122 réponses à ce sujet

[LemurFromTheId]

Headless Nemesis wrote...

It should be % of shots that hit the head, not number of enemy killed by the last shot in the head

...when it's not the ammo damage that gets the kill.

I'd love to have that statistic in the game - or the next game - and only counted from those targets you actually can headshot. (Actually it should be a weighted average where the weight is the headshot damage bonus.)

[OneTrueShot]

Back when I still played, I'd almost always have the medal by wave 3 on any class. I wasn't an amazing player like some, but my accuracy was always top notch.

[Gornok]

I am a PUG which usually gets it... nearly guaranteed if I use a Saber... also see others in games proficient in busting eggs too

[SpaceV3gan]

I am a pug, and I can get it done.

[Operator m1]

I am a pug that hosts. I get it in every weapon-abuse kit.

[Reizo Ryuu]

Literally all the time, the people that haven't are just BSN snobs that don't pug ;P.

[Evil]

I only see pugs get the 20 head-shot medal rarely, but the 10 head-shot medal is quite common.

Given that a lot of casters don't give a **** about head-shots, and quite a few guns are either incapable getting head-shots or are impractical for it, this doesn't surprise me much.

In fact, the fact that I ever see it at all is mildly surprising, goes to show that pugs aren't as bad as BSN would paint them to be.

Also, it's often better to aim for the centre mass and hit 95% of the time than to aim for the head and only hit 45% of the time.

Just because a player doesn't go for head-shots doesn't necessarily make him a bad player.

[cato potato]

Evil Mastered wrote...

I only see pugs get the 20 head-shot medal rarely, but the 10 head-shot medal is quite common.

Given that a lot of casters don't give a **** about head-shots, and quite a few guns are either incapable getting head-shots or are impractical for it, this doesn't surprise me much.

In fact, the fact that I ever see it at all is mildly surprising, goes to show that pugs aren't as bad as BSN would paint them to be.

Also, it's often better to aim for the centre mass and hit 95% of the time than to aim for the head and only hit 45% of the time.

Just because a player doesn't go for head-shots doesn't necessarily make him a bad player.

Agreed...........however if you always go for headshots but miss 60% of the time you'll still do the same damage as someone who never misses but only goes for body shots. I find aiming for headshots is almost always the way to go, at least versus mooks, plus it adds a little bit of challenge.

OT: I'm sure I must have seen randoms get the medal but I've never paid much attention to it.

Modifié par cato_84, 28 décembre 2013 - 10:30 .

[Evil]

cato_84 wrote...

Agreed...........however if you always go for headshots but miss 60% of the time you'll still do the same damage as someone who never misses but only goes for body shots. I find aiming for headshots is almost always the way to go, at least versus mooks, plus it adds a little bit of challenge.

Sounds about right, those numbers earlier were for illustrative purposes only, I didn't put any real thought into getting them dead on. 

In other words, I pulled 'em outta my ass.

You just highlighted another point: Some players only go for head-shots to add a little spice when the game isn't overly hectic, but switch to body-shots when under duress.

I do this myself sometimes, especially when I'm using an inaccurate gun.

Any player who does this is going to have a hard time getting the 20 head-shot medal.

Modifié par Evil Mastered, 28 décembre 2013 - 10:47 .

[R0gueHunt3R]

I never even considered 20 headshots to be all that impressive. After all, I tend to get it every single round, particularly if the Collectors or Cerberus were the enemy. Heck, if memory serves me correctly, I tend to get it by the halfway point. Then again, when playing against those two factions, I always go for headshots - that's just something that Counter Strike 1.6 taught me.

[Silvershroud]

cato_84 wrote...
Agreed...........however if you always go for headshots but miss 60% of the time you'll still do the same damage as someone who never misses but only goes for body shots. I find aiming for headshots is almost always the way to go, at least versus mooks, plus it adds a little bit of challenge.

Depends on the weapon.  Widow X with Phasic rounds on an Infiltrator?  Headshots are pointless, as you can kill any non-boss with a single body shot.  The Eagle on the other hand, is excellent at headshots.

On topic:  I rarely pay much attention to any medals besides my own, so I have no clue.

[cato potato]

Count Silvershroud wrote...

cato_84 wrote...
Agreed...........however if you always go for headshots but miss 60% of the time you'll still do the same damage as someone who never misses but only goes for body shots. I find aiming for headshots is almost always the way to go, at least versus mooks, plus it adds a little bit of challenge.

Depends on the weapon.  Widow X with Phasic rounds on an Infiltrator?  Headshots are pointless, as you can kill any non-boss with a single body shot.  The Eagle on the other hand, is excellent at headshots.

Yeah, fair point. There are always exceptions I suppose, although I still try to aim for the head otherwise I get rusty.

Or, to make it more of a stereotypical BSN response - Pfft, phasic crutch rounds on a winfiltrator......l2p scrub. 

[Silvershroud]

cato_84 wrote...

Yeah, fair point. There are always exceptions I suppose, although I still try to aim for the head otherwise I get rusty.

Or, to make it more of a stereotypical BSN response - Pfft, phasic crutch rounds on a winfiltrator......l2p scrub. 

Yeah, even with that setup, if the game is going well, I go for headshots too just for the practice.

Yup, I use infiltrator with phasic, and I'm not ashamed.  Though to even it out, I almost never use the TGI, AIU, or GI at all.  And the only character that gets the Harrier is the Demolisher.   Well, the AIU gets some use on Bronze when I feel like being stupidly OP just because.  

[RattleSnake08]

Yep .. not all PUG's suck

[VaultingFrog]

I have, but then again I am a PUG. In any case it has been done before.

[R0gueHunt3R]

This notion that simply participating on the forum magically makes you a better player is complete and utter hogwash.

[mybudgee]

I have once

[VaultingFrog]

R0gueHunt3R wrote...

This notion that simply participating on the forum magically makes you a better player is complete and utter hogwash.

I have been on the forums longer than you, there for I am better than you. True story. 1v1 me babby!

lawls

[cato potato]

R0gueHunt3R wrote...

This notion that simply participating on the forum magically makes you a better player is complete and utter hogwash.

You've got it backwards. Being a better player means you're probably going to be interested in the complexities of the game and will seek out that information from BSN or other sources. Ergo, participating on this forum makes it more likely that you're a better than average player.

[Evil]

cato_84 wrote...

R0gueHunt3R wrote...

This notion that simply participating on the forum magically makes you a better player is complete and utter hogwash.

You've got it backwards. Being a better player means you're probably going to be interested in the complexities of the game and will seek out that information from BSN or other sources. Ergo, participating on this forum makes it more likely that you're a better than average player.

And between the bugs and badly written descriptions, there's a fair few complexities to pick up on.

At the barest minimum, a BSN'er tends to be better informed on how to play in theory than a non-BSN'er.

This doesn't make every BSN'er a guy who solo's platinum without working up a sweat, nor does it make pug's useless.

It just means that we play a bit better on average than the non-BSN'ers do.

Also, a lot of the "pugs suck" posting is humour, not to be taken seriously.

[R0gueHunt3R]

I would say that that is true for very niche forums like Symthic and MordorHQ, but these official forums have their fair share of casuals on them.

And trust me, I too have gotten far too involved in the minutia of a game, and also sometimes resort to the "us-them" mentality.

Also, I'm not sure how much time clans like bravado (http://www.bravadogaming.com/) tend to spend on forums. If I were to wager a guess, I would say not very much.

Modifié par R0gueHunt3R, 29 décembre 2013 - 01:18 .

[MGW7]

Evil Mastered wrote...
And between the bugs and badly written descriptions, there's a fair few complexities to pick up on.

So much this, bsners tend to know how to avoid bugs, and exploit the advantages the game offers, but the actual skill is entirely related to the actual person

[R0gueHunt3R]

G#d, I'm being dogmatic tonight - even by my usual standards.

Maybe I should rephrase my original thought: just because a person does not post on forums, or engage in organized matches does not necessarily make them a bad player.

[chcknwng]

cato_84 wrote...

R0gueHunt3R wrote...

This notion that simply participating on the forum magically makes you a better player is complete and utter hogwash.

You've got it backwards. Being a better player means you're probably going to be interested in the complexities of the game and will seek out that information from BSN or other sources. Ergo, participating on this forum makes it more likely that you're a better than average player.

Have to disagree here Cato. Not all good players feel the need to POST. We don't know of those who lurk (Sack I am looking at you). 

[Evil]

wngmv wrote...

Have to disagree here Cato. Not all good players feel the need to POST. We don't know of those who lurk (Sack I am looking at you). 

A lurker's still a BSN'er IMO.

They still have access to the same info, ideas and discussions that we do after all, and they're still likely to equip an alternate banner in the N7HQ, they just listen without replying.

I lurked for around a year before posting, for more or less the reasons Cato described, despite the fact I'm a mediocre scrub.

Modifié par Evil Mastered, 29 décembre 2013 - 02:25 .