If you hate strafing, read this. | Forums

[Loomse]

If you hate strafing, circle running, getting melted by someone using high rpm weapon and 3p aim - stop playing GW. Really, nothing has been changed since the release (there was even a stamina increase at one point iirc). The game is not a tactical shooter like some people think. It's a mess, and you either accept it and play it or leave like many players already did.

Also - servers are absolute garbage which means hit register is ****.

[Meridian2251]

True story, after the updated Ghost War missions released with 2.0;
*Queues for Ghost War*
*Sees GxE Meridian in the match and thinks: "This is that guy from the forums that's so vocal and hostile against the chicken dance! Neat."*
*Witnesses GxE Meridian for three rounds*
What was witnessed for three rounds:

youtube has been deactivated.
Do you accept the use of cookies to display and allow you to watch the video content?

The intent behind your post is good: Help other players get more enjoyment from this game mode. Kudos for that, for sure.
But the content of your post is... almost as much of a joke as Ghost War itself.

Your post here, and a majority of your posts on the GW forums are heavily laden with an emphasis that you are the superior player to those you're talking to. You make ridiculous statements and presumptions over other players reasonings and skill.

What kind of logic could lead you to believe this statement? "It seems like most of you guys think that all strafers do is strafe to win. That's 100% false."
Seriously, I need your help in understanding any other reason than "to win" anyone would do this. Is it fun? Does it look cool? Does it earn the admiration and respect of your fellow players? No, it simply exploits the technical and thematic failures of gameplay to the end of giving the strafer the advantage for a victory.

"I am not defending the strafe, nor do I think it takes skill to do" But you also say "Strafers can do the same things you can but quicker and more effectively." So it takes no skill, but the people who do it are more skilled than you?

"The difference between us is that a good player will figure out how to counter instead of whining."
I'd say there are a few more differences than that.

"The evidence proves that as much as some might not believe it, Ghost Wars is a tactical game at its core."
Another true story -
Back in the day, my buddies and I would have LAN parties and we'd play Unreal Tournament with insta-gib turned on. We'd move around the maps slow and careful, emulating tactical movements and engagements. . . Do I need to explain what my point is, or is this hit registering?

Sincerely Meridian, I hope that someone is able to read your post and is able to use it to get even slightly more enjoyment out of this game.

But I hope even more that this franchise will be stripped from UbiParis, and given to a studio with some passion for the genre, or at the very least some skill. Because this Ghost War is way off the mark for tactical or skill based, so far off the mark for technical stability, and so far off the mark for fun.

I'm guessing you haven't played PVP or Breakpoint for a long time since you said, "GxE Meridian" instead of my name. I parted with GxE in February
.
My "ridiculous statements and presumptions over other players reasonings and skill" is not false. In Wildlands and Breakpoint, I solo-queue a lot more than I play on a team. I get put with randoms almost every time. When I'm dead, I'll have to watch my terrible teammates. They don't play their class properly, camp at the back of the map, overstack or avoid supplies and then die, crouch walk in the open, I could go on. Randoms (people that we don't recognize as a good player) are almost always unreliable. I'm sure these guys are probably young, new to the game, older folks, or in general, players that want to enjoy the game.

I see strafing as a tool that's crucial for me to use against competitive players. Yes, the endgame of having to strafe is to win battles. Do you think people that strafe would be clueless without it? All of the top players I know and have played against would still destroy anyone. That's what I mean when I said, "Strafers can do the same things you can but quicker and more effectively."

Your question - "So it takes no skill, but the people who do it are more skilled than you?". I would say yes because every strafer that I have played with or against already understand things like strategy, power positions, and sticking together. Randoms don't seem to think like that based on what I have experienced. If you only blame your loss on the strafe movement, then you need to start looking at your capabilities.

[Meridian2251]

I understand what you are saying @ meridian, but I fundamentally disagree with your definition of "good".

A tactical game should have at its heart the definition of good as being good at picking fire locations or movement routes, coordination with team mates, effective communication and anticipation etc. Good at waggling your thumbs about is of no interest to me and a lot of players that have given up.

Ghost War has become like a game of chess where the winner is the player who is "good" at throwing the chess pieces at the other player. No thanks.

Everything you define as "good" is what good players already do. There is nothing special about doing any of that. Working together is just common sense. Then it boils down to your and your teammate's skill level. I've never said the strafe was good. Being able to beat the strafe is good. When I read all these posts complaining about the strafe, I compare them to the randoms. Are they the type of players that hide in a bush or sit in a building the entire match? Anyone can do that.

[ArgimonEd]

You got a point in a couple of things.
I have played with teams on countless occasions where, they would just sit in one spot, pinging the direction of the enemy, expecting me.
Who are already with my sights on target, waiting to ambush.
Just drop what I'm doing and go to the other side of the map.
There was literally this match, where was just me and this dude against the enemy team.
The other two disconnected after being killed.
I had literally just killed 2.
While he was just sitting behind a rock, without doing nothing.
While I was moving to take out his target.
He allowed someone to pass right next to him, kill me, and all he done was ping the dude location a little too late.
He then proceeded to sit there and die.
He didnt even attempted to shoot his weapon.
For me that am a little rusty with the PVP in this game, and the recoil having changed a lot...
Things get definitely harder, when having to deal with the enemy team, entirely on my own.
Right at the beginning.
Before the people abusing the aim assist, and glitching the hitbox.
I would angrily watch, as my team tried to rush the middle.
While I tried flanking the enemies.
In the end I would be left all by myself.
To die by the last enemy because I couldn't figure where he was and he already new exactly where I was, because I wiped his entire squad from that location.

[CrockfordCK]

You have impeccable logic.

I'm guessing you haven't played PVP or Breakpoint for a long time since you said, "GxE Meridian" instead of my name. I parted with GxE in February.

How does the knowledge that a single player on this whole planet has changed their gamertag correlate with the when and how much another plays Breakpoint?

My "ridiculous statements and presumptions over other players reasonings and skill" is not false.

And you know these things because you've reached out to every single player and had an intellectual conversation with in regards to their actions, and weighed this against their relative performance?

In Wildlands and Breakpoint, I solo-queue a lot more than I play on a team. I get put with randoms almost every time. When I'm dead, I'll have to watch my terrible teammates.

When you're dead, you have to watch your living "terrible" teammates. I understand that this situation can exist. But the problem I have more often is that when I'm alive, I have to figure out how to track, avoid, or eliminate, a superior enemy force while weighing the risk/reward of moving to revive my "terrible" teammates that charged in and got killed.

They don't play their class properly, camp at the back of the map, overstack or avoid supplies and then die, crouch walk in the open, I could go on.

Please go on. Tell us the "proper" way to play each class. Explain how in order to have skill you must center your activity around one area of the map. I'd also like to know how the amount of supplies a player has on them at the time of their death gives you insight to their reasoning...

Randoms (people that we don't recognize as a good player) are almost always unreliable. I'm sure these guys are probably young, new to the game, older folks, or in general, players that want to enjoy the game.

To be a skilled player you must, without any form of prior knowledge or communication, be able to do exactly what Merdian wants when he want's it? And if you don't do that, then you're: Young, Old, New, or wanting to have fun in a video game... So again, to be skilled, you have to be a specific age, have played the game for a while, and also hate what you're playing?

I see strafing as a tool that's crucial for me to use against competitive players. Yes, the endgame of having to strafe is to win battles. Do you think people that strafe would be clueless without it? All of the top players I know and have played against would still destroy anyone. That's what I mean when I said, "Strafers can do the same things you can but quicker and more effectively."

No, I don't think all that strafers would be clueless without it. Don't forget, you are the one that jumps to absolute conclusions. And if all the top players you know would still destroy anyone... how are any of them top players? Certainly they would be destroying each other, including you. So which of them are skilled, and which are skilless?
And sure, a group that knows the map and exploits the games design flaws, is much more likely to defeat someone who doesn't do those things. But that doesn't equate to skill. It's just knowledge and exploitation.

Your question - "So it takes no skill, but the people who do it are more skilled than you?". I would say yes because every strafer that I have played with or against already understand things like strategy, power positions, and sticking together. Randoms don't seem to think like that based on what I have experienced.

I hope I don't hurt your head with this one:
Scenario - A player doesn't know strategy, power positions, and sticking together. This same player uses the strafe exploit....
Does this player have skill? (Remember, you just said "yes")

If you only blame your loss on the strafe movement, then you need to start looking at your capabilities.

No one is doing this. No one is saying this exploit is the only reason they die.
They are saying the same things you've said about it. It's a terrible design flaw, stacked on top of several other design flaws and technical issues, and it frustrates the players by r*tarding tactical gameplay.


Again, I understand what you were trying to do with your initial post. You wanted to help other people. But you needlessly jump to logical fallacies and berate other players.

[AI BLUEFOX]

Everything you define as "good" is what good players already do. There is nothing special about doing any of that. Working together is just common sense. Then it boils down to your and your teammate's skill level. I've never said the strafe was good. Being able to beat the strafe is good. When I read all these posts complaining about the strafe, I compare them to the randoms. Are they the type of players that hide in a bush or sit in a building the entire match? Anyone can do that.

The players that would still be good without circle running - yeah, of course they'd still be good - by definition. A grand chess master who can throw those chess pieces would cope with either style of play.

What ruins it for all the people who'd like a tactical game is that a whole load of players now are only good at circle running. Take that issue away and the truly good players won't have a problem, but the average players will get a game that is true to the franchise.

[Meridian2251]

"How does the knowledge that a single player on this whole planet has changed their gamertag correlate with the when and how much another plays Breakpoint?"

It doesn't. As I said, it was a guess.

"And you know these things because you've reached out to every single player and had an intellectual conversation with in regards to their actions, and weighed this against their relative performance?"

No. Imagine you just planted at Bombsite B. You took out one guy while defending. Then, another enemy kills you from behind. Now you have to watch your teammates that didn't help you earlier, try to save the day. The thing is they are too far away because they felt like being over there instead of being near the bomb. As the enemy defuses the bomb, you hop on your mic and ask your team, "Why didn't you play the objective?". I highly doubt your teammates will blame themselves. They will call you out for dying, for engaging with the enemy too closely, or not sticking with your team.

"When you're dead, you have to watch your living "terrible" teammates. I understand that this situation can exist. But the problem I have more often is that when I'm alive, I have to figure out how to track, avoid, or eliminate, a superior enemy force while weighing the risk/reward of moving to revive my "terrible" teammates that charged in and got killed."

No matter who I play with, I am looking to make choices that will impact the outcome of the match. Sometimes it'll lead me to my death. I don't have to stay alive longer to know that I can do better than my teammates. PVP records give me all the information I need to know about how well someone will perform. If someone has good stats, I can rely on them more than someone with bad stats. What are you referring to as a "terrible" teammate?

"Please go on. Tell us the "proper" way to play each class. Explain how in order to have skill you must center your activity around one area of the map. I'd also like to know how the amount of supplies a player has on them at the time of their death gives you insight to their reasoning..."

In Wildlands, it's easier to tell when someone is playing a class wrong since the game revolved a lot around classes. In Breakpoint, the game leans more towards individualism. The "proper" way to play a class is by finding its fullest potential and forming a playstyle around it. If you are playing Sharpshooter and not loading your rounds in and missing your shots, that's not proper. If you are playing Assault but want to snipe than moving into the map and engage in relatively close-quarters combat, that's not proper.

"To be a skilled player you must, without any form of prior knowledge or communication, be able to do exactly what Merdian wants when he want's it? And if you don't do that, then you're: Young, Old, New, or wanting to have fun in a video game... So again, to be skilled, you have to be a specific age, have played the game for a while, and also hate what you're playing?"

No, but you should be also independent and hold your own. I can play with a lot of people without hearing or saying anything and be able to figure out what they want to do. It's just something I picked up while solo queuing so much. I still rely on them as they rely on me. The "Young, Old, New, or wanting to have fun" are all possible reasons why someone is not good at a video game. You can be skilled regardless of how old you are. You do need to incorporate time into a game to get better. The same thing goes for other activities.

"And if all the top players you know would still destroy anyone... how are any of them top players?"

They are top players because they win a lot. I doubt they "destroy" each other but certainly sometimes lose and win. The top players I am thinking of all fit in together in that category. All of them are skilled. All players that can counter the strafe are skilled. I already said the strafe itself isn't a skillful mechanic. The players that use it are already at the point where they don't have much to learn about the game anymore. You can call it an exploit but an exploit wouldn't get beat by someone that knows how to use other aspects of the game.

"I hope I don't hurt your head with this one:
Scenario - A player doesn't know strategy, power positions, and sticking together. This same player uses the strafe exploit....
Does this player have skill? (Remember, you just said "yes")"

I have never played with/against someone that didn't know how to strategize, take map control, and stick together while being able to strafe. Like I said in my initial post, if the other team is just running at you, they are not respecting your skill level.

"No one is doing this. No one is saying this exploit is the only reason they die.
They are saying the same things you've said about it. It's a terrible design flaw, stacked on top of several other design flaws and technical issues, and it frustrates the players by r*tarding tactical gameplay."
"Again, I understand what you were trying to do with your initial post. You wanted to help other people. But you needlessly jump to logical fallacies and berate other players."

Some people actually do. We get messages in-game or through Xbox Live. I'm sure I could find a comment in the forums. I'm glad you understood my intention. I don't mean to come across as having a superior complex (which honestly, I have a habit of doing) or maybe I'm just trying to be too factual. I berate other players because the number of times I've seen players do dumb things just baffle me. I remember seeing two players just potato aim each other from a couple of feet which was one of the funniest things I have seen on Breakpoint.

[Meridian2251]

The players that would still be good without circle running - yeah, of course they'd still be good - by definition. A grand chess master who can throw those chess pieces would cope with either style of play.

What ruins it for all the people who'd like a tactical game is that a whole load of players now are only good at circle running. Take that issue away and the truly good players won't have a problem, but the average players will get a game that is true to the franchise.

"A game that is true to the franchise." Um...

[Church367A]

Take that issue away and the truly good players won't have a problem, but the average players will get a game that is true to the franchise.

Disagree with this statement. Being limited to strictly 4 v 4 is mediocrity in comparison to what previous Ghost Recons provided. It would be closer to what it should provide, but still fall short in my opinion. Seriously, what is the deal with Ubi and its limitation of 4, it does nothing for Ghost Recon and completely trashes what the series originally provided.

[xxFratosxx]

What ruins it for all the people who'd like a tactical game is that a whole load of players now are only good at circle running. Take that issue away and the truly good players won't have a problem, but the average players will get a game that is true to the franchise.

Well said. I agree. This played a role that also stop me from playing. This was considered meta for the game. Correct me if I’m wrong but meta is defined as best equipment, abilities, or playstyle right? The strafe glitch was quickly educated via videos and custom lobbies as meta. The “top players” invited me to a party once. Long behold the whole custom match meeting was about strafe practice or play a match to find out who is the better strafer to win. Meet in the middle then match over in 2 minutes. Not only I found that ridiculous but couldn’t believed they enjoyed it. If that’s what top players do I must be getting old. From that point I never joined those parties again for that reason.

The whole strafe thing is overrated and clearly caused the meta to grow on more players. Sorry but I never seen strafe as skill at all. It does get the job done to kill solely or as a team but to me it zaps the fun taking advantage over other players. I do believe majority of players are good and can play tactical. Mind games, planning, ambushing, and so on is all tactics. Nearly all players have it but there’s players that choose to not use the meta to win. That takes out originality on what tactical shooters was focused on. At least for GR.