Camping.... Good or Bad....?

[OrLoK 20]

Hello all

I bought this up in another thread today, and rather than hijack the existing thread and taking it off topic I'd thought I'd ask your opinions here.

I've been playing online "wargames" since doom, duke nukem etc.

And at the beginning camping was a viable and recognised tactic.

When Quake came along then folk started to hate us and various mods came about imposing penalties on such activity.

Now, I know these games have very little in common with OFP/Arma etc but I'd thought i would give a little history and explanation from where I came from.

But, to me Camping IS and always was a viable tactic, which in turn forced the opposing team to use tactics to defeat the camper.

I was often lambasted as being "Camping Noob" but believe as long as it got results and wasn't against the rules of play then why not?

I was chatting to a mate (trying to get him to convert to Arma2 and get a PC) and we were discussing the merits (or not) of camping.

He is an out and out Xbox player and is well known in the COD(3?) community, and he also believes camping is a great tactic in certain situations. But its a tactic often frowned upon in that arena.

Obviously "Base Camping/Spawn Camping" is ungentlemanly behaviour and I dont play like that, or condone it, but out in the field I'm all for it.

In arma1 for example Id often spend at least 10 mins moving to get into a decent position and then do my thing from inside a building and get good results for the team.

Obviously, if its on a real team oriented server like [gol] then I'm usually recruted into a squad and have to follow orders closely and this (unless im in a sniper/spotter role) prohibits such behavior.

But if im playing Ronin and im not immediately needed then this is often how i play.

What are your thoughts on Camping? Is it not what esentally a sniper/sharpshooter does?

Is it bad form and not "cricket"?

Or is it acceptable in certain game types and not in others?

I suppose its a very subjective issue, but Id like to hear your thoughts, from the old salts to the new chaps and chapesses coming in from other cames like COD4 BF and PR.

Rgds

LoK

[BaseJumper 10]

Its a viable military tactic.

Good for lowering the morale of the enemy.

However, the mission maker should put the spawnpoints where it is safe.

[max power 21]

Raising the issue sort of hints at a general inexperience in how the game is played. Like, what is camping? Setting up a defensive position? Sniping? Simply staying stationary for longer than 20 seconds? The way the game plays, it's practically impossible to go without doing those things pretty much constantly. Perhaps there is some small PvP arena missions that I have not played, where everyone is restricted to submachineguns, but I'm not sure even the term 'camping' applies.

Further, are you suppressing/bombarding or 'spamming'? I really don't think these terms apply.

[OrLoK 20]

Hello there

Well, Id like to think Im fairly experienced with the range of games from the OFP franchise to owning VBS1 and the Arma range.

Obviously owning these doesnt make me a great player, but Im referring to sitting in one spot (regardless of weapon although usually an acog weapon as a minimum) and waiting for people to enter your killzone, as usually folk+ai take certain routes which can be predicted in advance.

I suppose in Arma2 terms "camping" refers to a form of sniping, but waiting for the enemy force to come to you rather than activly searching for them (although that does come in the setting up of an OP)

As to suppressing,bombarding or spamming, Im not quite sure what you mean.

I think Ive explained what I personally mean by camping, but Im sorry if Im not to lucid in my explanations as its 4am and Im at work in a Nightclub, which isnt condusive to rational thought.

Rgds

LoK

[max power 21]

The reverse slope (camping) defence is a really effective tactic to use, and a really challenging and complex problem to solve when you're on the receivign end. It's stuff like that that makes this game different than counterstrike. Personally, I think it's wonderful that you can take pot shots with an acog and actually use the potential of a realistic performance model of a weapon and its optics.

[Cpt.Goose 10]

I think Max power makes some good points. This subject I think needs to be weighed out depending on the title as well. The term camping can be taken many ways as described and setting up a defensive spot, or aggressive sniper post is all part of the game and the real world out there. So camping in that regard is totally fine and should be looked at as a tactic, as it is.

As well I think it is the responsibility of the developers to create a multiplayer experience that rewards good tactics/behavior and punishes or lack of reward for poor tactic/behavior.

There should be more then just one object and we start to see that in today's games as they become more team play orientated.. It's hard to tell people to play as a team and you will win. They never listen so you have to be innovative in giving the player really no option other then to work as a team or they loose, can't upgrade/unlock weapons, etc. We see that with a variety of tasks like capture points, requiring a bunker down for sometime to hold it, kills to opposing force, and team work example: healing injured on the field, rearming personnel etc. I'm not trying to get off topic but with today's game you are expected to have to use a little bit of everything. You need someone to rush that point, you need someone to be the guinea pig and run out first, you need a medic to wait and then go after someone is injured so they to can be useful in there field, you need that sniper to nestle in and wait for the muzzle flash to return fire.

You see my point here, before when games were mostly point and shoot yeah the term "camping" was taken very negatively, but with time, more technology, and those idea's expanding and being implemented the term "camping" has become one of the required and necessary tactics in order to maintain a strong fighting force for your team.

[kremator 1065]

There is no such thing as camping here. It's a military simulator. All tactics are equally as valid as long as it fulfils your objectives.

[Murklor 10]

Camping is as valid a tactic as any other, the question is whether its your orders or not.

[Inkompetent 0]

As long as it isn't spawncamping camping is very viable as long as it fits into the mission's/superior's plan.

[walker 0]

Hi all

All camping in the Real Virtuality engine is perfectly legal. This is a Milsim not a paintball game.

It is up to the mission maker to protect base spawns and design the game so that they cannot be fired upon. Capture spawns are a whole different kettle of fish they are fare game. If your capture spawns are being suppressed you have to respawn back at base instead.

The reason why camping is so disliked in other games is because the missions, what they call maps :D because they are the whole Map in the games, are postage stamp sized prisons with invisible walls and limited weapons. This means your tactical options are so limited a camper can ruin the fun. Not so in ArmA.

In ArmA a camper is puzzle to be solved by suppression, teamwork and technology. If you are in one position you are fixed! In maneuver warfare that is a no no. In ArmA you can always be flanked in any of the three directions. And the complex vast terrain of ArmA II makes this easy. You can go round a flank, you can assault from the air or you can bombard with indirect fire. The latter is my preferred method of dealing with campers/snipers/anyone in a fixed position.

I got so good at using the multiple grenade launcher in BIS's OFP no sniper was safe. I would sit behind a house get direction and distance via Audio and put a nade right on their bonce.

If it was really distant I used a spotter who would hide and not fire so they did not reveal their positions. I would fire a shot using the side of a house as reference for elevation and the compass for direction. The spotter would call fall of shot and tell me to shift fire left, right, short increase 50 etc. And we would kill them, and they would never get a shot off, other than in frustration. If they broke cover the spotter would shoot them as they ran. I still have to get my eye in with ArmA II though.

There is no such thing as camping in ArmA II it is just good tactics but it is a tactic that in ArmA can be beaten, by any skilled player or team.

Kind Regards walker

Edited July 5, 2009 by walker

[{USI}_Zombie 0]

I think the camping issue is related to the game play mode as well. For warfare/cti it is a valid tactic. For AAS type maps, it's validity is questionable, but for CTF is where it's not valid. CTF mean capture the flag, you should either be a) advancing to take the flag b) covering the flag runner or c) chasing the enemy who has your flag.

Like Walker said, most ctf's are postage stamp "prisons" where motion is the key. In a ctf, your kill count doesn't matter near as much as your flag touch or hang count. Primarily the argument is "unwinnable" though. People who LIKE to camp can rarely be persuaded it is inappropriate, same with people who HATE campers cannot accept the merits of camping. Personally, if the other team never advances past the midway point of the map and just racks up their kill count without attempting a flagcap, they should be playing a tdm not a ctf. I know there are those who don't agree, and that's fine too.

[Inkompetent 0]

Camping in AAS highly viable. Done it multiple times myself. People will try to flank and get past the bulk of your side's forces to get easier kills, and sitting at some spot and wait, letting them pass, and shoot them in the back is incredibly fun. Of course not everyone can camp around, but it can be very valuable to have a few people doing so, since it can interrupt the enemy's plans. He might have to create search parties just to eliminate the campers, rather than spending enough energy on taking zones.

Campers are stationary and can either be circled around, avoided completely (go on the side far, far away from them to even make their ability to spot become useless), or suppressed. It is always easier to kill an enemy that you know where he is, rather than one you don't.

A camper simply can't be as efficient in ArmA as in other games with phone booth-sized maps. There are too many ways to kill them or avoid them, and it is hard to get away. They can't just run around a corner. They either have to crawl several hundred meters into the woods to not get shot (which is terribly slow) or run across more or less open terrain and just hope to not get hit, when they relocate (which they'll often have to do if they don't want to get fragged after a few shots)

[Milgeek 10]

I'm sorry to butt in on this discussion - I'm not an 'uber-player' or anything, so forgive me if my answer to this thread sounds a little simplistic...

Basically - IMHO - I don't think in a simulation as realistic as ArmA2 we can any longer talk about 'camping' (in terms that we would if we were talking about arcade games like CoD4, for example).

You do what you do in ArmA2 and if you 'camp' in the sense that we are used to teh term in any other game, you ARE NOT unfairly taking advantage or exploiting a loophole in the game - you are just employing good tactics taking advantage of your enemies weakness.

In the real world soldiers are never accused of being 'campers' - but 'camping tactics' are taught as part of basic field operational training as POSITIVE ways to take out your enemy.

I think that in the ArmA2 world - being a simulation - we should stop using the word 'camping' as it's meaning in terms of a game exploit is meaningless in the ArmA world. Someone who 'camps' is just a enemy who needs to be overcome.

As I said - maybe I am being naive (feel free to criticise my outlook on this issue), but if we really want an immersive world in ArmA2 we shouldn't be thinking in terms of 'game exploits' but rather about how to overcome 'tactical disadvantages'...

I simply perceive the 'camper' as someone who has identified a tactical advantage. Good on him --- go kill him!

[Binkowski 26]

I don't believe in the word of camping. It's something you do with a tent, some fire, marshmallows, chocolate, fire, etc. I believe in stalking a target for an extended amount of time waiting for ample opportunity to strike.

[mosh 0]

There is no such thing as camping here. It's a military simulator. All tactics are equally as valid as long as it fulfils your objectives.

Yep!

If the missions allow it, do it.

[Fixxxer46 10]

To me, in this game, there's no such thing as camping...

Infact, if you run around like you would in "normal" games, you'll get killed very easily. :)

[Binkowski 26]

I think the children coming from Battlefield 2 and Counter Strike want to run around and kill kill kill. Well, we all know how far that will get them.

[Inkompetent 0]

I think the children coming from Battlefield 2 and Counter Strike want to run around and kill kill kill. Well, we all know how far that will get them.

Yep. Just got to lie prone under a tree in the shadow, one shot at 300m with an M16A2, and there's one running (and want-do-bunny-jump-but-can't-because-they-can't-jump-in-ArmA2) player less, and his buddies won't even know where the shot came from.

[galzohar 31]

Like already sort of mentioned, if camping is done in a way that ruins the fun, then it's the mission designer who is to blame, not the players.