Discussion in 'SOCOM: U.S. Navy SEALs' started by Swill, Jun 8, 2016.
Love it. Keep doing what I want you to do.
Please make it stop. The points have been made and there is no reason to bring this along any further. We all know x-link is laggy. I'm not even on there yet and I know it.
EDIT: One of the things I'll admit I enjoyed about this back and forth is the prone dive discussion and whether it was a tactic or not. I'll be honest, I have never seen it discussed before here.
I for one, think it is a tactic, and I used it when I used to play S2 a lot. I also saw a lot of people using it back in the day, and to be honest, may have been the reason why I started using it. It worked on me, and it worked for me when I used it. not all the time, but it worked. I also switched up tactics and didn't use it during every engagement. It didn't work all the time, but it helped to get me kills.
After all of the rehashed discussions, this fresh take was a nice one to see...
We'll do as we please. Again, people need to stop taking it so seriously. It's just a bit of fun.
The prone diving is a gimmick and a placebo. As I told Mack, you could have killed them just the same standing upright. They could have killed you when you went to prone. The fact that you got a kill or avoided being killed after diving prone for a second doesn't mean it was because you dove to prone. I've killed people who dove to prone in the middle of a fight. I've had people kill me who dove to prone in the middle of a fight.
Again, making yourself an immovable object, even for a second, is a waste. During that second, you could easily unload 5-10 bullets that could kill your opponent, instead you use it to try and be gimmicky. The best defense is a good offense. Kill the opponent before you even need to dive to prone. Otherwise, you're on the back foot and playing defensively, which isn't good.
The only situation where diving to prone is useful in the middle of a gunfight is when you need to dive behind cover. Diving to prone in the middle of a gunfight out in the middle of the open is a waste of time. You're better off just killing the other person before you even get to that point.
That is your opinion that the tactic is gimmicky, just as it is mine and, when the servers were at their full capacity, many MANY others' opinions that it is not. If I used that tactic to get an advantage that either got me a kill or stopped my opponent from killing me while someone else killed him and I survived, then it is a viable tactic. I fooled that person during the heat of the moment into missing me by putting my target profile in a position where they did not kill me. Just as I had happen to me which led to my death, and as others had happen to them countless times in S2.
It is the same premise as using a double stepover in soccer or a spin move in football/basketball to shake free from your opponent. You are fooling the defender into thinking you are going one way while instead you go another. "During that second, you could easily unload 5-10 bullets that could kill you opponent" can be used in the same way when it comes to my other examples, then. During the time it takes for say Cristiano Ronaldo, or Pele, or George Best to execute those moves in a 1 v 1 situation, their defender could easily have come up and tackled the ball away from them. As a defender, you had it done to you once, or have seen these players do it to other people in the past, so you should know it's coming and be able to stop them, yet those tactics work over and over again. Not against everyone, as there is always a Paolo Maldini out there, but more often than not, it works. Same thing with the dive/prone tactic. You can say otherwise all you want, but in the end, someone was fooled which gave the person doing the move an advantage and led to a kill.
Where you going camping? I'm headed to Devil's Lake when I get back from Florida again at the beginning of May for a nice Memorial Day weekend drink and hike-fest...
But you don't know if they were fooled by the dive to prone. You're making an assumption. You have absolutely no way of knowing whether or not your dive to prone was the reason they failed to kill you. They could have failed to kill you when you were standing upright as well. You could have killed them standing upright as well. Just because lots of people did it doesn't mean that it wasn't a gimmick. It just means everyone suffered from the same placebo effect.
As for your soccer analogy, as someone who played the game my entire life and played as a defender at the collegiate NCAA Division 1 level, I can tell you that you're totally wrong. What allows a player to beat another player isn't the feint itself. What allows the offensive player to beat the defender is two things: First, the offensive player has the advantage, as the defender can only react to what the offensive player does. Second, it's not the feint itself that beats the defender. It's the change in direction and the acceleration. Great defenders don't fall for feints. They know that you don't react until you see the ball move. Great defenders get beat because defenders naturally have a disadvantage in that they have to react to what the offensive player is doing and don't know with any 100% certainty what the other player is going to do, and to try and defend against every possible decision the offensive player could make is impossible.
So again, diving to prone in the middle of a gun fight is just a gimmick. The overwhelming majority of the time, you're better off just strafing, making yourself a difficult target to hit, and killing the opponent off before you ever need to be in a defensive situation where you need to try and "fool" someone.
Sandhill State Wildlife Area in Wood County. It's a special little backwoods camp/hunt site that's great to get out and shoot some targets.
The bolded/red is the point I am making regarding dive/prone being a tactic. I'm not disregarding the rest of your point to just snip a tiny bit, but that bolded section is the entire basis for my claim. I'm making you go one way, then changing direction forcing you to react to me. I also played and did so for for 20 years, though my college years as far as age to play goes were spent in a helo. I played club level during that time when we were in port, and then after I got out. Competition was not as high as D-I (hat's off to you on that BTW), but still competitive enough. I agree with all of what you are saying there, but while there is no real life physicality and intertia involved outside of finger reaction, there is still mental reaction and anticipation involved.
You are right in that I have absolutely no idea whatsoever if the dive/prone is the 1 billion percent concrete reason why I got the kill. But my opinion, which I did state it was, stems from the personal goal of mine to get any advantage whatsoever and the odds of a tactic working. So if I can fool you into continuing to fire above me as I drop to the ground for a split second in order for you to clear your magazine and force a reload, then pop up and kill you, then my job is done. If you don't fall for it and wipe me out before I even hit the ground, then lesson learned. The odds were in my favor that it worked more than not in the overall scheme of things, so I would have continued to use that tactic until those odds changed.
It doesn't really matter if I KNOW whether the dive threw them off, what matters is that making myself immobile for a second didn't get me killed or put me at a disadvantage like you said it might, and ended up being part of the chain of events that lead to a successful gunfight. SOCOM 2 especially has always had a lot of dancing gunfights where both players are strafing like madmen, constantly switching directions and doing things to shake off the aim of the other person. Any move that the other player does not expect will throw them off, like suddenly breaking off from the gunfight and dashing behind cover or into a building to reengage later, or even changing the rate at which you alternate strafing could achieve that confusion you want, including a dive. The fact is, some people who use the dive in moderation find some measure of success doing it, much more so than if a soccer player decided to drop to a prone position in front of a defender for a second, for example.
In fact, maybe some people go full Hal and just have the mid-fight dive as part of their routine. In some intangible way, it makes them more successful. You keep calling it a placebo, but the crux of placebos is that they shouldn't work, but they do.
You also gotta remember that a well-executed tactical burpee takes, like, half a second. It gives a player a very short amount of time to reset their aim, refocus, and then return fire, all while they do a move that plays with their hitbox and gives them a smaller profile for a moment. I think I would find myself using it more often if I ever got to the point where I could reliably keep track of how many bullets my opponent has left in a mag, then using it around the time they're running low so that when I get back up, they're reloading instead of shooting back, and I've created my own window of opportunity.
You can argue that most people will expect the dive after it first happens, and yeah, sure they will. I'll argue that, especially when the game was popular, most people sucked worse than me at the game, especially in the aim department, meaning they were more susceptible to moves like the dive. I'll agree that for lots of players, the dive was overused to the point of diminishing returns, just like people jumping in the middle of a gunfight, but again, nobody here is arguing that that didn't happen, they're just saying that the dive is more applicable to certain situations than you give it credit for.
It's near the town of Babcock, off of Ball Road. In Wood County.
I kid...in all honesty, it looks gorgeous. Lots of diverse environments. Enjoy!
But the feint doesn't make the defender go one way, if they're great defenders. Bad defenders will fall for the feint and lean to the side you feint to, opening up the space on the other side and allowing you to accelerate into it. Great defenders don't fall for the feint and move in that direction to start with. That's why you never see a player like Ronaldo actually beat a great defender off the scissors. He beats them off a quick change in direction, shift of the ball, and getting off a shot or a cross before the defender has time to react to it. He has that advantage. The feint isn't what gives the offensive player the advantage. The offensive player always has that, because he's the one with the ball at his feet.
Again, you don't know if the player was missing you because they were shooting over you. In all likelihood, they saw you drop, tried shooting you while you were in prone, and simply missed you, just as they could miss you if you were strafing. The difference is, when strafing, you're a moving target who's difficult to hit. When you dive to prone, you're no longer a moving target that's difficult to hit.
When people dive to prone on me, I see it immediately. I adjust my aim and try to hit them just the same as if they were strafing. Sometimes I kill them, sometimes I don't. Exactly the same as if they were strafing standing up. So, where's the advantage in that? However, I can say with absolute certainty that I definitely prefer when someone dives to prone in the middle of a gun battle as opposed to strafing. Hitting a non-moving target is, surprisingly enough, easier to hit than a non-moving target.
Yep, we'll be staying in a site just off of Ball road actually. The whole enclosure is a little slice of heaven, and will be a damn fine escape.
You said defenders don't fall for feint, yet you go on to describe a feint. lolol you have no clue what you're talking about, and including some bs about playing d1 soccer doesn't help your point. Of course diving helps throw people off, get off your high horse and use a brain cell for a minute. Whenever your beat in an arguement, try not constantly claim the other party are "butthurt". You just come off looking pathetic
That cant be a coincidence. Dont forget to pack the lube @Tawok!
Look, Mack already cleared this issue up for us. He's been fooled by the dive deke before, in fact it happened last Friday. And THAT was after TWO (Count 'em, 2) AMAZING MVP performances, after only being on the scene again for a week. If such a truly elite player says the dive works, who are we to argue?
That's you. Like I said and now you are saying, sometimes it works, sometimes not. For the times you say you didn't kill the people that dive/prone on you, they killed you, right? Or at the very least prolonged their death and maybe died due to a reload or just bad aim. For me, it worked more often than not, making it a good, useful tactic and not a placebo effect gimmick, to use your words.
Why strafe? There should be no advantage to that either, but it worked in that it made it harder for someone to hit me. It's all about the little things; anything I can do to make it harder for you to hit me, I'm going to do it. Not everyone was able to react in time or they ran out of rounds and had to reload, so it worked.
I disagree wholeheartedly. I'm not saying that diving to prone doesn't work. I'm saying that it doesn't give a player an advantage. There's a major difference between those two. Diving to prone isn't an advantage over strafing. It's simply another technique to fight like strafing. I'm debating the effectiveness of the technique, and I'm very confident that my argument is solid. Unless people have statistical numbers that they've recorded that prove they've gotten more kills from diving to prone mid-fight than strafing, and unless a large sample size can do the same thing and confirm it's more than an anecdote, it's all speculation and assumption that it's somehow an advantage, nothing more.
There's no advantage gained from diving to prone anymore than there is in quickly changing direction mid-fight when your opponent least expects it. That's what makes it a placebo effect. People convince themselves they're gaining an advantage when doing it because that's what they want it to do and expect it to do. But again, it's not an advantage. It's simply another way to fight.
I didn't get killed by them because they fooled me by diving to prone. I got killed by them because I missed them with my bullets and they killed me before I could kill them. The exact same thing happens sometimes when people strafe, too. So there's no advantage that exists. If I kill someone in a gun fight by simply strafing, do I claim, "I killed him because I strafed, giving me an advantage over my opponent?" No. No one says that. Why? Because strafing doesn't give you an edge. It's simply a way to fight. Diving to prone doesn't give people any distinct edge. It just gives people a way to fight. Sometimes it works, sometimes it doesn't. No different than strafing.
And perhaps, just perhaps, you missing was caused by them changing their target profile by prone diving.
Also, the strafing and prone diving are not the reason you get the kill. You get the kill because you put rounds on target and took their health away. In the same way that strafing is a way to fight, so is prone diving. The strafing makes it harder for your enemy to quickly acquire and reacquire you as a target. So does prone diving.
You mentioned earlier, going back to the soccer discussion, that great defenders do not fall for the feint. I'll give you that. Not everyone is a great defender though. CR7 doesn't burn a Paolo Maldini, he burns the guy who's not Paolo Maldini. Same as in SOCOM with the prone dive. The great players don't fall for it, but not everyone is great...