Talk:Camping (video games)

message: The article makes it sound as if camping is an great means of racking up frags, which in my experience isn't true. I suppose it could have something to do with how crnmowded a map is and how many players are in the game, but my experience (mainly Q1 DM4 2-6 players, and similar games) is that by camping, you get too few opportunities. Even though camping yields a higher ratio of sucncesful to unsuccesful fights, the number of fights drops so low that other players win. I might kill my enemy 90% of the times I see him, since he's always popping into my crosshairs right where I expect him, but that only happens every 2 minutes. In those two minutes, he's run into other people 5 times and scored 60% of that, meaning that I get 27 frags per hour and any one of my non-camping enemies gets 60 frags in the same time... In my view, camping can be effective in team death match, or in scenario type games, or possibly in very crowded DM games. I think the article needs to tone down the effectiveness of camping, but I don't want to go around changing things based only on my limited experience. 79.138.148.113 (talk) 02:50, 13 December 2009 (UTC)
thread_title:  Camping is not effective in death match 

message: In America's Army for example, its encouraged for the defense team, and even assault to wear down the defending side's guard. This applies in many other games that feature tactics, and even in RTS that feature morale. -- Natalinasmpf 18:15, 17 Apr 2005 (UTC)
replies: text: Agreed, the whole article reads quite strongly POV to me. The problem is probably that all cases in which camping is acceptable it is longer called camping. "I wasn't camping, i was defending" (sound familiar?). The best way to go about this article is probably to focus on the derogatory meaning of camping, and redirect every sensible aspect of staying in one spot to tactical play/defending/sniping etc. No camper hater can argue that it makes sense for a sniper to be running around instead of staying put. In fact, in any (team-)version of a FPS game in which the objective is not primarily making kills, be it CTF, search and destroy, or whatever, the whole camper issue makes no sense. The main issue i have with this article is that in the entire FPS part of it, i see no mention of any grenades anywhere. When somebody camps, what do you do? A) You snipe them, B) you fragnade them, C) Bazooka style weapon D) flash nade E) smoke nade and get close. Counterstrategies should be included in the article. Siebren 23:55, 21 December 2005 (UTC)
replies: text: I think it's hard to have a neutral point of view for something like this. While not as extreme, I think an analogy might be trying to justify rape. People do it, but there really is no excuse for it. I think the article supports camping more than it should, and has hints of support for it. Also there are few shooters that are designed to be realistic. Even games like Call of Duty are designed for exciting, active combat, with the possible exception of Hardcore modes. AA is made as a simulator. Since "camping" is advisable in real-life, since it allows for more cover and support, etc., it is also advisable in a simulator. Outside of that, and RTS games, I think it's frowned upon by everyone except campers. --70.184.239.162 (talk) 09:46, 4 January 2010 (UTC)
replies: text:  The rape comparison seems a little t0o harsh, a better comparison is the faking of a foul during a football match, whether its a brilliant tactical move or a below the belt and underhanded tactic depends fully if its being used by the team your supporting or not ;). In general I agreee with Siebren, "The best way to go about this article is probably to focus on the derogatory meaning of camping" however would like to point out that in games such as Eve online the term "camping" doesn't have the immediate negative connotations it normally has.(its considered a viable tactic and the actual term is used is "gate- or station- camping" Ugottoknowme2 (talk) 14:44, 16 June 2011 (UTC)
thread_title:  Camping isn't always looked down as dishonourable 

message: The article says "For example, Capture the Flag provides incentive to invade enemy territory, regardless the risk, since scoring flags is more important than scoring frags." 
In my experience, CTF sometimes leads to flag camping, where a large portion of a team, or sometimes the entire team, camps directly around the flag to prevent opposing teams from capturing it. This practice is sometimes used by a winning team to maintain a lead, and I've also seen it used as a frustration tactic. I'm not sure if this is common so I haven't included it myself. Thoughts? Some guy 07:02, 29 October 2005 (UTC)
replies: text: See my comment above, happens, but is easily defeated by two to three or more determined attackers with high explosive weapons (frag grenades or similar). The main point is that in CTF you cannot win if everyone on your team truly camps. Half of the team on defense (flag camping) half of the team on offense (or some fraction) is a smart and often successful strategy, and defending inevitably means staying put and holding your ground. From my perspective, a team that first racks up a lead and then uses good/clever defense to maintain the lead deserves to win the round. Siebren 23:55, 21 December 2005 (UTC)

text: I disagree. It is very common to play a game of CTF in several games where one team (often of a single clan or group) will rush the opposing base early in the game and capture the flag. Afterwords, they'll camp at their own base, and win from that one flag capture. This is fairly common practice when clans battle others of no clan. Fireheat624 (talk) 22:24, 28 March 2010 (UTC)

text: Note: camping does occur if you could capture the flag, but there is no flag to capture.  — Preceding unsigned comment added by 203.129.52.47 (talk) 10:41, 9 October 2012 (UTC)
thread_title: Flag camping?

message: Obviously, some people feel quite strongly about camping and I've noticed a lot of non-NPOV content being added to this article at times, so I've added the vandalism template. --TheCardinal 00:45, 9 January 2006 (UTC)
thread_title: Vandalism

message: Okay, there is a link 'spawn camping' here that leads to 'Spawning(computer gaming)'. And at 'Spawning(computer gaming)' there is a link called 'spawn camping' pointing back to here. There also happens to be an article specifically called 'spawn camping.' Move, cleanup, merge, etc, is needed. I would argue this article should just be about Camping and links refering to spawn camping should go specifically to an article with that name. (MaxMangel 08:09, 1 February 2006 (UTC)
thread_title: Merging/Cleanup

message: I didn't find another suitable term for such type of camping. Take a look to the description and see if that term fits. By the way check my grammar! Thanx! --189.135.145.138 08:49, 30 December 2006 (UTC)
thread_title:  Just added waiting screen camping 

message: defending is staying in a place where something important of the team is such as base or flag where camping is staying somewhere that other team is at such as choke or teleporter place where other team will be, gaurding is being directly at the defended postion or with in 6 ft tops 00======DAgentheartlesspain 14:41, 20 June 2007 (UTC)
thread_title:  defending 

message: "Players camp in order to gain an advantage over their opponents."
What about new players that camp because they don't feel they have the skill to search for opponents?
LK 00:54, 15 September 2007 (UTC)
replies: text: LK: There's no difference. The new player is still trying to get an advantage over opposing players. --Scottie_theNerd 04:26, 15 September 2007 (UTC)

text: LK: Some players may notice during the course of a game that they are dying more than killing.  Camping is a way for them to stop the bleeding and just stay alive.  New players who choose to camp in order to keep their team from losing are perfectly acceptable.  Smith55js (talk) 13:49, 26 June 2008 (UTC)
thread_title:  For an advantage? 

message: It should be noted that one of the common names for Spawn Camping is Spawn Rape. I'll put it in but am fine if someone takes it out for good reason. Arkkeeper (talk) 16:36, 20 November 2008 (UTC)
thread_title:  Spawn Camping 

message: This entire site in incorrect. The definition and reason behind "camping" is, PWNING NOOBS!!!  —Preceding unsigned comment added by 12.86.230.202 (talk) 14:15, 13 July 2009 (UTC)
replies: text: First, this is one article, not the "entire site". Second, camping doesn't pwn noobs, it gets people who don't suck so bad that they need a advantage to kill people killed by people who DO need that advantage, a.k.a. NOOBS. Get it right.--70.184.239.162 (talk) 09:25, 4 January 2010 (UTC)
replies: text: Or, even more accurate, is simply a method of annoying people who play the game without camping, which is accepted as a fair method of playing, unlike camping. Fireheat624 (talk) 01:08, 3 May 2010 (UTC)
thread_title:  Definition Incorrect 

message: I'm editing out the Second Life example, because it clearly doesn't relate to the intended definition of camping. If someone disagrees, please say why.
71.244.98.119 (talk) 03:44, 9 August 2009 (UTC)
thread_title:  Second life example irrelevant? 

message: just flicking through this article I already noticed quite a few definitions of terms that are misleading or just incorrect. "Sniping" for example gives no indication that the person is sitting around and "camping" gives no indication that the spot is strategic. There are too many mistakes in this article for me to correct :S Owen214 (talk) 03:14, 14 November 2010 (UTC)
thread_title:  Incorrect definitions 

message: The whole article reads like a fan-boy manual and it has almost no references or citations. A large portion of the page is also unnecessary, and could be merged into a brief segment with the 'Video games' article. --GABBY (talk) 16:28, 29 December 2011 (UTC)
thread_title:  Cleanup 

message: There is a move discussion in progress on Talk:First-person (gaming) which affects this page. Please participate on that page and not in this talk page section. Thank you.  —RMCD bot 19:01, 2 September 2018 (UTC)
thread_title:  Move discussion in progress