Rifleman Archive

---

BlkHwkDwn wrote:

XaverriJade7,

Sorry dont know how to put people messages in my post, however, to respond, I fully recognize that the devs will never rework the combat range as they should. That is very sad if you ask me. You have to wonder how this will effect JTL, will there be a 64 meter max range of missles from an x-wing. Back to rifleman, the main reason for my post was simply to say I had no interest, what so ever in becomeing an infantryman. I picked up rifleman to become a sniper, I like the idea of it. I certainly agree that for the whole rifleman community we need the devs to choose whatever is the better of two options. However, if it were just me I'd rather stay a sniper even if it left me at a disadvantage.

Alamar Radoki

Master Weaponsmith, Rifleman 4/0/2/2

---

Here is our main worry. We already know that we can't be true snipers as you yourself admit. There is no range, no concealment (in PvP), and the damage is to low for what a sniper does.

We also know the Devs want to make us like snipers. That would mean getting rid of our AoE attacks. Snipers don't use them.

Want we are asking for is that the Devs recognize that we can't be snipers. So gear us towards infantry with some sniper like abilities instead.

Basically we are asking to be left alone. Just fix/replace TakeCover,SurpriseShot, and StartleShot.

I have to completely agree. As a Ranger, I use my rifle for hunting and have no use for an 'Infantryman'. Sniping works well already as is. I know it's silly to 'snipe' from 64m instead of a couplekms as it shoud be, just as it issilly to need tomake 3 or 4supposed 'headshots' tokill some things, ButI'd rather work withinthese limitations than to become someRun 'n Gun Infantryman simply for the sake of realism. There are lots of silly things in thegame that makeno sense. I'd much rather seechanges in howthings aggro to the rifleman, so that we can havemore time before they close in.

Sentari.

---

BlkHwkDwn wrote:

Im sorry to say I have to disagree vehemently wiht the idea of becoming and "Infantry Soldier." I picked up rifleman to be a sniper. The problem that exists in the game is the absurd mas Range. 64 meters is barely a reasonable efective range for pistols, but for rifles it is absurd. You can throw a greanade as far as I can shoot my rifle. Lets not change a profession that in my opinion would be fine if we could shoot from further away. Let pistols shoot up to 64, carbines 128, adn Rifles 200. Balance it by forcing huge penalties on rifleman on both speed and accuracy if the target gets within 64 meters. Also have big penalties on firing a rifle while moving. I'm sure at one point or another we have all thought how absurd it is that you can run and fire a T-21 one handed.

Alamar Radoki

Theed, Naboo

Master Weaponsmith, Rifleman 4/0/2/2

---

I have no doubt that all most allof us picked up the profession with the hope of being a sniper. But you need to understand, it will never happen. That is the point of the question. They will never give us longer range than other players. They will never make it so we can hit someone undetected. In the first case, as has fequently been stated, giving us a sniper's range would mean that the server would have to track and report targets in a much larger area, which would increase the work load on both the client and server, increase the amount of data that must be passed between the two, and create more lag than there is now. Yes, it coud be done, but it will not happen. In the second case, people scream when we take them down now when they can see us and can hit us from the same distance that we can hit them. Imagine the cacophony of nerf cries if we could shoot them and they could not figure out where it came from, especially if we got more damage at the same time.

Stealth and sniping are the game mechanics that best fit my preferred style of play. It is probably the preferred style of most everyone who chose this profession except for the holo grinders or flavor of the month crowd. But you need to understand, they will not implement it in this system, and you need to accept that and move on (move on as in adapt to what we really are, infantry).

Why? Because if we continue to push for the idea of a sniper role, what we will get is a deadly (to us) compromise of higher damage for slowerspeed, but no greater distance and no radar invisibility at the same time that theytake awayour biggest advantage, the ability to target an unhealable pool (i.e., by making mindas healable as the other pools). That will mean we will get off one shot, do a lot of damage that isalmost certainly healed while they run on top of us and beat the crap out of us while we are waiting for the next chance to shoot them.

There is nothing to gain and everything to lose from pushing the idea that we are snipers. It does not and cannot work in this environment, and we will get the worst of any compromise that is put in place trying to make us that.

Message Edited by Sotaudi on 06-03-2004 10:08 AM

---

XaverriJade7 wrote:

[snip]

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?

---

---

Sotaudi wrote:

---

XaverriJade7 wrote:

[snip]

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?

---

Good approach. Well stated, and to the point. I agree with the tone and direction of this question. But I have no doubt that they will just tell us to wait for the rebalance or simply stop using the term "sniper" andstart using the term "infantryman" whileimplementing what they intend to anyway.

---

'bout time you showed up

Thanks for the comments- I'm sure you're on to what answerwe'll be getting out of this, but as long as the CB is a balance and not a proportional nerf, us staying more or less the same is probably a good thing. (I hope)

Question 2:

Given the constraints of the current battle system, the Rifleman class does not feel that their role canfit 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 as more of a hybrid between a Sniper and a standard Infantryman. Many Riflemen feel that our Mindshots and Headshots are toomuch a part of what 'makes us what we are'to just give them up in order to make us purely Infantry. This fits with your stated vision of us. However, as many(or more) members of the Rifleman community feel our AoEs are too integral to the profession to give up even though they do not fit the Sniper role, but rather that of the Infantryman. As it is now, the Rifleman profession is very close to this hybrid and would require very little change aside from fixing a few broken or redundant specials. (Yes, we know- in addition to whatever the CB brings )

All that said, our 2nd question to the Development Team is this: Do you agree with the above and will you work to adjust your views to reflect this or do you see the Rifleman profession as one of 'sniping and nothing more'? Please explain why or why not. Thank you!

---

I like this better. It emphasizes the needs of most riflemen to keep the AoEs, but at the same time doesn't wreck it for those of us who prefer a sniper. Although, I have to say I'm completely with the Devs on this and against the Rifleman community at large. If changes are made that everyone here seems to fear (ie. trading speed for damage, etc) I would be very happy. I don't really care if they make mind damage healable as it won't effect me. In fact, it will probably help me as then I would be able to heal myself. I know I'm in the minority, but I'm a part of the Rifleman community too. I doubt I'm the only one that took Rifleman with no regard or desire for it's PvP abilities. There are things that I'd like changed/fixed, but overall I like things the way they are. If it ain't broke, don't fix it.

Sentari.

ppy with the way things are

i don't think that you should say improved, so much as tweaked or modified, cause we're not asking for major changes

as to the range issue, we're not going to be snipers in the 300m sense, but we could get closer to it if pistols stayed at their respective range. if a rifle can hit from 64m, then make it so a pistol can't

and people shouldn't have a problem with it (though theres always at least one that does) because its not like you cant run 20m closer in literally 2 seconds

and as for the speed, as was mentioned, they should just fix pistols so that they can hit the speed cap at master.

---

JayBurns wrote:

And to add insult to injury, pistols don't have near the damage or AP of riflemen. What if they pinched a little riflespeed from the tree, just enough to make a master pistoleer and master riflemen do the same DPS. Would many of you be opposed to taking the riflemen down a few notches?

I'm just interested, because it seems this thread is mostly about improving riflemen, which frankly I don't think it needs.

Welcoming your constructive input,

JBurns

---

They are not suppose to be the same DPS. Rifles are the damage dealers. Pistoleers are the defensive types. Carbines are the status effect attackers. Each profession has a specific role they should play. You balance that way, not by making everyone the same.

However the problem with Pistoleer speed isn't their speeds. It isn't hard to find a 2.2 speed pistol which means they hit the speed cap at about +55 . The problem is with the delay mods for specials. Those need to be changed some for both Pistoleers and Carabineers.

This thread is about keeping Riflemen mostly where they are already. We are a mostly working profession right now. We want to keep it that way.

---

Waste93 wrote:

---

PsychoticChipmunk wrote:

I feel that our class right now is more along the lines of a gunner. A normal infantry grunt. However we still have some of the sniper aspects (bear in mind this is the WW2 version of a sniper not today's military assassin's) available to us...they're just less appealing to be used the way they should be and can be outshone most of the time by our grunt skills. Well why should we be forced to take one side take it or leave it? Why can't we continue to be a split class with our options available to us.

When they answered us, and told us we were to become just snipers in the game, part of my character died. If we were to send this and tell them we just want to be infantry my character would be revived in that part, but another would die off. Ask them to give us, or rather tweak, both of our roles. Tailor our weapons half and half to work with half of our skills but be a horrid choice for the other. A sniper gets drawbacks against a horde of enemies advancing quickly and a machine gunner gets disadvantages taking on just a handful of guys at range. If they were to make our rifles decide our role, and allow us to decide our rifle then the game would get a lot more interesting for a rifleman in combat and give PvP a few more factors.

---

There really isn't much difference between a WWII sniper and todays military sniper. The role and abilities are pretty much the same. Only some of the equipment has changed.

The point of the question is to show how we can't really be snipers. Though we can have some sniper like abilities. Though we barely even have those presently. The only true sniper like ability we have now is ConcealShot.

SniperShot is just a ranged DB. That isn't very sniper like since it can only be used in PvP and only against an incap'd opponent. Snipers are not limited to killing someone that is not moving and semi-concious in real life.

MindShot and HeadShot are not very sniper like either. They are just pool targeting attacks that pretty much every profession has. Yes it says "Head" in it. But that has no real bearing in the game other than how the Devs made Mind the determining factor in PvP. In PvE it has no greater effect than being able to target any other pool since almost all MOB pools are even nor do they generally heal themselves.

You say the sniper is at a disadvantage against large numbers of targets while the gunner part is disadvantage against a small group at range.

Neither statement is really true. One of the primary abilities of the sniper in the military is the ability to cause fear. Eliminating the chain of command to cause confusion. Even when out numbered they can very often stall or drive off an enemy.

The machine gun makes up for it's lack of accuracy by sheer volume. And the farther away the target is, the closer they have to come, and the more time the gunner has to take them out.

Now if we are talking about making certain weapons "sniper" weapons that would only work with sniper like abilities and other that only worked with the "gunner" type abilities. That may work. But then we have the problem about snipers in the first place. No range, no concealment, no very high sniper damge, etc.

If the Devs decide we are snipers they are going to have to revamp the profession. If we can convince them that we are infantry with maybe a couple sniper like abilities we keep what we have now. Then just fix a couple things like SurpriseShot and StartleShot.

Rifleman is a profession that mostly works. That's an advantage over a number of professions. I'd prefer to keep it working as is and fix a couple minor things instead of getting the whole thing turned upside down to fit a role we can't do given the limitations imposed by the Devs.

---

---

LLJK_Griz wrote:

---

xavierwalls wrote:
Give us more range (200m). I would gladly take the more range at the cost of losing accuracy while moving. My point being is if we could shoot from more than 64m away we wouldnt have to run around as much.

---

They've said they can't increase ranges because of limitations of the game engine and bandwidth. If combat is possible at longer ranges, then the server has to send data about everything in that range and it'd become unplayable for dialup users.

You have a well-worded question on an important topic that could potentially produce a useful response, but I expect them to ignore the actual question and respond to part of the setup paragraph with some crap that they already said months ago, or to give some useless generic "wait and see" answer.

---

---

eXcali1979 wrote:

having sat in and observed a Seals Sniper qualification I can tell you there is a huge difference between snipers WW2 era and today. WW2 era they had the M1 Garand which is a great weapon. But these rifles they have now and abilities today with them. A 50 Cal semi-auto sniper rifle that can hit a the bulls eye of a 6 inch disc from 1200 meters..... that my friends s just mind boggling. So our present state of SW is like... 20,000 years in the future... yet the snipers of that age can't shoot as far as those in WW2 era... WW2 M1 Garand has a 1 mile range... SWG Snipers 64 meter range.

---

Common misconception. The US WWII sniper rifle was not usually the M1C or M1D Garand. The most common US sniping rifle of WWII was the 1903A4 Springfield. That is an accurized bolt action Springfield rifle with the front sights removed. It fires a .30-06 round like the Garand. The Garand snipers were not in general use until the Korean War. This was later replaced by the M21 which since it's based off the M14, which in turn is based on the M1 Garand, is almost the same rifle.

Yes the rifles of today are much better. However the role of the sniper and their training is not much changed between now and WWII. Their role is to remain unseen, eliminate high value targets, and observe the enemy.

Nor is the Barret M82 .50 semi auto rifle general issuance to snipers. It's a special duty weapon. Mostly because of it's large size, weight, and that of its ammo. It is used in special circumstances where extreme range precision shooting is required. Most often a .308 bolt action rifle is used for sniping by US forces.

The WWII Garand round may be able to go a mile. However it's effective range is much less. It's effective range is in the 1000m range.