Call of Duty: Black Ops - Page 383

Originally Posted by Daekwan

Football is on tonite ladies. If I get to see the Vick show against the Browns, I'll be watching that. If I'm stuck with the Skins vs Ravens.. I'll prolly play some BLOPS instead.

Originally Posted by bbexperience

Isn't this still preseason, i.e. the who-the-hell-cares season?

Originally Posted by Daekwan

Nothing worse than a damn TD vulture! I feel your pain PJ.. I had Jamaal Charles from KC and everytime they got inside the 10.. they would pull him out the game and put old azz Thomas Jones in. It would take TJ all 3 tries to break the plane, and many times he still never scored.

Really sucks not to reward your workhorse for getting you all the way down the field with a TD.. but most teams run a "Thunder & Lightning" RB scheme this days. Where the more talented, athletic back will do most of the work in the open field (and also catch passes as a check-down receiver). But the bigger, bruiser back will get the straight up the middle, goal line carries because they have the additional size & power. You can thank Jerome Bettis for this.. as he made it extremely popular with the Steelers years ago by having the "Bus" punch it in every time.

You guys interested in starting an AVS FF league? I'd play for sure!

Originally Posted by Daekwan

Yep its still preseason, but if you are a fan of football then you are fan of the preseason too. And out of all preseason games.. this 3rd week of preseason is the most important, as coaches will use their starters for the majority of the game & use real season schemes, game-plans and scenarios during the game.

For those that play Fantasy Football like myself (I'm in 5 leagues this year, 4 of them are money leagues) the preseason is probably more important than the regular season because it determines how you will draft your entire team for the season. You get to analyze talent 1st hand, instead of reading news on a player. You can see who's picking up well on new schemes, judge what backup players will move into the starting position soon and which starters will end up getting benched. Making bad picks in the first 3 rounds and missing out on potential sleepers in the last 5 rounds is where you win or lose your fantasy season.

Specifically tonite I want to get a good look at how a healthy Peyton Hillis looks and how hard is running for the '12 season, as he is ranked pretty low this year due to injury concerns and could be a great bargain pick. I'm also interested in seeing how well Vick rebounds after his 3 INT game, and what Jason Avant does.. considering half of the Eagles WR roster is on the injured roster right now.

If the Skins game is on, I want to get another look at Hightower and 3rd string RB behind him. And see who Sexy Rexy is favouring in the Skins passing game. On the Ravens side of the ball.. I think Boldin will have one of the best seasons of his career as he is the featured WR with no threats for his targets. And see is Ray Rice is getting goal line carries this year, or if his backup is vulturing them again like Willie McGahee did for so long in Bmore. If Rice is getting vultured, that goalie back is gonna be an awesome 13th round pickup.

Originally Posted by PJ_Rage

I have to respectfully disagree with the core of your argument, Murilo. I don't think party communication in TDM is nearly as important as you claim. I can respect the logic, and in some cases it might hold true to an extent, but by and large, TDM is completely skill based, and being in a party doesn't add much, especially in core mode. For HC mode without ready access to radar, team play and communication is much more pronounced. But in core mode, I get just as much info, actually a lot more info, from spy planes, sounds (gunshots and footsteps), unsilenced red blips on radar, disappearing teammate triangles, etc as I do from our team, and we are a damn good team when we all get together, with great communication when it's needed. But, the amount of information you can get from your radar and game sounds, if you pay proper attention, absolutely dwarfs the info from your team about "there's a guy over there" or whatever. This is not true for other modes, but for TDM, it is by far my experience. I do not play any better in TDM when I'm on a team with good communication, vs the same skilled team without communication. I do hate getting put on a team with noobs and losing when I do really well, but I never blame communication in TDM, because I just don't think it has nearly as much to do with it as you do.

Now, that is all with respect to party communication, as you were arguing was the problem. I disagree with that. I think the problem you ran into is just that you had a lot of good players playing together. I don't disagree that a party full of really good players will absolutely DESTROY noobs. We do this all the time, only it's not our communication that accomplishes it. Most of the time we are talking about something non COD related, or just cracking jokes. The reason a team full of good players is a problem, even without good communication, is because the better players have very good situational awareness as I described above, paying attention to radar, sounds, etc. No one needs to tell me where the enemy is. When a teammate dies, 9 times out of 10 I know right where that teammate was on the map, which direction they were facing, etc, and based on the direction he was facing, my knowledge of the map, and the sounds I heard, I will head straight there and know just where to look for the enemy, what gun the enemy was using, a good estimate on whether or not that enemy is reloading, which enemy it was (was it a good player?), where they might be headed, etc. This is all without any input from teammates. Half the time, even if a teammate says "He's over there", before he can finish, we just say back "he's already dead." And it's not because they told us where the enemy was. Now, in normal games there might be one maybe two players like this on the enemy team. They can be a pain, but don't necessarily dictate the victory. But if you have 6 of them doing this, that's freakin hard to overcome, whether they communicate with each other or not.

So this is all to agree that playing against a team of good players sucks and is hard/impossible/a problem, but I want to clarify that it has very little or nothing to do with them telling each other where you are. At least, in my opinion.

And FWIW, I never play mercenary mode because it is harder IME. All of the good players who want to play solo think they are smart by playing merc mode, but in reality, it's just full of all the smart good players, lol. Because BLOPS allows guests, and the guests can only play in the regular TDM lobby, and because 99.99% of the time the guests are terrible (and so are the hosts), I prefer to play against these noobs, and the other noobs who don't even know what merc mode is. You might run into a group of really good players every once in a while, but that is quite rare IME. I can almost count on one hand the number of teams I've faced where more than 2 of them had a kd above 2, in the couple thousand matches I've played and probably 20 days of play time (or whatever it is). It sucks bad when you do, but it's rare enough that it doesn't really bother me.

Originally Posted by PJ_Rage

Missed you on BC2 last night gutter!

Originally Posted by drudiggs

Every time I turn my 360 on I wait a couple minutes for an invite. They invariably come from conman first so I end up on BLOPS. I just assume you guys have a full crew on BC2 most of the time anyway and don't feel like ending up on the opposite team so I don't bother. At least on BLOPS if I'm on the other team I can ruin everyone's killstreaks

Originally Posted by rudubb1n

LOL im starting to get the feeling that the kipiris + Dual weild and steady aim is mosterous. It reloads faster than the scorps and its got a better ROF.

Originally Posted by PJ_Rage

Damn, I need to get on early and invite buc and gutter right away! I keep seeing you guys already in BLOPS and if I send an invite, no response

Originally Posted by tibble89

On my quest to find out what causes people to have lag on this, I came to this conclusion, which may sound crazy but it's plausible:

There's 'a' limit of lag/latency, which I don't know, but lets say it's 150ms.

-I read someone said the game has 100ms
-Internet before it gets to your router, possibly 20-40ms?
-Wired vs Wireless Internet - wireless latency = ??
-Your TV, it depends for us all but 20-30ms avg I assume
-Controller, (wireless does have latency) be modest and say wireless is 10ms & wired 0ms
-Cables used: VGA vs HDMI - I only use VGA, suppose to reduce lag on TV's

I don't have a wired pad now, but I should in a few days so I did a simple test: 19" cheap TV, wireless pad, wireless internet, nat type STRICT vs 32" Samsung TV, wireless pad, wireless internet, nat type OPEN. For me, it's much better on the 19" even though it's a cheap brand..

What got me thinking this was that on same TV's I noticed that on a wired pad it was fine, but with wireless I noticed a difference, which probably pushed it past the 'limit' in which the lag is noticeable.

- I might purchase a decent ethernet cable and see if that changes anything..

So, there it is, an extremely wacky theory, but it's possibly correct, apart from some semi-made up figures, hard to be accurate. It's the only thing which seems possible anyway..

Originally Posted by tibble89

On my quest to find out what causes people to have lag on this, I came to this conclusion, which may sound crazy but it's plausible:

There's 'a' limit of lag/latency, which I don't know, but lets say it's 150ms.

-I read someone said the game has 100ms
-Internet before it gets to your router, possibly 20-40ms?
-Wired vs Wireless Internet - wireless latency = ??
-Your TV, it depends for us all but 20-30ms avg I assume
-Controller, (wireless does have latency) be modest and say wireless is 10ms & wired 0ms
-Cables used: VGA vs HDMI - I only use VGA, suppose to reduce lag on TV's

I don't have a wired pad now, but I should in a few days so I did a simple test: 19" cheap TV, wireless pad, wireless internet, nat type STRICT vs 32" Samsung TV, wireless pad, wireless internet, nat type OPEN. For me, it's much better on the 19" even though it's a cheap brand..

What got me thinking this was that on same TV's I noticed that on a wired pad it was fine, but with wireless I noticed a difference, which probably pushed it past the 'limit' in which the lag is noticeable.

- I might purchase a decent ethernet cable and see if that changes anything..

So, there it is, an extremely wacky theory, but it's possibly correct, apart from some semi-made up figures, hard to be accurate. It's the only thing which seems possible anyway..