|
|
| (12 intermediate revisions by 10 users not shown) |
| Line 1: |
Line 1: |
| − | I really feel like adding something to the Razorback's main strategies:
| + | {{Talk archive |
| − | *Use Something else.
| + | | arc1name = Archive 1 |
| − | | + | | arc1link = Talk:Community Sniper strategy/Archive 1 |
| − | but I'm afraid it would be considered abuse or something. [[User:Guy|Guy]] 17:33, 1 August 2010 (UTC)
| + | }} |
| − | | |
| − | :That's wouldn't be a Razorback strategy. Don't do it. -- [[User:Pilk|Pilk]] <sub>([[User talk:Pilk|talk]])</sub> 17:45, 1 August 2010 (UTC)
| |
| − | | |
| − | ::it's more of a joke then anything else, implying the razorback is useless. [[User:Guy|Guy]] 17:53, 1 August 2010 (UTC)
| |
| − | | |
| − | :::It's your opinion. Readers do not want to read your opinions or have them thrust upon them. -- [[User:Smashman|Smashman...]]{{bur}} <sub>([[User_talk:Smashman|t]] • <span class="plainlinks">[http://www.steamcommunity.com/id/smashman2004 s])</span></sub> 18:03, 1 August 2010 (UTC)
| |
| − | | |
| − | == New Sniper strategy ==
| |
| − | i have a few strategy some which i wish to discuss
| |
| − | | |
| − | in the general section
| |
| − | * With the primary weapons([[Sniper Rifle]], [[Huntsman]] or [[Sydney Sleeper]])stand behind a wall, charge the shot (in the huntsman's case put pull back to it's fullest) and gradually come out from behind the wall scanning the area. Doing this allows you to scan the area without leaving you to open to enemy fire.
| |
| − | **Sometimes enemy's will see this and try to counter you with this strategy, while they have there weapon aimed at the edge of the wall learn from your death, remember where the enemy is and instead of gradually coming out rush out while zoomed in or pull back. The enemy wont expect this causing them to have to re aim but by the time they re aim your shot should of killed them.
| |
| − | | |
| − | in the sniper rifle section i would like to get rid of a strategy if acceptable
| |
| − | *having your back to a wall will stop possible back-stabs from spy's -> reason: because of the way that the models are made there are only 3 parts of a player; the head, back and front. So if a spy was to back-stab the back half of your side the attack would count as a back-stab and most spy's today are aware of this.
| |
| − | | |
| − | [[User:Lexicon249|Lexicon249]] 03:25, 6 December 2010 (UTC)
| |
| − | | |
| − | :I copied the below statement from some user talk pages. [[User:K-Mac|K-Mac]][[File:Tfccivilian_thumb.png|25px]] <small>([[User talk:K-Mac|Talk]] | [[Special:Contributions/K-Mac|Contrib]])</small> 03:32, 6 December 2010 (UTC)
| |
| − | | |
| − | :The first part of the strategy had been previously mentioned ("If you are entering a new area...try and use crouch to peek out"). The second part is rather subjective, and would probably result in more deaths than not if followed. Parts also generally lacked correct grammar, something lots of people are sticklers for (Articles do try to appear semi-professional, as gaming-related as they may be). I do agree, however, with your latest edit, but probably for different reasons.[[User:InShane|InShane]]03:21, 6 December 2010 (UTC)
| |
| − | | |
| − | == Minimum Damage with Sniper Rifle for Classes with Altered Health == | |
| − | | |
| − | I have started a list of the minimum amount required to kill classes that have their health altered from wearing [[Item Sets]] or weapons that change health like [[The Gunslinger]].
| |
| − | | |
| − | I was hoping if there is or plans of people doing community testing on the following situations to know how much charge required will be needed to kill them.
| |
| − | | |
| − | *A Scout with the [[Sandman]]. (110 Health/165 Overhealed.)
| |
| − | *A Demoman with [[The Eyelander]] with four or more heads. (210 Health/310 Overhealed.)
| |
| − | *A Medic with the [[Vita-Saw]]. (140 Health/210 Overhealed.)
| |
| − | | |
| − | I won't be asking for 1-3 heads with the Eyelander since it'd be virtually impossible for a Sniper to know exactly how many heads a Demoman currently has.
| |
| − | | |
| − | Edit: I will try to make some mathematical caluations using proportions to give estimates to help with anyone who volenteers for testing later. (11:54 AM)
| |
| − | | |
| − | [[User:Davtwan|Davtwan]] 18:46, 15 October 2010 (UTC)
| |
| − | | |
| − | '''Update'''
| |
| − | | |
| − | I finished making some calculations that can be used in community testing. The latter percentage is what's required to kill an overhealed version. All percentages that ended with a decimal are rounded up to the nearest percentage.
| |
| − | | |
| − | '''A Scout with the [[Sandman]]'''
| |
| − | | |
| − | * HEAD: 0% (5%)
| |
| − | * BODY: 60% (115%)
| |
| − | | |
| − | '''A Demoman with [[The Eyelander]] with four or more heads'''
| |
| − | * HEAD: 20% (55%)
| |
| − | * BODY: 160% (265%)
| |
| − | | |
| − | '''A Medic with the [[Vita-Saw]]'''
| |
| − | * HEAD: 0% (20%)
| |
| − | * BODY: 90% (160%)
| |
| − | | |
| − | Hope this information helps! ----- [[User:Davtwan|Davtwan]] 20:30, 26 October 2010 (UTC)
| |
| − | | |
| − | I realize the corrections for the Scout with a Sandman are nowhere near correct. I'll double-check my work and re-add it later. ----- [[User:Davtwan|Davtwan]] 21:53, 26 October 2010 (UTC)
| |
| − | | |
| − | The list has been reupdated. I checked the amount of damage that increases with the rifle instead of doing fraction proportions. The results make much more sense now. Feel free to use these for testing. Unlike the last calculations, these percentages are exact and have not been rounded.
| |
| − | | |
| − | Please let me know if the results are legimiate as soon as possible! The math appears correct, but testing will truly verify them. Thanks to anyone who tests this! ----- [[User:Davtwan|Davtwan]] 18:22, 27 October 2010 (UTC)
| |
| − | | |
| − | ==Example Setups== | |
| − | | |
| − | I think the Example setups section needs a at least one more setup added to it. Specifically one that involves the Sidney Sleeper I havn't actually used the weapon in-game, but I'm going to aquire one and the rest of the new sniper weapons and see what I can come up with strategy wise. Unless of course anyone else knows more about it, which someone must, because I know almost nothing other than what it does. [[User:Redeye|Redeye]] 14:45, 19 October 2010 (UTC)
| |
| − | | |
| − | == Working on this ==
| |
| − | | |
| − | I'm working on making everything more concise; this'll probably be a week-long project, thanks to the size of this section.
| |
| − | | |
| − | My goal: 50kb page, max. I got it from 84 to 80 just by editing the General section, so we'll see how that goes. Check back every now and then for updates.
| |
| − | | |
| − | * Update: Made a table out of bodyshot/headshot percentages, got rid of the big list and the situational stuff. Only things that don't fall between 125 and 300 are the Sandman and the Rocket/Sticky Jumper, and the latter 2 are hardly worth noting.
| |
| − | ** Update: Made a second table for the Huntsman, cleaned up the Huntsman section and added said table. Eliminated the weapon combinations table. 69kb awyeah
| |
| − | *** Update: Built off another user's edits to trim every last bit of fat off the Sydney Sleeper topic. Anything you can add to that section could be said of the Sniper Rifle as well, so I eliminated it for redundancy's sake. Made everything second-person, added synergies since I deleted the big ol' table earlier. 65kb and counting! Tomorrow's targets: Sniper Rifle, maybe more Huntsman, Secondaries.
| |
| − | **** Update: Heavily trimmed the Sniper Rifle section, need to add synergies and fix the table formatting. [[User:Henry Spencer|Henry Spencer]] 02:53, 15 December 2010 (UTC)
| |
| − | | |
| − | A lot of the things you've cut out of this page like the section on the Huntsman kill taunt and the weapon combination table also appear on all of the other Community Strategy pages for the other classes and are sort of "standard"... why are you so bent on reducing the size of this page down to 50kb? Now I'll definitely agree with you if you say that a lot of the Community Strategy pages are overlong, contain redundant information, and some inconsistent writing styles (I have been guilty of using personal pronouns quite a bit), but are you aware that the Basic Strategy pages were created to solve the whole "conciseness" issue? In other words I think that all you're really accomplishing with your pruning shears is erasing a lot of other people's contributions including a few of mine. My personal rule of thumb for removing other people's work is, as long as something is well written and not redundant, I leave it alone other than maybe to reorganize and reformat it. More information never hurt anyone. If people want a strategy guide that is shorter and more to the point, that's what the Basic Strategy pages are for (thanks to Zoolomander). --[[User:Aranarth|Aranarth]] 04:10, 16 December 2010 (UTC)
| |
| − | | |
| − | * Sorry dude, the big man himself told me to get out the pruning shears. He likes the changes I've made. Everyone thought the weapon combination table could be done simply by adding a few synergies to appropriate sections, and the Skewer thing was ridiculous anyways. Why should we have a whole section dedicated to something you're practically never gonna use? Plus, most of them boiled down to "oh hey, you can catch enemies running straight at you off guard lol". I added a mention to the Huntsman section, and I added the one REALLY good use of it. That's all that's needed.
| |
| − | Also, I'm aiming for 50kb to have an attainable goal. It's not a hard, fast number. And if I'm barreling over your edits, who cares? These pages are pretty much set to be glassed anyways. I've been told that not even all these reductions I'm making could save it. So it's either my pruning shears, or a staff member's tactical nuke. Your call. [[User:Henry Spencer|Henry Spencer]] 05:31, 16 December 2010 (UTC)
| |
| − | | |
| − | ** First, I don't know who "the big man" is. Please let me know, because I would really like to confirm that what you've said about the strategy pages is true. I've barely edited the Sniper page, so don't worry I was speaking on behalf of whoever had made the edits, but I don't like the idea of these pages being removed completely. I've done a lot of work on the Engineer strategy page and I'll argue the pants off of anyone who says that what I've done should be "glassed"... Where are these discussions occurring? First of all, from what I've seen of some of the other strategy pages including this one, they ARE a mess, but not so much so that they should be removed. --[[User:Aranarth|Aranarth]] 17:09, 16 December 2010 (UTC)
| |
| − | | |
| − | ::Use colons to tab over, duders. Ok, I get the point. Don't remove people's work. I don't think anyone is asking for the pages to disappear. They just need to have redundancy removed, and really poor strategies should be pruned as well. The page doesn't need to be even remotely close to basic strategy small, but many of these entries could say more in half the words. [[User:Zoolooman|Zoolooman]] 17:13, 16 December 2010 (UTC)
| |
| − | | |
| − | :::The page is down to 66kb so far. I've done a bit to try and help, myself. Corrected a few grammatical errors and reworded a few statements, but I think we're getting there! [[User:Magic Magician|Magic Magician]] 03:23, 28 January 2011 (UTC)
| |
| − | | |
| − | ::::I gave up on this a month ago. There are more meaningful things to do than edit this page, I guarantee you. Sorry to be a downer. -- [[User:Henry Spencer|Henry Spencer]] [[File:Backpack_Dr's_Dapper_Topper.png|24px|link=User_talk:Henry Spencer]] 03:25, 28 January 2011 (UTC)
| |
