
Originally Posted by
PandaThing
Mintage, there was a good reason I apologized already if i viewed the video in the wrong context. I wouldn't insult you by not reading you post and not watching the video.
Also, i play a hell of a lot of battlefield 3, and a sniper rifle on team deathmatch is unparallelled for kill efficiency. In the end, without lag of course, i would 'question the skill' of any sniper who has difficulty combating assault weapons at long range in BF3.
Look, I just don't think a sniper rifle needs to have a place where the focus is medium to close range infantry combat. Why should a sniper stand up to an assault rifle as medium range? That just isn't what its for. If you don't have any success with a sniper rifle, then change to something else, don't bemoan the weapons damage and scorn the other players lack of skill. The other players who have had the common sense to choose a mid range or close range weapon in a mid to close range environment.
If all the maps contained an equal range of close, medium and long range environments, then the sniper should be just as effective as all of the other weapons. On maps with more close range environments, then it won't be as effective. The whole point of different weapon types is that they are effective at different ranges and in different situations, and shoehorning any weapon int a new role because people just have to have a sniper class, and then insist on using it in a medium range environment is bad game design. If you die a lot by Ar's, it s because they are bringing the right tool for the job, and you are not, not that the sniper should just kill people in one shot to make it fair. As soon as you do that, and then move to the environments where the sniper is intended, and you have a horribly overpowered weapon on your hands.
In the context of battlefield 3, if your playing conquest on operation metro and keep dieing while using a sniper, its not because the gun is bad, its because you should be using something else.