Rifleman Archive

The way I see it we have to move away from the sniper Image.

If you think Rifleman I think, your typical army grunts, M16 or in our case Laser Rifles, with T21's comparing to a M240 or something with AOE attacks.. Were never going to be able to be real snipers..in PvP at least in PvE we can allready useConceal/cover and such to hide from the NPC's and that seems to work pretty well.

The most sniperish thing we should have is our Headshots and such.

The Trees could really use a Revamp..

---

XaverriJade7 wrote:

Thanks for the great response (as usual ) Waste!

I think the general opinion is that a Sniper role would be ideal (it is pretty cool to take out the enemy before they know you're even there ), but it's difficult to argue the fact that it'd be silly to try such a thing given the current system (not to mention unfair ). Personally, I think a Heavy Gunner approach would be way more and would be all for pushing for something like that instead.

Let's keep up the great discussion!

---

I don't even see us as heavy gunners. That is more in line with Commando I think. Riflemen should be regular infantry. Infantry carry assault rifles as their main weapons. An assault rifle by definition is capable of select fire. Either semi-auto or full auto (or burst fire), which is why we have AoE attacks.

I think this is what we should be pushing for. This will give us the basic infantry role along with the light machine-gunner (as the SAW isin the US military is) role.

It's a technical disagreement about the word "heavy gunner" of course. But it's an important distinction I think. It also leaves the door open for Commandos to get skill and weapons along the "heavy gunner" line. Which preserves their role as heavy weapon specialists and ours as infantry.

Yes a Sniper role would be ideal and it is expected for a game to have one. However it is impossible to do under the current limitations. Moreover we have to show the Devs how making the Riflemen into Snipers if they did it the way a Sniper is suppose to be, will actually make us more powerful and be terribly unbalancing.

We have the convince the Devs we can't be Snipers first. Then we can roll out the correct role of Infantry. But until we convince them we can't be what they want us to be, we are in trouble.

Also we have to show them how making us Infantry actually involves less work (changes) than a Sniper role would. We could keep all our current skills and just fix the redundent ones (StartleShot) and broken one (SurpriseShot). Other than that, we already pretty much have the infantry role. Areskills are along those lines already.As it should be.

---

Telakyte wrote:

But, you also have to consider what the devs do. Making us snipers that are totally not designed as snipers is easier than giving us a complete makeover, and further more, a makeover that would require other professions to be enhanced, etc.

It's a time crunch/what little must we do issue. The more work is needed, the more far off the idea is to the devs.

---

Yes Waste, I gotta agree- just a difference of semantics

I said Heavy Gunner, but that would make the Commandos a 'Heavy Heavy Gunner?'

'Infantry' works too- I amalsoabig a fan of the AoEs and do not want to see them change (much). I was just thinking back to the "Sneaky Sniper or Mr. Heavy Gunner" thread, so I picked 'Mr. Heavy Gunner'.

BTW, you know way too much about guns. (j/k)

---

XaverriJade7 wrote:

Yes Waste, I gotta agree- just a difference of semantics

I said Heavy Gunner, but that would make the Commandos a 'Heavy Heavy Gunner?'

'Infantry' works too- I amalsoabig a fan of the AoEs and do not want to see them change (much). I was just thinking back to the "Sneaky Sniper or Mr. Heavy Gunner" thread, so I picked 'Mr. Heavy Gunner'.

BTW, you know way too much about guns. (j/k)

---

I'm a firearms collector and military historian. Even have some original sniper rifles in my collection. And they all work.

Waste I agree with you totally, I say to push my question to show the extreme drawback of trying to make us snipers in a system that can't support it. Thatis the objective of following up the first question with one like I suggested. Personally I don't even want to be a sniper, I like to do lots of direct damage. When I started this game I was going to go Commando for damage, but then found out how bad off Commandos were and that the real damage dealers were Riflemen. Of course you really weren't a good damage dealer until Master but still...

Anyways, I am way off topic, but the purpose of my question was to point out the extreme drawbacks and impossibilities of being a sniper in the current system.

---

beamstalk wrote:

Waste I agree with you totally, I say to push my question to show the extreme drawback of trying to make us snipers in a system that can't support it. Thatis the objective of following up the first question with one like I suggested. Personally I don't even want to be a sniper, I like to do lots of direct damage. When I started this game I was going to go Commando for damage, but then found out how bad off Commandos were and that the real damage dealers were Riflemen. Of course you really weren't a good damage dealer until Master but still...

Anyways, I am way off topic, but the purpose of my question was to point out the extreme drawbacks and impossibilities of being a sniper in the current system.

---

Yes. But I would modify the question slightly to add in the part about Infantry. This will give them a seed to focus on once they see they can't do snipers.

Your question shows that snipers can't really be done. But we need to add a section at the end that says something like. " Since being a true sniper is not possible given the above limitiations. Would it not make more sense to make Rifleman the standard Infantryman. Since the Rifleman profession already has 90% of their skills heading in this direction. " Or something like that.

We have to show how it is impossible and at the same time offer an alternative. Both at the same time.

---

Waste93 wrote:

---

beamstalk wrote:

Waste I agree with you totally, I say to push my question to show the extreme drawback of trying to make us snipers in a system that can't support it. Thatis the objective of following up the first question with one like I suggested. Personally I don't even want to be a sniper, I like to do lots of direct damage. When I started this game I was going to go Commando for damage, but then found out how bad off Commandos were and that the real damage dealers were Riflemen. Of course you really weren't a good damage dealer until Master but still...

Anyways, I am way off topic, but the purpose of my question was to point out the extreme drawbacks and impossibilities of being a sniper in the current system.

---

Yes. But I would modify the question slightly to add in the part about Infantry. This will give them a seed to focus on once they see they can't do snipers.

Your question shows that snipers can't really be done. But we need to add a section at the end that says something like. " Since being a true sniper is not possible given the above limitiations. Would it not make more sense to make Rifleman the standard Infantryman. Since the Rifleman profession already has 90% of their skills heading in this direction. " Or something like that.

We have to show how it is impossible and at the same time offer an alternative. Both at the same time.

---

Shoot Waste, you beat me to it. I was gonna suggest this exact thing, but was working on how best to word it

If we make the 'we can't be snipers' part a statement rather than a question (easily done) and finish up with something along the lines of 'so why not infantry?', I think we'd have something real nice to give the Devs to think about.

What does everyonethink of this?:

Given the constraints of the current battle system, the Rifleman class does not feel that their role can or shouldfit that of a sniper. A sniper needs range(in excess of 300 meters), concealment(radar invisibility), and power that results in the majority of kills requiring but a single shot(think in terms of 10x our current damage or greater). These requirements cannot be met now and even if they were feasible following the Combat Rebalance, it would severely overpower the Rifleman class and imbalance the entire combat system.

Our proposal- Since being a true sniper is not possible given the above limitations, we would like to see the Rifleman profession shaped to fit the role of the standard Infantry soldier. With the exception of our current Mindshots and Headshots, our skills are already well-suited for this role.

Just a start, but this will give us something to work with assuming klaw hasn't already sent something in to the Devs. Please add/comment to the above so we can make it exactly how we want it. Klaw, if you're here, please let us know what you have to say

---

XaverriJade7 wrote:

Shoot Waste, you beat me to it. I was gonna suggest this exact thing, but was working on how best to word it

If we make the 'we can't be snipers' part a statement rather than a question (easily done) and finish up with something along the lines of 'so why not infantry?', I think we'd have something real nice to give the Devs to think about.

What does everyonethink of this?:

Given the constraints of the current battle system, the Rifleman class does not feel that their role can or shouldfit that of a sniper. A sniper needs range(in excess of 300 meters), concealment(radar invisibility), and power that results in the majority of kills requiring but a single shot(think in terms of 10x our current damage or greater). These requirements cannot be met now and even if they were feasible following the Combat Rebalance, it would severely overpower the Rifleman class and imbalance the entire combat system.

Our proposal- Since being a true sniper is not possible given the above limitations, we would like to see the Rifleman profession shaped to fit the role of the standard Infantry soldier. With the exception of our current Mindshots and Headshots, our skills are already well-suited for this role.

Just a start, but this will give us something to work with assuming klaw hasn't already sent something in to the Devs. Please add/comment to the above so we can make it exactly how we want it. Klaw, if you're here, please let us know what you have to say

---

Thanks Kel-jun! One problem I just noticed was I forgot to phraseit in the form of aquestion (and I even watch Jeopardy!)

So how about tagging this to the end:

Our 2nd question: Does the Dev Team share our thoughts on the future of the Rifleman profession?

Maybe there's a better way to say that, but it'll do for now

Edited for clarity.

Message Edited by XaverriJade7 on 05-31-2004 09:24 AM

---

XaverriJade7 wrote:

Thanks Kel-jun! One problem I just noticed was I forgot to phraseit in the form of aquestion (and I even watch Jeopardy!)

So how about tagging this to the end:

Our 2nd question: Does the Dev Team share our thoughts on the future of the Rifleman profession?

Maybe there's a better way to say that, but it'll do for now

Edited for clarity.

Message Edited by XaverriJade7 on 05-31-2004 09:24 AM

---

I'd change it a bit. We already now the Devs don't share our vision of Riflemen presently. So we have to see if they can change their present view first.

Maybe something along the lines of " Since being a true sniper is not viable. While an Infantry role is not only viable but also close to what Riflemen presently are. Would you agree with this and adjust your views on Riflemen accordingly."

Or something like that. I think the question should be worded first to show why a sniper is not possible, why infantry is possible, and finally to get the Devs to agree that Infantry is a much better role.

The first two parts set up for the third part which I think is the most important. Unless we get them to change their mind, we could be in for a fair amount of trouble. So we should change their minds first.

The way I'm seeing it is in three parts. First part is what snipers are and what would have to change to make us into one. Range, one shot kills, camo, etc.

Second part would be about infantry. Their role, etc.

Third part would be a statement showing how sniper is not possible while infantry is. Ending in the question of will the Devs reconsider their view of our role.

Message Edited by Waste93 on 05-31-2004 11:14 AM

Good points Waste! Let's try this:

Question 1:

Rifleman: What is the Development team’s vision for Rifleman with the upcoming combat system overhaul?

Development Team: The vision for the rifleman hasn’t changed. They are still intended to be the long range snipers and that will stay the same. What will change is the mechanical balance - - especially with the HAM revamp portion of the CB. The new HAM system will be much more dynamic and as a result will change the focus on “mind hits”. I don’t know to what degree, but that is something that will surely be looked at.

Question 2:

Given the constraints of the current battle system, the Rifleman class does not feel that their role can or shouldfit that of a sniper. A sniper needs range(in excess of 300 meters), concealment(radar invisibility), and power that results in the majority of kills requiring but a single shot(think in terms of 10x our current damage or greater). These requirements cannot be met now and even if they were feasible following the Combat Rebalance, it would severely overpower the Rifleman class and imbalance the entire combat system.

Since being a true sniper is not possible given the above limitations, we would like to see the Rifleman profession shaped to fit the role of the standard Infantry soldier. Not only is an Infantry role viable given the constraints of the combat system, but the Rifleman profession is already very close to this model as it is.

Our 2nd question to the Dev Team is this: Do you agree with the above and are you willing to adjust your views on the Rifleman profession to reflect this? Why or why not?

Some things to consider: Does the first part sufficiently debunk the possibility of us being 'snipers'? Does the second part adequately describe our desired role as Infantry? Is our question detailed enough to require more than a simple one-sentance answer?

I think we're almost there! And I ask those who have yet to speak not to feel shy. I'd like not to have anyone feel left out.

EDIT: Added Question 1 and its reply to the top

Message Edited by XaverriJade7 on 05-31-2004 10:46 AM