Dirty multiplayer tactics

[Jumplion]

And example would be T-squared, the alleged "god" of Halo 3, he gave some tips on how to own at halo 3 and ALL of them were hiding spots for camping and waiting for someone to come up and "own" them ith the Sniper Rifle. He makes me sick as he probably does that all the time in Halo 3.

Going around the other team with invisibility while your team is BRing is camping? Running away while throwing grenades is camping?The Frag headshot or the B,Y,B combos is camping?

No, finding an invisible ledge that no one else can get to is camping. Finding an invisible ledge, jumping from that ledge to another invisible ledge where it's impossible for anyone to see you is camping. Going off the freakin' map where there is yet ANOTHER invisible ledge on a pile of grass where you pop out and kill someone passing by is camping.

Though I guess that's what halo is based off of

Yea what next hiding in cardboard boxes? Or even Barrels that are made of metal that is solid and may even be Japanese or meatshields like in Gears of War 2.

Actually, in some maps, MGO supports camping but balances it out by the whole "Invincible for the first few seconds" thing and non regenerating health, PLUS using the cardboardbox is also a legitimate strategy because if you're hit while wearing the CBB then you're stunned for a minute nad it's used to get out of a whole team chasing you (i've done it before), and I don't know how meatshields got into this as that isn't camping and you generaly aim for the head of feet anyway.

And i'm talking about glitch camping, not regular camping which in some cases is fine but in other cases is just annoying.

Camping is fine is some places, hell the basic sniper is based off of camping which is fine, but it's when they include glitches and invisible ledges that don't make it a legitimate strategy anymore, it's just glitching. And apparantly you wont get reported for glitching (which I think is against MSs code of conduct or something) but you'll get reported for being godly at a game.

An example of this would be my friend, he found a glitch in CoD4 and used it for every Hardcore version of anything and resulted him in the glitch. It's almost impossible to find through a regular scope and the glitch lets you see the whole entire map where you could pick people off with a sniper. THat's not a legitimate strategy,that's glitching unless it's a server or game that encourages glitches.

But if it's in a professional game where everyone knows eveyr little glitch then i guess it's fine, but not when it's just a regular game of REd vs. Blue.

 

[shatnershaman]

3. It's anti-social- While this may not be a very strong arguement, close or mid-range combatants can actually have rather epic or otherwise entertaining fights at their ranges while long range encounters tend to be one-sided and dull which (lets be frank) doesn't make for good annecdotes to your friends the day after.

This is why in some games (basically the ones made by EPIC) the snipers blows up the head ina nice gory fashion.

 

[shatnershaman]

Actually, in some maps, MGO supports camping but balances it out by the whole "Invincible for the first few seconds" thing, and I don't know how meatshields got into this as that isn't camping and you generaly aim for the head of feet anyway.

Camping is fine is some places, hell the basic sniper is based off of camping which is fine, but it's when they include glitches and invisible ledges that don't make it a legitimate strategy anymore, it's just glitching. And apparantly you wont get reported for glitching (which I think is against MSs code of conduct or something) but you'll get reported for being godly at a game.

But if it's in a professional game where everyone knows eveyr little glitch then i guess it's fine, but not when it's just a regular game of REd vs. Blue.

Lets do this in order

I was making a joke (gears of war was the only gear I could think of).

What next not allowing certain weapons (*cough*Halo 1 pistol*cough*) everyone can do that trick. (Playing the game is not against the rules (hacking is not glitching)).

 

[Jumplion]

Lets do this in order

I was making a joke (gears of war was the only gear I could think of).

What next not allowing certain weapons (*cough*Halo 1 pistol*cough*) everyone can do that trick. (Playing the game is not against the rules (hacking is not glitching)).

ohhh this is so much fun! Glad you're back shatnershaman. But could you say that again? I didn't understand what you were talking about.

 

[shatnershaman]

Lets do this in order

I was making a joke (gears of war was the only gear I could think of).

What next not allowing certain weapons (*cough*Halo 1 pistol*cough*) everyone can do that trick. (Playing the game is not against the rules (hacking is not glitching)).

ohhh this is so much fun! Glad you're back shatnershaman. But could you say that again? I didn't understand what you were talking about.

You want me to edit my quote into your quote if we are going to be picky now?

 

[Jumplion]

Lets do this in order

I was making a joke (gears of war was the only gear I could think of).

What next not allowing certain weapons (*cough*Halo 1 pistol*cough*) everyone can do that trick. (Playing the game is not against the rules (hacking is not glitching)).

ohhh this is so much fun! Glad you're back shatnershaman. But could you say that again? I didn't understand what you were talking about.

You want me to edit my quote into your quote if we are going to be picky now?

Let's just continue this through PMs if this conversation is still going to save the public of a pointless war.

 

[Fuzzylightning]

Beaten to the punch but I'm going to expand on it a little.

Players in multiplayer games are selfish bastards. They're often out to have fun on their own rather than have fun with a whole lot of people. The whole point of playing multiplayer is to play with other people but when it becomes just an exercise in getting a new piece of kit, a better kill:death ratio or griefing players, the game gets less fun and less fun for everyone.

If you hear a frustrated player talking about how some clown has been following him and has headshot him 5 rounds in a row and they haven't been able to do anything about it, the usual responses are to mock them, ignore them or say they're whining. There are always things you can do, like you can follow them around and protect them for a little, kill their killer a few times, give them some pointers for the map/game or switch teams with them.

Everyone is out to have fun, extending a little courtesy goes a long way to help other players enjoy the game and it will usually help you to enjoy it more too. Things like teamwork rather than being assholes to your teammates, not repeatedly killing some guy because he's not as good at the game as you are, and many more help to make a shit match into the only place you want to be. I'm sure you've stumbled on a server with a bunch of good people who play decently if only for a short length of time. It may be rare but it exists.

I'm against achievements and ranks because it takes the game into a dumb serious tone where nobody is able to play the game casually. Unfortunately more and more games are coming out that are 100% based on things like that. There are some games that have some basic alternatives built in such as unranked servers, which is a good thing. Rewarding a player is one thing, but rewarding a player for being an asshole to everyone is something I hate.

As for an answer to the OP's question, a tactic many people like to employ (perhaps it's not seen as dirty) is always choosing the winning side. A new player might join the game and instantly go to the team that's winning. Existing players on a team might switch teams to the better team. The teams end up being stacked usually in two ways: in number and in skill level.

 

[Nazrel]

Let start by stating that I don't play FPS's , I primarily play, strategy, tactical and RPG games.

I have however observed my brother play them on many an occasion, and have noticed a total lack of strategy, tactics , or any level of teamwork coercion.

Campers are the only one's I have any respect for!

Seriously it's like rest of you are led by general dumbass.

General Dumbass: "Our objective of this scenario is to defend this point. So everyone charge forward recklessly and get yourself killed!"

Private Camper: "But sir shouldn't some of us stay here and defend this point like we're supposed to?"

General Dumbass: "That sounds like wussy talk soldier! Now Charge forward and get yourself killed!"

and why would you say that camping not fun? Some people find fishing fun, and unlike the fisherman it's not like they have long to wait, there's always someone rushing into line of sight, sometimes the same one. You'd think they'd learn that charging headlong in to the middle this specific clearing was a bad idea after having their head shot off the first 5 times!

The amusement of that alone is quite likely worth the wait.

Since the wit and wisdom of Terry Pratchet is insufficient for some how about Sun Tzu?

"Of old the skilled first made themselves invincible to await the enemy's vincibility.

Invincibility lies in oneself. Vincibility lies in the enemy.

Thus the skilled can make themselves invincible. They cannot cause the enemy's vincibility.

Thus it is said 'Victory can be known. It cannot be made.'

Invincibility is defence.

Vincibility is attack.

Defend and one has a surplus.

Attack and one is insufficient."

 

[llaunay]

I hate, HATE HATE HHHHHHHHAAAAAAAATE! when playing TF2, and we're trying to capture the control points and some FUCKS put two fully upgraded sentries right at out exit areas when we have tio attack. There's a good minute before the game starts and in this one map if you're attacking you have two exit points. However defending team can go out and sit infront of them. So some douche bags put two fully upgraded sentries there. Worst part, they can see a cloaked spy!!!!!! I like to find out who did it, and submit several poor reviews and reports.

That is a completely FAIR tactic... its pretty much the only way senturys get kills on that map.

 

[Unknower]

Spawn camping. Camping as in defending a site is okay, but when you've got a tank's turret's/aircraft's/sniper rifle's/rocket launcher's crosshair pointed at the entrance of a spawn point, you're a dick.

Mines and C4. I don't mind anti-tank mines but anti-personnel mines annoy me. That's just such a cheap and dirty way of killing someone. So is C4 against infantry. In Crysis, people adopted the tactic of placing a C4 on an entrance and then blowing it up when someone comes in.

Not choosing auto-join. Once in CS:S, I chose auto-join (as usually) in de_dust and joined terrorists (what a friggin' surprise). I then checked the teams. 20 vs 12?

Rocket Launchers against infantry. When I played Battlefront, almost half the people had rocket launchers. In Crysis, lots of people used rocket launchers against other guys but when there was enemy tanks nearby, rocket launchers were nowhere to be seen.

Playing only for your rank. I guess everyone who has played CS has noticed this: someone joins the server, writes "showstats" or something and then proceeds to buy an AWP, go to a camping spot, play for a while, check his stats again and then leave. They don't play for fun, they play because it's their other job!

Not really a dirty tactic, but something developers fail to grasp: snipers don't need one-shot-one-kill rifle. They already have enough advantages over other people, just like they do in real life, for example their long range ensures they'll have bigger kill-death ratio. A sniper rifle which takes 2 shots or 1 headshot to kill someone is perfectly fine. Remember, it's not a combat simulator, it's a game.

 

[the-kitchen-slayer]

the thing i hate in online games is the bastards who go around, killing their own team-members for no apparent reason whatsoever. Haze is a good example of that. First time online, i was a rebel. one other rebel, RIGHT BY THE BLOODY SPAWN POINT WE HAD TO USE, was killing everyone who spawned.

traitors just piss me off

 

[shatnershaman]

Nazel

Invincibilty is defence what?The attacking side has won wars before. And couldn't the "Private Camper" get his ass kicked by "General Dumbass"'s soldiers (Frag spamming,invisibilty,invinciblity,air strike,helicopter,sheer numbers,noob tube or for offline affairs screen peeking)

 

[Nazrel]

Nazel

Invincibilty is defence what?The attacking side has won wars before. And couldn't the "Private Camper" get his ass kicked by "General Dumbass"'s soldiers (Frag spamming,invisibilty,invinciblity,air strike,helicopter,sheer numbers,noob tube or for offline affairs screen peeking)

I'm direct quoting from Sun Tzu. It is an English translation of 2000 year old eloquent Chinese.It means that in defending you are at an advantage.

I'm not sure what you mean by that second part. Please elaborate.

 

[Saskwach]

Nazel

Invincibilty is defence what?The attacking side has won wars before. And couldn't the "Private Camper" get his ass kicked by "General Dumbass"'s soldiers (Frag spamming,invisibilty,invinciblity,air strike,helicopter,sheer numbers,noob tube or for offline affairs screen peeking)

The point is by attacking you offer the enemy the chance to win. By defending you don't; he has to take it, and in so doing he has to risk offering you that chance to win. Offensive wars have been won, yes, but almost always because the attacker had more men, more money, more guns, to throw at the enemy walls.

 

[Iron Mal]

To counter the 'General Dumbass' and 'Private Camper' analogy that someone else made, I will admit that staying in one location while defending is okay (hence the fact that it is called defending), however, defending and camping are two seperate things.
Defending is holding one location because that is the point of a given game (such as capture the flag or assault for those of you fammiliar with Unreal), camping however, is holding one spot in a map purely because it gives you the upper hand in combat (for example, jumping out around an often travelled corner with a shotgun in hand).

Not camping may make me a dumbass but on the bright side I give the other side a fair chance (which is the point of online games being competitive, i.e: it is he who is more skilled who wins rather than he with the bigger gun or the guy with the game's engine backing him). Also, that is quite a biased analogy as well, assumeing that anyone who doesn't camp is a dumbass is quite a narrow minded view.

 

[shatnershaman]

Nazel

Invincibilty is defence what?The attacking side has won wars before. And couldn't the "Private Camper" get his ass kicked by "General Dumbass"'s soldiers (Frag spamming,invisibilty,invinciblity,air strike,helicopter,sheer numbers,noob tube or for offline affairs screen peeking)

I'm direct quoting from Sun Tzu. It is an English translation of 2000 year old eloquent Chinese.It means that in defending you are at an advantage.

I'm not sure what you mean by that second part. Please elaborate.

How to kill a camper:Frag spamming,invisibilty,invinciblity,air strike,helicopter,sheer numbers,noob tube or for offline affairs screen peeking etc etc

Lets use UT3 for example: Some one is camping around a corner with the sniper rifle and flak cannon.
To defeat said camper

1. Get the shield belt
2. Get a keg o health
3. Get juggernaut
4. Flank
5. Get buddies
6. flak cannon the corner

etc

EDIT:

Not camping may make me a dumbass but on the bright side I give the other side a fair chance (which is the point of online games being competitive, i.e: it is he who is more skilled who wins rather than he with the bigger gun or the guy with the game's engine backing him). Also, that is quite a biased analogy as well, assumeing that anyone who doesn't camp is a dumbass is quite a narrow minded view.

Wouldn't using the environments and timing power weapons/power ups not be skills?

 

[Nazrel]

Nazel

Invincibilty is defence what?The attacking side has won wars before. And couldn't the "Private Camper" get his ass kicked by "General Dumbass"'s soldiers (Frag spamming,invisibilty,invinciblity,air strike,helicopter,sheer numbers,noob tube or for offline affairs screen peeking)

I'm direct quoting from Sun Tzu. It is an English translation of 2000 year old eloquent Chinese.It means that in defending you are at an advantage.

I'm not sure what you mean by that second part. Please elaborate.

How to kill a camper:Frag spamming,invisibilty,invinciblity,air strike,helicopter,sheer numbers,noob tube or for offline affairs screen peeking etc etc

Lets use UT3 for example: Some one is camping around a corner with the sniper rifle and flak cannon.
To defeat said camper

1. Get the shield belt
2. Get a keg o health
3. Get juggernaut
4. Flank
5. Get buddies

etc etc
4. flak cannon the corner

These all seem like good tactics(Though I'm not sure what juggernaut means. That mean getting the tank?), and I commend you if you employ them.

But I think you failed to see the point of the General Dumbass, Private Camper analogy.
It was about people who rush forward like idiots, get taken out by a camper, then whine about them because they're to dumb to find a way to deal with them, and call them wussy's and cowards. There is nothing wrong with camping in many scenario's it's what you're supposed to do.

 

[shatnershaman]

But I think you failed to see the point of the General Dumbass, Private Camper analogy.
It was about people who rush forward like idiots, get taken out by a camper, then whine about them because they're to dumb to find a way to deal with them, and call them wussy's and cowards. There is nothing wrong with camping in many scenario's it's what you're supposed to do.

Well there is the General Tactics and Private Dumbass analogy too you know.

 

[Nazrel]

Well there is the General Tactics and Private Dumbass analogy too you know.

Please elaborate.

 

[JC123]

Players in multiplayer games are selfish bastards. They're often out to have fun on their own rather than have fun with a whole lot of people. The whole point of playing multiplayer is to play with other people but when it becomes just an exercise in getting a new piece of kit, a better kill:death ratio or griefing players, the game gets less fun and less fun for everyone.

If you hear a frustrated player talking about how some clown has been following him and has headshot him 5 rounds in a row and they haven't been able to do anything about it, the usual responses are to mock them, ignore them or say they're whining. There are always things you can do, like you can follow them around and protect them for a little, kill their killer a few times, give them some pointers for the map/game or switch teams with them.

Everyone is out to have fun, extending a little courtesy goes a long way to help other players enjoy the game and it will usually help you to enjoy it more too. Things like teamwork rather than being assholes to your teammates, not repeatedly killing some guy because he's not as good at the game as you are, and many more help to make a shit match into the only place you want to be. I'm sure you've stumbled on a server with a bunch of good people who play decently if only for a short length of time. It may be rare but it exists.

I'm against achievements and ranks because it takes the game into a dumb serious tone where nobody is able to play the game casually. Unfortunately more and more games are coming out that are 100% based on things like that. There are some games that have some basic alternatives built in such as unranked servers, which is a good thing. Rewarding a player is one thing, but rewarding a player for being an asshole to everyone is something I hate.

As for an answer to the OP's question, a tactic many people like to employ (perhaps it's not seen as dirty) is always choosing the winning side. A new player might join the game and instantly go to the team that's winning. Existing players on a team might switch teams to the better team. The teams end up being stacked usually in two ways: in number and in skill level.

Pfft, I love this stuff. "Everyone's out to have fun, let's all share and be happy."

Hell no! I'm out for ME. If I wanted to have fun and share the love around, I'd play multiplayer offline with mates, or in a private server. If I'm online, all I'm after is something that isn't A.I. - either it's too hard, too easy, or I just need a change. I want to enjoy myself, not play babysitter to others. I want to kill as many people as I can, or beat them any way I can, because that's where the fun comes from, and I despise those too weak or ridiculously overpowered. If they suck, they should shut up and cope, learn to better themselves. Play offline, follow the tactics of good players, or just stay the hell out of the way. Don't get me wrong, I suck at quite a few games myself, so this isn't an elitist attitude, it's just realistic.

The only thing in multiplayer that I don't agree with is unfair and unavoidable exploits. If I get killed by a camping sniper, good on him/her. I just have to find another way to improve my situation - take a different route, use a different weapon. But spawn camping when you have no chance to fight back isn't fair (one exception - if they need to camp the flag for a while to capture it, Battlefield-style). As is grenade spamming, rocket launcher overuse, or other unrealistic weapon god-states. If there's a good few seconds I can get them back then it's fine, but if they can fire off 4 rounds in as many seconds, that's unfair. It just turns the battle into a solo artillery show. Skill is fine.