No Sensors?

[Ein]

Ya know... I for one have used claymores in a cb to protect the wz. So claymores are used. Weather they are always a good idea, i dont know. But I for one am tired of nadespammers in this game. Probably similar to the way people are tired of sensor campers. I mean with those oicw/nades, you can always blow me up in all my great hiding spots where i am camping with my sensors. So if sensors go then i suggest oicw/gl goes... even better get rid of oicw entirely. It's a crappy gun without sensors or gl anyways. And while were getting rid of that gun, might as well get rid of the whole rifleman type altogether because the only reason to choose one is for sensors or oicw. And since were getting rid of rifleman and support is out of the question, in the following season, we all must be either a demo or a sniper.

I like the way this sounds. Do all of you? or do you think it sounds stupid?

Thats right... its stupid so keep the game how it is. If you dont want sensors in your game play a cqb or ffa and just get over it.


Ein

[crypt]

Why don't we just ban the teams who win? You guys just don't get it, the game was made the way it was for a reason. Keep it how it is. This discussion is through.

[Aramarth]

This discussion is through.

Thankfully for everyone, crypt does not determine when and where a discussion ends. The rest of you may continue, but crypt has checked himself out, so I will make a point of removing any future posts of his from this thread. Hopefully, this will have a motivational effect to keep people from wasting everyone else's time.

[crypt]

Ok, well, I have points too. Infact, I actually used to be one of the biggest "no sensors" rule supporters. If you wanna delete this, go ahead. It's not gonna cause me any emotional distress or lack of sleep tonight.

My point is that you just told us all that you HAVE no input on the matter and consider it closed. Just say what you mean, and let other people have the same privilage. -Ara

[crypt]

Ok, I'm sorry. I'm just saying that although a good suggestion, this is something that shouldn't be taken in to consideration just because it's been denied before. Probably not gonna change now.

Continue posting your suggestions.

[Forrest]

As about 20 people have already said there is always a group of people who get worked up over this subject every season and every season it gets shot down. Why? Because sensors were included in the game for a reason by designers and testers who get paid to produce a BALANCED, and enjoyable game. They clearly saw the need to give those who prefer not to charge into their opponent's spawn or where ever with their guns blazing a tool that would allow them to move methodically and stratigically (yes, this includes not moving at all) in order to win. I understand the arguements of those opposed to sensors and, for the most part, they are valid. But sensors are not "a menace to the GhR community," they are part of how some people choose to play this game and while this may be different from how you choose to play the game it does not make any way other than yours wrong, noobish, or cheap. It is simply a different approach to the game. In closing, the sensors were put in the game to allow for multiple approaches to the same situation and allow gamers of almost every style to enter the game in a position equal to that of the other players.

Just my two cents, Forrest

[BTs_Lee.Harvey]

well put forrest

[Ein]

"Just my two cents, Forrest"

Two cents? sounded like a dollar to me... and right on

Ein

[Revolt]

Tru dat Forrest Gump...
Some take sensors i perfer to rush an opponent..while they are starin at map...
8 of 10 times they are lookin at map..instead of visual range..and 9 times out of 10 you can run up and buck.buck.buck...BOOOM!!!

To each his own..i was over the oicw after my 2nd season of DAMN*...

You can beat sensors...Get past em undeteced...Just a full clip and My Iraqi Air Max's...
And your good...

Dont hate the playa...hate the game....

[crypt]

Dont hate the playa...hate the game....

Most people do. Hate the game that is. According to a few RS guys.

[Aramarth]

Pardon if I am skeptical about "balance" of any kind in GhR. That word and this game are not even on speaking terms.

[crypt]

What do you mean Ara?

[BFG]

i think the game is balenced compared with some games out there. hell if you don't screw around with the game to much its fine. its when poeple start really picking and choosing from the game, adding and taking away that you start to loose how the game was originaly designed. All in all though i don't see massive issues with it.

[Aramarth]

The term "balanced" when applied to a game should tell you that any joe shmo with any given weapon, lets say the M16, should be able to play any one else with say, an OICW, and should not be at a disadvantage due to his weapon. Any weapon, like perhaps the 7.62 carbine, ought to have an advantage over everything else in just one catagory (with this gun perhaps accuracy), to allow people to use anything and still have a chance. However, GhR as we now know it sees everyone using one of two weapons religiously. The OICW is not the best in any catagory except zoom, but it takes second place in everything else. This is not balance, it is true cheese.

[spike]

But that's life isnt it? The army doesnt reduce the effectiveness of their guns in order that wars be more "balanced." They develop better, stronger, and more accurate weapons all the time so that they can wipe out the opposition. You are playing a fps based on real life combat, life isnt fair, and art imitates life.

[crypt]

Well said, Spike.

[Acri]

The guns are designed for single player.

[Forrest]

The guns are balanced!!! Lets ban the guns!!! This is going nowhere. Someone just lock the thread, we aren't even talking about sensors any more. The debate has died once more.

the debate
|
|
V
 

[Civrock]

thaaat's right, this is going nowhere... aaand we're done.