How braindead do you have to be to actually defend instakill mechanics?

If the rife has a long reload time and has a low mag capacity then it's balanced. Poke out, force the miss, then attack.

Most snipers cannot aim at all. Sniper isn't hugely OP but I'd lower his damage output a bit.

>hitscan
>don't get hit

>shoot sniper
>his rustled jimmies force him to miss my head
>get closer
>Shoot him again
>more butthurt as he is only is able to get my shoulder for 50
>shoot him again
>he is already dead
>reload
Suppressive fire needs to be implemented to be more potent but this is literally what they intend you to do to beat him and it actually works on most players

>damage is charged up quickly by simply aiming down the sights
>can one shot a majority of the cast
>can also deal significant damage with bodyshots
>no weapon sway or anything, so it's extremely accurate
>also has a rapid fire weapon and an escape tool

Attached: hero-select-portrait.png (180x310, 93.8K)

Last time I checked, instagib settings in Unreal Tournament for example is no skillful (skillful=some players consistently winning - whatever factor that allows them to win, we call skill) than regular game modes, at least not to a major degree.

Those are "solutions", not reasons behind why instakill mechanics should be a thing in the first place
Yeah, I'm also braindead, but that doesn't excuse insta kill mechanics

At the distances most video games happen at the different is going to be negligible whether a bullet is treated as hitscan or it's path deduced point by point over time. Get serious. You know perfectly well "don't get hit" is a function of the actions taken proactively, not reactively.

>predict an enemy you can't see or even hear, while he can see you perfectly

Getting instakilled is a natural logical occurrence given of the existence of damage and hp.

Do we need to make everything a nerf gun to appease you.

Then why are you playing a shooting game that has a 3d open space in which people can see your exposed back?

>prediction
I said nothing about that you illiterate faggot. Proactive is the word I used. Otherwise known as "making smart choices based on the information at hand to mitigate statistical chances of bad events," something you're obviously not capable of.

Everyone has it, so it becomes a battle of accuracy, reflex, map awareness/game sense, and less about weapon x beating weapon y at z range.

It’ll always be your fault, and the majority of the time you get outplayed.

A good game, in theory, should give you tools to let you know if an enemy is close to you, like his footsteps or the sound of his gun. A Sniper negates that with distance, and can instantly kill you, meaning you can't prepare, neither react to his attack.

The instakills I refer to are from Full HP to 0 in one hit. Should have clearified that.

Best class

Attached: maxresdefault.jpg (1280x720, 67.16K)

How are you proactive about someone who can kill you with one hit, across the map and whose existence you don't even know about up until he kills you?

You don't move into areas that could contain active snipers? Especially in maps that are static where you know common snipe points. Especially in games where you can see who got killed by what, and therefore have an approximate idea of where enemy snipers are applying their zone of control? This is basic fucking logic dude, come on.

Well it sounds like your problem is more with the existence of snipers and long range projectiles in general. Getting sniped sucks, but the ball is in the player's court to avoid putting themselves in the situation to be sniped. A good game does not mean it has to make decisions for you or give you eyes in the back of your head. Not everything must /can be reactable. Which is why we use map awareness and positioning to avoid situations we can't react to.

>just don't walk at all bro, let a faggot who you can't even see negate a whole area because he chose a sniper rifle

What an awful way to reason
And even then, you are presenting a solution to a problem, not a reason as to why the problem should continue to exist

>snipers can observe the entire map unimpeded through their literal tunnel vision device, and are also known to be incredibly mobile
The second part is true in Overwatch I guess.

The thing is, you can't really predict Snipers, you can't react to Snipers due to the instakill factor, and they are negating you a whole chunk of the map just by existing. I don't consider that to be a fair thing, since every other class has to put some sort of movement, risk and effort to actually contribute to the match. Sniper just negates all that with his mere presence.

>a reason as to why the problem should continue to exist
It is not a problem that exists. It a variable that exists. Just like a player sneaking up on you is a variable or a random thrown grenade. If you we're playing a single player game than sure. But a multiplayer game by nature means every player is an unknown variable that you have to consider. As for why snipers can be capable of one shotting. It's an element of "good game" design. In exchange for good accuracy, the player is rewarded with high damage.

if snipers are so OP, why don't entire teams just play sniper

You are trying to present a logical argument while disregarding the entire set of logical factors. Snipers can't see anything but what's through their scope, meaning they take risks by staying in one place too long and not being able to see what's around them because applying their control to an area is a selective action. Moreover, your team has snipers too which can engage enemy snipers. There are limiting factors to their effectiveness in a team game that can be exploited.

I have no problem with rewarding good aim. The problem I have is rewarding good aim that comes from being at a distance and abusing the fact that he's at that distance and you can't reach him.
>a variable
Yes, of course. But that doesn't mean that you can deal with said variable. At least, not by adapting the same playstyle he's using, or trying to sneak up on him (which will be almost impossible, since you need to get trough his team aswell to do so)

The point is: if a player sneaks up on me and kills me, then that's my fault. If I'm punished just for walking around, then that is a flawed game design, at least in my eyes. I can counter the flanking player by being more aware and killing him before he kills me. But I can't counter a Sniper without me myself being also a Sniper.

A Sniper can un-scope to get a better grasp as to what's around them, and (depending on the game) they can get the instakill even without aiming down. And again, countering Sniper as Sniper isn't really valid, because it forces me to either adapt a completely different playstyle, or completely rely on the hipotetical skill my team's Sniper have (if there are any at all)

>fair
And there it is. Competitive activities are unfair by nature due to human differences, but that's another conversation. Getting shot from behind can be considered unfair, but every player has the ability to catch others unaware. If other classes not being able to instakill bothers you, then think on this. While the Sniper has high damage in exchange for high accuracy at long range, he loses much. He is vulnerable at short range. A sniper rifle can't keep up with a machine gun, pistol, or any other weapon at close distance. They can simply put out more bullets per second than a sniper rifle, leading to more damage per second. After missing one shot, the sniper is almost guaranteed to die.

Another thing is that firing a single shot points a target on a sniper's head. Meaning they have to quickly move or risk getting killed by a different class or another sniper. This movement can't be quite difficult and may not be possible depending on the map.

>If I'm punished just for walking around
You are not being punished for walking around. You're getting punished for not moving around the risk of getting sniped. If you move, you need to move under cover, or move quickly through an open space to reduce the risk of getting shot. By your logic a player with good aim killing you with an assualt rifle at long range before you can react is unfair.

Oops OP here I used the wrong image silly mistake

Attached: 1555272876544.png (300x270, 101.22K)

They would if they could or were good

>NOOO EVERYTHING MUST TURN INTO A LONG AND BORING SHOOTOUT WHERE EVERYONE DEAL THE SAME AMOUNT OF DAMAGE

Regardless of whether or not this is bait, I still value the posts here. There too many stupid/mentally ill people in this world. And some have dumb beliefs like this. The anger of people getting shot in the back in Call of Duty makes this type of discussion worthwhile.

>be oblivious dummy that doesnt pay attention to ambushes or sightlines
>die
Without high burst damage, youd see a meta of high health overheal beefy targets slowly glacier their way across the battlefield because trying to contest them ends in your death.
TF2 is a very lethal game because of how damage ramp up works, most things die in 2 well placed shots how the fuck do you think you can do better than 2 shots?

>Competitive activities are unfair
They are unfair, yes, but not due to the tools used, but rather the skill each individual inputs into it. Say, if we are both doing pole vaults, then the one who wins should be defined by who's better at doing it, and not by who is using a broken pole and who is using and high quality pole.

>risk getting killed
You aren't considering two factors.
One: that will always depend of a Sniper's awareness, since if he sees someone coming after him, he can kill them before they kill him. And even if someone flanks, they still need to get trough the Sniper's team and kill the Sniper himself since, as I said above, Sniper isn't defenseless.

Fair point, I should rephrase what I said: I'm being punished for not having information, yet the game doesn't give me that information before killing me, and even with said information, I still need to either get trough the whole enemy team or play Sniper to counter another Sniper. I'm being forced to make a competely 180 degree turn in playstyle just because one dude is sitting at a distance.

>weak at close range
Avoiding the fact that you can still one shot someone if he's close to you, Snipers also have close range defenses, like grenades, Machine Guns as secondary weapons, or straight up piss. They aren't defenseless at close range.

Attached: y0ql394ghcp21.jpg (2220x1080, 547.32K)

nice strawman you have there

> I'm being punished for not having information, yet the game doesn't give me that information before killing me
That is literally how ambushes should work. He gets 1 free shot and after that none of you should give him a chance to take more. Fucking threaten him, force him to be paranoid to avoid charged shots from being a threat and encroach on him with overheal that he has no hope of dealing with quickly enough. Talk to your damn team instead of trying to fight him in his element, you re the kind of dumbass that runs into 3 sentries and complains about area denial instead of understanding just how 1 dimensional the gameplan they have is and how to outplay them.
You cant just unga your way to victory, overwatch is 2 doors down.

>a completely 180 degree turn in playstyle
That is a playstyle you should have in a shooting game regardless of whether or not it has snipers in it. You already have the information as soon as your start a match that snipers or other players are setup. And if there aren't you should still assume they're could be regardless. Unless it's your first time you should be aware which spots have good vantage points for people at long range.

Don’t get scanned then retard

Attached: 1561909843450.jpg (396x246, 31.35K)

Sniper isn't ambushing you. He's just sitting at a distance, abusing the fact that you have no way of telling he's there.

If I look around, I can see, say, a Pyro waiting for me in the corner. But I can't tell if a Sniper is aiming trough a small spot trough the map, waiting to kill me from 5 kilometers away.

Sentry stacking is a problem aswell, but not because of the Sentrys, but rather the three dumbasses tanking them. Even then, they are easier to deal than a Sniper.

Also
>Talk to your damn team instead of trying to fight him in his element
What, so I should ask someone in my team to be bait?
Or to uber me in order to kill a Sniper?
Litereally any class that isn't Medic can deal in one on one combat with the other classes with no problem, but only Sniper can deal in a 1v1 situation against another Sniper? That's balanced?

You are missing the point. Of course you need to be aware for enemies, I'm not saying you should not. But expecting a Sniper at all times just turn matches into a Trench War.

Am I to assume you've never taken out a sniper at range with an auto/single shot assault rifle? Or even a pistol?

Yes, because there are no counter tactics against snipers.

>Trench War
I didn't say bunker down and wait around. Move safely and quickly through open spaces. If that's too much or too unfair than you do you.

Sniper would be extremely overpowered if tf2 had good hit detection.

Attached: cornholio.png (264x376, 208.61K)

Being surprise attacked is literally what am ambush requires. He doesnt need to jump your anus for it to be an ambush.
You can tell if a sniper exists by looking for his dot or looking down the slight line. If he can see you, you can see him. Only approach sightlines with a safe amount of overheal to buffer your chances of survival. Talk with your team about taking alternate routes to ensure he doesnt have a shooting gallery to play in and warn people of his location so they can avoid taking his sightlines, spam him to force a retreat, or kill him outright.

But he's still negating an area with his mere existence. He's denying you any chance to move around said area with the threath of him instantly killing you
The safest option will always be to not engage at all with him, since that way you don't risk getting one shot

>if he can see you, you can see him
*Laughs in Badwater and Upward

Any sniper worth their salt knows how to hide the dot, and if they're looking down an open area they don't even need to use the scope until right before they fire.

At least in some games instakills needs to be headshots; then there's csgo where all you need is a bodyshot, and people defend it because most of them would be trash if they tried other weapons.

instakill is legit but there has to be a way to anticipate it

Then take the risk. That's what movement is for. That's what taking potshots is for. Grenades, tools, etc. He's a human being and you can do things to influence him to miss or prevent him for headshotting you. How long have you been playing games for? If you have a mentally disability then I'll understand. But this is ridiculous OP.

hitscan is based
insta kills are redpilled
get good

i've said this in threads exactly like this before, snipers are long range sentries that fire slower. you walk into their range and there's a chance you either get hurt really badly or you die instantly, but they're only effective in a small number of places without putting themselves at massive risk, so avoiding those sightlines is the same as avoiding a well known sentry spot, and it's just as easy to overwhelm. unless he has a vaccinator pocket medic, those snipers are fucking cunts.

It's even more infuriating when you know snipers are overwhelmingly picked by children (what's up with that ?). I advise playing Fortnite, you can build your way out of anything, one shot are very rare so it shouldn't get too bad. As a sneak I like executions and the likes but I could do without.

>he has trouble with snipers being played by children
those kills could not be more free

Again, those are ways to work around a problem, not a direct way to counter the problem itself. You talk about the situation as if the Sniper is the only member on his team, while he still has a whole team to back him up.

High time to kill appeals to bad players, because if you get lucky you can still win a fight that you walked into unprepared for.

If you walk around a corner while reloading, you can still win if the guy who outplayed you has a slightly weaker gun.

You also have a team.

>kills could not be more free
I think the reason why they pick snipers is because they're too afraid to die, I'm not gooing to chase them at map ends, easy kills as they can be, not to mention in objectives mode (I'm thinking Battlefield 3) it's a waste of time. Although in my experience they really don't kill me often, maybe I haven't played the right games where they're enabled the most.