m99 Awareness week

[Lnwlf]

LOL, you mean watch those servers FILL UP with people who DONT need a nub tool to get kills? You are wrong. And the only reason you or anyone uses that gun is because its the easiest to get a kill with. If they patch the 50cal into crappiness, all the nubes, like yourself, will find the next easiest thing to use. Either way, our server will be full. With or without it.

I do agree with body damage variance.

Jungle map???? The Cut mb?

P.S. Play the game for more than 5 minutes next time.

TeamHOT server will be up in a matter of days. No m99. No GL. All Skill.

yay!

[PersianImmortal]

Its a similar weapon to the AWP on css,

This is not CSS, and I for one don't want to play GRAW 2 if it turns into CSS or BF2.

if someone is using it then I just grab a few grenades and the balance is equal. The same can be said about the m99, its balance is the GL.

That's great, so virtually every server becomes a GL and M99-fest, because everyone has to choose these weapons to counter each other? How does this lead to an interesting game? How does this make GRAW 2 a tactical shooter, and not just another deathmatch game?

The truth is that if the M99 and GL are left unaltered in the game, then watch as all the servers empty out over time and fewer and fewer people stick around to play GRAW 2. I've been gaming online for 9 years now, starting with the original Unreal Tournament, and if I want to play a deathmatch game with insta-kill weapons then I'll stick with UT or Quake-based games. GRAW 2 is meant to be something different, it's meant to be a tactical shooter, and if the developers forget that, then the game is pretty much going to die.

[Lnwlf]

yeah it would suck to have GR2 be a multi year competition mainstay.

Edited July 27, 2007 by Lnwlf

[PersianImmortal]

Notice how players in GRAW 2 don't have the ability to jump - why do you think that is? Because GRAW 2 is not meant to be a typical deathmatch, run-around-jumping-and-shooting-everything-that-moves type game. The developers clearly intended GRAW 2 to be a tactical shooter. That's the game's niche. If you want a competitive deathmatch game, then why not go play CSS, BF2, or the Quake Wars beta, or wait for UT3 to come out? Then you can strafe-jump and awp and railgun as many people as you want while yelling "WOOT!!" the whole time.

There's no reason why GRAW 2 can't be a competitive game as well as being a balanced tactical shooter. Competition doesn't equal mindless instant kill action. If however I'm mistaken and the developers have actually aimed the game at the average 16 year old who wants to "shoot stuff" and get instant kills with unrealistic weapons while constantly talking smack, then you can count me out.

What makes a successful game is when it finds a niche and serves a particular audience. If it just tries to poorly imitate other more successful games, it will always be less popular. We'll wait and see what the developers do with the game in upcoming weeks, but if it turns into a poor-man's BF2 or America's Army then I'm not going to bother with it. You "competitive gamers" are welcome to run around sniping each other with .50 cals all day long.

[Lnwlf]

Notice how players in GRAW 2 don't have the ability to jump - why do you think that is? Because GRAW 2 is not meant to be a typical deathmatch, run-around-jumping-and-shooting-everything-that-moves type game. The developers clearly intended GRAW 2 to be a tactical shooter. That's the game's niche. If you want a competitive deathmatch game, then why not go play CSS, BF2, or the Quake Wars beta, or wait for UT3 to come out? Then you can strafe-jump and awp and railgun as many people as you want while yelling "WOOT!!" the whole time.

There's no reason why GRAW 2 can't be a competitive game as well as being a balanced tactical shooter. Competition doesn't equal mindless instant kill action. If however I'm mistaken and the developers have actually aimed the game at the average 16 year old who wants to "shoot stuff" and get instant kills with unrealistic weapons while constantly talking smack, then you can count me out.

What makes a successful game is when it finds a niche and serves a particular audience. If it just tries to poorly imitate other more successful games, it will always be less popular. We'll wait and see what the developers do with the game in upcoming weeks, but if it turns into a poor-man's BF2 or America's Army then I'm not going to bother with it. You "competitive gamers" are welcome to run around sniping each other with .50 cals all day long.

assault 7 FTW! Im only sad cause i can't shock paddle people anymore.. but good points, all these games had their strong points and their weak points bf2's downfall was hit reg. bf2142 improved it and made it much more of a tactical shooter type game. At the end of the day, all of these games have vibrant competition communities whom support a game much longer than the casual pubber. and invariably we are the ones participating in closed betas providing feedback months before anyone else. We were playing the ETQW closed beta since feb and there is a reason some of us came here. so you are preaching to the choir.

[viiiper]

Notice how players in GRAW 2 don't have the ability to jump - why do you think that is? Because GRAW 2 is not meant to be a typical deathmatch, run-around-jumping-and-shooting-everything-that-moves type game. The developers clearly intended GRAW 2 to be a tactical shooter. That's the game's niche. If you want a competitive deathmatch game, then why not go play CSS, BF2, or the Quake Wars beta, or wait for UT3 to come out? Then you can strafe-jump and awp and railgun as many people as you want while yelling "WOOT!!" the whole time.

There's no reason why GRAW 2 can't be a competitive game as well as being a balanced tactical shooter. Competition doesn't equal mindless instant kill action. If however I'm mistaken and the developers have actually aimed the game at the average 16 year old who wants to "shoot stuff" and get instant kills with unrealistic weapons while constantly talking smack, then you can count me out.

What makes a successful game is when it finds a niche and serves a particular audience. If it just tries to poorly imitate other more successful games, it will always be less popular. We'll wait and see what the developers do with the game in upcoming weeks, but if it turns into a poor-man's BF2 or America's Army then I'm not going to bother with it. You "competitive gamers" are welcome to run around sniping each other with .50 cals all day long.

Another tail of doom and gloom from down under

One ex BF2 & CounterStrike member views on the perils of not making GRAW2 to his liking, so this is the best argument you can come up with to support the idea to change the weapons you don't like (along with the merry men) and leave all those that don't have no problem with it with something that could end up not being used. I some how think GRIN has this number. So in your own words, your out, well enjoy counterstrike and Battlefiled (you previous joys).

GRAW/ GR series never was an imitation of other games, more games are moving to the GR format and in doing so are bring some unwanted styles of play and moaners. GRAW survived without all the "ban the bullet" ideas and will survive long after they go back to battlefield, counterstrike or quake. Thank you for your insight into what makes a successful game, I'm sure it is a contributing factor.

Its a similar weapon to the AWP on css,

This is not CSS, and I for one don't want to play GRAW 2 if it turns into CSS or BF2.

if someone is using it then I just grab a few grenades and the balance is equal. The same can be said about the m99, its balance is the GL.

That's great, so virtually every server becomes a GL and M99-fest, because everyone has to choose these weapons to counter each other? How does this lead to an interesting game? How does this make GRAW 2 a tactical shooter, and not just another deathmatch game?

The truth is that if the M99 and GL are left unaltered in the game, then watch as all the servers empty out over time and fewer and fewer people stick around to play GRAW 2. I've been gaming online for 9 years now, starting with the original Unreal Tournament, and if I want to play a deathmatch game with insta-kill weapons then I'll stick with UT or Quake-based games. GRAW 2 is meant to be something different, it's meant to be a tactical shooter, and if the developers forget that, then the game is pretty much going to die.

More tails of doom and gloom from down under PART II

Thank you for that insight Staff Sergeant, your crystal balls must be working over time in Australia. The truth is that if the M99 and GL are left unaltered in the game, then watch how the community adapts and servers tailor play to suit there audience. Not to forget, that most of the GR community make the best addons of any game.

I don't care for America's Army ex pats, or quake junkies finding there way and I'm happy as hell that there are limited resource and time for the developer to patch GRAW2. All these wants and predictions can be made by a third party.

I wait for the day the locusts leave.

[NoQuarter]

A place for everything and everything in its place.

____

A little self-moderation might be in order, this is an open forum afterall, not a private club.

[viiiper]

Shouting fowl play and unfair with points/ topics that technically work fine because there vision is not being met, is not the way. I personally hate the developer being told/ asked to make time for things that work and sacrifice limited resource on other things that have real problems.

So to all new comers, welcome to the best GR Series forum on the internet, the one true home of GR.

[PersianImmortal]

For the record I don't like UT and Quake-like games, the entire reason why I'm interested in GRAW 2 is exactly because it isn't a deathmatch game, and it shows a lot of promise. I soon found out that games like UT, BF2, Quake, America's Army all have one thing in common - a childish community of people who are interested only in running around and "owning" everyone else.

I am hoping that GRAW 2 is different, and that both the community and the game itself are unique. That's why game balance issues are important to me. I believe a game which levels the playing field in terms of game mechanics and game balance then allows people to shine based on their individual skill, not because they've found the weapon which provides the easiest kills and exploit it.

And don't worry, should GRAW 2 continue the way it's going, I will leave without any more fuss and drama. That's why I'm waiting to see what GRIN do in upcoming patches, and should they ignore this issue (as is their right to do so), then I'll quietly stop playing and won't be posting here any more. So you just might get your wish.

[viiiper]

No wish of mine for you to leave, but trying to homogenize all the weapons into one flavour is not going to bring out skill in anyone. That's why weapons in real life are so diffrent, like video clips I posted, the overall mechanics of the M99 etc are good. The point at hand is that all the other weapons are poor and why?

The only thing wrong with the current weapons is the collision detection with objects, in general the weapons are good and the characteristics are ok as well. The lack of wounding is a missing element, that's why the other rifles look so poor, cos the M99 normally does not wound, it kills.

Great point. If we had a wound damage model that caused limping/stunning/slowing down/knock down, this whole issue wouldn't even exist. M14 sniper or any other gun hits enemy, enemy wounded, doesn't have a chance to run off or turn and shoot like nothing happened. M14 sniper (or insert any gun here) hits him again and gets kill.

This is what I agree with, this is the real problem, it never was the M99, it's the wound model that all the other guns follow, they are inaccurate. Fix this you fix the whole topic.

[Nutlink]

Those of us arguing against the M99 and GL aren't trying to homogenize the weapons either, we just hate seeing the same weapons over and over, making things like the M14 virtually unseen and useless. I personally still think the M99 should always be a one hit kill, but as it stands it is THE sniper weapon to use without question. Although a good damage model with things such as limping, loose aim, inability to run, etc etc would probably make this a pointless argument as you stated before. Chances of adding in a wound model is low (considering we've been asking for it since GRAW) while adjusting the 2 "uber" weapons to go with the flow is more likely. Here's to hoping for a wound model, though.

Edited July 27, 2007 by Nutlink

[viiiper]

I'll tell you a story, in the ghost recon days, the M82A1 was a sniper rifle, strange little thing as it's the more powerful semi automatic version of the M99, no one complained it was a one kill wonder. But very few took it, why ? the maps did not call for it, the wound model made things such, that most weapons, wounded or killed with one bullet. Now roll forward to 2006 and we have this situation, GRAW1 & M99, no one is moaning ? why? there is no real wound model, but no moans, because all the other weapons are rather lethal too. Now we are into 2007, The M99 is back with it's 3 second reload, the same killing power, but all the world moans on, why ? because all the other rifles have lost the will to kill

Don't fix something that has not changed, fix the problem, not the scapegoat.

[Undercoverman]

Here are the reasons why the M99 should be retained, unchanged:

- One shot, with a lengthy reload time. It is conceivable that the person who is exposed long enough to be sniped, could also be hit with any other weapon, and what's more, hit a multitude of times. If you expose yourself, and if you are exposed enough for a sniper to look down his SIGHTS (a process that takes roughly a second, second and a half) and acquire you in his crosshairs, then you deserve to be shot. You're a sitting duck. Couple this with the fact that the sniper CANNOT make another shot for at least another 4 or 5 seconds, if he misses he has a considerable period where he cannot return fire.

- A sniper needs to be established AT LEAST a couple of seconds before he can get off a shot. The rets of the rifle, while moving, should be wider, but they are not accurate enough to ensure a kill at close range while moving every time. Besides, if you run up to a guy holding a rifle, you only have yourself to blame. GRAW2 is a game to be played where players move to differing areas of cover UNDER cover fire. If you move into an exposed area, you will die. This is reflected in the single player game, too. It's even hinted at in the hints before MP games - assault weapons for all round, snipers for precision, MGs for cover. You COVER your advance, suppress the waiting, and move to your own cover before allowing others to advance.

- YES, GRAW2 is a TACTICAL shooter, and part of those tactics are that you should be INCREDIBLY careful about where you place your avatar. If you sit yourself down in an exposed area, or run into someone's cover arc, you SHOULD DIE. The advantage in this game, as it ALWAYS should be, is with the defender, the person entrenched. If you have time to establish yourself, and lock down a choke point, NOBODY should be able to get through without using the tools to give yourself a tactical advantage - smoke, cover fire and explosives.

- The M99 can decimate public servers. Why? Because people do NOT move together, or cover each other, in public servers. Unless two people are lined up for a one-shot-two-kills, the sniper cannot kill two people at once. If there is more than one person, the sniper is dead. In the time it takes for the sniper to reload, and after exposing himself by making the shot, the other person can comfortably mop up. If the sniper himself is covered, he needs to be displaced by an explosive - cue GL or a thrown grenade. I know usually it's not always as simple as this, but GRIN have given us the means with which to dig people out of holes. Crying foul because we're not using them en masse is ridiculous. The tools are there - perhaps a counter-sniper awareness week should be required?

- What about the SCARH? With one well placed (unsuppressed) round, it can end your game. With at MOST 3 rounds to centre mass, it can kill anyone. You can shoot accurately and rapidly with the SCARH to similar effect, only it's not sighted. Stick an underslung GL on it and you're got a major bringer of death. This, if used correctly, is AT LEAST as deadly as the M99. A couple of people covering each other with the SCARH is far deadlier than a sniper, even two snipers. Just because the sniper rifle is seemingly the most effective in public servers, it doesn't make it the deadliest weapon.

- Communication is key. There are a limited number of places a sniper can be on the maps, owing to the lack of long sightlines. If the sniper is exposed, or discovered, a simple message to watch out in a certain area can be his undoing. A sniper RELIES upon not being discovered (which is why a good sniper never makes the same shot twice and relocates after every round is fired). In public servers, people don't communicate and as a result a sniper can notch up several kills in one area because people are unaware of his presence and additionally do not cover each other's advances. Making an effort to inform each other, and not wandering into his sights, can render a sniper useless.

- Snipers do not wear ghillie suits in this game. The only advantage you have in hiding yourself is dropping into a shaded area or merging with a bush. ANYBODY can do that in this game. The sniper doesn't have some sort of cloak of invisibility. The advantages a sniper would normally have in the field, his most primary one - camoflage - is almost none-existent in relation to the advantages anybody else has. A sniper is no more or less exposed than anybody else.

That's about all I can come up with off the top of my head. In the situations where a sniper has dominated, it is because of poor communication, lack of cover, and lack of care. The M99 isn't overpowered - everybody else, especially in public servers, is underpowered... Haha!

Edited July 27, 2007 by Undercoverman

[PersianImmortal]

Don't fix something that has not changed, fix the problem, not the scapegoat.

But I don't see any real problem at all. It's not like I'm "whining" about the M99 when there are more important things to be addressed - there's no major issue that needs to be fixed in my opinion. Sure, we want a map editor, and there are random crash issues and some minor bugs which GRIN needs to address, but they are already well aware of these.

To me GRAW 2 is spot-on perfect in most respects, except for the minor issues we're discussing now. The graphics, sound effects, the game mechanics, and most of the weapons are absolutely great. What we're talking about now are relatively minor refinements which should be quite simple for GRIN to implement, and which all games have to go through before they can be considered well-balanced. Every major online game released in the past 8 years has had patches which introduce gameplay fixes precisely for this reason.

The issue is simply that the M99 and GL are completely out of place in GRAw 2. The rest of the weapons have their strengths and weaknesses, and all of them fit into the theme of a tactical shooter. But the M99 and GL both encourage deathmatch-like hit and run tactics. So far I haven't seen a single logical argument as to why it would be bad for the M99 to have scope sway unless the user is prone, and why the GL can't have an arming distance which prevents kills at under 10-20m. If these weapons are being used as intended, these changes would have no impact whatsoever. If you're prone and sniping properly, scope sway will be a non-issue; if you're using the GL at medium to long distance, the minimum range limit will be a non-issue.

I'm not saying they should be banned, I'm not saying there shouldn't be a .50 cal instant kill weapon in the game. I'm saying it's currently overpowered and it risks skewing GRAW 2 to the point where most people will use M99 or GL as their primary weapon, either because they want to or because they're forced to. I would be making the same complaints if the SAW in the game had no recoil for example, or if every kit had a dozen hand grenades included. These sort of things unbalance an otherwise great game.

Edited July 27, 2007 by PersianImmortal

[{B:P:R}Joker]

this all boils down to public servers at the end of the day and people playing with unlimited spawns.

cant wait for clan matching to commence after speaking to the clans we have known for several years and have matched with on a regular basics playing the game types and rules we all like no re spawns and no tdm.

we have no problem with the m99 basically because only a few will use it and do what its intended for sniping from a vantage point and laying still and not running about.

so at the end of the day the m99 will not be banned from any of our servers nor will the gl.

people sit here moaning about the way you can swing the gun around yet what about the support weapons that you can walk around the entire map scoped up so if you want to start getting picky about stuff boys and girls we could pull all the weapon apart for various reasons and have an awareness week every week for each gun.

go team hot

[viiiper]

Here are the reasons why the M99 should be retained, unchanged:

- One shot, with a lengthy reload time. It is conceivable that the person who is exposed long enough to be sniped, could also be hit with any other weapon, and what's more, hit a multitude of times. If you expose yourself, and if you are exposed enough for a sniper to look down his SIGHTS (a process that takes roughly a second, second and a half) and acquire you in his crosshairs, then you deserve to be shot. You're a sitting duck. Couple this with the fact that the sniper CANNOT make another shot for at least another 4 or 5 seconds, if he misses he has a considerable period where he cannot return fire.

- A sniper needs to be established AT LEAST a couple of seconds before he can get off a shot. The rets of the rifle, while moving, should be wider, but they are not accurate enough to ensure a kill at close range while moving every time. Besides, if you run up to a guy holding a rifle, you only have yourself to blame. GRAW2 is a game to be played where players move to differing areas of cover UNDER cover fire. If you move into an exposed area, you will die. This is reflected in the single player game, too. It's even hinted at in the hints before MP games - assault weapons for all round, snipers for precision, MGs for cover. You COVER your advance, suppress the waiting, and move to your own cover before allowing others to advance.

- YES, GRAW2 is a TACTICAL shooter, and part of those tactics are that you should be INCREDIBLY careful about where you place your avatar. If you sit yourself down in an exposed area, or run into someone's cover arc, you SHOULD DIE. The advantage in this game, as it ALWAYS should be, is with the defender, the person entrenched. If you have time to establish yourself, and lock down a choke point, NOBODY should be able to get through without using the tools to give yourself a tactical advantage - smoke, cover fire and explosives.

- The M99 can decimate public servers. Why? Because people do NOT move together, or cover each other, in public servers. Unless two people are lined up for a one-shot-two-kills, the sniper cannot kill two people at once. If there is more than one person, the sniper is dead. In the time it takes for the sniper to reload, and after exposing himself by making the shot, the other person can comfortably mop up. If the sniper himself is covered, he needs to be displaced by an explosive - cue GL or a thrown grenade. I know usually it's not always as simple as this, but GRIN have given us the means with which to dig people out of holes. Crying foul because we're not using them en masse is ridiculous. The tools are there - perhaps a counter-sniper awareness week should be required?

- What about the SCARH? With one well placed (unsuppressed) round, it can end your game. With at MOST 3 rounds to centre mass, it can kill anyone. You can shoot accurately and rapidly with the SCARH to similar effect, only it's not sighted. Stick an underslung GL on it and you're got a major bringer of death. This, if used correctly, is AT LEAST as deadly as the M99. A couple of people covering each other with the SCARH is far deadlier than a sniper, even two snipers. Just because the sniper rifle is seemingly the most effective in public servers, it doesn't make it the deadliest weapon.

- Communication is key. There are a limited number of places a sniper can be on the maps, owing to the lack of long sightlines. If the sniper is exposed, or discovered, a simple message to watch out in a certain area can be his undoing. A sniper RELIES upon not being discovered (which is why a good sniper never makes the same shot twice and relocates after every round is fired). In public servers, people don't communicate and as a result a sniper can notch up several kills in one area because people are unaware of his presence and additionally do not cover each other's advances. Making an effort to inform each other, and not wandering into his sights, can render a sniper useless.

- Snipers do not wear ghillie suits in this game. The only advantage you have in hiding yourself is dropping into a shaded area or merging with a bush. ANYBODY can do that in this game. The sniper doesn't have some sort of cloak of invisibility. The advantages a sniper would normally have in the field, his most primary one - camoflage - is almost none-existent in relation to the advantages anybody else has. A sniper is no more or less exposed than anybody else.

That's about all I can come up with off the top of my head. In the situations where a sniper has dominated, it is because of poor communication, lack of cover, and lack of care. The M99 isn't overpowered - everybody else, especially in public servers, is underpowered... Haha!

The best post on this thread by far, well thought out and true to the point, I'm getting tired of going over and over on a point of none issue. The M99 like 'Undercoverman' states is a weapon of skill and chance, it only works well in a team and it's the failings of the opposition (yes you know who your are), to counter the situation that creates the problem.

O yes I know why the M99 is so good, because a bunch of whiners, will not sacrifice there precious (scope) for the team and take smoke, grenades or GL's to dig out the said snipers. Like it's been said before don't blame others for your failings to play as a real team. Don't blame the weapon, look at how you play, most of the guys I play with are on voice comms, and that makes our play 10x better than without.

The new point about public server is a good point, 'a group of players does not make a team of tactical fighters'.

[PersianImmortal]

Ok we're getting nowhere fast. This is my last post on this topic. I've made my points, I'm sure those who need to see them have seen them. M99 awareness week has hopefully made people aware of this weapon and the GL's flaws. I leave things in the hands of GRIN over the next few weeks, and as I said before, I'll (regretfully) walk away from GRAW 2 if it does not have appropriate game balance tweaks undertaken. That's all from me.

[ruggbutt]

This sounds like a scrimmage is needed. Set it up. Team hot against BSR. If you want a neutral server with all weapons, let me know.

I doubt highly that we'd go out of our way to do anything that has to do with the self proclaimed world champs after they started tk'ing our squaddies on one of the UBI servers. I've disagreed with the BS laid out by Jar publicly but after that stunt they've achieved legendary status amongst boogereaters such as DMOC.

And like Ruggbutt says, I guy I never saw eye to eye with, but he talks more sense that most. I can't wait to play against the self proclaimed World Champs of GR.

Play 'em no respawns.

Edited July 27, 2007 by ruggbutt

[Peace]

haha I really enjoy reading this thread

[Guest]

It IS a fun one to watch Peace! I've seen presidential debates with less flawed logic in them! The only thread that comes close is the one complaining about spawn limits.

[huddex]

As i wrote earlier, the only thing in need of a change is the tree's. The M99 needs to be able to penetrate them.

[xtraclip]

... for a sniper to look down his SIGHTS (a process that takes roughly a second, second and a half) ...

you havn't played this game very much, do you ?

What I think is really funny is, that the same people who want spawnlimit are the ones who are afraid the M99 could be weakened

Edited July 27, 2007 by xtraclip

[Easton]

All in all, I enjoy the 99 on public servers.. and I do not have a problem when they are shot at me. Many points were made in this thread, good points on both sides... and that was the point. Who knows how the 99 will be regarded in comp play, we will see.

My number one annoyance is the reinforced steel leaves on these damn trees.

The next, and I am not calling for a nerf here, but I get damn annoyed at being nade launched... so if I am killing you, a lot, bust that out to ###### me off

Also, rugg, get over it, man... no one is professing world domination here... the players on our Graw2 team have not won much....

Easton

www.TeamHOT.net

[Sleepdoc-iBeta]

O yes I know why the M99 is so good, because a bunch of whiners, will not sacrifice there precious (scope) for the team and take smoke, grenades or GL's to dig out the said snipers. Like it's been said before don't blame others for your failings to play as a real team. Don't blame the weapon, look at how you play, most of the guys I play with are on voice comms, and that makes our play 10x better than without.

Although I will stop short of calling people whiners, I have to agree whole heartedly with this post. Last night, I saw it prove to be true.

We were on a server getting absolutely sluaghtered by some guy with a M99 who was essentially running and gunning and we were all getting frustrated wtih him. Then we simply grabbed smoke, and in one try, flanked him and killed him.

Then he returned. We used smoke and then tried to flank him but he was ready. So we set up a counter sniper. We smoked his usual direction and then sniped him from his flank (counter sniped him i should say)

The bottom line appears to be that if one side is organized (teamspeak, battle buddy teams etc) and the other side is not, the organized side can do some serious damage with an M99. But the second the other side decides to actually apply resources and strategy to nuetralize the M99 guy, his weaknesses can be qiuckly exploited and turned against him.

Its the learning curve. We finally got on that curve last night.

Over time, the people who hate the M99 will simply come to learn what we learned last night and more and more people will know how to counter them. Over time, their apparent throne will be removed and only the most skilled snipers who know how to sneak, shoot, move, hide etc will want to make that their weapon of choice....

Edited July 27, 2007 by Sleepdoc

[{B:P:R}Joker]

oh teamwork that old chestnut why didnt someone say that before then and use other teamplayers and use erm erm erm erm erm erm whats it called oh yeah

TACTICS.

glad it worked for you sleepdoc you never no people might read your post and have a go sometime themselves.