Seals Vs Terrorist - Balanced?

AL GIORDINO · 10-06-2004

Nahhhh guys this thread isn't about the IW! It is about the gameplay balance, and what I was trying to say is that the gameplay IS balanced, with all guns in use. The maps I give this exception to are those with the terrorists have M79s but no Seals M203.

I think its safe to say most people DONT think IWs are noob guns, thank god, though there are a lot who do. In all the time I play, I come across few people who have a problem with the IW. So what does it matter if some top guys think they are for newbies? I'm sure there are plenty of top guys who think they aren't.

You guys are only comparing guns, as in all that's needed to be a good player, and thats where I disagree.

Your not battling a Seal or a Terrorist on a perfectly flat surface, with no buildings or walls, where only the person who doesn't get killed wins the game.

Except for on supression maps, the majority of maps in the game have objectives different than KILL. Nobody says that when your playing a terrorist, you have to turn it into a DEATHMATCH. Unless its supression, it's not Deathmatch.

You gotta use the terrorist advantages that they have. This means guarding the hostages in an extraction. Rushing the VIPs in an escort. Camping the base and mining the hell out of it in a breach. Supression, using your better start point to get nades going faster, rush faster than Seals expect. Demolition, grab the bomb faster. (Terrorists can grab the bomb faster than Seals on every Demolition map)

USE THESE ADVANTAGES, and forget about the IW. Seals get IW for having the harder mission to complete. Fact. The reason they complete it easier with the IW is because most terrorists play like it's a deathmatch, when it's not. This isn't Quake. I'll own a team of Seals with IWs, by using the terrorist advantages. That's what I think is fun about a terrorists. It's a different gameplan. Learn it.

I just don't think people should be complaining about guns, when mainly it's really their skills that are newbie.

Claymore Crisis · 10-06-2004

Yeah, what the **** happened to the mark 23?!?!?
I am dependent on that gun

Erg · 10-06-2004

Al the idea of advantages that go to the different teams is great, unfortunately some people just dont get it thats why they complain about the different guns. As far as im conerned any gun the kills is a noob gun. i once used the sasr for the first time and a guy called me a noob!

Wand3rer · 10-06-2004

Quote:

This was not really directed to anyone in this thread, just the IW 203 squad in general.

P.S. I think the most amusing IW debate I ever had was when some kid tried to convince me why the IW needed a 203 launcher. LOL

A tip for you, do not quote real life weaponry and try to compare them to weaponry in a video game, no matter how realistic they are "supposed" to be.

Greywolfe · 10-06-2004

Quote:

Originally Posted by Wand3rer

A tip for you, do not quote real life weaponry and try to compare them to weaponry in a video game, no matter how realistic they are "supposed" to be.

Well that was actually directed to the people that say, "Seals have better weapons in real life and, that the IW80 is just so good in real life. It was not necessarily mentioned in this thread but this is not the first IW thread I have read, and someone always seems to make the comment about how good it is in RL, so I was just being preemptive.

DaKilla · 10-07-2004

I have to go with Greywolfe on this one...

The game was and is supposed to be realistic as far as weaponry goes. Why do you think they took all the funs and fired them with extensive testing while making the game?

The point is, people always make the comment that the SEALs have better weaponry because they do in real life, which is not necessarily as true as one may think. Sure, they may have better weapons, but how far can the advantage be taken before the level of playability is severely limited. This is one of the key concepts in developing a game, and in my opinion, Zipper screwed it up a bit.

I don't like to run-and-gun without tactics; trust me, I absolutetly hate it. The problem is that with the weapons the way they are now, SEALs can simply charge straight in and massacre the Terrorists on most maps. And don't start telling me about specific cases, or this and this map, because, quite frankly, the most played maps are the ones in which SEALs have the advantage. That's simply the way it is, and there isn't going to be anything done about it. I'm sure Zipper tried to make everything equal with maps, etc; but the problem is that some of the maps that make it equal just aren't played often.

Jezz · 10-07-2004

You are a noob when you cant use any other gun.

The amount of people that come on seals on my team and they use and IW, and get 2 or 3 kills a round. They boast, so we say if your really skillful use another gun but the IW. They do sometimes and their kills drop significantly.

This is when your a noob

Wand3rer · 10-07-2004

Quote:

You are a noob when you can't use any other gun.

And the reason people call guns "newbie guns" is because they are arrogant mother fsckers and assume that they only use that gun no matter what.

DaKilla · 10-07-2004

I call certain guns "n00bish", and I'm not arrogant at all.

My reasoning behind it:

If a gun is easy to use, and this is on a personal scale, I consider it more "n00bish" than a gun that I think is hard to use. The word "easy" and "n00b" are interchangeable when speaking of the weaponry in Socom 2 for me.

That's the only reason I would call one gun (the IW for sure) more "n00bish" than the F90, for example. It is like a scale of ease of use, with the easiest weapon being the most "n00bish".

I hope you guys can understand that reasoning, because that's how I've been meaning it all along.

Wand3rer · 10-07-2004

I misphrased, my fault.

People who complain about guns being n00bish are arrogant mother fsckers who assume that players only use the wepaon to rank up.