Encouraging long-range combat

Mess Room
1

Now the most useless players on your team have a bonus to kills.

IMG_20231218_224712
IMG_20231218_2247121076×675 234 KB

Thank you developers, you definitely incentivize winning in this game.
I still don’t understand why sniper squads should be the first squads a player unlocks.

His squads should be engineers/stormtroopers/9 bodies.

Sniper gameplay is the cancer of this game, I’m getting tired of seeing 3 German and Allied sniper squads each on the second or third floor of a department store in Stalingrad.

image-98
image-981920×1080 140 KB

It’s not like they literally don’t attack points, they don’t rally point, It’s just ballast that are encouraged for some reason. Give more points for rally point use, give more points for strategic point actions.

What good is a player 85 meters away from a strategic point?

6 Likes
2

i get the sense of accomplishment.

but like, snipers already had long range kill bonuses.

don’t really see the necessity of this bonus.

especially in a game where objectives don’t go beyond 300 meters :joy:

1 Like
3

Yes this class should have had normal “chips”, in the end it’s a useless 5 man squad where three have optics.
The only useful squad is a sniper stg/mkb, you can then add a sniper with a stg to the assault squad

4

not quite.

snipers are detrimental for picking out targets from a far.

even more in lone fighther

but the incentive should be by making more kills, in the shortest ammounf of time possible or being the most accurate as possible.

not by camping the far as possible and gain almost more than the sniper around the objective…

( ps. as for balance and sake of realism, i rather that those scoped weapons should be behind snipers than allow them to everyone )

1 Like
5

A good MG nest can far out perform snipers, especially in Stalingrad fallen fighters square.

2 Likes
6

Yes, large caliber machine guns are very useful when you have to capture a point (no)

7

DF when? :eyes:

IMG_4922

8

It’s not an issue that snipers are rewarded. Issue is that the game is badly designed and snipers don’t contribute to the victory.

3 Likes
9

You would be surprised.

10

How do compers contribute to winning?

11

No, if teams are effective machine guns don’t live longer than 10-30 seconds, they just get destroyed. The br5 battles with fully pumped players on both sides are very action packed.

12

The role of the sniper is to eliminate high value targets. So they can help by removing threats on your way so you as the assaulter face less resistance.
But in elisted all infantry targets are basically worthless and easy to kill.

Next one is reconnaissance. But snipers don’t have any tools and in general it’s better to kill than to mark.

I think I could give more examples but I’m lazy. I hope you get the idea.

1 Like
13

I don’t give 2 fucks about br5 matches. They are boring.
Ppl spam the same meta shit and just run into each other like in some tug of war game.

I’m not surprised MGs don’t last long there as it’s pure chaos without any sensible frontlines.

3 Likes
14

At least it’s more interesting than watching a bunch of snipers occupy every window of Stalingrad but never go to a strategic point

15

So they are useless and should be redesigned, but in their current form they shouldn’t get bonuses for not helping them win

3 Likes
16

That’s what city fights are about. Enemy behind every corner and in every window.

17

But they can’t be redesigned because ppl with 2IQ on forum cry about buffing them. (Not about you.)

18

They just make me cringe.

image-98
image-981920×1080 140 KB

19

Turn them into a scout squad that can use the gray area, but it will become more toxic and the number of geniuses in the windows won’t change

1 Like
20

correct, if it was 200 players against each other and not bots in majority snipers would be actually pretty damn good,

in lonefighters they basically dominate the game which is lame too imo, two extremes.

1 Like