Gameplay has turned into a campfest...

[KarmakazeNZ]

Also I've been saying it a lot of times, this is not about realism or anything else it's about the gameplay (karmakazeNZ reread my posts) I never said it wasn't realistic I said it wasn't fun or challenging.

Try taking your own advice. The game play is brought about by the realistic game mechanics. The game is MEANT to be realistic. If you don't like that, too bad. That's what it was advertised as.

You may be right though, you may be able to shoot accuractly with a bullet in your body at 60-80 meters away

A certain Fijian won the VC for operating a 25 pounder artillery piece single handedly for quite some time AFTER he had his jaw shot off. Saving his unit from a massively overwhelming attack in the process. He was hit several more times, and after getting help from another member of his unit, who was also wounded, and at points aiming and firing the gun at point blank range, he succumbed to his wounds. The soldier that came to assist carried on fighting, wounded, for another lengthy period of time until the attack was finally driven back with air strikes.

It's more than possible. It happens quiet a lot actually. You have to do something pretty amazing to even get noticed.

But still if you think RO:HOS is fun because it's super realistic and you enjoy the gameplay then there's little to discuss I fear.

Because you have nothing to discuss. You know what I'm saying is true, you just don't want to admit it.

PS: it's not bout how I play, it's how everyone plays, you can shoot a bullet in the camping spots and be 90% sure to get someone.

No ****. Bad players, play badly. Good players beat them. Are you surprised?

 

[MadGelo]

well, you get way more points by "camping" in the objective...

 

[6S.Manu]

Campers, please note the various ranges these guys were killed from. If he's moving he can get wherever he needs to be to take you out. If you are camping, you have to wait for him to move where you want him.

Are you surprised he wins?

Don't blame the weapons or the mechanics. He has the same limitations you do. You are not gimped. You CAN defeat him if you're a little smarter about it.

Did he win?

I would like to know if he was supported by a squad (probably camping behind him, bad thing right?) and if he was not how many times he has died acting like Rambo in that way.

Because in this game usually Rambos can be successful only if the opposite team is doing wrong: how did he reach that place without being shot? Probably those guys did not know the map... and looking at their Honour Level... but who cares, HE won...

But ok... continue to think that movement is the base of the real combat: knowing that the camper is rested, in cover, with his weapon already braced and if he's part of a well organized team you can't surpise him.... And of course, the camper is helping the run'n'gun guy in no way.

I dont know if during the D-Day there were some germans running to the shore to kill noobs... but they lost so probably there weren't.

 

[Scarf Ace]

Campfest? where?

Oh right.. theres the campers *Grins* All over the place. I love campers <3 especially flushing them out with my nagant bayonet or with a beloved ppsh.

Spoiler!

Lol, I hope you stole that PPSh

 

[OnCrack]

[..]

Again you fail to see what I am saying, I said realism is good when it's not brought to extremes, gameplay is more important. I see nobody falling on the ground while non mortally wounded, or hit in the left etc. I see no weapons dropping for being hit in the arms or hands, or receiving the kinetic energy from the impact from close range, is that realistic to you? A bullet hits me from 2 meters and I stand there with magic bandage, why when I walk outside the map I explode? is it realistic to you? You see realism isn't all.

My point was that shooting was too easy, and that camping was too common because of that, It's not a matter of being good or bad, it ruins how the game is played, no teamwork no tactics, just point and shoot, something you can find in any other fps title.

I've stopped playing as defending team because of that, offense at least gives you the challenge of capturing objectives, but still It's boring. Just played another round and ended with 26 kills thanks to MKb42/g41 on top of the leaderboard.

But if RO2 is realistic, also are call of duty and all that stuff right?

 

[KarmakazeNZ]

Because in this game usually Rambos can be successful only if the opposite team is doing wrong:

Anyone can be successful if the opposite team is doing wrong. It takes skill to be successful if the opposite team is doing right. You are trying to tell me that camping is more successful, which in your eyes makes it right, and yet here is a screenshot of four different enemies dying within 50m of each other.

Either they were camping and had no idea he was shooting guys so close to them, or Rambo here was out-running and out-gunning them like a mad man.

Either way, he assaulted a position and killed four enemies, and has a screenshot of him standing healthy in the aftermath. The class is called "assault". He did his job. No classes are called "camp". You're not doing your job if that is ALL you do.

how did he reach that place without being shot

It's pretty easy if you know how, and it doesn't even take map knowledge. There are several basic rules of thumb taught to real infantrymen that work in a game as realistic as RO2. My bet is he used them, knowingly or unknowingly, to first flank, then enfilade, and even envelop the enemy position.

Those are all real military terms for what he did. Count on it. I don't even have to know the details. The fact he is there, proves it.

But ok... continue to think that movement is the base of the real combat: knowing that the camper is rested, in cover, with his weapon already braced and if he's part of a well organized team you can't surpise him....

Most of my kills are campers who had no idea I was there or where I shot them from, and I get more kills than most. Clearly running and gunning and hunting campers, even with an MG, is just as, if not more, successful than camp and snipe. I could even explain the technological and physiological reasons it is superior, even in the real world, if you're interested. A lot of people complain about how much I write, however, so if you are interested in reading a lengthy argument, then let me know.

And of course, the camper is helping the run'n'gun guy in no way.

Personally, I have never said he didn't. The problem is, once I've finshed running and gunning and getting the cap, I'm going to camp, and you're supposed to start running and gunning into the next objective while I cover you.... but you don't... so I run off to try capping the next objective myself, thinking you will at least move into the cap and start covering me for the next objective, but you don't.

You stay right where you were, probably no more than 100m from the first spawn, covering the first objective that I have already captured and moved on from. You are covering the area I have already cleared in case someone kills me and tries to retake it. Gee... thanks.

But guess what? You're still behind the objective, so the enemy just stroll in and set up shop, starting to cap it. Now when I spawn, I have to try and get back there and kill them before they cap it, or start all over again.

Then you kill an enemy in the cap from 200m and pat yourself on the back for a job well done.

I dont know if during the D-Day there were some germans running to the shore to kill noobs... but they lost so probably there weren't.

Do you even know what the word "assault" means? Clearly not.

 

[Mike 78]

Seemed more realistic to you. The problem here is that your vision of "realistic" gunfights of WW2 is inaccurate. People used covers and crawl on the ground extensively because in actual combat, if your head sticks out in the open too long it got you shot at.

It's so hilarious some RO1 vets thinking the scare show of missing bullets in that game was somehow realistic.

If RO2 would have featured the true realism of the battles of Stalingrad than the Grain silo or factory battles would not take 10 minutes to fight out. Gunfire was exchanged for hours or days without either sides getting annihilated or even taking mass casualties like they would if RO2 physics would be the standard.

People used cover and crawled in RO1 and they took fire whenever they were spotted by the enemy, but they didn't get instantly nailed at range like in RO2. There was room for movement, sometimes in the open. Now there is no movement, just people rushing to their favourite camping spot. If you think real combat is like RO2 than you are plain gullible. Look up howmany rounds were fired to kill an enemy in WW2. Real combat isn't like CS. People aren't marksman all the time, especially not when their lives are on the line and they are under fire or freezing, tired or undernourished. This CS approach is pure BS and everybody who doesn't miss the RO gameplay probably never even played it. I'm back playing darkest hour because eventhough it looks outdated it owns RO2 gameplay on literally every level.

Btw, hate to refer to Hollywood movies but lets say that Band of brothers or SPR would be slightly realistic, than RO1 comes much closer to what is depicted as close combat in those movies. Raging gunfire on both sides and not 1 shot 1 kill BS that is featured in RO2.

 

[Gaizokubanou]

If RO2 would have featured the true realism of the battles of Stalingrad than the Grain silo or factory battles would not take 10 minutes to fight out. Gunfire was exchanged for hours or days without either sides getting annihilated or even taking mass casualties like they would if RO2 physics would be the standard.

People used cover and crawled in RO1 and they took fire whenever they were spotted by the enemy, but they didn't get instantly nailed at range like in RO2.

Gunfire was exchanged for long time because irl people behave more carefully. In a video game players try new things, often dumb things but they try just to see if they can get lucky or whatnot. Those idiotic charges are what get you shot up in RO2, as it would irl.

And without taking mass casualties...? Soviet Union took about 7950 casualties per DAY on average from 1941 and 1945. Imagine little more than two 9/11 happening on daily basis in terms of casualties. World War 2 was not some fireworks demonstration that you thought it was. People got mowed down if they ran in the open, you had better chance of living by keeping your head down. You do the same, you will live really long in RO2. You just won't get many kills and it'll be boring as hell but hey that's realism for you.

What RO1 did was let people seek excitement of a game and they implemented unrealistic penalties to capability of weapons so that players lived longer to have more fun. RO2 brought much more real capability to weapons and now people are finding out that if you are trying to have fun in more realistic combat, it just gets you blown away.

 

[Stahlhelmii]

Try taking your own advice. The game play is brought about by the realistic game mechanics. The game is MEANT to be realistic. If you don't like that, too bad. That's what it was advertised as.



A certain Fijian won the VC for operating a 25 pounder artillery piece single handedly for quite some time AFTER he had his jaw shot off. Saving his unit from a massively overwhelming attack in the process. He was hit several more times, and after getting help from another member of his unit, who was also wounded, and at points aiming and firing the gun at point blank range, he succumbed to his wounds. The soldier that came to assist carried on fighting, wounded, for another lengthy period of time until the attack was finally driven back with air strikes.

It's more than possible. It happens quiet a lot actually. You have to do something pretty amazing to even get noticed.



Because you have nothing to discuss. You know what I'm saying is true, you just don't want to admit it.



No ****. Bad players, play badly. Good players beat them. Are you surprised?

Are you a high school teacher, by any chance? I ask because you've been copying every other post and correcting them in small segments, as if you're grading an essay test.

 

[Nenjin]

Are you a high school teacher, by any chance? I ask because you've been copying every other post and correcting them in small segments, as if you're grading an essay test.

I lol'd.

 

[KarmakazeNZ]

If RO2 would have featured the true realism of the battles of Stalingrad than the Grain silo or factory battles would not take 10 minutes to fight out. Gunfire was exchanged for hours or days without either sides getting annihilated or even taking mass casualties like they would if RO2 physics would be the standard.

"The 13th Guards Rifle Division, assigned to retake Mamayev Kurgan and Railway Station No. 1 on 13 September suffered particularly heavy losses. Over 30 percent of its soldiers were killed in the first 24 hours, and just 320 out of the original 10,000 survived the entire battle. Both objectives were retaken, but only temporarily. The railway station changed hands 14 times in six hours. By the following evening, the 13th Guards Rifle Division had ceased to exist, but its men had killed approximately an equal number of Germans. Combat raged there for weeks near the giant grain silo. When German soldiers finally took the position, only forty dead Soviet fighters were found, though the Germans had thought there were many more due to the ferocious resistance. The Soviets burned heaps of grain during their retreat."

You were saying? You seem to think the Battle of Stalingrad was fought with two 32 man teams.

There was room for movement, sometimes in the open. Now there is no movement, just people rushing to their favourite camping spot.

Oh bollocks. Maybe YOU do that. I have the screenshots to prove I don't.

Btw, hate to refer to Hollywood movies but lets say that Band of brothers or SPR would be slightly realistic, than RO1 comes much closer to what is depicted as close combat in those movies. Raging gunfire on both sides and not 1 shot 1 kill BS that is featured in RO2.

Bahahahaha.... You didn't even watch the movie very closely, did you?

 

[Gaizokubanou]

You were saying? You seem to think the Battle of Stalingrad was fought with two 32 man teams.

Well it must've been because that's how it would be fought in RO1 and RO1 is super real and... stuff!!!

 

[KarmakazeNZ]

Are you a high school teacher, by any chance? I ask because you've been copying every other post and correcting them in small segments, as if you're grading an essay test.

Are you a high school student by any chance? You seem to have teachers on your mind. Should you be studying?

I format my posts the way I do so that there is no confusion about what I am saying in response to what. I have been arguing on forums for a very long time, and I know all the tricks people who haven't got a real argument try to pull, so I do things to head them off at the pass. I argue just as tactically as I play the game.

So... do you actually have anything to add, or a dispute with anything I said? Or is this one of those tricks that I was talking about?

 

[Pig]

I find it boring that I can stand still and have the same accuracy I have with the gun rested.

it's just not fun that I can run for miles and have no penalty while shooting.

i fully aggree on these points.

And i made a thread long before the game was released that bullets should have an impact when they hit you but not kill you. Like in RO you move slower, you lose your weapon(which could be replaced with a huge sway for a short time). all these things+stats not working make me not play Ro2 atm

 

[6S.Manu]

Anyone can be successful if the opposite team is doing wrong. It takes skill to be successful if the opposite team is doing right. You are trying to tell me that camping is more successful, which in your eyes makes it right, and yet here is a screenshot of four different enemies dying within 50m of each other.

Either they were camping and had no idea he was shooting guys so close to them, or Rambo here was out-running and out-gunning them like a mad man.

Either way, he assaulted a position and killed four enemies, and has a screenshot of him standing healthy in the aftermath. The class is called "assault". He did his job. No classes are called "camp". You're not doing your job if that is ALL you do.

I'm trying to explain that your acting alone, flanking the guys without getting shot is because the bad quality of the other team in terms of teamplay and leadership.

In RL they use squads because ONE standard soldier could not make the difference (if you don't have a LMG or an AT gun at least).
Of course the guys were flanked because they did not know the map: clearly their HL demostrate this. So what you guys are doing posting screenshots about your kill and how much "awesome you are" is useless.

You can't demostrate that a tactic is valid in that way: post me a video of you entire action and MAYBE I can take your "Rambo" tactic seriously and say "Good one" to you... it's been a bad idea workin alone but at least I have to admin that you are a skilled player.

It's pretty easy if you know how, and it doesn't even take map knowledge. There are several basic rules of thumb taught to real infantrymen that work in a game as realistic as RO2. My bet is he used them, knowingly or unknowingly, to first flank, then enfilade, and even envelop the enemy position.

Those are all real military terms for what he did. Count on it. I don't even have to know the details. The fact he is there, proves it.

In real life a single guy don't even start thinking about flanking enemies alone (in this case 4 of them). Only Rambo could do this. I hope you understand this, that a real soldier has ONE life and the only way to fight and stay alive is to work as a team.

Look I'm a guy who play IL2 full switch (most realistic settings on) since years and the first rule of my squad is "Don't die! Never!". Because of this we learned to act as a team.

So I'm totally against an irrealistic way to fight like the way you are defending here. The way that this game is allowing and that many players hate. Player's skill > team work => CoD style.

Most of my kills are campers who had no idea I was there or where I shot them from, and I get more kills than most. Clearly running and gunning and hunting campers, even with an MG, is just as, if not more, successful than camp and snipe. I could even explain the technological and physiological reasons it is superior, even in the real world, if you're interested. A lot of people complain about how much I write, however, so if you are interested in reading a lengthy argument, then let me know.

I can easily be one of your victim if my team is doing wrong. Many times I die because playing with casual teammates I can't communicate with them. I saw one of my guy covering the right flank, so I have faith in him and I advance ignoring that side. Then you flank me on that side and I die, only because the guy on the right has not done his job. Damn but probably it's because you're more skilled than me.

Personally, I have never said he didn't. The problem is, once I've finshed running and gunning and getting the cap, I'm going to camp, and you're supposed to start running and gunning into the next objective while I cover you.... but you don't... so I run off to try capping the next objective myself, thinking you will at least move into the cap and start covering me for the next objective, but you don't.

You stay right where you were, probably no more than 100m from the first spawn, covering the first objective that I have already captured and moved on from. You are covering the area I have already cleared in case someone kills me and tries to retake it. Gee... thanks.

But guess what? You're still behind the objective, so the enemy just stroll in and set up shop, starting to cap it. Now when I spawn, I have to try and get back there and kill them before they cap it, or start all over again.

Then you kill an enemy in the cap from 200m and pat yourself on the back for a job well done.

Of course the strategy is to assault under cover and then give cover.

Anyway until you objective is not clear (enemy want to retake it) somebody have to stay behind on the last one, and move only when the objective is ours 100%. Above all the slow LMGs.

Do you know that riflemen's job there to advance until in effective reange of their weapon, under cover of the MG, and when wrest fire superiority from the enemy? If your enemy is in range then you fire!

Do you even know what the word "assault" means? Clearly not.

Of course... all my post is against the "aggressive defence" concept.
If you are attacking you have to move (supported) and advance.

Anyway you have to do that as a team. That's the biggest difference with the old RO (or DH): here a single soldier can do the difference and because of this I'm losing interest in this game and I'll be looking for mods.

Its because the map design, the ridiculous bendage system, the quantity of semi and auto weapons, the inaccuraracy of MGs and their bad suppression feature, ect.

 

[Joseph-Porta]

Did he win?

I would like to know if he was supported by a squad (probably camping behind him, bad thing right?) and if he was not how many times he has died acting like Rambo in that way.

Because in this game usually Rambos can be successful only if the opposite team is doing wrong: how did he reach that place without being shot? Probably those guys did not know the map... and looking at their Honour Level... but who cares, HE won...

But ok... continue to think that movement is the base of the real combat: knowing that the camper is rested, in cover, with his weapon already braced and if he's part of a well organized team you can't surpise him.... And of course, the camper is helping the run'n'gun guy in no way.

I dont know if during the D-Day there were some germans running to the shore to kill noobs... but they lost so probably there weren't.

I hear ye want to hear the tale of how I got that shot..

Me and 2 friends + some random guy where running around in Fallen figthers, we fought our way braveily supported by an marksman (the random) an MGshooter (friend) and an squadleader(Friend) my self was an rifleman..

we pressed our way up the right flank, running from sewer to swer opening, clearing them of russians with granades as we fought our way forwards with sniper and MG support, covering eachother and picking off every russian that tried to face us.

in the end we where outside the house, all alive, 15 dead russians at our feet Atleast!!! I had picked up an PPSH from an dead russian, my friend an STV40. our sniper was in the back alley and the MG shooter covering the main enterence, me and my friend went in, myself in front, a nade flew in and to shake up th edefenders, but there was noone there. I charged up the stairs and shot two russians in the window dead, ran around the corner and gunned down one more at the Maxim... and charged further and blew away the last one by the window at the second stairs.. we carried on for 5 min, holding the russian house, keeping the window clear of sniper and cowards.. so our team could move up and cap the plaza!!!

OURRAAAAAAA!!!!

 

[messiah]

signed and agree with topic author... unfortunately...

 

[6S.Manu]

I hear ye want to hear the tale of how I got that shot..

Me and 2 friends + some random guy where running around in Fallen figthers, we fought our way braveily supported by an marksman (the random) an MGshooter (friend) and an squadleader(Friend) my self was an rifleman..

we pressed our way up the right flank, running from sewer to swer opening, clearing them of russians with granades as we fought our way forwards with sniper and MG support, covering eachother and picking off every russian that tried to face us.

in the end we where outside the house, all alive, 15 dead russians at our feet Atleast!!! I had picked up an PPSH from an dead russian, my friend an STV40. our sniper was in the back alley and the MG shooter covering the main enterence, me and my friend went in, myself in front, a nade flew in and to shake up th edefenders, but there was noone there. I charged up the stairs and shot two russians in the window dead, ran around the corner and gunned down one more at the Maxim... and charged further and blew away the last one by the window at the second stairs.. we carried on for 5 min, holding the russian house, keeping the window clear of sniper and cowards.. so our team could move up and cap the plaza!!!

OURRAAAAAAA!!!!

Great! Why did you not tell us in yout first post but only a "I'm awesome!" screenshot?

It's been a really good action! Congratulations!

Still has not to do with camping or not: you worked as a real team more than them.

 

[OnCrack]

Soviet Union took about 7950 casualties per DAY on average from 1941 and 1945.

This is the most retarded thing you could say, do you even know how long was the front and how many offensives? Jesus I wonder why people go to school...

Also stop bringing into the argument realism like that, it doesn't help anybody it just show you're a ww2 nerd. Focus on gameplay instead, think about the average kills you get and how easy is that?

edit: I am comparing my experience in RO and now in RO2, in roost i had to use tactics and skill to flank in order to kill the enemy, here i can just kill them as they pop their head out of cover to spot targets. To me it's not that fun or challening.

 

[Nenjin]

here i can just kill them as they pop their head out of cover to spot targets.

I'm having flashbacks to my first days playing RO, sticking my head out of a crater to try and get my first kill and getting my face blown off.

I think your argument is pretty weak. The latter years of RO were nothing but people sitting on their asses waiting for someone to look out of cover.