That is the only thing we are supposed to say when someone says sniper is unbalanced. I have been playing tf2 for years and i only have 600 hours. Its also because i play many other games and online shooters but you get the idea. How to solve sniper issue? Well, this is a life issue. The issue is that some people dont have it.

@@zombine7103 problem: people dont have lives Solution: *t a k e i t f r o m t h e m*

@@Randus1058 thats a goo-*aahhhaamm* an evil approach.

@@Randus1058 lmfao

@@zombine7103 what can I say… evil is effective

Few things as nice as firing a projectile at an angle you know will be peeked and crouching into cover to hear the kill sound. It makes for great mindgames and also encourages thinking ahead, as opposed to "just" pointing at heads.

The Huntsman begs to differ

Didn't the snipers in both Titanfall games also work like this? I remember them not only having travel time like but also some bullet drop, requiring you to lob your shots depending on how far away you are.

@@dukeradwardthe5th843 more of a gimmicky weapon, no?

@@dukeradwardthe5th843 can't 1 shot on a fully charged body shot so it's balanced in my opinion

Can you elaborate more on how the sniper there works? I'm confused

@@-RandomStranger- Charger (sniper) has a (you guessed it) charge up time, during this charge time you move extremely slowly with most chargers, you can hold the charge as long as you want but you have to be slowed. They ALWAYS one shot on body and head, with only a few exceptions. It forces you to be committed to making plays.

@@CalciumEnjoyer the sniper in tf2 has the same mechanics and hes still hated, except he only oneshots 5 classes in the game with a bodyshot, but a lot of snipers still have a moral code to try and aim for headshots, even if they're fully charged

To clarify,, you cannot passively charge it or hold that charge. You must choose to charge it and then release

@@stavbearer9878 and that seems like the huntsman, the tf2 weapon all players like/ars fine with(excluding the bugs)

Another thing they did was with the M107 Barrett, it did low damage that went up to a certain point, then a ways after it went back down again making it most effective between there

Alternatively, if you have a points system, you can do exactly what you mentioned but with points instead - up close kills results in minimal points, so people who do this barely get any reward for doing it.

phantom forces is indeed amazing for sniper balance, but you're forgetting the fact that you can equip a shotgun shorty or whatever its called now (used to be serbu shorty, i haven't played in a bit but i know it changed) and a sniper rifle. i use this strategy and it is... a little bit overpowered, to say the least. i immediately kill anyone at most ranges (the few ranges i don't cover tend to be absent on most maps) though, i mostly target higher-level people because i think its good aim training, and i don't use the body-shot snipers like bfg 50 or hecate 2.

It's also was the first Unreal Tournament by the time of CS1.6, which had pretty deadly sniper rifle, especcially on large maps. And yep, it looked like balance as all the guns have some killer features like really big boom or dedly substance blobs spawns

THANK YOU. I got so annoyed when he skipped TFC and went straight to Counter-Strike.

ya he didnt mention UT or TFC, zzz

Man the biggest challenge with sniper in the original quakeworld TF mod for quake was the fact we were all playing on a dialup connection back then. I was rocking a 14.4 dialup connection on AOL back then. I didn’t hit many sniper shots.

@@metl6929 TFC, Half life (had an actual sniper weapon) or Quake 2. The guy must be very young to not know all these games.

correct me if im wrong but I remember halo 3 having this or it was suposed to have this I found a limited edition version of the game many years ago, the one that came with a book on enemys and weapons and i remember it saying in that book each of the weapons damages at diferent ranges, with long range weapons doing less damage at closer ranges but at the same time I do not remember ever feeling like this mechanic was in the game itself

I find it funny how he does mention Battlefield, but not that Battlefield 1 has exactly the mechanic you mentioned here. It's even used to differentiate the rifles against each other, with different rifles having different one hit zones.

1:46 There could be more aspects depending on the game, mobility can branch out into aiming walkspeed and hip walkspeed, handling could branch into recoil, ADS time, or sway, and range could branch into a damage range (less damage over long ranges) or velocity which is how fast a bullet travels.

I was about to comment something like this, another solution is make the shotgun have better rof and mobility and handling than the sniper

@@Right1994exactly

My personal favorite solution is when shotties and snipers aren’t weapons you spawn with but function more like a power up, like in halo

Just pull a fortnite and make the aiming stupidly inconsistent for hip firing so you basically have zero chance if you dont use the scope

an idea i had yesterday was to make the bullets "rocket propelled/accelerated". basically the longer the bullet travels the more damage it does

please for the love of god... whatever you do... never give a sniper the option for a shotgun as a secondary (or if you do, nerf it). this is a deliberate tactic i use in some FPS games and it can be HORRIBLY overpowered.

@@remingtonn_Best long range weapon and best close range weapon together? What could go wrong!

Man slug rounds on BF:BC2 and BF3 were such a meme. For some reason I really got into them, I think in BC2 I always played them with magnum rounds so I could one shot kill people at some range.

To me 2 of the points contradict each other quite a bit, I don't feel like having way bigger maps encourages bigger scope or long range because scope glint exists. Scope glint directly discourages long range and high power scopes, which encourages using weaker/short range sights thus encouraging you to play medium like an AR making the bigger maps just more annoying and "Sniping" somewhat pointless. But that's just my personal opinion.

Loved playing with a squad in Bad Company 2 as a sniper, with a medic and resupplier for support. The bullet drop always made sniping way more rewarding imo

Honorable mention goes to BF1s sweet spot mechanic making rifles strong at different ranges. The mechanic got $h!t on a lot but ultimately it did inject a mechanic of choosing your engagements. The sidearms in bf1 usually filled in the gaps that the sweet spot rifles failed at. I personally didn't think it was all that bad of an idea, it just was never overtly explained to players very well. Lots of long term battlefield fans didnt like it but I think thats mostly because they only ever think about the mechanic when they get killed by it. And ultimately if you are working with your team well, you can soft counter the effects of the sweetspot.

BF1 was pretty bad about sniper rifles with how good they were. BF4 was the opposite. They weren't that good but if you were someone who put a bunch of time into getting good with them, they were a monster, so it was always one extreme or the other. BF5 was just a bad game so whatever lol

you also need to constantly reposition and have bad mobility for at least a little bit before you whip out the knife, which is too late when you're already getting slowed by shots. Anyone that's not an MG lowelo dog can easily win awps

and this is why woxic plays on serial killer high sens so he never has to scope out hahaha

Moreover, the amount of money you recieve after kill are the lowest, if we deeply look onto in-game economics, you can get a kill or two, still die with lost round and not get a new rifle in the next. This ultimately pushes the player to analyse, are they confident to make a push in enemy controlled territory or they would rather save it to the next round, thus keeping on team-economy with high valued gun. That's what I think is the best balance point in tactical shooters. Snipers almost everytime have a low balance so they have to rely on their teammates or switch gameplay to money grinding SMG's/shotguns e.t.c

...only if you've got headpones on, and they're cranked up to EAR BLEEDING. They're basically legal wall hacking and I've never agreed with the people who believe it's realistic to turn footfall up to 11 and still call it "fair and tactical" gameplay

@@iller3 you can hear scoping on any volume, you don't need your volume through the roof. I'm pretty sure you can hear it even on speakers, but idk why anyone would do that to themselves.

call of duty exists

see: splatoon

maybe get good and stop crying when u get merked

@dustydeemer8347 Using texting shortcuts in comments, and the comment is actually true to some degree.

@@AWESOMEPRO-xu4it what about texting shortcuts?

but that just means an class in game with 8-12 shrikens alot of the creativity and kind of maps you can make

The best solution to the Sniper issue is to not add it in the first place.

Bazookas! Clear sight lines no problem, just barrage the shit out of any obvious sniping position.

Same thing for utility... Snipers are balanced by having their usual position being flashed or their view blocked by smokes

@@vivelespatat2670 That's also how you lose millions of players as well. You'll still play the game if there are snipers, I won't play the game if I can't snipe.

yea but iv come to close to screaming the n word coz someone sniped me from 200 meters away and theres nothing i could do abt it, causing a decrease in fun for close-quater players

@@prince0panda914 Just admit you have racist tendencies without blaming the game LMAO

@@oba9ara every gamer, racist or not, has come close or has said the n word at least once.

that was my first thought too going into the video, that the sniper could just be modified to be weaker on closer targets. other solution could be that its accuracy would become worse the closer the target is, where being too close to an otherwise clear shot will make it have a much higher chance of bullet spreading away from a target than a shotgun would around corners. the game can show your vision gradually blurring more and more while scoped, the more you aim at closer surfaces, until it becomes completely blurred aiming at something right in front of you. so shotgun would pretty much always win even with a whole wasted mag. would completely discourage anyone from even attempting to use a sniper in close combat, so snipers stick to zones they are capable in. bonus balancing point could be that if target moves into you, they shove your sniper rifle aside so you cant shoot them at all, so you are forced to use secondary in corners where you can get caught off guard. like how some games disable using bows if warriors get too close, makes aiming impossible. i feel like i have seen so many action movies where people grab pistols to disarm someone from shooting, its strange no one thought of it as a balance against sniper rifles. those guys probably dont want you to push around their heavy and unbalanced gun while sticking your smgs in their face lol

@@oba9ara I was exaggerating for dramatic effect I don’t use the n-word when I get sniped

Exactly my thoughts watching this video, and why I have mostly dropped casual shooters (who needs "weapon balance" when the biggest threats are grenades, vehicles and artillery? Lol)

Destiny2 also balances their snipers this way, and it's why they feel great

Same with cod for quickscoping you let go of all movement keys for a couple milliseconds then shoot

Didn't excpected that PR would be mentioned here, but I'm glad you did :3

@@thisgoddamusernamestoodamnlong no they feel great because they game literally has aimbot.

Furthermore, it is very easy to bait out a shot from the AWP and push immediately afterwards while it still reloads Team coordination makes this even easier

Also utility balences snipers alot

@@LuxthXO agree. utilities destroy the awp, flash and smoke.

The awp is OP but it's a key game mechanic of the game. It's like a map feature or dangerous part of the map. It makes the enemies economy even more important.

It's still annoying when its 90% of my deaths

AA 2 best game ever...... No scope/crosshair MOS mount mekenna .. I wish i could still play it :( Back when bunny hopping was a bannable offence. Now its just a 13 year olds way of moving ugh the good old days haha

This is very much what I was going to say - although I didn't have an example ready. This is a more fair, fun, and realistic way to balance a sniper rifle than any of the balances mentioned in the video.

@@craig5340 bunny hopping is annoying, but banning people for bunny hopping is pretty petty and lame.

@@DeadSpacedOut Never said I want it banned I am telling you this is how it used to be . For the people around for the entire fps genre

@@craig5340 I didn't say you said you wanted that, all I said was that it's petty and lame.

shotgun slugs with similar range to shotguns but more damage?

quickscoping is not the problem and it should be rewarded, a quick scope upclose takes skill and is not easy to do and so when you nerf quickscoping you basically cap the skill ceiling and reward long range 1 hit 1 kill with no consequences to doing so, thats why the best possible fix for it is damage falloff that still rewards close range quickscopes but discourages long the long range camping.

@@MidoEl Quickscoping is the problem you shouldn’t be rewarded for using a long range weapon in close range. Snipers should be boring and campy its what they’re made for you should be playing around them not running in a straight line towards them. There are multiple ways to bait snipers(jiggle peeking, jump peeking, utility, etc), and get close but if you get clapped easily even at close range then theres no real viable strategy to handle them just pray they miss.

@@MidoEl nah it should be the opposite. The sniper should do LESS damage at close range. That sounds stupid, right? yes it does, but an explanation could be over-penetration causing the bullet to do less damage. This way would be the best way to balance snipers in my opinion

@@GamerGod-fp1tj what about giving it high inaccuracy when aiming the weapon with your mouse quickly?

Yeah, everyone calls snipers unbalanced, but never know how nightmarish it is to be IRL solider, stuck in the open, with an enemy sniper pinning you down. And just like in the games, you don't know where they are. Snipers are a menace in real life like that.

but those irl snipers don't kill on close range :D this video game sniper nonsense is so idiotic to me in general. just aim for one millisecond and hit headshots... yeah right

@@sebw89 I presume (with an un-educated guess) that the reason we don't solve all wars with close-range sniper duels, is because they're bulky and it takes considerably more strength to hold them up or spin around with them to take aim. How do we translate that to video games though? No matter how close in-game you stand to a wall, you're never going to accidently hit said wall with the gun barrel, character movement has to be responsive and not realistic, etc. It's a god-damn mess!

@@silver1340 you could make it so that people carrying a sniper rifle move slower than others.

@@destroyerofturtles5024 Lower it too much, and the weapon itself becomes unviable to reliably carry. At most it makes people switch to other weapons more (knife) for increased mobility, which also increases time to take a shot as you have to pull out the sniper, but in the end it just turns annoying. Perhaps some simulation of weapon weight (slower movement speed) + respecting their bulky nature (drag when looking around with weapon out), the latter of which is unnoticeable on compact weapons such as SMG?

one of the more unintuitive game ever where you can headshoot a aerial pilot with sniper but you need 2 explosive for destroy the aerial vehicule as the tank

​@omnianti0 It's not exactly complex. The pilot is more vulnerable than vehicles, but harder to hit.

@@smokescreen100 if you considere the helicopter integrity its very vulnerable to any damage especially the litlebird what their is barely nothing out of structural and critical mecanic to hit if you shoot it a dozen of time with cal.50 it not a real threat ND EVEN A SINGLE RPG7 SCORE IS NOT ENOUGHT

​@@omnianti0Battlefield 1 doesn't have helicopters.

i dont experimented rifles versus planes but i bet ita the same resistance @@Creepernom

Even then, the rail has been considered to have balance issues by many. I like Reflex's answer: the stake gun. Turns the rail into a projectile weapon, but in return you can use it to make stanfable surfaces on walls

Half Life also have sniper (crossbow actually but it functions as a sniper) and it naturally released before CS did.

That just means the amount of skill you need to have to kill people with it goes up. Among the best of the best the railgun is still just as broken as it is among the best in other games.

@@matthewgagnon9426 Quake 2 didn't even try to balance all of its weapons though. There were 4 distinct tiers of weapons, and part of the game was a race to get top tear weapons. (1.blaster, shotgun, machine gun. 2. chaingun, hyper blaster. 3. Super shotgun, grenade launcher. 4. rocket launcher, rail gun and BFG) The rocket launcher helped balance the shotgun/sniper divide by giving skilled players the ability to shoot around corners and behind cover, as well as get multi kills. Camping with the rail gun for too long usually meant getting second or third place. However, yes, 1 vs 1. almost always ended up as a rail gun duel where people would only use the rocket launcher for rocket jumping.🤣

This only applies to TF2. In other games like CoD snipers run and gun as if they were shotguns and still have the range advantage. It's funny that even the most balanced sniper type in the video is considered OP by the community. But I think this video is proof of how well designed TF2 and why it has such a persistent community.

Or there’s the real life solution, which is that everyone dies to the mortars, sniper included.

@@josepetersen7112 Bad idea

@@neoumbrela4935 Yeah in Call Of Duty i have no idea how we could fix that while still being fun to use the snipers

@@alface935 Oh, I didn’t mean that realistic fire support was a good idea for games, just commenting on how in real life 90% of combat is indirect fire.

This sounds like a great solution. But it introduces a ton of calculations for the GPU to handle every frame, without the option to disable it (as doing so would defeat the purpose). Not only is it somewhat computationally expensive to blur an image, but it would have to get the distance of every pixel (or every mesh, for performance sake) from the viewport in 3D space and factor it into the blur calculation.

​@@RAndrewNeal I think with things like deffered rendering and for medium to high end systems, that would probably be fairly ok tho (emphasis on think : p)

@@RAndrewNeal Seems like there would be a way to cheat that. Instead of calculating every pixel just figure out which pixels aren't blurred and blur everything else. We don't care about the objects too close or too far away, only the ones in the sweet spot. And since distance calculations already have to be done for meshes anyway, just lock it to already present mesh value. Just pick a distance mesh layer to set as the default range for a sniper rifle and blur everything that isn't on that layer.

Um thats ALSO ignoring the fact that whwn your sighted in for that range its going to affect where your bullet goes. Say youre sighted in for 100 meters and someone is standing 10 in front of you. You aim at his upper chest and shoot, bullet flies over his head because its sighted for 100 meters away, not 10. Only game ive ever seen do this is bf4 (proving most computer nerds know nothing about how guns work xd)

@@halycon404 I guess if you want to do it in stages instead of a more life-like gradient, that would ease the load. And I didn't realize that the distance to the viewport already needed to be gotten, so that helps. I'd still worry that requiring a blur effect to be enabled might make the sniper unplayable for people on a low-spec system, though.

like Splatoon the thing is though, you could hide your aim by pointing it elsewhere (ie at the wall in front of you) and then just do flick shots.

That requires skill and makes it more difficult to hit your shots than waiting for someone to walk into your sightlines@@Kensuke0987

@@Kensuke0987 you could, but it's much more difficult to do that and leaves you open due to looking at a wall

@@lunasagaming5801 when you're aiming down the sight or through the scope at something far away, you're already leaving yourself open from being attacked from the flanks - you literally have tunnel vision. Splatoon is in 3rd person, so you can actually look past the wall even if you're aiming at it, but I think you can kinda do something similar in first person shooters by standing some distance away from the wall, or aiming at an obstacle between you and your target to hide your beam (or just your aim). In competitive Splatoon, it's pretty much meta, so everybody practices it and can do it consistently without compromising awareness/vision.

yeah in games where its mostly close range that would actually be pretty sick but at the same time if they add that... They can just directly jump the realism part lol

I was gonna say

fr

Fire rate is pretty close to reload speed, but not the same. An ammunition amount is also an important factor

Well, the issue being considered here is how broken the Sniper's 1-shot-kill mechanic is. And while, yes, both of those are valid and important stats for your average gun, for a sniper specifically it doesn't really affect the issue at all - if you can kill your enemy with a single bullet, for that encounter what you do with the rest of your magazine is completely redundant

@@rohanshirodkar8353 I mean thats one of the issues but isn't whats being discussed how snipers are overpowered in general? The video talks about changing firerate and mobility which might affect the "fun factor" is any lower which isn't relate to the 1 shot kill problem. Increasing the reload time or reducing the magazine size could be useful for balancing without making the gun unfun to play with. As other people have said, people are assuming that we have 100% accuracy even in close quarters. You might only need one bullet to finish an encounter, but if you're right in someones face, reducing the number of bullets you have will also reduce the number of mistakes you can make.

Yeah and ingame price of the gun as well!

Thats probably just you being bad at avoiding snipers

@@heyyanewbie *just don't get shot, bro* riveting suggestion, you should be a general or something

Have you tried getting better teammates?

Woah bro. Easy on the homophobia. Not cool especially in 2023.

@@samatics4 Huh? Who's being homophobic?

Quake 1 had a lightning gun. That was a pretty fucking snipey weapon

So it's the machana

@@DizzySpark Except it was so short range.

One thing to mention though is that the RG was not that powerful, there are not headshots and it was meant to be used on the move. You can't really stay stationary in quake, the camper will be flushed out by grenades, rockets and plasma slugs. IMO its more of a "coup de grace" gun.

@@ConsciousExpression AND it is a tracking weapon instead of a flick-shot weapon. It deals meaningful damage over time and not in an instant. Also, as others mention, even the RG didn't do crazy damage against a well-kitted player. Compare this to lag-compensated, insta-kill-at-any-HP-or-armor-level hitscan weapons we got in modern shooters. The elephant in the room is movement in general. Quake on top of all the above downsides had players with very fast and unpredictable movement in maps often with maps that weren't super large usually, indirect nerfs to RG effectiveness.

I agree, but as a sniper main, I think they should make it similar to mvm's bot sniper, it should be a transparent laser that decreases its opacity as the sniper charges his shot, that should at least give most players a chance without having to resort to nerfing his damage/range. Also I think we can all agree that bodyshots need to be nerfed, they take significantly less skill to pull off as headshots yet can still give you 150 dmg.

It is always about balance which means there will not be much difference between the weapons which becomes boring. Snipers should be effective and it anyone can use it so there is no point in nerfing it. If I'm using a sub machine gun, I do not want it to operate like a handgun. Or hand-to-hand combat being the same as using a knife. Snipers are not exactly invincible as you can throw bombs at them. Run and gunning is the best way to die. If it is a game with no respawns then you get in one or two hits and die.

That doesn't work at all though, most classes can be 1-shot instantly with 0 charge. Those that can't have slow projectiles or are Heavy which is dead anyways. The sniper doesn't have to aim and is rewarded for not aiming by being aware of potential spies and having a wider field of view.

The dot is small and can blend in on some walls. You won't always see it to know there's a sniper

Also, the demo class helps fix a lot of the short range sniper issues because of how much the grenades can bounce I would always bounce the grenades off the door frame, and since snipers had such low health, it would normally take care of them before I would even enter a line of sight

i loved that thing in Q3. it was definitely tricky to use, but so satisfying when you figured it out. some toons were easier to frag than others just because of their size and movement patterns. there was this old NES game called "Hostage: Rescue Mission" and it had a sniper phase where you had to shoot dudes in a window before sending in the SWAT FPS phase. while aiming at the 'whack-a-mole' windows, your crosshair would shake and jiggle, simulating your breathing/bloodflow/natural limb fatigue. it wasn't like that in the FPS phase, so they understood real world mechanics. they should bring that back.

You pretty much have to learn how to use all the weapons though or you can't keep moving

I came to say the same thing. You cannot "charge" a Sniper, not unless it was an Magnetic-Shot (or some sort of Energy/Plasma). In which case, Q3A came to mind with the Railgun. It was both over-powered AND balanced, this is because it required a lot of skill, since characters can run fast, jump everywhere, and teleport. The other thing that came to mind was the Ballistic Shot in Doom 2016. But that's mainly a single-player game. When it comes to more "real life" games, that is when the Sniper becomes difficult to balance. You can't have people flying about. You can't charge-up a shot, I mean you can, but only by having all the bolt-action use a Huge Bullet with really long reloading and aiming times. So not really an option, or a fun one. And it makes no logical sense that the damage in close-range should be lower than one at long-range. Not to mention many balancing properties make the game less fun (really long reloading, really heavy walking, really really long aim down time). So it's a mess to sort out. So what can you do? There's some options, such as: - Aiming. Make the guns light to carry and run with, but cumbersome. Their ultra-long size means that moving the aim is very slow. At long ranges, this doesn't matter since you only need small aiming adjustments. But in close ranges you need to move the barrel left or right relatively fast. If this is slow, it makes it very hard to win against shotguns and smgs, and it makes midranges against ARs more balanced. - Recoil. Hip-firing will be very random and almost never hits your target. Medium range is also not very good, and it forces people to "mount" the weapon on the floor, against a box, or wallface to fire more accurately. Making it basically useless at close-range kind of like how a Shotgun is useless at the long-range. - Scoping. You must always have a scope, which blocks your peripheral view when used (tunnel vision). And you cannot quick-scope, because the eye-sight is blurry, and your aim when fired before the animation is complete, will stray off-course a lot and randomly making you lose your shot. Kind of like hip-firing but not as bad, but bad enough to make the weapon not very viable in that play style. - Supplementary Damage. Make it so that no gun can 1-shot the opponent, but physical damage comes with supplementary damages with certain weapons and ranges. Such as burning or bleeding effect. This means you can give Bolt-Action Snipers the ability to do 95 damage in all the ranges, but midrange gets partial effect (so sometimes 1 or 2 shot to kill), and long-ranges get full-effect (always 1 shot). But this isn't that realistic either, because it's a blanket-solution, since in the real-world these effects soldiers depending how they got shot, where they got shot, and the unique individual. Things that make the game too complex (simplicity needs balance). - Physical Damage. Make close quarter shots do less physical damage. The idea is that bullets "go through" the targets instead of getting embedded which does not actually sound unrealistic. People have been conditioned to this through movies already. This means you need to multiple shot them (body) and due to the slow reloading, it means you lose against close-quarter weapons. It's probably a good idea to make this 3-shots in close range, 2-shots in midrange, and 1-shot in long-range. Except headshot which are always 1-shot. - Viewing. Make it so that basically using a scope comes with problems in close range. That is if someone starts shooting in your general direction, dust and particles lift up and blur your vision but only in the close ranges. You can still see through it and make out the long ranges. This can apply to flashbangs as well, so that if an enemy used that on you, you would recover quicker than everyone else but only with the scope in the longrange, at the hipfire and midranges you would be very blind perhaps longer than everyone else. It is justifiable but not very logical or realistic. ....and lastly you can run a combination of all of these! (to be honest, I'm not a fan of the idea of a charge-shot or supplementary damage, as they make the game less realistic. Not a fan of Viewing differences either as it makes the game more complex. But perhaps a combination of the other options above, yes, they can keep the game simple, fun, and balanced. That's something missing in Call of Duty and its rivals.)

Another thing that I think is a decent solution is characters having moderate speed and bullet velocity so you have to lead up shots and obviously players dont always walk in a straight line

Its easiest to hit opponents that just bounced off a pad since the movement is predictable but all other movement is pretty hard to hit.

Just have to think about my narration, i feel like its too energized for a documentary style channel

@@OfficialArch there's no such thing as too energized :(

@@OfficialArch No shame in being unique

@@FaizPhobia there definitely is, but i get what you mean

@@OfficialArch it sounds better than most documentaries (:

doesn't nerf the close range engagements though, because the projectile hits basically straight away

Yeah, upping the game speed works kinda well with slow weapons and the faster players move, the harder it also is to actually line up a shot and hit, a thing which has been neglected in this video throughout; It's assumed the sniper player always hits, which is not a given at all anymore at certain game speeds (including TF 2 in which you can also try stuff like double-jumping in order to dodge shots).

I think the reason this works in Titanfall is because everyone moves super fast so it’s hard to hit anything in CQC. In Apex, they removed the one-shot capability, made it take forever to cycle the bolt, and gave it 12 rounds per Kraber, and it’s still OP because everyone moves a lot slower and the map’s bigger.

Titan-Fall did a lot right!!!

@@chasetoyama8184 Also, the time to scope on the Kraber is suprisingly slow compared to anything else in the game. It's still a 240 headshot damage, but yes, no one shot on the body. That said, as mentioned, TtK is very high, so the issue that other games have where for example an assault rifle has a one shot headshot. Even headshots with something like a flatline (most powerful assault rifle) needs FIVE shots, and the second most powerful sniper (Sentinel) still needs two at least. That's why the kraber works. It's way more powerful than anything else whilst still not being a one-shot-body-kill.

Fries

@@elihovorka1828 Burgers

@@Iwanttogokms soda

u mean csgo

Baking soda

There isn't a map in TF2 that would be good for fighting sniper, because they one-shot quickscope your head anyways at any range with any class. As scout you need 2 shots with primary or 1 shot with primary and like half a magazine of your secondary, where all he needs is 1 hit. There were too many times I closed the distance perfectly with full HP and got instakilled meter in front of the sniper... so that's not a valid point. The only way to balance a sniper I've seen is to reduce the damage it deals the closer your target is to you, then map design plays a huge role in how you play and where you play making you more predictable and interactable for the enemy to deal with. That will still generate one-sided firefights where sniper always wins long range and never wins short range, but that's simply unavoidable as the whole nature of one-shoting weapon will be massive ups and downs. I think for TF2 it'd be more fun if the sniper rifle was replaced with something like the WW2 bolt actions without scope, requiring secondary to finish enemy off at close range due to that reversed falloff while making it still usable for midrange "sniping", also with that remove the headshot modifier entirely or only slightly increase the damage, where it deals 150 instead of 100 and increases charging speed on headshot meaning it'd still pose threat to high HP classes, but it'd have to be deserved through waiting for full charge (wouldn't have to be charged by time spent or slow you down. It could just increase ammo consumption so it'd take 3 ammo from a 5 ammo magazine pool for example)

COD BLOPS 2 was the worst about this. Every map was a tiny 3 lane hallway simulator with multiple chokepoints. Add in infinite tactical insertions and it became almost impossible to bump snipers from power positions. Best you could do was spawn, dump your emps and C4 in their direction, hope they aren't running flak/trophy(hint:they are), and either try to wall bang (and be shot in the back) or just patrol parts of the map you think have fewer snipers.

Or, just add significant hit flinch that makes ur cross hair point to the f’n sky

@@A1cr_yt I think muscle memory would easily deal with penalty of that sort, just watch what recoil does in CS:GO it's not a downside, just an extra skill to master to unlock weapon's full potential. Not to mention it wouldn't address the issue with bots or regular cheaters which, despite my hatred for all the edgy sniper mains, deserve the nerf more.

I really like most of Call of Duty's MW2 maps (reincarnated with new weapons that probably don't work) If I missed like 2 or more shots I had to hunker and prepare for the worst, even Wasteland or Derail which are sniper maps except the middle area/one of the 2 major buildings respectively

I used to play titanfall 2 and I loved the Kraber The headshots made me feel like a god

As a kraber main, I can confirm that cross map shots on a moving pilot is a nightmare.

Every time I play Titanfall 2 I main almost exclusively the Kraber. It's just so damn fun to use and so rewarding.

Best weapon in any game. I used to be krsber main when I played. I love that rifle.

you know it's funny you mention Titanfall 2. I feel like something about the map design and movement encourages closer range combat so much that my frankly unskilled automatic/shotgun reliant self ended up with my best KD using snipers in Titanfall 2. no still nowhere near 1.0, but an interesting alternative take to the balance question. making movement so fast that the question of range becomes irreverent. And yes, I use a Northstar xD

I definitely agree with your first paragraph. The second... I would suggest that you consider that many of us consider realism the fun itself. The reason people find one hit body snipes "fun" is because it's effective and they know that a .300, .308, .412, or .50 cal round ripping through someone in spitting distance really is absolute destruction... pulling it off with multiple consecutive kills feels extremely rewarding because you know YOU DID THAT. We make some concessions in games, take things for granted like regenerating health. Sure you killed that guy with your sniper before he killed you... but only once you play Escape From Tarkov do you realize that you are still going to die as your character is coughing up blood and close to blacking out while you frantically search for a bandage to hold your AR shredded intestines together. Winning a fight due to tactics and not inherent mutant/god abilities to survive violence upon your body is it's own, different, kind of fun. Arguably, we could be having the same discussion about grenades in video games. Realistically, a handheld deformed ball will kill anyone within 10 feet (or more) without even needing to expose oneself to use it. They are also so high in availability we think of them more like ammo than a weapon. I haven't seen a lot of crazy grenade montages since Halo's sticky grenades though... and few people complain about them either.

I say we make a game with no hitscan at all.

ever got one-shot in the air in tf2?

@@murdurmuffin7872 Yeah it wasn't my most thought out paragraph. I think realism in games like tarkov is a great thing because as you explained, the realism IS the appeal. But in a game like Valorant- there is NO REASON for any of the guns to have realism. I also believe that many games go for realism as part of the appeal assuming people care- but I don't think the majority of gamers are itching to have a perfectly modeled real life gun. Those folks exist, but I am not convinced they are a majority worth catering to across every genre of shooter. If the purpose of the game is competitive, esport type gameplay/balance, I think realism NEEDS to be sacrificed. I don't think that is important for all games though and it is perfectly fine to be realistic as part of the appeal. And if you want realism AND competitive stuff just get rid hitscan snipers! People are too good at games now.

@@purp40 Later call of duty games aren't hitscan, just very fast projectiles. Also there isn't really such a thing as both, unless you go with a method that sends hitscan traces in intervals moving forward at a certain speed from their firing position, that's the only real "both" method that I know of (Don't know of anything that really uses that though) Also, unless I'm misunderstanding, your mentioned both method doesn't really make much sense, that hitscan check sounds useless and would just be a projectile regardless, unless you just missed some info to explain that there.

Battlefield 1 has a mechanic like this. Every slow firing sniper has a “sweet spot” (like 50-70m) where they 1 tap to the body. Longer range snipers have larger sweet spots to compensate for the difficulty of firing at range

Yeah right, since realism doesnt really apply here anyways since shotguns in rl also have much bigger ranges.

I was thinking that through the entire video If the sniper did less damage the closer the enemy was it would encourage people to snipe

yeah, its a videogame. this solution favours games not going for extreme realism, which most if not all popular fps dont prioritize. its more in the vein of sim games

The main issue is if someone gets close your secondary will most the time lose the duel and your sniper definitely will

eh people can still hit nasty flicks through flinches

that is one hell of an excellent counter point

personally i consider flinch and tagging to be some of the worst balancing decisions, especially since most games incorporate them into all weapons. Your punishment for being shot is losing health, slowing you down and also making your aim fly in random directions feels downright sadistic.

That's what I was thinking the entire video!!!

It worked in Halo.

It’s not a sniper, but the medic in team fortress two has a crossbow with this exact mechanic. It’s also a projectile weapon, but it still applies in concept lol. Weirdly enough, it does healing based on the same mechanic.

But then I'll just be forced to camp at long range instead of coming closer to go for more high risk encounters, literally that's what people have been complaining about, those longer ranged camping tactics, so I don't see how this will stop the complainers from whining

@@therobertguy2436 It also has an 100% crit rate, just like his ubersaw

That's actually one of my ideas for how devs could balance snipers too, and I actually have it from a RTS game In Company of Heroes 2, LMGs do more dps at long range, due to the model with the LMG firing more often at that range That means that 1) the squad keeps most of its long range dps even as soldiers die and 2) other squads can still fight them at mid - short range as the LMG is less powerful there, even if the squad overall does more damage because of their other guns Of course you'd have to change the weapon cooldown to damage for an FPS, but still, make it so they deal the most damage at a specific range, like BF1 did too. Or you just pull a Hell let Loose and make it so almost everyone one-shots everyone, as all boltaction and semi auto rifles in that game oneshot, but only the snipers have scopes.

It's an interesting idea except it doesn't make sense. The right solution is to require very specifically headshots for a kill at any range, and a long reload time. It's realistic, and if they shoot the body at close range they're screwed. And more vertical movement options for players. Or, as he says in the video, just make them scope for longer for full power. Cool idea! Makes sense.

He also left out Sniper-Flinch. You get hit first -> You will miss

My cod sniper builds: all in speed of movement In cod there are interesting feature, idk how it called on pro language but i called it prescope or halfscope. In cod you have time when you press RMB and spread start decreasing to get you in scope, you can release mouse button to break sequence. So you can prescope shoot and with skill and luck you kill opponent on various distances.

@@_DAN11L_ I know exactly what you mean, and tbh that is not at all broken, if you have the skill to pre-aim at the right direction and hit 1 shots it should be rewarding

i'm not an fps player at all, so i've never heard of this mechanic. that seems like a really good solution all things considered. if your game has a stamina meter of any kind, just tie it to the player's ability to ADS with a sniper. i could see it going a couple of ways. either have ADSing (AingDS? lol) with a sniper outright consume stamina; or else pause or slow stamina recovery when you ADS with a sniper and have the current stamina level influence things like view-bobbing, bullet spread, damage, etc.

That and time to hit after shot that can be an exclusive to sniper feature like in some of the battlefields: The bullet will take some time before reaching its destination, which allows the adversary the opportunity to avoid the shot at long range and to answer with his own defense at mid range

yep, u nerf snipers by buffing smoke.

Yeah, you want to encourage risk and reward and variety. A single wide open area with sparse cover is just a shooting ground. Being trapped like sardines in landing craft scene in Saving Private Ryan is not fun gameplay.

@@andrewstambaugh8030 it can be though. i think BFV did that pretty well with the iwo jima map. that assault force it's pretty much force to throw themselves into a meat grinder but at the same time they give you some tools to make it work.

Well also more realistic titles like tarcov, squad, arma extra made everything dangerous all the time and made it a hassle to be in an advantage. Then there is games like foxhole with a logistics mechanic so its just difficult to be useful with. It makes it important but only to the level of its risk.

Also in Rising Storm 2 Vietnam, where the game limits the number of snipers to just 2 or 3 per team, and it it really does suck at closer ranges.

is Enlisted still worth it?

@@yhwach1 no

​@@yhwach1 yes

I was looking for this comment

The unscope mechanic can be downright infuriating tho. But itdoes give SMG class weapons an edge, not shotguns tho

The reticle on the screen and the fire rate of the sniper makes that almost irrelevant though

​@@speven371 No

Hipfiring is super accurate though

Appreciate it!! The next one will be even better :)

true iv'e been watching this channel maybe half a year? and i really like his content

And his audio/sound is spot on! Half the time when I watch game video's, it's like people are allergic to paying attention to the audio work but this is just top notch. :)

@@anderman1231 how, there's only 1 video

@@gabrielc7861 well I mean my dude has another channel

Of course, it also made holding certain spots on certain maps ridiculously easy - I remember an Operations game I had where I was playing Scout with the Arisaka, Infantry-pattern (no scope, only ironsights on the rifle with the shortest sweet spot). I held a point by myself for over 20 minutes since the only entrances to the area were a pair of open staircases at the exact sweet spot range. I racked up 50 kills with 1 death, and I got res'd by a passing Medic anyways.

you talking about Battlefield 1942?

Also, second mechanic that worked well in tandem (as sweet spot generally encouraged playing in mid-to-slightly-long range) was the drag coefficient, which would gradually increase bullet drop rate with distance traveled. Led to fewer people sitting hundreds of meters away from any kind of objective (hi, Op. Firestorm mountain in BF3/4), although it didn't exactly stop it fully, obviously. Also, one curious spin on the sweet spot was adding a different scope glint to mid- and high power scopes when rifles they were attached to pointed at you within their sweet spot range. Gave you a good hint that maybe it's time to look for cover.

​@@ahuels67 no the battlefield after battlefield 4 was called battlefield 1

@@ahuels67 BF1, the WW1 game.

cousin, let's go bowling

Thats the best way imo

Yeah, but Snipers were still pretty broken on many maps due to wide open terrain perfect for farming fiestas.

The other way they balanced snipers was by shining, letting faraway players they were about to be fired upon

Too bad that was the worst decision cuz older games before bf1 u had to headshot where that let you one hit body in a game in ww1 where u didnt have longer range options

I love that, overpenetration is such a good term to describe how you deal less damage at lower ranges if you add that feature to a game. And it doesn't matter against the head, because... well, it's the head. Furthermore, what if overpenetration was always lethal, but after a time delay? In a few seconds the enemy would die due to the strong DoT the overpenetration would apply; however, that sill gives them long enough to push up to the sniper that hit them and have a chance to take their revenge. Snipers would need to be careful to hit their headshots, lest they suddenly need to finish off their target with a second one. Edit: the point would be to not leave enemies on fractions of health, which can feel bad, instead doing something that still isn't as good as a guaranteed kill but is more fun to work with.

I like that idea. Always seems like making a sniper rifle a one-shot kill in all ranges was unnecessary. Feels like making it do less damage and harder to hit in close range makes more sense as counters to the long-range destructive power of the gun.

Oh, thanks you two! Even if, like a total dummy, I commented this before realizing it's mentioned in the video. 😅

I was thinking something like that too, a mechanic where it will do less dmg within 30 meters, then the bullet speeds UP and does insta-kill dmg.

@@incinerativemario Yea, let's say you have a sci-fi related game you could make a sniper that works on plasma or something and would have some sort of heat up or speed up mechanic wich would do 1 hit on longer distances but significantly less damage in close range Combat.

I wouldnt say its unfair at all. A scoped sniper weapon already has a massive ranged advantage, it doesnt need a TTK advantage too.

@@jackmcmorrow9397 bolt-action snipers require you to hit the enemy either headshot them or center mass, and you have a single shot to do so while anything has 30 rounds or so depending on the weapon you are running, while you reload your one shot, and you can't really play a sniper rifle in many games close range (because if you get pushed you are just dead par from some miracle play from your part) so in those games like CSGO you as a sniper take the slower longer ranged engages and deter people from using some of those routes without flashing/smoking. but what about games like Battlefield or Planetside? surely since they are mainly mid to long range snipers would be overpowered? not really, in many cases the sniper rifles have a bullet drop that is abysmal to shoot with from the longer ranges and can't even 1 hit you if you don't get headshotted, while you can run,slide,jump zig zag and more making it extremely hard to hit a good player in said games and when the developers make an unbalanced weapon archetypes problem, it's the developers making that single sniper too overtuned, same can be said with many other weapons like the rifles, shotguns (remember BF3 AA-12 with Explosive rounds?) that can be extremely overpowered but you don't hear people saying "rifles are op" or something like that. now let's take yet another game, Halo. Sniper rifle in Halo is 2 shot to the body, one shot to the head, no bullet drop, hits instantly and can be fired from the hip (no scoping), has 4 rounds and doesnt take ages to reload with bolt-action, but is it overpowered? only in custom games intended for it to be. in competitive it's extremely well balanced, being able to being taken down by a Battle rifle or a DMR quite easily. but why is this? 1. if you are scoping from longer ranges you being hit with any kind of weapon will take you out of the scope instantly and you'll miss your shot 2. you have 4 shots that you need to be extremely precise to kill the enemy before they can either kill you or close the distance where they can just shoot you low and melee you. the game being mainly short to medium ranges making it much easier to just have a shotgun or a rocket launcher as a power weapon and be good with them. 3. even if you do kill the enemy, you have 4 shots and often 4 more or 8 more after that, and if you hit all those to the head first time sure you'll have 8-12 kills but did you win the match by then? since you had to be farther back your teammates had to go get the flag and if they didn't your sniper rifle was pretty much useless apart from making sure the enemy didn't get your flag, meanwhile shotgun or a rocket launcher can push the enemy, kill "in shotguns case maximum of 4-8 depending on the Halo game" and rocket launchers case about "2-4 depending on only if the enemies were close by or not, the rocket launcher in Halo has 2 shots before reloading" so which one is more overpowered if they both can't be gotten by any other way but the power weapon drop on the map which you have to fight over to gain control of said weapon? same with Destiny 2, sniper rifles used to be very useless when we had "power ammo" as the only source of ammunition for said weapon type, since you could just run linear fusion rifle, shotgun,sword (which you can use to peek around corners in 3rd person even without you having ammo), rocket launchers, grenade launchers and so on, and have more impact for that one shot, or be in a more safe place like with the shorter range weapons, to even having more ammo to play with than sniper rifles, all while you can't bodyshot your opponents with sniper rifle because Bungie made the Destiny 2 sniper balance similar to Halo's. now ask yourself what in these games makes the sniper rifle fundamentally broken? is it because you feel bad of being shot by it? or is it actually better weapon than it's counterparts?

Well... if a sniper (maybe with the charge) holds a defensive position, it _should_ be powerful. That kinda is the idea of snipers. Support your storming squad from the back or hold a really strong defensive position, hard to take over. My idea is, snipers should be capable of defending really good while assault rifles... well... should be strong while _assaulting_ a position. Or something like that. And lowering the damage to non-headshot non-kill makes the sniper very reliant on comrades (or a potential side arm), as they need to take out the severely wounded enemy, while you cannot. FPS games should generally be more team/squad based...

@@KimDare75 the problem with this mentality is, if we go by arcade shooters "not realistic and doesnt try to be" logic, everything needs to be balanced around being able to play alone which means if something isnt quite as good as something else at ending the enemy most players will never use it, take for example CSGO, revolver is hardly ever used because we have Desert eagle, far superior and easier to use version of the same weapon archetype. or the light machine guns in CSGO, hardly ever used except for trolling noobs because we have submachine guns which do the same thing "high fire rate run and gun" but with way less investment from the player (you) to get one. but is the Desert eagle and the submachine guns overpowered? no of course not, they just perform as they should but because they do something else is bad so in Arcade games you can't have something that has a "suppressing effect" or "used to finish enemies" alone, you have to be able to end the enemy by yourself as easily as you can, for it to be good in said games. now if we go to realistic games even milsims like Arma/Squad and so on, snipers have to be good cause that is what is realistic and thats what your job as a sniper is, but what counters snipers? another sniper or a single machine on a vehicle or even a mortar. so in both examples you cant have the sniper be what you said. because it makes no sense.

It's not that it's unfair, it just undermines to the core fantasy of playing a sniper. And I'm personally fine with snipers in low TTK shooters like Call of Duty or CS, but in games that consistently give some leniency for making mistakes, sniper just doesn't compute.

Not only that, the suppresssion mechanic also helps, so you can't fight enemys as good that are actively shooting at you (e.g with an assault rifle).

ranking by sniper balance in shooters: 1) battlefield 4+ series 2) phantom forces 3) everything else

Sounds good on the surface doesn't hold up in-game. For 90% of use cases the Ross MkIII is the best rifle, because it's straight pull-bolt action and can one-shot enemies unlike any other rifle. The only thing it doesn't have is reduced drag or a super long range sweet spot, M1917 has that covered. 2 rifles make the entire rest of the weapon category redundant.

The biggest problem of BF1s sniping, was that the support class was better at it. You could suppress snipers (can no longer accurate hit you), unlimited ammo, and the defensive nature of the game made this strategy incredibly easy to replicate. Genuinely infuriating to being getting laserbeamed from across the map with no easy counter

@@afj810 snipers in phantom forces are opposite of balanced. Yes they are fun but definitely not balanced. They are just insane at close range

Even with all of that, they're still vulnerable if something like a Brella challenges them, less so in 3 because of the shitty net code, but you can still use the Brella canopy to run up on a charger with relative ease, not to mention Brushes mobility giving them the perfect tool to duck and weave between shots and get to them, or the various specials that can shut them down.

i hope they fix brellas one day

Also thought of splatoon! Their way of nerfing the sniper works in achieving balance. Buuut, that way doesn't work in any realism shooter..

Tldr pls

@Alex .G Splatoon keeps snipers balanced by limiting the range they can one shot from and how quickly they can charge up a one shot while also giving a variety of snipers to choose from so the classic sniper is not the only viable option

I think any mods meant to make a sniper rifle more tailored to how it is actually used, will invariably lead to it being less adequate than assault style weapons in battlefield style games, because they just are. Snipers were designed for scoping out enemy positions, and occasionally firing from the comfort of a bush thousands of meters away from your actual target. Quick scoping and other nonsense is only a thing in games thorougly removed from the reality of these weapons.

Another Option for more realistic games is to make every weapon one shot.

@@nafetz1687 That's not realistic. Sure 1 shot will often kill someone eventually But it's not enough to kill a person instantly unless it's a headshot or it pierces the heart There are many stories of people needing several shots from a 9mm to be taken down because adrenaline kept him going through the pain and blood loss

Don't forget about bf's bullet drop, especially back in the day it was one of the only games that did the whole bullet drop thing

@@NathanielBTM That's an important factor because sniping is supposed to be high skill requirement but high reward for mastering it Although, it does nerf the sniper at long ranges, where it's supposed to dominate, encouraging more medium range engagements

I play a TF2 mod that does a bunch of rebalances, and one of them is giving Sniper an audible reload that everyone can hear. That way, you know when a Sniper is vulnerable and can push their sightline.

One thing he didn't mention is the normal lag issue. If two players (in CS), one with shotgun and one with a sniper shoot each other at the same time, even if they both get a headshot, the sniper seems to always win. Why not make it so the shooter's damage is not always one value? It's actually more realistic. Also, both players should be able die at the same time (except maybe if they are the last players in that round).

11:37 half life?

It is good idea

Mfw when aim flinch

​@@lavetissene339 😂😂😂

just like in meet the sniper. "i think his mate saw me. yes, yes he did."

I like what FishStickOnAStick proposed better, which is giving Sniper more downtime by giving the sniper rifle less ammo and a hard reload. So, the Sniper is just unable to watch his sightline forever, and is more vulnerable when scrambling for ammo packs, more opportunities for the flankers.

@@lavetissene339 Aim flinch doesn't always work, since people can easily headshot if it's not enough, and won't be able to play if it's too much. Based on the many different contexts of fights, aim flinch can be terrible for either party, and game devs can't account for every situation (especially since sniper already flinches). Aim flinch also requires you to risk yourself by putting yourself in sights of a sniper whilst at his preferred range, because if you weren't making him flinch, you'd have just killed him. Whereas forced unscoping means you can drastically mitigate a sniper's damage, whilst also not outright killing him, which seems like a really good compromise and actually gives him proper counter-play outside of "be a better sniper". Might even be a reason to start using The Classic, lol.

Giving a sniper reverse falloff has its own issue however as someone may land a shot at decent range but due to it being a kid range shot falls just short of killing the target Not to mention giving a sniper reverse falloff encourages rushing the sniper instead of playing around the snipers sightline and basically encourages playing like an idiot

@The Knight fair point, I mean if the solution was simple, this video wouldn't exist

Wasn’t this the second solution he offered? He just added charged shots on top of this

its not exactly the same. the mechanic mentioned in this comment fromm rounds, makes bullets bigger and more powerful, the longer its traveling. so you dont need to charge, but it doesnt do any extra damage in short range, only in mid range and even more in long range.

@@hellhound74 I dont see either point being an issue considering the first applies to shotguns as well and has never been a large problem, if it was such an issue it could always be tweaked to be a flat damage between certain ranges/range changes. as for the second point, is that not the point the snipers are meant to be weak at close range? when playing around the snipers sightline comes down to avoiding peaks entirely I dont think it's productive to fluid gameplay

Damn, interesting idea. I don’t think I’ve ever seen this implemented before but it would make a lot of sense.

I think that's an interesting idea, but it really doesn't fix short ranges unless it took an extremely long time to focus because of how much bigger the targets are

I think CoD: Ghosts did this by blurring the area outside of your scope on snipers. I’m probably wrong, but it might be right.

I like that. It would be like BF1 sweet spot damage but more realistic version of prefered range enforcement

@@overtone55 make it fixed short range. or let the player adjust scope (zero feature in battlefield games) before ADS.

I think this is probably the best way to balance it, but some players prefer a more fast paced play style.

​@@Deadvalley200well, if you prefer a fast paced playstyle, just dont play sniper in that case

@@Deadvalley200 that’s the opposite point of a sniper. Just don’t play sniper then but if you do, don’t expect if to work well because that’s not what snipers are intended for. Simple as that if you want to be a good sniper you won’t be fast, if you want fast don’t be a sniper at least that’s what it’s like in real life and realistic and accurate games. I’ve been playing snipers in games since Xbox 360, and in real Life I do all kinds of competitive shooting. And currently in the process of joining the military. But what do I know just a couple thousands maybe tens of thousands of rounds throughout my life. My point is, IRL and accurate portrayal of real life would be “Fast gameplay doesn’t = sniper, sniper = slow but highly accurate and quickly paced if put in the hands of a competent shooter. If you want to play fast and great. Best option anything but sniper, if you want highly accurate, hard to Learn and hard to master, but a bit slower, go sniper and I’m basing this on more realistic games like arma physics, etc. not that COD or battlefield reality wanna be physics. But If you wanna be a fast gameplay high kills God Tier sniper if you achieve that, you’ll know it’s not a great game just from that being a possibility. But hey live and let live I guess

@@ste4lth147 well said

yeah! not to mention bullet drop, travel time, scope glint and suppression for the sniper, the skill gap is so much higher for bf1 snipers and you really have to play actively and not passively with them!

@@Tom_Hillman bf1 is like the easiest battlefield to snipe on tho lol

@@ClueIess It's certainly the most enjoyable sniping experience for both the sniper and the other players.

@@Tom_Hillman It's also realistic too (+), In real life you really don't want to f near an uncovered sniper's den in ww1 because one peek would make your head explode. Some parts on why it's enjoyable too.

@@deaconfetundes7888 Not necessarily because every gun IRL can do that you will die unless your incredibly lucky to any gun if your with in there range