[General] Lethal or Less-Lethal?

[Matt]

Originally Posted by SAS_Random

I agree that it's harder to get a good score playing lethal. Of course anyone can rambo through a mission killing every suspect in sight, and this seems to be the default opinion that LTL players have of players using lethal weapons. Lethal does not mean kill them all and let God sort them. Far from it.

There is no doubt that games like SWAT4 lean players toward LTL, if they want to score high. If you want to exceed the game limitations imposed by such a point system, playing lethal and trying to arrest as many suspects as is safe for civilians and officers, and preserving anywhere from 60-80 points, you have probably played as close to true police ROE as possible.

Police try to save lives, that is true. However, police assign value to each life differently. For example, if there is a choice between saving a civlian non-combatant or an armed suspect, these are not equal in the ledger sheet. If there is a choice between saving and officer or saving a civlian non-combatant, close your ears...ROE is to save the officer. This doesn't mean that an officer will choose to save himself before a civilian--often the opposite is true, but a partner or team mate should ALWAYS choose team over civilian. In the military the mission comes first. If saving a scumbag for interrogation is the goal, you just pray that such decisions don't have to be made during your next operation. Therefore it's well known police tactics are to avoid loss of life.

Also, from my perspective, SAS added SWAT 4 because it was a great tactical shooter and we play using a blend of police and military tactics because it makes the most sense for us. What drives me nuts is when people say stupid things like, "We play tactical here, no lethal weapons." I don't think that word 'tactical' means what you think it means. Just because my tactics are different than yours, doesn't mean I'm not playing tactically. I always laugh at the ridiculousness of the idea that tactical=LTL. What you should say is that we use LTL tactics here. You can't change the meaning of a word to suit your needs because it invalidates everyone else's tactics.

Just because most idiot, nabs don't know how to properly employ lethal tactics, doesn't mean that there are not good tactics being used during lethal-weapons-only play.

Try scoring over 70 points at the DNA lab using only lethal weapons and tactics. It's HARD. Conversely, it's fairly simple to use LTL tactics and score over 80 points.

That's my opinion, I welcome yours.

I agree with you totally. Exact same viewpoint I share.

The reason i prefer less lethal though comes back to just the game. I like to get 100 percent. Killing is penalised and rightly so to a degree.

I also find when playing with a private group I take mp5 on armoured suspect missions. This is more realistic to swat teams. For example with a few suspects like Fairfax less lethal shotgun would be a real life choice as threat is minimal.

Sadly though I play public most the time and taking less lethal teaches rambos tactics have to be used as you cannot rush and kill everything with less lethal setup.

I agree about the comment saying tactics are only less lethal. That's crap. Depends on the player mentality with lethal. This is what gets confused. Both options used tactics, it's not about the kit but the use of it.

Lastly I come back to why I choose less lethal personally.... Police don't like kills. Particularly in the UK. Many examples of when the British SAS have been called in to end sieges after police hand over control. When the military special forces get a green light, it is pretty much the end of the line for the suspects will be killed. Take the Iranian embassy siege. Police did not storm the building as their mentality is not like the military. They tried negotiations and failed. SAS mopped it up.

Either way I play swat with a constant view suspects should face justice and be forced to comply. A death is a big thing for the police, but less lethal or lethal, the kill should be a last resort. That's more the discussion in my opinion. The tactics players take, which I see too many thinking it's counter strike.











Sent from my SM-G925F using Tapatalk

[Selena]

Hey.

Just wanted to say that I am with Matt on this one.

Lethal is a last resort... But I am quick to use it against a surprise threat, especially when a hostage is threatened. My load out usually consists of a lot of gas canisters, due to the effectiveness of subduing several known suspects and being effective in a challenging environment. I vary my armaments, but I carry one lethal weapon to always be able to shoot, be it through glass or plastic to take out a hostile target if need be.

I also try to respect Police ROE. If a suspect runs, I usually don't fire a lethal weapon, even if he fired first, lost his gun or got stunned and ran. Runners are really dangerous to officers in the game, yet I prefer not to shoot someone in the back.

You have some nice tools in SWAT4, but I think some of those tools made players more lazy with their team efforts... With doorsitting and wedging, it is a bit of a manipulation more than a SWAT4 tactical entry.

I'm all for a fun time though, cuffing up suspects and calling it a day with a 100 point smile is my favorite.

[SAS_Random]

Originally Posted by Selena

...I think some of those tools made players more lazy with their team efforts... With doorsitting and wedging, it is a bit of a manipulation more than a SWAT4 tactical entry.

LOL. Don't get me started on my top peeves about SWAT 4 players using odd-ball tactics.

Door sitting, as you call it. SAS calls it body wedging. Soooooooo unrealistic. What do you suppose any non AI suspect would do about a door that is being held by an officer's ass? He would pump said ass full of lead. If you don't have wedges, please don't use the door sit/body wedge.

This "tool" is an LTL player's compensation to not wanting to shoot any suspects. Don't be lazy. If you anticipate needing wedges, then equip your team with enough of them. Otherwise, be a true operator and cover the door with your weapon from a safe angle and distance. If a suspect enters unannounced, issue compliance then let the bodies fall where they may.

[Columbo]

Have to agree with Demon Speed.
I prefer using lethal weapons, because it encourages close teamwork to achieve a good score.
Also i think it is more challenging - but i not claim its harder to complete the round, survive the round or to aim your gun. No. But it is harder to get a good score, it's harder to get 100/100 ranking. And that is good this way!

Certainly, i think like most people, i started playing the game less lethal. And as you said Matt, it almost ensures that you get a 100 score per round. Actually i know less lethal players that consider it a failure if there is any other end result than 100.
Skilled players can practically clear the default maps completely alone using less-lethal guns and getting full score.

But i learned fast that, for me, a score of 100 doesn't mean it was a good round... for example when people on a Less-Lethal-server started pepper rushing on Tenement and i virtually never see a teammate the whole round. Although 100/100, the "GG" at the end almost feels like irony. Thats no cooperation in my opinion.
The biggest weakness of Less Lethal is, as experienced player you not really need to cooperate with others or teamwork. Also a less-lethal player does not need to care for Rules of Engagements - you can always "shot on sight" without consequences... if it was a civilian that came around the corner and got hit by a beanbag, who cares?
I know it sounds like a "David vs Goliath" thing going with a Nova pump and beanbags against heavily armed, armored combatants.
But in this game it really isn't! One beanbag round, no matter at which body part it is placed, will stun every opponent.
Thats what lethal players are talking about, when saying less-lethal is overpowered.

In contrast to that, lethal players can only rely on their tacaids to solve the situation without casulties. With tacaids i mean flashbangs, gas, breaching equipment, wedges etc.
And these are extremely limited, forcing you to work together to achieve a good end result.

Im totally with you, when you say SWAT is a police force and there to save lives.
I think thats the curse of lethal weapons, that some people tend to confuse military (or anti-terror missions) with the tasks of a police force, that SWAT is.
Unfortunately there are lethal players that provoke shootouts, entering rooms without nades (even if they still got plenty), simply going for the kill (to prove their good reaction? idk).

But i think a serious lethal player is also aiming for a 100 score!
But getting there is a real team effort and a lot harder to achieve.
And yes, it is possible to do full score on all default maps with a full lethal setup (primary and secondary weapon lethal).
Of course this requires different tactics and procedures than with Less-Lethal, but if you succeed it feels like a real accomplishment.

I think in the end people have many different motives to play Swat4 COOP - some want to "beat" the game and get high scores others want a realistic experience and close teamwork.
I would say, stay open minded and respect each other. Thats most important.

Greetings

[Matt]

Originally Posted by Columbo

Have to agree with Demon Speed.
I prefer using lethal weapons, because it encourages close teamwork to achieve a good score.
Also i think it is more challenging - but i not claim its harder to complete the round, survive the round or to aim your gun. No. But it is harder to get a good score, it's harder to get 100/100 ranking. And that is good this way!

Certainly, i think like most people, i started playing the game less lethal. And as you said Matt, it almost ensures that you get a 100 score per round. Actually i know less lethal players that consider it a failure if there is any other end result than 100.
Skilled players can practically clear the default maps completely alone using less-lethal guns and getting full score.

But i learned fast that, for me, a score of 100 doesn't mean it was a good round... for example when people on a Less-Lethal-server started pepper rushing on Tenement and i virtually never see a teammate the whole round. Although 100/100, the "GG" at the end almost feels like irony. Thats no cooperation in my opinion.
The biggest weakness of Less Lethal is, as experienced player you not really need to cooperate with others or teamwork. Also a less-lethal player does not need to care for Rules of Engagements - you can always "shot on sight" without consequences... if it was a civilian that came around the corner and got hit by a beanbag, who cares?
I know it sounds like a "David vs Goliath" thing going with a Nova pump and beanbags against heavily armed, armored combatants.
But in this game it really isn't! One beanbag round, no matter at which body part it is placed, will stun every opponent.
Thats what lethal players are talking about, when saying less-lethal is overpowered.

In contrast to that, lethal players can only rely on their tacaids to solve the situation without casulties. With tacaids i mean flashbangs, gas, breaching equipment, wedges etc.
And these are extremely limited, forcing you to work together to achieve a good end result.

Im totally with you, when you say SWAT is a police force and there to save lives.
I think thats the curse of lethal weapons, that some people tend to confuse military (or anti-terror missions) with the tasks of a police force, that SWAT is.
Unfortunately there are lethal players that provoke shootouts, entering rooms without nades (even if they still got plenty), simply going for the kill (to prove their good reaction? idk).

But i think a serious lethal player is also aiming for a 100 score!
But getting there is a real team effort and a lot harder to achieve.
And yes, it is possible to do full score on all default maps with a full lethal setup (primary and secondary weapon lethal).
Of course this requires different tactics and procedures than with Less-Lethal, but if you succeed it feels like a real accomplishment.

I think in the end people have many different motives to play Swat4 COOP - some want to "beat" the game and get high scores others want a realistic experience and close teamwork.
I would say, stay open minded and respect each other. Thats most important.

Greetings

Could not have put it better myself. Here Here Columbo.... Well said

[Selena]

Originally Posted by SAS_Random

This "tool" is an LTL player's compensation to not wanting to shoot any suspects. Don't be lazy. If you anticipate needing wedges, then equip your team with enough of them. Otherwise, be a true operator and cover the door with your weapon from a safe angle and distance. If a suspect enters unannounced, issue compliance then let the bodies fall where they may.

I wouldn't say it is has much to do with LTL players as much as it has to do with the lack of players and training together. A SWAT team would be full of officers ready to cover all angles, where as you might be going in alone or with a buddy. Same with struggling to have a cohesive unit with a full team. With no training among each other, and leaders who's not able to keep people in line. And with few maps that are played so many times people "know" beforehand what's up. I'd love to play a "no doorsitting" round with a team.. But the probability of it being anywhere near a smooth experience is... Well... I have doubts.

Nothing a bit of training among us won't fix though. With EL, R1, R2, B1, B2 set up and having designated roles and tactics people know fairly well, it should be smooth sailing for element lead to designate roles and each role having a load out that fits the role... Red being point, Blue being secondary/cover/back-up.1's carrying mirror, 2's deployment.. Movements and formations adapting to the environment flawlessly without an EL having to direct... With rolling points in hallways for maximum cover and... and... Yeah... My SWAT3 days are surfacing here.

[Ninwes]

Originally Posted by Selena

I wouldn't say it is has much to do with LTL players as much as it has to do with the lack of players and training together. A SWAT team would be full of officers ready to cover all angles, where as you might be going in alone or with a buddy. Same with struggling to have a cohesive unit with a full team. With no training among each other, and leaders who's not able to keep people in line. And with few maps that are played so many times people "know" beforehand what's up. I'd love to play a "no doorsitting" round with a team.. But the probability of it being anywhere near a smooth experience is... Well... I have doubts.

Nothing a bit of training among us won't fix though. With EL, R1, R2, B1, B2 set up and having designated roles and tactics people know fairly well, it should be smooth sailing for element lead to designate roles and each role having a load out that fits the role... Red being point, Blue being secondary/cover/back-up.1's carrying mirror, 2's deployment.. Movements and formations adapting to the environment flawlessly without an EL having to direct... With rolling points in hallways for maximum cover and... and... Yeah... My SWAT3 days are surfacing here.

I do remember games before where no one actually had to say anything, the whole team was like on auto-pilot and no words where needed

It was all because you always play with the same team and know how they playing.

But we did have like El,Red1 and so on before and it worked pretty good.

[MichaelSR]

In regards to body-wedging, a humorous input from me, picture this if you'd like:

I do wonder how much of a heart attack would someone get, if the suspect simply pulled the door open instead of continuously trying to push it open, since as we all know, doors in SWAT4 open BOTH ways.
"Oh this door can't be pushed? I pull. Hello there, random crouching officer with his back turned thinking the door is sealed." :3

[Selena]

Originally Posted by Ninwes

I do remember games before where no one actually had to say anything, the whole team was like on auto-pilot and no words where needed.

Sounds smooth, but I wouldn't go that far. EL is the glue that keeps it going, and choosing different approaches gives game variety, so as EL I try to do different things, even if it is compromising.

My responsibility would be to try to find the best solutions to the issues that arise, and to reign players in and maybe give some risky orders to keep the players on their toes even though I know the layout and dangerous corners. The players need to feel a bit of a thrill too, and not just the mundane (trust me, in the past I would go with safe and mundane). I know I've gotten more triggerhappy over the years too.

I wish there was a mod that switched up enemy placement more. Making more roamers (seemingly individuals with things to do and not just standing in the same place for hours). But I suppose I could start playing those custom maps.

[Ninwes]

Originally Posted by Selena

Sounds smooth, but I wouldn't go that far. EL is the glue that keeps it going, and choosing different approaches gives game variety, so as EL I try to do different things, even if it is compromising.

My responsibility would be to try to find the best solutions to the issues that arise, and to reign players in and maybe give some risky orders to keep the players on their toes even though I know the layout and dangerous corners. The players need to feel a bit of a thrill too, and not just the mundane (trust me, in the past I would go with safe and mundane). I know I've gotten more triggerhappy over the years too.

I wish there was a mod that switched up enemy placement more. Making more roamers (seemingly individuals with things to do and not just standing in the same place for hours). But I suppose I could start playing those custom maps.

To get new experience custom maps are the thing as they are ussually harder then the vanilla maps, also TSS also has a little more different as they are not always on the same place, they stand back up and they move more around.