I don't know yet.

bah unlucky, anways..didnt know you've got commentator skills :D!

You should check out his FIFA commentating skills at SEC ;D

where can I check them? :p

http://www.sk-gaming.com/video/4636-SEC_2008_Best_of_FIFA_Soccer_2008 from 5 mins onwards, Carmac + myself.

erm I can hardly see the difference?

Only thing I noted is that rail does less damage, which sucks.

How on earth can that suck?

Because I have never had any problems with rail damage or found it overpowered. For me rail is the quake weapon which requires the most skill and is the most fun to use, so consequently should be rewarded as such. Also in many cases rail is THE weapon to wrestle control back on a map, for example on the unbalanced dm6 sniping the enemy is usually the only way to get back into the game.

I know why they did it though, because supposedly a (high-powered) railgun leads to camping and low scoring games which people with ADD tend to call boring. I call it tactical, it forces you to use your brain and not run like a headless chicken around the map. Besides in practice these so called camping games hardly ever happen among two equally skilled players.

The problem weapon in quake3 has always been the machine gun. It totally ruins 4v4 where four freshly spawned players can take over any area with it. This just leads to mg rushes over and over. Also in 1v1 if you had a close battle and kill your opponent while having little health left yourself, you usually are rewarded by getting killed from across the map by a freshly re spawned mg. As a starting weapon it is just way too strong.

No, the railgun is the simplest weapon to use and requires the least tactical skills from players. It's point and click, cannot be dodged and has unlimited range.

Oh really? so why don't players who get a railgun use it exclusively to win the game then? I mean it's just point and click and cannot be dodged... might aswell type gg and leave when your opponent picks it up

RL = ranged = tactical
RL = land the first shot, get a very significant advantage = tactical
RL = can be dodged = more difficult to use
RL = four dimensional shot = more difficult

obviously it depends on the range of the opponent.

A rail is going to be dominant vs RL at long range while a RL is going to be dominant vs a rail at close range. It's hardly "rocket" science.

Except for the mg which with it's high firing rate is equally effective at any range. The mg is a long range lightning gun, and the lg really is a very balanced and underused weapon in q3 at the moment (/end sarcasm)

What you are obviously not noticing is that to kill someone with the RL you actually need to make use of your brain and get close to the opponent not only without getting harmed but making sure that you land the first shot.

If you want to talk about obvious things, then you should know that it was the input of the most experienced esports players that made the rail weaker. You can pretty much assume, then, that it's better for esports.

That argument holds for every weapon. You have to use your brain to put yourself in the right position to either kill your enemy or avoid getting killed yourself. If you only have a rl you have to use your brain to get close to your opponent, if you only have a rg you have to use your brain to avoid getting close to your opponent.

And people usually only argue in their own intrest. I highly doubt players with great rail aim like zero4, cypher, jibo etc argued for a weaker rail. More likely players with comparatively weaker rails like cooller and avek would like to see that happen. But I don't know how the developers came to that decision.

1) Staying far away with the railgun out is the most difficult thing to do in all fps games indeed.
2) Most top players, even those with great rails, think 100 damage for a rail shot is too much.

1) depends on the map
2) Seeing how you seem to know everything for a fact, I guess I'll have to take your word for it.