Buzzing Topics on the realitymod forums

[LeadMagnet]

A few things here about all this. The SAW, besides the lack of overheat is pretty damn close to it's real life counterpart. Seeing as I work with Colt Canada these days and have fired many belts through our modified C9's I can attest to the accuracy they can achieve when using optics.

As to deviation on a whole we've had to try various approaches over the years and as always it's an on-going struggle to find something that pleases us (the MA's) and what pleases the community as a whole. I've had to censor myself several times in those discussions as my experience with what various weapons can do is tempered by the fact that I was in a position to put more rounds downrange in a year than most do in 5. I constantly have to remember that we're trying to model the "average" soldier and not just reward the player with the lowest ping or fastest twitch reflexes (CS player). Added to that, having been shot in the vest with an assault rifle I can honestly tell you that taking a burst to the chest is not the most conducive thing to aimed, accurate return fire. If we were to bring the accuracy back to .756 days then you'd see the return of prone divers taking a burst then dolphin diving to zap you in the head....utterly unrealistic.

The problem with the first round seeming to disappear is a bf2 one unfortunately that cannot be solved without EA giving us access to how deviation is handled and as for talk of "realistic ballistics" in regards to what CA has done...well I'm sure it's nice but without things like barrel fouling, fatigue or windage it can never be anywhere near realistic.

So as usual we're back to the drawing board to continuously tweak and test the deviation code taking into account public feedback and MA advice to try and achieve something that is somewhat realistic while still balancing gameplay. It's like trying to land a jumbo jet left handed in the dark, engines out while receiving a blowjob.

[Taip3n]

I agree, of course on the basics of ballistics and like the ideas put forward by you Celestial. And I'd guess as much as me, you would like crouch, prone, or standing to be aligned with aiming and shooting, at distances, with various weapons. If I stand/crouch besides an opponent and allow time to fix a settle on an opponent, i expect to down him. As Wickens said, I prone for ages, through a scoped sight and utterly miss. this is wrong.

the bullets whizzing and suppresion effect you describe is right on the button.

As for the knife, I believe as a soldier you would carry one for a last resort fight in close combat. And would suggest anyone that didn't is either in the wrong army or the wrong place utterly. i would not wish to be in a position to be in a real life knife fight, for sure but I can see that unarmed combat or using tools is fundamental to a good soldiers' training.

Well, i will not say who was attacking and who was defending and how many were left standing but I assure you the principle of gamesmanship came down to two guys in a room that recognised it as such. The rest is pure fiction as to whether 5 people came in, perhaps there were. I find it not so wise to suggest a lack of teamwork or that teamwork is everything, in defence to a position. I can do that about try harder, go commander quips, retorting through high and mighty snorting attitude, and no where near thought out or thinking of the other.

That said, I do not think you meant to imply it, though some may read into it. Yes, 5 guns on auto should knock down a couple of defenders as a rule of thumb. But gaming is not all about guns and full auto, 6 man squads working together to storm a position. It is only part of the game, and perhaps a hand wave from me as to suggest what is needed in a more holistic philosophy starting from principles of what makes a great game and implementing depth - not the other way round, be it LMG's that fire and the attitude of teamwork, though the latter is of course a principle of the philosophy it is not 'the' prime philosophy but part of it.

Commander is an interesting one. Earlier versions saw people say we needed a Commander before the game even started. I do not agree that the drone firing missiles is a way to keep the Commander occupied. I like to think of the Commander as the proverbial chess player; the rest of the team the chess pieces. A focus on this is perhaps a better way forward as to the 'philosophy and the philospohy therefore of the Commander role', therefore creating aspects like squad teamwork, or team work essential criteria, of course, but not 'the criteria'. I hope you understand my distinction to 'the philosophy' of the game and then what comes next, and so forth, until we reach a point of nice graphics on marksman rifles and so on. What goes up and down the spectrum of what is need in the minds eye of PR and how it all forms into one spectrum in the end. perhaps then, a look into the past aspects of Commander to look at re-implementing these instead of putting in cool new things like missles on drones. Again, this is my point of not having the eye on the ball, and being too focused on nittygritty things like new graphics or toys instead of getting the depth right and focusing on basic principles.

Leadmagnet wrote same time I did, so a bit to his good words: then let it be as you see it when it comes to weaponry and of course it is difficult to set ballistics right and try to keep aspects of jamming, windage, as you say, or popping someone at close range - and vs vanilla ways. more depth and less 'nilla is always handy. And although personally I am fustrated at being a good shot and can't (yeah, I got marksman in rl which I think back to) and 'feeling a weapon', and the reality of what it does, compared to infuriating dolphin diving spamraiders, I try to be patient as the rest of them. The LMG SAW is fine if it is real to itself. Just cant pop the dolphin diver in the head, even if he hasn't seen me anyway nowadays. So it seems in a way, these guys are backed up. I have had the drop on a non moving target, proned for ages at 50 metres. Missed. hit him once, he drops to prone, shoots and one shot i'm gone. Ping may be bad my end but I am a good shot with the ability to think ahead of the game. So something is wrong. Perhaps it is that good players are loosing out to spammers and divers, because of the very fear you talk about and tried to resolve, nowadays. Maybe it is time to review what worked in older versions and give it a try. If you need testers, I am sure half of this community including myself would spend time trying out gameplay before versions are released so the techs can try out specs and changes in the code. I can't speak for others but I know some would have experience and know the tactics of the game, the feel for things, and would be very well placed to spend testing time. I would and if you want help, I for one am right here to help out so you can move forward in weapon handling and ballistics etc..

[snooggums]

/Revive!

Highen overheat threshold (sic)

Discussion on increasing the overheat threshold on heavy weapons (.50 cals, autocannons)

The mounted guns on vehicles should be a bit less prone to overheat in my opinion but not critical as the situations that cause overheats are generally using the weapon for more than it's intended purpose. I didn't like most of the solutions, just a total length of firing increase would solve it.

Drones have missiles

Suggestion on allowing the UAVs to fire Hellfire missiles while in flight as a commander asset.

No, no weapon mounted UAVs, we don't need more air assets with only 32 players on the field. Not all of them need to be watching the sky.

Knives. Do we really need them?

Yes, we should keep 'knives', they give us a hand held tool and weapon of last resort. They could be modeled as hands or fists if wanted but should be kept to represent close range fighting.

Add Apache to Operation Archer

Suggestion on adding an Apache to the map.

Many are claiming that since the map is very open that the apache would dominate, since it can very easily spot the taliban and be mostly impervious to technicals or AA, due to one reason or another.

They are right, an apache or other attack chopper would ruin this map as the open areas would just be death for the Taliban and the Taliban would have no good anti air defense. It's another flyboy wish list item.

Filler text goes here.

[A.WICKENS]

Lead personally I think you should have a regular thread where you discuss the game engine/deviation/real life stuff as I know I'd read it, really interesting stuff.

When I referred to 0.756 I certainly wasn't advocating it's return. I enjoyed the accuracy and all that but do appreciate that whilst I may take my time to line up a medium range shot a consequence of that improved accuracy as represented by the BF2 code is insta dolphin headshots. I have discussed cone of deviation with Fuzz before and he did a good job of explaining how every adjustment to fix one aspect has an effect on another that is not always intended or desirable.

To be honest I focus a lot of time on in game basic infantry weapons handling and this all fascinates me. What works, what doesn't, by that I don't mean trying to find weaknesses in the system as it were or exploits like the dolphin diving of old. More like which realistic tactics and methods can be used effectively in game, bearing in mind the game engine. Things like rapid single shot vs burst at close range, double tapping whilst moving in a crouched position etc.

As regards the SAW in game as it is, yes I agree it seems very realistic and when I see squads using it in its main RL role I think it's one fo the coolest things in PR, allowing full blown suppression and facilitating squad movement etc. However it also seems to have become the new uber pwner as it is very hard to counter when you have god know's how many on a map and people are using them for room clearing and CQB. Due to movement deviation SAW seems to beat most weapons hands down on areas like stairwells due to being able to spray a whole box of ammo etc which in my opinion is nonsense, an M4 would be quicker to the ready position and more easy to manipulate. Is there anything that can be done to counter this or would any fixes nerf the weapon again and reduce it's effectiveness in it's primary role.

One thing I would like to see is kit's like the saw only available to squads of 4 players or more. This would reduce the 2 man saw squads that plague some rounds chasing kills. I understood the logic of making kits available to 2 man squads at first but in my experience of this version thus far it has actually hurt teamwork to some degree. At least before people had to join larger squads before they could get a requestable kit, then you had a chance to try and get them doing something teamwork related. Perhaps different squad sizes for different kits, fairly realistic and logical I think. To be honest anything that makes kit requesting for new players a little bit more difficult would be a good thing. I actually believe PR needs a bit more complication in some areas lol, though I doubt many others agree.

So your thought's Lead?

[LeadMagnet]

Actually Wick, that makes a lot of sense... I'd like to put that forward to the devs that we increase the number from 2 to 4 as I too have seen an increase in the "tard factor" when using the kit. Granted I'm normally one of the ones hunting the kits to take it (and fairly successful at it) this would go a long way to making them value it more again. The only fault I can see is those idiots that join a larger squad for the kit then switch squads leaving the original short. But like we say, you can't mod the players.

My other idea that I'm trying to push through is to decrease the time it takes to ready a grenade and throw it. Myself and several other MA's have been screaming bloody murder since the new animations came out as it (along with some of the reloads) felt like you were at the range qualifying rather than in combat. If you can get a grenade off quicker you'd definitely see a decrease in guys trying to use a SAW like a broom.

[snooggums]

Request kits I can think of off the top of my head and the squad size I think is appropriate:

Pilot - 1
Engineer - 1
Crewman - 2
Officer - 2
Medic - 2
Sniper - 2
Anti-Air - 2
Marksman - 3
Light AT - 3
Grenadier - 4
Auto Rifle - 4
Heavy AT - 4

Reasons for suggested sizes:
-Several aircraft only require one pilot.
-The engineer is a support role and should be able to function on their own if desired.
-Crewman always operate vehicles with more than one person.
-Officer and medic are basic classes, so should be widely available.
-AA and Snipers can operate in small teams so as not to take too many troops from the front lines, but should not operate alone (both should have spotters).
-Marksman and LAT are light support weapons so would be appropriate for a small squad.
-Grenadier, Auto Rifle, Heavy AT - these are heavy support weapons and should be allocated to round out a squads role, not to have for a single min maxed squad. The reason I don't think they need to be held to 5 or 6 man is so that a squad can get these even if the squad has not yet reached full strength due to a team limit on players (the odd squad out should not be completely unable to request these weapons).

[Dreadnought]

There are a ton of situations where some aspect of the game may need to be nerfed because it's overpowered; especially when the overpoweredness is due to something unrealistic.

However, with the case of the SAW, the problem is not that the weapon itself is unrealistic. (As I have read; never shot one myself.) Whenever something is over powered, not in spite of its realism, but because of it, I do not think it should be changed. However, the reason people feel it is overpowered does need to be examined.

I believe the primary reason people think the SAW needs a good nerfing is because they (for some odd reason) think war should be fair. "If you find yourself in a fair fight, your tactics suck."

"No, good sir, after a saw has pinned you, you should NOT have a 50% chance of charging out and killing him." "WHAT? IT'S OVERPOWERED!"

As far as preventing people from the 2 man saw squads, I don't see a real need. I don't blame people for doing that, I blame the lack of skill and teamwork on the other teams behalf for making our tactic an effective one.

People are never going to use realistic tactics until they value their player as much as their life, which will never happen. We wouldn't have instances of: "OMG that saw killed me in the SAME place 4 times now! They are so overpowered!" "Ever think of not going over there anymore?"

I really enjoy weapons that have a large learning curve to operate and to counter against. Guns, to a large degree, removed much of the skill involved in fighting. I agree there is much, much skill involved, but I can learn to shoot a lot faster than I can learn to guide a saber into some exposed place in someone's armor. Anyone can point and click.

Honestly, the realistic outcome to what we are seeing here with the SAW being overpowered is a retraining of the troops regarding tactics to counter it. I like the weapon the way it is, other than lack of overhearing.

[Taip3n]

I rest my case on alot of players here would be of good use as testers, or with real experience able to point out real issues. Let alone the pool of thought and good comments on a 'production' level (where production looks at all aspects of the depth of game).

I don't know much about testing but I would certainly spend time checking 'does this work'? kinds of aspects like deviation, and what Wicks says about double taps at crouch v bursts etc. Thankfully he can write clearer than me (or indeed follow the problems faster) but I follow similar principles although he is obviously the military man, and I am just a guy with a 'feel for things' more than trained. Anyway, if there is alot of testing, or more to the point there is not enough manpower to do frequent testing - there should be so's to shorten the time lag between the 'oh, no that isn't right lets try this' factor. And suggest there are some guys in this community that would be great for it to make this aspect faster at least in testing and suggesting to the techs.

Oh and whilst I am being his groupy again, I agree that some things should be made harder But echo his thoughts on more dialogue could lead to the mutual desire to make the game brilliant (and future ones if future engines and production of a 'released PR on a different engine that can handle the problems faced and rids them is eventually born).

Also it is a good idea about the squad asset stuff and would follow Snoog's numbers.

[LeadMagnet]

Don't worry, I'll be looking to add some testers shortly and I've always looked to TG for talent. Granted some have moved on due to real life issues (Skud had to learn to sew/fly with the airedales, Dirt had to take a vacation in the sandbox etc) and others who just couldn't make the schedule. We still welcome any and all who wish to join the team that can give 1-3 hours of week minimum to testing.

[A.WICKENS]

There are a ton of situations where some aspect of the game may need to be nerfed because it's overpowered; especially when the overpoweredness is due to something unrealistic.

However, with the case of the SAW, the problem is not that the weapon itself is unrealistic. (As I have read; never shot one myself.) Whenever something is over powered, not in spite of its realism, but because of it, I do not think it should be changed. However, the reason people feel it is overpowered does need to be examined.

I believe the primary reason people think the SAW needs a good nerfing is because they (for some odd reason) think war should be fair. "If you find yourself in a fair fight, your tactics suck."

"No, good sir, after a saw has pinned you, you should NOT have a 50% chance of charging out and killing him." "WHAT? IT'S OVERPOWERED!"

As far as preventing people from the 2 man saw squads, I don't see a real need. I don't blame people for doing that, I blame the lack of skill and teamwork on the other teams behalf for making our tactic an effective one.

People are never going to use realistic tactics until they value their player as much as their life, which will never happen. We wouldn't have instances of: "OMG that saw killed me in the SAME place 4 times now! They are so overpowered!" "Ever think of not going over there anymore?"

I really enjoy weapons that have a large learning curve to operate and to counter against. Guns, to a large degree, removed much of the skill involved in fighting. I agree there is much, much skill involved, but I can learn to shoot a lot faster than I can learn to guide a saber into some exposed place in someone's armor. Anyone can point and click.

Honestly, the realistic outcome to what we are seeing here with the SAW being overpowered is a retraining of the troops regarding tactics to counter it. I like the weapon the way it is, other than lack of overhearing.

Dread not to be critical, and I do understand what you are saying, but I think you have missed my point.

Sadly we can't mod the players but the concept of the SAW being the weapon for all seasons is nonsensical. It is not designed for room clearance and would not 'own' the M4 carbine ideally in a realistic representation of probable outcomes.

Yes I am sure people can pull examples out of the hat of people storming rooms in Fallujah and hosing the place down successfully, I can think of one right now but it's not the norm. It is a light fire support weapon of sorts and CQB is not it's primary use. Have you never been hammered by an PKM on the stairs on an insurgency map and thought that's not very realistic. Assault weapons have evolved from standard rifles previously issued to infantry because they required something between a 'long' as it were and an SMG. The 'long' was too cumbersome and the pistol round of the smg too weak. Each weapon has it's arena, it's most advantageous area of application. My point is that the LMG as it stands due to numerous factors has overlapped those areas too much and in effect encroached on areas that belong to other weapons. It is in fact a misuse, a misdeployment, how 'realistic' is that. The sniper weapon is to some degree the most accurate, i.e most likely to be accurate at longer ranges, therefore it should be the best weapon in the game no? Of course not, it has a specific purpose, an area it excells. The SAW has to some degree, due to quirks of the game engine and other factors, now become overpowered in the sense that it can be 'effectively' used in unrealistic ways. That is my argument.

I have no problem with LMG gunners in game when deployed in the most realistic fashion, I either withdraw from the area and accept that avenue of approach is denied to me and flank or try and move through with smoke. I'm not bitchhing about being shot by a SAW lol.

For future reference for SAW read any LMG.

[Startrekern]

When it comes to the SAW, from the early .9 video that was posted in the Dev Dump thread, it appears that they've nerfed it slightly by increasing the recoil and the scope looks a bit different.

When it comes to weapons to MATCH the SAW, I love the MEC H&K Version of which I forget the numbers for. It's great.

[Dreadnought]

Dread not to be critical, and I do understand what you are saying, but I think you have missed my point.

Sadly we can't mod the players but the concept of the SAW being the weapon for all seasons is nonsensical. It is not designed for room clearance and would not 'own' the M4 carbine ideally in a realistic representation of probable outcomes.

Yes I am sure people can pull examples out of the hat of people storming rooms in Fallujah and hosing the place down successfully, I can think of one right now but it's not the norm. It is a light fire support weapon of sorts and CQB is not it's primary use. Have you never been hammered by an PKM on the stairs on an insurgency map and thought that's not very realistic. Assault weapons have evolved from standard rifles previously issued to infantry because they required something between a 'long' as it were and an SMG. The 'long' was too cumbersome and the pistol round of the smg too weak. Each weapon has it's arena, it's most advantageous area of application. My point is that the LMG as it stands due to numerous factors has overlapped those areas too much and in effect encroached on areas that belong to other weapons. It is in fact a misuse, a misdeployment, how 'realistic' is that. The sniper weapon is to some degree the most accurate, i.e most likely to be accurate at longer ranges, therefore it should be the best weapon in the game no? Of course not, it has a specific purpose, an area it excells. The SAW has to some degree, due to quirks of the game engine and other factors, now become overpowered in the sense that it can be 'effectively' used in unrealistic ways. That is my argument.

I have no problem with LMG gunners in game when deployed in the most realistic fashion, I either withdraw from the area and accept that avenue of approach is denied to me and flank or try and move through with smoke. I'm not bitchhing about being shot by a SAW lol.

For future reference for SAW read any LMG.

Couple of things:

Although my post was only supposed to be about 25% response to you and 75% my opinion about the SAW, I do get what you're saying.

However, I am limited in my knowledge of the SAW such that I would have assumed it would be fairly effective in CQB even though it was not designed as such. Therefore, I saw no problem with its use in this way.

I trust you that the M4 is superior indoors, but I'd like to know exactly why. If it is because of increased maneuverability, do you think that a M4 would win IRL against a SAW if they met at a narrow corner? How about if the M4 turned a corner to meet a SAW at the opposite end of a long hallway? If in the former example the M4 would win, and in the latter example the SAW would win, I would say it would be due to increased maneuverability of the M4 and increased firepower of the SAW.

One of these is already implemented; the firepower of the SAW. However, if I'm understanding you correctly, the SAW is, unfortunately, just as agile as the M4. If this agility is to be reduced, there are several options to someone who is not familiar with the capabilities of the BF2 engine yet can dream:

I'll order these roughly from what I'd imagine is easy to do, but far from what we'd like, to hard/impossible to do but what is real.

1) remove undeployed mode

2) increase "shoulder" time in undeployed mode.

3) when overheating is implemented, make it much shorter while shooting from the hip to simulate ability of a man to shoot that gun from his hip. (I assume it does a number on his arms.)

4) Unable to shoot in either mode unless shouldered. (Can you shoot this gun from the hip IRL?)

5) Much like a tank turret, place a maximum speed that a player can turn while SAW equipped to simulate greater weight and less agility. (possibly add small "unequipping" animation as well; switching from binocs to smoke should be quicker than SAW to smoke.) (Maybe also reduce sprint overall for the kit and eliminate it completely for SAW selected.)

While I understand the problem, and agree with it, the solution you came up with of limiting the LMGs treats the symptom, not the problem. I guess I'm somewhat of a Laissez-faire economist with it comes to my opinion of tweaking the mod. To encourage or discourage something, I'd rather it be advantageous to do something, not make it required; and disadvantageous to do something else, not make it impossible.

(I don't, in fact, like the idea of limiting any kit. For example, when they limited the medic kit, they were trying to solve the forever resuscitated squad. The "dead if wounded again in 60s" was great, but the kit limitation was unnecessary. If the super abilities of the medic kit puts a kink in the game, reduce its abilities, not limit the still unrealistic kit. Headshot insta kill, or a random chance of 25% that you would be dead instead of wounded would be more realistic IMO.)

[snooggums]

I'd rather have the deployed mode be the only mode for the Auto Rifles or simply not allow firing of the Auto Rifles while moving (to represent the user having to be prepped to fire even from the hip, just like how HATS cannot fire while laying down). This solves all the cqb issues I've seen brought up and would not nerf the rifle in it's intended role.

[Dreadnought]

I'd rather have the deployed mode be the only mode for the Auto Rifles or simply not allow firing of the Auto Rifles while moving (to represent the user having to be prepped to fire even from the hip, just like how HATS cannot fire while laying down). This solves all the cqb issues I've seen brought up and would not nerf the rifle in it's intended role.

I believe your first suggestion was my #2. But I am unsure of your 2nd suggestion. Is that realistic? If so, then so be it, I'm no expert. But if we solve unrealism with unrealism, we're just trading for our opinion of which is less evil. The mandate for change should always rest with increased realism, not quid pro quo subject to our personal opinions.

[brettwad]

The SAW should be a deployable weapon only or if you open up in a room undeployed you get the same effect as being shot at and lose control of the weapon (not sure if engine can handle). It is not a weapon for clearing rooms.