i just finished a game in storm break, I got 37 kills and 14 deaths, my team was absolut rubbish and there was this guy…he got 36 kills being 25 with the answer, he literally didn’t move from the tunnel pass, I manage to kill him once or twice, but having the answer is always a losing battle. By the time the game ended I was really salty (hell, I’m still salty) not because my team lost, but because I hate those type of people, I was even in the mood of sending him a hate message, but then I was like, hmm maybe camping it’s not dumb, but smart. What’s your take on camping?
It’s definitely a legitimate strategy.
Sure it will always be frowned upon but what’s the point of running around just for the sake of running around? I don’t care if people get mad at me for camping because even if I did care about what a stranger online has to say about my tactics, playing “fairly” and still beating them is not going to all of a sudden get respect from them. They’re still gonna think I’m cheating or I’m a sweaty nerd who still lives in his mom’s basement.
Bottom line is who cares? “Camping” is how you defend an area that you are in or nearby. It’s a legitimate strategy.
Never understood why people have felt that the only way to play shooters is sprinting ahead, guns blazing like Rambo. Camping is just as valid as running around. Each has their place.
If someone is sitting in a Sniper Tower all I can say is well at least they have to actually work for their kills, and at least they had to obtain the position to begin with.
Rounding any random corner just to get instantly shotgunned or sprayed down by someone just crouching there is beyond annoying though, and I doubt it’s much fun for the person who did it either.
How are we defining a “legit strategy”? I’d say any strategy that gains you victory is a legit strategy. However I’d also say not all strategies are good game design, and not all deserve to be possible in the game. I’m going to use sprint to my advantage, but that still doesn’t mean I like the fact sprint exists within the game.
Good game design is not having people sit in one spot the entire match, nor is it encouraging them to run around aimlessly. You need to achieve balance, achieve structure and flow. This is why we differentiate “map control” from “camping”.
In some situations I think is a valid option like an strategy when you have low shields or you are outnumbered by foes, by camping you increase your chances to make a pro-like play and win the encounter.
But there the annoying side, when a player spends the entire match hiding in the corners with shotgun, smg, storm rifle, rockets or sword and jumps at you insta killing you most times, for me that strategy is for unskilled players.
Like I said sometimes is useful but if you do it every single match man you play in such a coward way.
> 2533274819302824;4:
> How are we defining a “legit strategy”? I’d say any strategy that gains you victory is a legit strategy. However I’d also say not all strategies are good game design, and not all deserve to be possible in the game. I’m going to use sprint to my advantage, but that still doesn’t mean I like the fact sprint exists within the game.
I’d say “legit strategy” is any strategy that is within the rules of the game. And because in a video game the rules are anything the player can do without modifying the game, anything but modding and hacking is a legit strategy, including abusing any errors in the game’s design.
There’s a discussion to be had in regards to what is good sportsmanship, and whether making a given strategy viable is good design. But if you think you can win the game by sitting in the corner with a shotgun, then good for you.
> 2533274941773412;1:
> i just finished a game in storm break, I got 37 kills and 14 deaths, my team was absolut rubbish and there was this guy…he got 36 kills being 25 with the answer, he literally didn’t move from the tunnel pass, I manage to kill him once or twice, but having the answer is always a losing battle. By the time the game ended I was really salty (hell, I’m still salty) not because my team lost, but because I hate those type of people, I was even in the mood of sending him a hate message, but then I was like, hmm maybe camping it’s not dumb, but smart. What’s your take on camping?
What you are describing is actually considered map control. I don’t know what type of weapon the answer is (sorry I haven’t played this game in months) , but if he was shooting at range , holding down a path of travel , that is map control. If he was crouched behind a corner , waiting for some one to come around it and get easy kills , that is camping. Both are legitimate strategy , one is less sportsman like than the other.
I have been the camper and the camped , and I can tell you , depending on the spot , it can be quite intense. Sword room on The Pit for example or shotgun hall on The Pit can be very stressful places to hole up. Depending on opponents and team mates it can be very entertaining. And if you think it is easy to hold a spot once the enemy knows you are there , I suggest trying it.
The campers I tend to dislike are the aforementioned spot campers that move from one corner to the next as to avoid a strait up confrontation. I camp but don’t move. I mean I move with in my space but if I shotgunned you in the hallway you can bet I will be in that hallway waiting for you to come back. I camp for the advantage as I am not a great head to head marksman. It may seem cheap to a “skilled” marksman but I feel it is cheap that you can shoot me from across the map and there is not much I can do to stop you other than run for cover , and that doesn’t always work. (It didn’t before sprint any way , now I get away a lot more , but still not always) Some of you may think this cowardly , but is it better to be a coward and get my points were I can and save you from getting them when I can , or run around like a headless chicken dying every thirty seconds?
Definitely a legit strategy if you’re facing a team dumb enough to keep going to your location to feed you kills.
Not a legit strategy if you’re not getting kills as your team is then effectively a man down.
If its working for the camper, then sure as its helping out his team. But most campers don’t last long and if your dumb enough to keep dying by them then take different routes to take them down or best of all, use a Active Camo, kill him, tea-bag him and take his weapon 
Of course its a legitimate strategy. Sure, everyone hates when they find a camper who has dug in well, but Finding a super defensible position where the enemy keep coming to you? Definitely a good strategy.
> 2533274806711091;8:
> Definitely a legit strategy if you’re facing a team dumb enough to keep going to your location to feed you kills.
>
> Not a legit strategy if you’re not getting kills as your team is then effectively a man down.
Also, this.
Not as much as a big deal as it’s made out to be. I like to move positions a lot, move out and gain bases. But sometimes I like to defend a base while the rest are elsewhere. I have played a few games just defending the monument on noctus.
Any play style is fair game. Camping down a position with high traffic only makes sence. It makes sence as well cause the objective isn’t always hunt people down.
No, you should never just sit there and wait for the kills to come to you.
If you are defending your conquestpoint, then it’s actually legit for the time being, but simply sitting there and doing jacksquat is for wusses.
> 2533274825830455;6:
> > 2533274819302824;4:
> > How are we defining a “legit strategy”? I’d say any strategy that gains you victory is a legit strategy. However I’d also say not all strategies are good game design, and not all deserve to be possible in the game. I’m going to use sprint to my advantage, but that still doesn’t mean I like the fact sprint exists within the game.
>
>
> I’d say “legit strategy” is any strategy that is within the rules of the game. And because in a video game the rules are anything the player can do without modifying the game, anything but modding and hacking is a legit strategy, including abusing any errors in the game’s design.
>
> There’s a discussion to be had in regards to what is good sportsmanship, and whether making a given strategy viable is good design. But if you think you can win the game by sitting in the corner with a shotgun, then good for you.
Agree!
Fir sure it is a legitimate strategy. Its up tou you to decide how to take him out if you know he is there with a answer… grap a rocket or whiplash and blast tye hell out of him 
I think there are some good answers here. Generally my tendency has been to think “if everyone camped, could you even play a game?”
However Warzone is a different beast, and map control is huge. Further, when you’re working some of the specific weapon commendations, it can certainly put you into a camping mindset. Ultimately, I know there are times when I will start camping, and conversely I hate when I get killed by campers. 
Nothing wrong with camping, if by camping you are defending a base/area/fireteam, or sweeping it for kills - zone control.
If by camping you mean lining up around spawn points and farming, then that person deserves a big smack
> 2533274821428609;18:
> Nothing wrong with camping, if by camping you are defending a base/area/fireteam, or sweeping it for kills - zone control.
>
> If by camping you mean lining up around spawn points and farming, then that person deserves a big smack
I would even say that I wouldn’t consider controlling your corners “camping” if you are on the defensive and the enemy is dumb enough to not check them first. I consider camping spending a good amount if not majority of the match waiting for someone they don’t even know is coming and solely earning kills that way. Much different from the aforementioned strategy.
I think its one of those things that when u do it its fun. but if its done to u then u hate it lol