The only people who are truly 'vets' would be the Devs and PTs. I've been playing since Halloween, so i'm definately experienced, but i'd expect the PTs to still know some tricks i'm not aware of.
<!--QuoteBegin--JRock+Jan 16 2003, 07:52 PM--></span><table border='0' align='center' width='95%' cellpadding='3' cellspacing='1'><tr><td><b>QUOTE</b> (JRock @ Jan 16 2003, 07:52 PM)</td></tr><tr><td id='QUOTE'><!--QuoteEBegin--><!--QuoteBegin--Fantasmo+Jan 16 2003, 05:20 PM--></span><table border='0' align='center' width='95%' cellpadding='3' cellspacing='1'><tr><td><b>QUOTE</b> (Fantasmo @ Jan 16 2003, 05:20 PM)</td></tr><tr><td id='QUOTE'><!--QuoteEBegin--><!--QuoteBegin--></span><table border='0' align='center' width='95%' cellpadding='3' cellspacing='1'><tr><td><b>QUOTE</b> </td></tr><tr><td id='QUOTE'><!--QuoteEBegin-->I feel that the chances of survival for a close-quarter encouter with an alien should be far less then 50/50<!--QuoteEnd--></td></tr></table><span class='postcolor'><!--QuoteEEnd-->
<!--QuoteEnd--></td></tr></table><span class='postcolor'><!--QuoteEEnd--> YOU feel. Not the rest of us. Your opinion is one that favors aliens which, while more movie-like, is not ideal for a game where balance is everything.
Also what the hell is an NS old timer or veteran? The game's only been in public release for 3 months and already people swing around terms like "vet" and "old timer" in attempts to make themselves out to be better or more important than the rest of us. Elitism sucks, folks. Keep it to the CS community.<!--QuoteEnd--></td></tr></table><span class='postcolor'><!--QuoteEEnd--> Whoa big guy,
1.) You are correct, <b>I</b> feel this way that is why in my post whenever <b>I</b> express my opinion <b>I</b> typed that <b>"I feel... blah-bah-blah-blah..."</b>. Notice <b>I</b> never used, "We feel... blah-bah-blah-blah." because then I would be speaking for the rest of you which is something I purposely chose to avoid doing. <b>I</b> can only speak for myself so that is why <b>I</b> used <b>I</b> in my post to express my own, <i>and nobody but my own opinion</i>.
<u>Quick English Lesson for JRock</u>
<b>"I"</b> means I'm speaking for myself. <b>"We"</b> means I'm speaking for a group of people.
If I used "we" to express my opinion anywhere in my post I apologize, but I'm pretty sure I didn't because I don't make it a habit to speak for anybody else.
2.) I presented my position and reasons for that position in my post. If you disagree and wish to engage me in a discussion you'll have to state a few reasons why my position is weak. You think removing evasive bunny hopping is bad for balance, explain why. You wrote, "Your opinion is one that favors aliens which, while more movie-like, is not ideal for a game where balance is everything." which is neither informative or a great discussion starter, you aren't right by simply reversing my position, give me some reasons.
3.) Coil and Silver Fox are both play-tester (PTs) from before the game was even released. They were playing NS when we were just drooling over screenies of release candidates on the forums. They were making game changing suggestions from experience while we could only dream about what NS is going to be like. I've been playing NS since the 1st release but I would not use vet or old timer to describe myself. However I think those who might have help initially shape NS could qualify as the only real "vets" or "old timers" in this mod. Perhaps you're right, maybe it's early to use "vet" or "old timer." Would you feel better if I called them, "The guys who PTed the game, have seen the most change, have been around longer then anyone else in the community, knows the developers and the developers know them, and have probably played this game more then 85-90% of the community."?
4.) Look up <b>elitism</b> on www.dictionary.com and use quotes to tell me where you detected even a sub-atomic particle of elitism in my post. I think people swing around terms like 'elitism' in attempts to sound intelligent but really have no clue what the word means.
Half-baked arguments suck folks. Don't even keep it to the CS community, just keep it to yourselves.
i think what's confusing many people on this forum is the use of the word "bunnyhop" for two different cases (speed and evasion). bunnyhopping should only be applied to the speed case (when a player uses the exploit to move far beyond their intended speed). this is what is to be removed.
on the other hand, jumping around like a fairy in order to prevent a skulk from nipping at your feet will NOT be removed. we'll label this fairyjumping in order to prevent further confusion. <!--emo&:p--><img src='http://www.unknownworlds.com/forums/html/emoticons/tounge.gif' border='0' valign='absmiddle' alt='tounge.gif'><!--endemo-->
you'll still be able to fairyjump, you just can't bunnyhop. get it?
coilAmateur pirate. Professional monkey. All pance.Join Date: 2002-04-12Member: 424Members, NS1 Playtester, Contributor
For the record, my personal position: I like neither speed-bunnyhopping nor evasive bunnyhopping. I'd love to see marines forced to wait ~1 second between jumps; they'd still be able to dodge the first bite... but good luck dodging the second as well.
For the record as well, Flayra's decision is to remove speed-bunnyhopping (I do not know how he plans to do this; he's the coder, not me) and retain evasive jumping. I can see some of his rationale for this - not wanting to slow the game down, as people consider CS to have been slowed down by jumping limitations, is probably one of his reasons. Without talking to him, I don't know the rest of his side of the argument, so I'll wait on it.
I bet I know the way he's removing 'speed' bunnyhopping...
By removing the ability to 'buffer' a second jump while you're still in the air, which is actually the glitch that makes most of speed-bunnyhopping physically possible.
The Quake-engine codes all share one facet, or did until recently with many mods modifying the following code-fragment idea.
Normally, when jump is pressed and you jump, a flag is set saying 'jumped already' to prevent just holding down the jump button to bounce along like a rubber ball.
When you release the jump key, even in mid-air, that flag is forcefully cleared.
Change it so that two flags are set, one of them cleared when you land and the other when you release the jump key, and viola, speed-bunnyhopping goes bye-bye because you're always forced to be 'on the ground' for a split-second before being allowed to bounce again, which causes the friction that breaks speed-bunnyhopping.
<!--QuoteBegin--WolfWings+Jan 17 2003, 01:20 AM--></span><table border='0' align='center' width='95%' cellpadding='3' cellspacing='1'><tr><td><b>QUOTE</b> (WolfWings @ Jan 17 2003, 01:20 AM)</td></tr><tr><td id='QUOTE'><!--QuoteEBegin-->I bet I know the way he's removing 'speed' bunnyhopping...
By removing the ability to 'buffer' a second jump while you're still in the air, which is actually the glitch that makes most of speed-bunnyhopping physically possible.
The Quake-engine codes all share one facet, or did until recently with many mods modifying the following code-fragment idea.
Normally, when jump is pressed and you jump, a flag is set saying 'jumped already' to prevent just holding down the jump button to bounce along like a rubber ball.
When you release the jump key, even in mid-air, that flag is forcefully cleared.
Change it so that two flags are set, one of them cleared when you land and the other when you release the jump key, and viola, speed-bunnyhopping goes bye-bye because you're always forced to be 'on the ground' for a split-second before being allowed to bounce again, which causes the friction that breaks speed-bunnyhopping.<!--QuoteEnd--></td></tr></table><span class='postcolor'><!--QuoteEEnd--> Oh wow! Someone who actually knows something about code!
As far as my opinions are concerned, (They are short and brief.)
Speed-Bunnyhopping = Bad Dodge-Bunnyhopping = Fine
Skill is skill. Skill will prevail and be apparent even if you can't SpeedBH anymore. Turn those skills to dodging and accurate shooting.
Being able to SpeedBH entire halls requires skill, but in my opinion, promotes the wrong skill set.
<!--QuoteBegin--Fantasmo+Jan 17 2003, 01:39 AM--></span><table border='0' align='center' width='95%' cellpadding='3' cellspacing='1'><tr><td><b>QUOTE</b> (Fantasmo @ Jan 17 2003, 01:39 AM)</td></tr><tr><td id='QUOTE'><!--QuoteEBegin-->[QUOTE]I feel that the chances of survival for a close-quarter encouter with an alien should be far less then 50/50[/QUOTE]
[/QUOTE] YOU feel. Not the rest of us. Your opinion is one that favors aliens which, while more movie-like, is not ideal for a game where balance is everything.<!--QuoteEnd--></td></tr></table><span class='postcolor'><!--QuoteEEnd--> Perhaps you should read the original design docs. 1 on 1 encounters are supposed to generally result in marine death.
Exactly, marines are supposed to stick together for protection.
I'm glad bunny hopping for speed and silence is going finally. Good work.
Just don't add a stamina bar. That might be a little too far. <!--emo&:)--><img src='http://www.unknownworlds.com/forums/html/emoticons/smile.gif' border='0' valign='absmiddle' alt='smile.gif'><!--endemo-->
<!--QuoteBegin--coil+Jan 16 2003, 11:13 PM--></span><table border='0' align='center' width='95%' cellpadding='3' cellspacing='1'><tr><td><b>QUOTE</b> (coil @ Jan 16 2003, 11:13 PM)</td></tr><tr><td id='QUOTE'><!--QuoteEBegin-->For the record, my personal position: I like neither speed-bunnyhopping nor evasive bunnyhopping. I'd love to see marines forced to wait ~1 second between jumps; they'd still be able to dodge the first bite... but good luck dodging the second as well.
For the record as well, Flayra's decision is to remove speed-bunnyhopping (I do not know how he plans to do this; he's the coder, not me) and retain evasive jumping. I can see some of his rationale for this - not wanting to slow the game down, as people consider CS to have been slowed down by jumping limitations, is probably one of his reasons. Without talking to him, I don't know the rest of his side of the argument, so I'll wait on it.<!--QuoteEnd--></td></tr></table><span class='postcolor'><!--QuoteEEnd--> Thank for confirming your position Coil. That is what I thought.
I'm in the same camp as you. I'm not going to stop playing because of evasive bunny hopping but my personal opinion is that I would rather have the ability removed.
<b>"I"</b> means I'm speaking for myself. <b>"We"</b> means I'm speaking for a group of people.
If I used "we" to express my opinion anywhere in my post I apologize, but I'm pretty sure I didn't because I don't make it a habit to speak for anybody else.<!--QuoteEnd--></td></tr></table><span class='postcolor'><!--QuoteEEnd-->
Actually, my point was that you feel this way but the rest of us don't, not that you used the wrong word. Just pointing out that it's a singular opinion that favors skulks versus the concensus of the developers that in order to balance the game, there is a need for a balance between marines and skulks, even though it would be more like the Alien movies if the skulks were more dangerous than a single marine could handle.
That's all. No need to be rude to me about it.
And yes, I prefer a game where there is teamwork required by Marines to move down a hallway otherwise they should face the very distinct possibility of death by skulk, because skulks should be winning a higher percentage of the encounters with single marines.
In fact, the Marine spawn-rate advantage would be voided most effectively just by doing what you say and ensuring that, given two equally skilled players, the skulk player should be winning 60% or more of the encounters with the single Marine.
Then again you're getting into the details such as map topology where you look at what terrain they're fighting in - broad, bright, open hallways will naturally be the skulk's demise. So really the more-skilled skulk players already have a ratio greater than 6:4 of kills:deaths because they use the skulk where it excels - dark corners, small hallways, dropping out of vents, etc.
Technically there is no flame, so I guess you don't know what a flame is. His insinuating that I need a grammar lesson for the English language is more of a flame than anything else in this thread. But feel free to not know what a flame really is.
ShockehIf a packet drops on the web and nobody's near to see it...Join Date: 2002-11-19Member: 9336NS1 Playtester, Forum Moderators, Constellation
Dude...
<!--QuoteBegin--></span><table border='0' align='center' width='95%' cellpadding='3' cellspacing='1'><tr><td><b>QUOTE</b> </td></tr><tr><td id='QUOTE'><!--QuoteEBegin-->That's all. No need to be a d!ck about it. <!--QuoteEnd--></td></tr></table><span class='postcolor'><!--QuoteEEnd-->
Is a return flame. Not gettin dragged in here, but it's headed that way.
Uhm no, that's not a flame. I did not directly call him a name. I simply used a common everyday phrase to say that he doesn't need to be going off on tangents about the English language in a discussion of bunnyhopping. He took the thread off on a tangent and even hinted at insulting my intelligence, but I'm overlooking that and just simply saying there was no need for it.
Do I anywhere directly call him a name? No. Of course not. I wouldn't flame someone, even if they're insulting my intelligence.
Wow, I'm having a discussion of what a flame is or is not. Good grief, go earn some messageboard vocabulary. :rolleyes:
edit - and actually I added two words to the sentence you're so interested in so it's more clear what I'm saying - that I'm not calling him a d-ck, just requesting he not be a d-ck <b>to me</b> by pouncing on a tangent instead of discussion the actual issues. Then again, maybe you've never heard the term "to d-ck with somebody", which does not mean the person doing it is a "d-ck", it simply means you're purposely messing with them which is rude.
That's it though; that's more than enough explanation for you. If you don't undestand the intent yet, forget it and move on.
Bunnyhoping is a skill that doesn't fit in NS... It's good for HLDM or TFC, that are esentially truly unrealistic fast paced games (ALA Quake) but not in NS.
joevGiving grief... With a smile.Join Date: 2002-07-20Member: 977Members, Retired Developer, NS1 Playtester, Contributor, Constellation, Reinforced - Shadow
edited January 2003
<!--QuoteBegin--JRock+Jan 18 2003, 06:36 AM--></span><table border='0' align='center' width='95%' cellpadding='3' cellspacing='1'><tr><td><b>QUOTE</b> (JRock @ Jan 18 2003, 06:36 AM)</td></tr><tr><td id='QUOTE'><!--QuoteEBegin-->edit - and actually I added two words to the sentence you're so interested in so it's more clear what I'm saying - that I'm not calling him a d-ck, just requesting he not be a d-ck <b>to me</b> by pouncing on a tangent instead of discussion the actual issues. Then again, maybe you've never heard the term "to d-ck with somebody", which does not mean the person doing it is a "d-ck", it simply means you're purposely messing with them which is rude. <!--QuoteEnd--></td></tr></table><span class='postcolor'><!--QuoteEEnd--> Well now, your use of the term is not as you've stated it's commonly used..
By your logic, your scentence should read:
"No need to d!ck me around about it" or some variation.
You say instead:
No need to *be* a d!ck blah blah.
That, whatever your intent, implies that the other party is a d!ck, and *reads* as an insult.
When argueing the semantics versus intent of such things please put yourself in the *readers* shoes, not your own.. the person you are addressing is unlikely to be a mindreader and aware of your *intent*. All they will see is an insult to them.
I strongly suggest you modify the 'phrase' to something like:
"no need to be rude to me about it" which is much clearer, doesn't include a blatant attempt at circumventing the swear filter [hint hint] and overall will cause much less insult to be percieved at the recieving end.
This will have the added benefit of closing this particular issue, and moving this thread back on topic before we're forced to close it for drifting over to an english lesson.
joevGiving grief... With a smile.Join Date: 2002-07-20Member: 977Members, Retired Developer, NS1 Playtester, Contributor, Constellation, Reinforced - Shadow
edited January 2003
<!--QuoteBegin--JRock+Jan 18 2003, 08:10 AM--></span><table border='0' align='center' width='95%' cellpadding='3' cellspacing='1'><tr><td><b>QUOTE</b> (JRock @ Jan 18 2003, 08:10 AM)</td></tr><tr><td id='QUOTE'><!--QuoteEBegin--><!--QuoteBegin--joev+Jan 17 2003, 08:29 PM--></span><table border='0' align='center' width='95%' cellpadding='3' cellspacing='1'><tr><td><b>QUOTE</b> (joev @ Jan 17 2003, 08:29 PM)</td></tr><tr><td id='QUOTE'><!--QuoteEBegin-->"no need to be rude to me about it"<!--QuoteEnd--></td></tr></table><span class='postcolor'><!--QuoteEEnd--> <span style='color:purple'><b> If you don't have anything nice to say, shut your pie hole...</span></b>
Wait a minute, my post that says, "You're right, I will change it and reword it so it sounds better" was deleted. That's pretty funny! I was actually admitting I worded it poorly and said I will fix it and you delete my message saying that and act like I said something bad! That's insane.
And the anti bhop code played a good part, in each case, of removing me from said playerbase - in each case after playing the game almost continuously from first beta.
I have faith - I would just like to state that I really really hope they are careful how this is done.
Hmm. Hope I don't put this wrong, but: 1. Anything that gives you an advantage that <i>is not intended</i> that is from outside sources('net) is a cheat. 2. Anything that gives you an advantage that is not intended that is from INSIDE sources(console command for example), is an exploit. Therefor, bunnyhoppers are exploiters.
As it is now: A good level 3 cara skulk can kill a good 'normal' marine if he: 1) knows the layout 2) Isn't ambushed
A group of marines in formation can annihilate anything but a serious ambush from multiple skulks, however the commander can allow them to survive this aswell by the use of scan.
An exploiting marine who B-hops silently gives the skulk no warning of the approaching marine. As the silent marine passes the skulks hiding place it drops down significanly behind him (because it couldn't pre-empt due to the lack of noise and the marine is moving faster than normal). The silent marine has no problem hearing the skulk, he flips round holds down his 'b-hop backwards' key and continues to accelerate away from mr skulk while shooting him'
He has no problem hitting mr skulk, 'muzzle flash? what muzzle flash?'
Alright, first I want to clear up some misconceptions about bunnyhopping. First, as some others have mentioned, you cannot get more than a 70% speed boost doing so. The way the code works is that whenever you hit the ground, your speed is checked. If your speed is more than 70% more than your max speed, you are brought down to your max speed. Secondly, you cannot bunnyhop simply by downloading a script. my thoughts are that people who claim this have no experience in this matter. There are however a few ways to make bunnyhopping a bit easier, but even with those it takes quite a bit of practice to get down. I myself do not use any of these methods; only pressing spacebar at the exact moment I hit the ground. Third, while you are bunnyhopping, the direction that you are looking is very important, so you can't aim at something and continue bunnyhopping at the same time.
Also, before someone gets misconceptions about this post, I am not arguing to keep bunnyhopping as it is, I think there are things wrong with it in its current incarnation in NS.
Now I'll respond to some gripes about bunnyhopping I've heard in this thread.
<i>Bunnyhopping is unrealistic and does not belong in NS.</i> I'll agree with you that it is unrealistic, however I hold a strong opinion that realism should take a backseat to gameplay/fun in the majority of circumstances. Once you play for a while you just accept NS for what it is, and the "atmosphere" and the "realism" just aren't there anymore. Sure it helps when you start playing the game, because things make sense and you like walking around in dark tunnels with steam in them. But everyone can admit that after a while, they stop noticing the steam and the ambient sounds. The same concept applies for bunnyhopping, people can get used to seeing it and not care. I enjoy bunnyhopping mostly because it gives me something to do while going from point A to point B save walking in a straight line, besides giving a little speed advantage that I earned by lots of practice. I find it a fun and rewarding activity, without it being too powerful (except for a few cases in NS which I will discuss).
<i>Bunnyhopping is an exploit that was not intended by the developers and should therefore be removed.</i> Let's take a look at this "exploit." It takes a high amount of skill and practice to do, unlike other exploits such as the alien with the marine skin. It has drawbacks, as in you have to contend with stairs, ladders, corners, and plus while bunnyhopping you cannot fire at something. If you hit something or mistime a jump you stop completely, resulting in moving slower than regular running. You can counter this exploit easily by just (gasp) doing it yourself, if you can get over your fears about doing something a dev didn't directly specify you can do. Here's a list of questions and responses you might ask of someone who does not bunnyhop:
Why is bunnyhopping an exploit? Because it gives a player an unfair advantage. Why don't you bunnyhop yourself and take down that advantage? Because bunnyhopping is an exploit, and I am morally opposed to exploits.
Notice how the beginning of the discussion is the same as the end. This is called circular logic, and any argument which depends upon it is worthless, end of story.
Also, we can draw a parallel to rocket jumping. The devs of Quake did not intend for a player to fire a rocket at their feet and jump really high, so rocket jumping is technically an exploit. However, rocket jumping is generally accepted because anyone can learn to do it, and there is a disadvantage of losing a good amount of health while doing so. The devs got a positive feature they didn't even have to code.
In conclusion, if an "exploit" has all the properties of a intended game feature (not overpowing, counterable, etc), then probably it's not an exploit.
<i>Having bunnyhopping as a feature would make the learning curve too high for NS.</i> This is the very best argument against bunnyhopping I've heard that I don't completely agree with. I think that is true to an extent, because having a hard to master skill that is very powerful would be very frustrating to new players and might turn them off. However, just toning down bunnyhopping (see max speed suggestion below) could ease this issue, without having to take such a crude measure as removing the speed increase completely.
<i>Marines can hop backwards and retreat from skulks at a high speed, while still firing.</i> I agree with this one. The game would be much more balanced and fun without this ability. Skulks are supposed to be able to catch up with marines, because their only weapon is melee.
<i>Marines can move around the map silently by crouch-bunnyhopping.</i> I agree here too, even though it's fun to do, it simply is too big an advantage for a marine to get around that stealthily.
<i>You get an illegal speed boost while bunnyhopping.</i> See the argument about it being an exploit, especially the part about anyone being able to do it. However, the argument does hold some water, because extreme speed boosts just screw gameplay up too much.
<i>I hate bunnyhopping: it sucks, and I can't do it, so remove it!</i> That's not an argument.
Alrighty, now it's apparent it bunnyhopping needs to be changed, so I'll list some changes that I would think appropriate, and some that I think should would not be.
Changes I'd like to see: 1) If you are in the air, are a marine, and are facing more than 90 degrees away from the direction you are moving, then you should be slowed down to normal backwards-moving pace. (This would fix the hopping retreat problem discussed earlier) 2) You should make noise if you jump while crouched. (This would fix the stealth-bunnyhopping discussed earlier) 3) Maybe the increase speed cap should be changed from 70% to 40% or something around there. (This would tone down bunnyhopping enough to not make it too big of an advantage, but still let people use their skill and have fun)
Change that I wouldn't like but would still play NS if it were implemented: Changing the max speed increase from 70% to 0% (You can still jump around but gain minimal speed from bunnyhopping. I feel that there should be at least some reward for learning this skill)
Changes I would <i>hate</i> to see: 1) CS-style jumping system (jumping horribly slow, ackward, and un-fun) 2) Stamina bar for jumping (simply not needed gameplay-wise with changes I proposed, thus a useless, cluttering, and frustrating limitation on the marines)
Now as sort of an addendum I'll respond to some statements earlier in the thread, as the real meat of my post is above this sentence.
<i>If you won't like NS without bunnyhopping, then don't play it.</i> I, like most people hate to see something they like to play/use get mangled, simply for the reason the thing I once liked to do I now cannot do. I also feel this argument in general is weak, as it can be used for both sides of an issue equally effectively.
<!--QuoteBegin--></span><table border='0' align='center' width='95%' cellpadding='3' cellspacing='1'><tr><td><b>QUOTE</b> </td></tr><tr><td id='QUOTE'><!--QuoteEBegin-->I don't quite see what the problem is; they put in anti-bhop code in cs, firearms, DoD, and soon to be NS.
CS, firearms, and DoD all have a playerbase; I don't see how anti-exploit code is going to effect NS.<!--QuoteEnd--></td></tr></table><span class='postcolor'><!--QuoteEEnd--> I don't play CS, firearms, or DoD. One of the main reasons is that they threw bunnyhopping out the window in favor of the flimsy realism argument. I'm not a big fan of realism mods, that's why I play Science and Industry, NS, and some TF. If they did something CS-style to jumping there would be a high probablility I would give NS up for other games.
<!--QuoteBegin--></span><table border='0' align='center' width='95%' cellpadding='3' cellspacing='1'><tr><td><b>QUOTE</b> </td></tr><tr><td id='QUOTE'><!--QuoteEBegin-->The fact of the matter is that in tihs game the skulk was DESIGNED to be faster than the marine.
Put a skulk and marine side-by-side. Say go. Watch them run. (both WITHOUT jumping) Who is faster?
The skulk. Why?
...because the game was DESIGNED that way.
Now take that same marine and have him BH against a running skulk. You'll notice that they both move at the same speed. (or the marine might be a little faster, depends on the BH) That means a person who BH has taken a feature of the game and disabled it.
To those who would suggest that people BH to catch a BH, I say, I don't want to have to llama myself to play the game as it was designed to be played. <!--QuoteEnd--></td></tr></table><span class='postcolor'><!--QuoteEEnd--> Take a marine and the skulk, and have both of them bunnyhop. The skulk catches the marine, and all is right with the world, Horaay! And about your moral opposition to bunnyhopping, see above explaination of circular logic.
<!--QuoteBegin--></span><table border='0' align='center' width='95%' cellpadding='3' cellspacing='1'><tr><td><b>QUOTE</b> </td></tr><tr><td id='QUOTE'><!--QuoteEBegin-->If the developers wanted marines to be able to pull a 180 and hop backwards at a speed equal to a skulk then they wouldn't have made backwards a 'walking' speed only.<!--QuoteEnd--></td></tr></table><span class='postcolor'><!--QuoteEEnd--> I agree with you on that point, but you can fix it without killing bunnyhopping.
<!--QuoteBegin--></span><table border='0' align='center' width='95%' cellpadding='3' cellspacing='1'><tr><td><b>QUOTE</b> </td></tr><tr><td id='QUOTE'><!--QuoteEBegin-->If bunny hopping is so critical a 'skill' for an individual that it will greatly affect their playing style when it is removed, then they are lousy players.<!--QuoteEnd--></td></tr></table><span class='postcolor'><!--QuoteEEnd--> Removing the ability to go forward would seriously limit your playing style, therefore you are a lousy player.
<!--QuoteBegin--></span><table border='0' align='center' width='95%' cellpadding='3' cellspacing='1'><tr><td><b>QUOTE</b> </td></tr><tr><td id='QUOTE'><!--QuoteEBegin-->BHing was never meant to be part of the game. The developers have made that clear. Time for people to get over it and just play.<!--QuoteEnd--></td></tr></table><span class='postcolor'><!--QuoteEEnd--> See above argument about exploits. Also, using your argument, it's time for you to get over the fact that bunnyhopping exists and just play the game.
<!--QuoteBegin--></span><table border='0' align='center' width='95%' cellpadding='3' cellspacing='1'><tr><td><b>QUOTE</b> </td></tr><tr><td id='QUOTE'><!--QuoteEBegin-->If you want to bunny hop, play TFC. There you can BH to your heart's content.<!--QuoteEnd--></td></tr></table><span class='postcolor'><!--QuoteEEnd--> But if I play TFC, then I'm not playing NS, which I like.
<!--QuoteBegin--></span><table border='0' align='center' width='95%' cellpadding='3' cellspacing='1'><tr><td><b>QUOTE</b> </td></tr><tr><td id='QUOTE'><!--QuoteEBegin-->bunny hopping a skill? (let me demonstrate why its not)
press spacebar, depress spacebar. repeat.<!--QuoteEnd--></td></tr></table><span class='postcolor'><!--QuoteEEnd--> I guess that's why everyone can bunnyhop perfectly the first time they try. Oh wait, they can't! That's because the jumps take split second timing, and the mouse and key movement need to be learned.
<!--QuoteBegin--></span><table border='0' align='center' width='95%' cellpadding='3' cellspacing='1'><tr><td><b>QUOTE</b> </td></tr><tr><td id='QUOTE'><!--QuoteEBegin-->the stamina system is the best idea ive heard in this post, that should get rid of bunny hopping script lamers<!--QuoteEnd--></td></tr></table><span class='postcolor'><!--QuoteEEnd--> Because you bunnyhop you must be a "script lamer"? That's funny, I can bunnyhop without using a script to do so.
Anyway, one final thought to wrap things up: I think a lot of people don't like bunnyhopping because it takes a lot of practice to do, and the developers didn't intend it. Therefore they choose to see bunnyhopping as an exploit, because having it removed would be much easier than learning to bunnyhop themselves. There also might be a certain amount of fear of learning something so hard to master, and of the disapproval bunnyhopping gets you from some single-minded people. It's just easier for them to put themselves onto moral high ground and try to get rid of or ban bunnyhoppers.
Comments
<!--QuoteEnd--></td></tr></table><span class='postcolor'><!--QuoteEEnd-->
YOU feel. Not the rest of us. Your opinion is one that favors aliens which, while more movie-like, is not ideal for a game where balance is everything.
Also what the hell is an NS old timer or veteran? The game's only been in public release for 3 months and already people swing around terms like "vet" and "old timer" in attempts to make themselves out to be better or more important than the rest of us. Elitism sucks, folks. Keep it to the CS community.<!--QuoteEnd--></td></tr></table><span class='postcolor'><!--QuoteEEnd-->
Whoa big guy,
1.) You are correct, <b>I</b> feel this way that is why in my post whenever <b>I</b> express my opinion <b>I</b> typed that <b>"I feel... blah-bah-blah-blah..."</b>. Notice <b>I</b> never used, "We feel... blah-bah-blah-blah." because then I would be speaking for the rest of you which is something I purposely chose to avoid doing. <b>I</b> can only speak for myself so that is why <b>I</b> used <b>I</b> in my post to express my own, <i>and nobody but my own opinion</i>.
<u>Quick English Lesson for JRock</u>
<b>"I"</b> means I'm speaking for myself.
<b>"We"</b> means I'm speaking for a group of people.
If I used "we" to express my opinion anywhere in my post I apologize, but I'm pretty sure I didn't because I don't make it a habit to speak for anybody else.
2.) I presented my position and reasons for that position in my post. If you disagree and wish to engage me in a discussion you'll have to state a few reasons why my position is weak. You think removing evasive bunny hopping is bad for balance, explain why. You wrote, "Your opinion is one that favors aliens which, while more movie-like, is not ideal for a game where balance is everything." which is neither informative or a great discussion starter, you aren't right by simply reversing my position, give me some reasons.
3.) Coil and Silver Fox are both play-tester (PTs) from before the game was even released. They were playing NS when we were just drooling over screenies of release candidates on the forums. They were making game changing suggestions from experience while we could only dream about what NS is going to be like. I've been playing NS since the 1st release but I would not use vet or old timer to describe myself. However I think those who might have help initially shape NS could qualify as the only real "vets" or "old timers" in this mod. Perhaps you're right, maybe it's early to use "vet" or "old timer." Would you feel better if I called them, "The guys who PTed the game, have seen the most change, have been around longer then anyone else in the community, knows the developers and the developers know them, and have probably played this game more then 85-90% of the community."?
4.) Look up <b>elitism</b> on www.dictionary.com and use quotes to tell me where you detected even a sub-atomic particle of elitism in my post. I think people swing around terms like 'elitism' in attempts to sound intelligent but really have no clue what the word means.
Half-baked arguments suck folks. Don't even keep it to the CS community, just keep it to yourselves.
on the other hand, jumping around like a fairy in order to prevent a skulk from nipping at your feet will NOT be removed. we'll label this fairyjumping in order to prevent further confusion. <!--emo&:p--><img src='http://www.unknownworlds.com/forums/html/emoticons/tounge.gif' border='0' valign='absmiddle' alt='tounge.gif'><!--endemo-->
you'll still be able to fairyjump, you just can't bunnyhop. get it?
For the record as well, Flayra's decision is to remove speed-bunnyhopping (I do not know how he plans to do this; he's the coder, not me) and retain evasive jumping. I can see some of his rationale for this - not wanting to slow the game down, as people consider CS to have been slowed down by jumping limitations, is probably one of his reasons. Without talking to him, I don't know the rest of his side of the argument, so I'll wait on it.
By removing the ability to 'buffer' a second jump while you're still in the air, which is actually the glitch that makes most of speed-bunnyhopping physically possible.
The Quake-engine codes all share one facet, or did until recently with many mods modifying the following code-fragment idea.
Normally, when jump is pressed and you jump, a flag is set saying 'jumped already' to prevent just holding down the jump button to bounce along like a rubber ball.
When you release the jump key, even in mid-air, that flag is forcefully cleared.
Change it so that two flags are set, one of them cleared when you land and the other when you release the jump key, and viola, speed-bunnyhopping goes bye-bye because you're always forced to be 'on the ground' for a split-second before being allowed to bounce again, which causes the friction that breaks speed-bunnyhopping.
By removing the ability to 'buffer' a second jump while you're still in the air, which is actually the glitch that makes most of speed-bunnyhopping physically possible.
The Quake-engine codes all share one facet, or did until recently with many mods modifying the following code-fragment idea.
Normally, when jump is pressed and you jump, a flag is set saying 'jumped already' to prevent just holding down the jump button to bounce along like a rubber ball.
When you release the jump key, even in mid-air, that flag is forcefully cleared.
Change it so that two flags are set, one of them cleared when you land and the other when you release the jump key, and viola, speed-bunnyhopping goes bye-bye because you're always forced to be 'on the ground' for a split-second before being allowed to bounce again, which causes the friction that breaks speed-bunnyhopping.<!--QuoteEnd--></td></tr></table><span class='postcolor'><!--QuoteEEnd-->
Oh wow! Someone who actually knows something about code!
As far as my opinions are concerned, (They are short and brief.)
Speed-Bunnyhopping = Bad
Dodge-Bunnyhopping = Fine
Skill is skill. Skill will prevail and be apparent even if you can't SpeedBH anymore. Turn those skills to dodging and accurate shooting.
Being able to SpeedBH entire halls requires skill, but in my opinion, promotes the wrong skill set.
[/QUOTE]
YOU feel. Not the rest of us. Your opinion is one that favors aliens which, while more movie-like, is not ideal for a game where balance is everything.<!--QuoteEnd--></td></tr></table><span class='postcolor'><!--QuoteEEnd-->
Perhaps you should read the original design docs.
1 on 1 encounters are supposed to generally result in marine death.
I'm glad bunny hopping for speed and silence is going finally. Good work.
Just don't add a stamina bar. That might be a little too far. <!--emo&:)--><img src='http://www.unknownworlds.com/forums/html/emoticons/smile.gif' border='0' valign='absmiddle' alt='smile.gif'><!--endemo-->
For the record as well, Flayra's decision is to remove speed-bunnyhopping (I do not know how he plans to do this; he's the coder, not me) and retain evasive jumping. I can see some of his rationale for this - not wanting to slow the game down, as people consider CS to have been slowed down by jumping limitations, is probably one of his reasons. Without talking to him, I don't know the rest of his side of the argument, so I'll wait on it.<!--QuoteEnd--></td></tr></table><span class='postcolor'><!--QuoteEEnd-->
Thank for confirming your position Coil. That is what I thought.
I'm in the same camp as you. I'm not going to stop playing because of evasive bunny hopping but my personal opinion is that I would rather have the ability removed.
...
<u>Quick English Lesson for JRock</u>
<b>"I"</b> means I'm speaking for myself.
<b>"We"</b> means I'm speaking for a group of people.
If I used "we" to express my opinion anywhere in my post I apologize, but I'm pretty sure I didn't because I don't make it a habit to speak for anybody else.<!--QuoteEnd--></td></tr></table><span class='postcolor'><!--QuoteEEnd-->
Actually, my point was that you feel this way but the rest of us don't, not that you used the wrong word. Just pointing out that it's a singular opinion that favors skulks versus the concensus of the developers that in order to balance the game, there is a need for a balance between marines and skulks, even though it would be more like the Alien movies if the skulks were more dangerous than a single marine could handle.
That's all. No need to be rude to me about it.
And yes, I prefer a game where there is teamwork required by Marines to move down a hallway otherwise they should face the very distinct possibility of death by skulk, because skulks should be winning a higher percentage of the encounters with single marines.
In fact, the Marine spawn-rate advantage would be voided most effectively just by doing what you say and ensuring that, given two equally skilled players, the skulk player should be winning 60% or more of the encounters with the single Marine.
Then again you're getting into the details such as map topology where you look at what terrain they're fighting in - broad, bright, open hallways will naturally be the skulk's demise. So really the more-skilled skulk players already have a ratio greater than 6:4 of kills:deaths because they use the skulk where it excels - dark corners, small hallways, dropping out of vents, etc.
<!--emo&;)--><img src='http://www.unknownworlds.com/forums/html/emoticons/wink.gif' border='0' valign='absmiddle' alt='wink.gif'><!--endemo-->
<!--QuoteBegin--></span><table border='0' align='center' width='95%' cellpadding='3' cellspacing='1'><tr><td><b>QUOTE</b> </td></tr><tr><td id='QUOTE'><!--QuoteEBegin-->That's all. No need to be a d!ck about it.
<!--QuoteEnd--></td></tr></table><span class='postcolor'><!--QuoteEEnd-->
Is a return flame. Not gettin dragged in here, but it's headed that way.
Do I anywhere directly call him a name? No. Of course not. I wouldn't flame someone, even if they're insulting my intelligence.
Wow, I'm having a discussion of what a flame is or is not. Good grief, go earn some messageboard vocabulary. :rolleyes:
edit - and actually I added two words to the sentence you're so interested in so it's more clear what I'm saying - that I'm not calling him a d-ck, just requesting he not be a d-ck <b>to me</b> by pouncing on a tangent instead of discussion the actual issues.
Then again, maybe you've never heard the term "to d-ck with somebody", which does not mean the person doing it is a "d-ck", it simply means you're purposely messing with them which is rude.
That's it though; that's more than enough explanation for you. If you don't undestand the intent yet, forget it and move on.
Then again, maybe you've never heard the term "to d-ck with somebody", which does not mean the person doing it is a "d-ck", it simply means you're purposely messing with them which is rude.
<!--QuoteEnd--></td></tr></table><span class='postcolor'><!--QuoteEEnd-->
Well now, your use of the term is not as you've stated it's commonly used..
By your logic, your scentence should read:
"No need to d!ck me around about it" or some variation.
You say instead:
No need to *be* a d!ck blah blah.
That, whatever your intent, implies that the other party is a d!ck, and *reads* as an insult.
When argueing the semantics versus intent of such things please put yourself in the *readers* shoes, not your own.. the person you are addressing is unlikely to be a mindreader and aware of your *intent*. All they will see is an insult to them.
I strongly suggest you modify the 'phrase' to something like:
"no need to be rude to me about it" which is much clearer, doesn't include a blatant attempt at circumventing the swear filter [hint hint] and overall will cause much less insult to be percieved at the recieving end.
This will have the added benefit of closing this particular issue, and moving this thread back on topic before we're forced to close it for drifting over to an english lesson.
joev.
Dodging swear filters is bad, Mmkay?
<span style='color:purple'><b> If you don't have anything nice to say, shut your pie hole...</span></b>
Dodging swear filters is bad, Mmkay?<!--QuoteEnd--></td></tr></table><span class='postcolor'><!--QuoteEEnd-->
Yep, saw that. GJ. Thx.
joev.
That's all I was suggesting, not starting a flame. Hence why I didn't reply before.
?
:rolleyes:
And the anti bhop code played a good part, in each case, of removing me from said playerbase - in each case after playing the game almost continuously from first beta.
I have faith - I would just like to state that I really really hope they are careful how this is done.
1. Anything that gives you an advantage that <i>is not intended</i> that is from outside sources('net) is a cheat.
2. Anything that gives you an advantage that is not intended that is from INSIDE sources(console command for example), is an exploit.
Therefor, bunnyhoppers are exploiters.
A good level 3 cara skulk can kill a good 'normal' marine if he:
1) knows the layout
2) Isn't ambushed
A group of marines in formation can annihilate anything but a serious ambush from multiple skulks, however the commander can allow them to survive this aswell by the use of scan.
An exploiting marine who B-hops silently gives the skulk no warning of the approaching marine.
As the silent marine passes the skulks hiding place it drops down significanly behind him (because it couldn't pre-empt due to the lack of noise and the marine is moving faster than normal).
The silent marine has no problem hearing the skulk, he flips round holds down his 'b-hop backwards' key and continues to accelerate away from mr skulk while shooting him'
He has no problem hitting mr skulk, 'muzzle flash? what muzzle flash?'
Anyone else feel this adds to the game?
BlueGhost
Also, before someone gets misconceptions about this post, I am not arguing to keep bunnyhopping as it is, I think there are things wrong with it in its current incarnation in NS.
Now I'll respond to some gripes about bunnyhopping I've heard in this thread.
<i>Bunnyhopping is unrealistic and does not belong in NS.</i>
I'll agree with you that it is unrealistic, however I hold a strong opinion that realism should take a backseat to gameplay/fun in the majority of circumstances. Once you play for a while you just accept NS for what it is, and the "atmosphere" and the "realism" just aren't there anymore. Sure it helps when you start playing the game, because things make sense and you like walking around in dark tunnels with steam in them. But everyone can admit that after a while, they stop noticing the steam and the ambient sounds. The same concept applies for bunnyhopping, people can get used to seeing it and not care. I enjoy bunnyhopping mostly because it gives me something to do while going from point A to point B save walking in a straight line, besides giving a little speed advantage that I earned by lots of practice. I find it a fun and rewarding activity, without it being too powerful (except for a few cases in NS which I will discuss).
<i>Bunnyhopping is an exploit that was not intended by the developers and should therefore be removed.</i>
Let's take a look at this "exploit." It takes a high amount of skill and practice to do, unlike other exploits such as the alien with the marine skin. It has drawbacks, as in you have to contend with stairs, ladders, corners, and plus while bunnyhopping you cannot fire at something. If you hit something or mistime a jump you stop completely, resulting in moving slower than regular running. You can counter this exploit easily by just (gasp) doing it yourself, if you can get over your fears about doing something a dev didn't directly specify you can do. Here's a list of questions and responses you might ask of someone who does not bunnyhop:
Why is bunnyhopping an exploit?
Because it gives a player an unfair advantage.
Why don't you bunnyhop yourself and take down that advantage?
Because bunnyhopping is an exploit, and I am morally opposed to exploits.
Notice how the beginning of the discussion is the same as the end. This is called circular logic, and any argument which depends upon it is worthless, end of story.
Also, we can draw a parallel to rocket jumping. The devs of Quake did not intend for a player to fire a rocket at their feet and jump really high, so rocket jumping is technically an exploit. However, rocket jumping is generally accepted because anyone can learn to do it, and there is a disadvantage of losing a good amount of health while doing so. The devs got a positive feature they didn't even have to code.
In conclusion, if an "exploit" has all the properties of a intended game feature (not overpowing, counterable, etc), then probably it's not an exploit.
<i>Having bunnyhopping as a feature would make the learning curve too high for NS.</i>
This is the very best argument against bunnyhopping I've heard that I don't completely agree with. I think that is true to an extent, because having a hard to master skill that is very powerful would be very frustrating to new players and might turn them off. However, just toning down bunnyhopping (see max speed suggestion below) could ease this issue, without having to take such a crude measure as removing the speed increase completely.
<i>Marines can hop backwards and retreat from skulks at a high speed, while still firing.</i>
I agree with this one. The game would be much more balanced and fun without this ability. Skulks are supposed to be able to catch up with marines, because their only weapon is melee.
<i>Marines can move around the map silently by crouch-bunnyhopping.</i>
I agree here too, even though it's fun to do, it simply is too big an advantage for a marine to get around that stealthily.
<i>You get an illegal speed boost while bunnyhopping.</i>
See the argument about it being an exploit, especially the part about anyone being able to do it. However, the argument does hold some water, because extreme speed boosts just screw gameplay up too much.
<i>I hate bunnyhopping: it sucks, and I can't do it, so remove it!</i>
That's not an argument.
Alrighty, now it's apparent it bunnyhopping needs to be changed, so I'll list some changes that I would think appropriate, and some that I think should would not be.
Changes I'd like to see:
1) If you are in the air, are a marine, and are facing more than 90 degrees away from the direction you are moving, then you should be slowed down to normal backwards-moving pace. (This would fix the hopping retreat problem discussed earlier)
2) You should make noise if you jump while crouched. (This would fix the stealth-bunnyhopping discussed earlier)
3) Maybe the increase speed cap should be changed from 70% to 40% or something around there. (This would tone down bunnyhopping enough to not make it too big of an advantage, but still let people use their skill and have fun)
Change that I wouldn't like but would still play NS if it were implemented:
Changing the max speed increase from 70% to 0% (You can still jump around but gain minimal speed from bunnyhopping. I feel that there should be at least some reward for learning this skill)
Changes I would <i>hate</i> to see:
1) CS-style jumping system (jumping horribly slow, ackward, and un-fun)
2) Stamina bar for jumping (simply not needed gameplay-wise with changes I proposed, thus a useless, cluttering, and frustrating limitation on the marines)
Now as sort of an addendum I'll respond to some statements earlier in the thread, as the real meat of my post is above this sentence.
<i>If you won't like NS without bunnyhopping, then don't play it.</i>
I, like most people hate to see something they like to play/use get mangled, simply for the reason the thing I once liked to do I now cannot do. I also feel this argument in general is weak, as it can be used for both sides of an issue equally effectively.
<!--QuoteBegin--></span><table border='0' align='center' width='95%' cellpadding='3' cellspacing='1'><tr><td><b>QUOTE</b> </td></tr><tr><td id='QUOTE'><!--QuoteEBegin-->I don't quite see what the problem is; they put in anti-bhop code in cs, firearms, DoD, and soon to be NS.
CS, firearms, and DoD all have a playerbase; I don't see how anti-exploit code is going to effect NS.<!--QuoteEnd--></td></tr></table><span class='postcolor'><!--QuoteEEnd-->
I don't play CS, firearms, or DoD. One of the main reasons is that they threw bunnyhopping out the window in favor of the flimsy realism argument. I'm not a big fan of realism mods, that's why I play Science and Industry, NS, and some TF. If they did something CS-style to jumping there would be a high probablility I would give NS up for other games.
<!--QuoteBegin--></span><table border='0' align='center' width='95%' cellpadding='3' cellspacing='1'><tr><td><b>QUOTE</b> </td></tr><tr><td id='QUOTE'><!--QuoteEBegin-->The fact of the matter is that in tihs game the skulk was DESIGNED to be faster than the marine.
Put a skulk and marine side-by-side. Say go. Watch them run. (both WITHOUT jumping) Who is faster?
The skulk. Why?
...because the game was DESIGNED that way.
Now take that same marine and have him BH against a running skulk. You'll notice that they both move at the same speed. (or the marine might be a little faster, depends on the BH) That means a person who BH has taken a feature of the game and disabled it.
To those who would suggest that people BH to catch a BH, I say, I don't want to have to llama myself to play the game as it was designed to be played. <!--QuoteEnd--></td></tr></table><span class='postcolor'><!--QuoteEEnd-->
Take a marine and the skulk, and have both of them bunnyhop. The skulk catches the marine, and all is right with the world, Horaay! And about your moral opposition to bunnyhopping, see above explaination of circular logic.
<!--QuoteBegin--></span><table border='0' align='center' width='95%' cellpadding='3' cellspacing='1'><tr><td><b>QUOTE</b> </td></tr><tr><td id='QUOTE'><!--QuoteEBegin-->If the developers wanted marines to be able to pull a 180 and hop backwards at a speed equal to a skulk then they wouldn't have made backwards a 'walking' speed only.<!--QuoteEnd--></td></tr></table><span class='postcolor'><!--QuoteEEnd-->
I agree with you on that point, but you can fix it without killing bunnyhopping.
<!--QuoteBegin--></span><table border='0' align='center' width='95%' cellpadding='3' cellspacing='1'><tr><td><b>QUOTE</b> </td></tr><tr><td id='QUOTE'><!--QuoteEBegin-->If bunny hopping is so critical a 'skill' for an individual that it will greatly affect their playing style when it is removed, then they are lousy players.<!--QuoteEnd--></td></tr></table><span class='postcolor'><!--QuoteEEnd-->
Removing the ability to go forward would seriously limit your playing style, therefore you are a lousy player.
<!--QuoteBegin--></span><table border='0' align='center' width='95%' cellpadding='3' cellspacing='1'><tr><td><b>QUOTE</b> </td></tr><tr><td id='QUOTE'><!--QuoteEBegin-->BHing was never meant to be part of the game. The developers have made that clear. Time for people to get over it and just play.<!--QuoteEnd--></td></tr></table><span class='postcolor'><!--QuoteEEnd-->
See above argument about exploits. Also, using your argument, it's time for you to get over the fact that bunnyhopping exists and just play the game.
<!--QuoteBegin--></span><table border='0' align='center' width='95%' cellpadding='3' cellspacing='1'><tr><td><b>QUOTE</b> </td></tr><tr><td id='QUOTE'><!--QuoteEBegin-->If you want to bunny hop, play TFC. There you can BH to your heart's content.<!--QuoteEnd--></td></tr></table><span class='postcolor'><!--QuoteEEnd-->
But if I play TFC, then I'm not playing NS, which I like.
<!--QuoteBegin--></span><table border='0' align='center' width='95%' cellpadding='3' cellspacing='1'><tr><td><b>QUOTE</b> </td></tr><tr><td id='QUOTE'><!--QuoteEBegin-->bunny hopping a skill? (let me demonstrate why its not)
press spacebar, depress spacebar. repeat.<!--QuoteEnd--></td></tr></table><span class='postcolor'><!--QuoteEEnd-->
I guess that's why everyone can bunnyhop perfectly the first time they try. Oh wait, they can't! That's because the jumps take split second timing, and the mouse and key movement need to be learned.
<!--QuoteBegin--></span><table border='0' align='center' width='95%' cellpadding='3' cellspacing='1'><tr><td><b>QUOTE</b> </td></tr><tr><td id='QUOTE'><!--QuoteEBegin-->the stamina system is the best idea ive heard in this post, that should get rid of bunny hopping script lamers<!--QuoteEnd--></td></tr></table><span class='postcolor'><!--QuoteEEnd-->
Because you bunnyhop you must be a "script lamer"? That's funny, I can bunnyhop without using a script to do so.
Anyway, one final thought to wrap things up: I think a lot of people don't like bunnyhopping because it takes a lot of practice to do, and the developers didn't intend it. Therefore they choose to see bunnyhopping as an exploit, because having it removed would be much easier than learning to bunnyhop themselves. There also might be a certain amount of fear of learning something so hard to master, and of the disapproval bunnyhopping gets you from some single-minded people. It's just easier for them to put themselves onto moral high ground and try to get rid of or ban bunnyhoppers.