-[Silver.Inc* wrote:
So i'm guessing your one of the people who rape the carrier in a J10...
I agree with him that infantry only shouldn't be ranked. Of 600 hour playtime I have 50
minutes in a jet and Karkand is the 7th most played map. I only play maxsized maps preferably with 64 players (otherwise it gets too vehicle dense).
When running around as infantry on maps like Fushe and Daqing, 1 death of 5 (arbitrary figure) will be caused by other infantry the rest is by enemy vehicles. I'm not saying I would get quadrupled KDR on Karkand but being able to end Dragon Valley with a KDR higher than 1 when playing mostly infantry is something that should be appreciated in the KDR value. Some people get a high KDR by being skilled in infantry-vs-infantry combat, I know how to not get killed by tanks/APC/choppers/jets in maps where those are present - also when I have a enemy UAV above me. Where to walk, which flags to attack - from where, quick kitswithing with a dead AT guy etc. All that will be completely nullified when all vehicles can simply be turned off
in ranked play.
And that's NOT an option, it will hit the ranking system whether you play infantry only or not, which some of the supporters probably are aware of.
Marinejuana wrote:
The people that are against infantry only do not seem to realize that the ranking system already allows for peoples stats to be catered by the individual choices of the player. For example medics gain many more teamwork points on average than assault. But then assault players may get more kills than medics. Pilots that never play maps like mashtuur and karkand get insane kill to death ratios. Engineer in a tank versus on foot could drasticaly change your engie k:d and overall k:d. People typically still find the ranking useful with all this divergent playing because the same system records how much of a, for example, medic whore, armor whore, commander whore etc. you are. People that play infantry only will have strengthend infantry stats, provided that they are good as infantry. This wont destroy the ranking system at all. It just means in the future when you look at someones stats, you HOPEFULLY will be able to to see how much of that was infantry only. As far as I'm concerned, the choices we have between maps and vehicles already affect our stats more than infantry only will.
At least you seem to understand the issue. You're somewhat right. However, getting good infantry KDR by playing Karkand is much more visible than this infantry only mode, in fact the infantry only effect on the stat will be pretty much invisible. Besides, 2 wrong doesn't make 1 right.
For those who to the issue about ranking responds that it's an option I'd like to ask this: why does it need to be ranked then, if it's the play mode you're interested in?
It's a bit like the K/P-server issue. The supporters say that anyone should be able to play how they want. The thing is, K/P-servers aren't illegal,
ranked K/P servers are. Go ahead and play on a unranked one. But there are no ppl on those, they say. Of course they're empty, because playing on K/P servers only for fun is BS, it's the effect on the stat in terms of awards and knife kills that's important. The empty unranked K/P-servers are the proof.
It's even more funny to hear "stat is unimportant" as a argument
for ranked infantry mode. Why is it so important that it is ranked if stat is unimportant?
fierce wrote:
jord wrote:
Can't people think of a reasonable argument other than to bring stats into it?
They can: "BF2 isn't Q4, UT, CS!".
There aren't any valid arguments against Infantry Only in BF2.
edit: complete post quoted.
For 3453th time, the issue isn't Infantry Only, it's
ranked Infantry Only. At least in this particular thread.
Last edited by voltage (2006-08-15 15:50:09)
