of locating the opposition who are in concealment.
Call of Duty 5 has ALL of the above, but allows both styles. They tried to make it as open as possible. The bolt action rifles come with camouflaged outfits, and clearly support people wanting a sneakier/patient experience.
Snipers shoot very rarely (but accurrately) and have concealment as absolute number one priority. That's what snipers do. Concealment (not necessarily cover) is what they seek out. Talking about 'sniper' and 'camping' in the same sentence is nonsense.
-
Here's the source of the strife, and anti-camping sentiments:
- Depending on game, the gameplay style of the 'hyper' impatient run and gun crowd is often not wise against the tactically sound (depending on what game) way of using concealment and cover. The faster you move, the harder it is to see, and the easier you are for others to see and hear.
- Since FPS games first developed from large communities playing the only games available at the time - Quake, Duke Nukem 3D, Doom, counterstrike, a kind of 'code of honor' has developed, to favour the gameplay style of the run and gun crowd. "Camper" is used as an insult and has been for well over 10 years. It's become a kind of social norm.
- A psychological phenomena known as "false consesus" is when people wrongly believe others to hold the same views/properties as themselves in larger society. Just read this topic to see how many are in complete disbelief that others would have the patience they don't, and don't get bored by not running constantly. This makes the run and gun crowd even more annoyed/hateful at the 'camper' crowd.
SUMMARY: The impatient run and gun crowd will as a result (their tactic, or lack of, being ineffective) see camping as an unfair, cheaty, unethical advantage and feel that it takes the fun out of it for them. If everyone played run and gun, their preferred tactic would be less vulnerable and be more rewarded. They feel that others play
----
Depending on how the game is designed, it will make different tactics more or less viable and rewarding. Speaking from a complete realistic point of view, the following things make the game more forgiving to lacking/nonexisting tactic and running & charging all the time:
- Faster movement speed (including jumping). This makes the player harder to hit and more able to get away with being caught without cover.
- Ignoring the mass of the weapon and difficulty in the real world of aiming unsupported. If there's no need to support your weapon against something to get perfect aim, and you might as well even be standing up or even running at the same time without penalty.
- Reducing or eliminating recoil.
- Able to withstand more punishment than real life (less consequence from getting hit).
- Respawn.
- No friendly fire.
- Inability to be completely motionless (the eye is attracted to movement).
- Lack of fatigue.
- Disorganized battlefield (people spawning behind you and so forth). Confusing.
- Cover not stopping bullets like it should (i.e. excessive penetration).
- Kill-cam
- No score penalty for dying (and giving the other side advantages), only amount of kills/objectives fulfilled.
- Environment designed to be artifically devoid of places with good cover and concealment. I.e. every spot with a view is incredibly vulnerable from two or more directions.
- Artificial means of locating the opposition who are in concealment.
Call of Duty 5 has ALL of the above, but allows both styles. They tried to make it as open as possible. The bolt action rifles come with camouflaged outfits, and clearly support people wanting a sneakier/patient experience.
MikkOwl, you are implying that the only alternative to camping is mindless running around, but that isn't the case. People can move in a deliberate, careful way, or in a strategic way, and there is no reason why movement or this kind cannot also be combined with periods of waiting in particular places. In fact I wouldn't object to camping at all if the campers at least moved after each kill, or after a certain period of not seeing any targets. But refusing to move at all is detrimental to the game as a whole, because it makes movement a less competitive strategy for everyone else, frustrating the gameplay style of people who do want to move. Essentially I see the situation as this:
Gameplay involving movement does NOT rule out other kinds of gameplay including, for example, periods of waiting, hiding or sneaking.
Gameplay entirely WITHOUT movement makes every other kind of gameplay much less competitive.
In this way campers are being selfish, because their gameplay style invalidates every other style people might want to play, because as soon as ONE person camps, it immediately becomes everyone else's best strategy to do the same thing, forcing people to play in a way which they don't want to, and ruining the game for those of us who enjoy occasionally moving!
PS. Do you really think a wartime commander would allow his men to just sit in a corner of the battlefield for the whole war? That is not how wars are fought, last time I checked. Most wars involve troops actually moving!
Gameplay involving movement does NOT rule out other kinds of gameplay including, for example, periods of waiting, hiding or sneaking.
Gameplay entirely WITHOUT movement makes every other kind of gameplay much less competitive.
In this way campers are being selfish, because their gameplay style invalidates every other style people might want to play, because as soon as ONE person camps, it immediately becomes everyone else's best strategy to do the same thing, forcing people to play in a way which they don't want to, and ruining the game for those of us who enjoy occasionally moving!
PS. Do you really think a wartime commander would allow his men to just sit in a corner of the battlefield for the whole war? That is not how wars are fought, last time I checked. Most wars involve troops actually moving!
Well, the only thing I would say is that, like, admittedly, the majority of people, you are too worried about being victorious and triumphant. Being owned really isn't that damaging, people only think it is because we have evolved as creatures to be desperate for high status because high status brings reproductive opportunities. This is why humans are so obsessed with winning, and hate humiliation so much. But being like that doesn't benefit the individual, it only benefits your DNA. When we become obsessed with winning, and frightened of being owned, we are being slaves to our DNA. Does being owned really cost us anything? It doesn't put us in danger of losing our home, it doesn't jeopardise our food supply. It is a completely imagined injury, put into our heads by DNA which has had to survive in the incredibly competitive world of natural selection. We no longer need to be so competitive to survive, we can survive and reproduce perfectly well without being so desperate to win and so desperate to avoid losing. I would recommend you don't worry so much about your ranking in the game. If running and gunning is what you enjoy, do it, don't worry about getting killed. Personally I never feel particularly bad when I get killed, and if the person who kills me actually does it skillfully or in an impressive way, I actually feel impressed and appreciative of their skill rather than annoyed, and actually almost enjoy dying because of it being part of a shared experience of a cool event. I can see past the pain of being owned, because my enjoyment comes from participating in the game and appreciating everything the game has to offer. And I tell you, when you pull off a skillful kill yourself, the enjoyment is a hundred times more than you get from pulling of a cheap kill. Pulling off a really cool kill which is a result of strategy or quick thinking or fast reactions, or getting a kill in desperate circumstances after a tense confrontation, is so much more satisfying than getting a high placement on the scoreboard at the end of the game, and far outweighs the dissatisfaction of being owned a few times.ManiacRaccoon said:
For the people who aren't very good at these games I would say the same thing, just enjoy the parts of the game where you do well, and keep playing, and you will find that practice will pay off, and you will get better at it. It will mean more if your achievements are gained through legitimate effort. Perhaps the reason such people don't get any better at the game is that they spend too much time camping, and are too unwilling to take risks and play the game properly. Perhaps if they played a few rounds where they let themselves get owned they would be able to develop strategies to improve. The experience itself would make them better players. I certainly remember the first time I played COD4, which wasn't all that long ago, I got owned in round after round, but I was enjoying it, and not worrying too much, and not assuming I immediately deserved to be at the top of the scoreboard. You don't have to always be in the running for the top spot to enjoy a game, you can still enjoy facing off against people, and trying out tactics, and you always have at least a chance of killing people, and you will find that if you at least try to play like this your skill will probably improve rapidly.
Yeah but COD4 was made for idiots who didn't have the attention span to play a decent game and I am willing to bet a all the kills I've ever made in BF2 that you wouldn't even be able to work out where I was sniping you from let alone kill me with a machine gun before I put a bullet between your eyes.
Yeah proud of it because they're idiots out there who have a huge objection to the things other people do. Smacktards who create arbitary rules designed to cover their own stupidity and lack of skill. I am playing by the rules yet you ***** and moan because I am doing something the game fairly allows and you don't have the skill or intellect to get round it. Who's the bigger problem in that equation, really?
The reality is if your fun is being ruined by someone who is playing the game by the exact same rules as you are then who's fault is that? Maybe you should go play something a bit easier I hear Minesweeper doesn't allow spawn camping.