Vulcan

I was wounded yesterday to the point of near death, it was actually pretty cool. I tried to bring up my iron sights and my arms just couldn't quite get the iron sights up and I started making painful noises. It was very cool. It seems that this is rare though. They need to adjust accuracies a bit or tweak damage down, i dunno. Most times i shoot someone in the stomach once and they fall down dead.

__________________

CingularDuality

No way! This is the most realistic game since Ghost Recon in terms of how much damage is done when you are hit. It's absolutely perfect right now.

__________________

Become a supporting member! -- Shop at the Tactical Market!

Take the world's smallest political quiz! "I was touched by His Noodly Appendage."
TacticalGamer TX LAN/BBQ Veteran:

ednos

Well, it would be cool to decrease damage just so you get the near-dead effect a lot, although I imagine it would get annoying.

__________________
The trouble with the world is that the stupid are cocksure and the intelligent are full of doubt. ~ Bertrand Russell
I have a tendency to key out three or four things and then let them battle for supremacy while I key, so there's a lot of backspacing as potential statements are slaughtered and eaten by the victors. ~ Magna Centipede

MagnaCentipede

I've been waiting for a Ghost Recon sort of health system for a while...so yeah, I like it as it is. If you get shot any place that would be lethal or a serious-enough wound to disable the combatant, they're "out." That's how it should be.

__________________

Vulcan

That's true, It is realistic in that you do die with what should be fatal shots. I'm thinking more along the lines of how easy it is to get those fatal shots. People are dropping rather easily on the game.

For instance. I peak around a corner using lean and somehow the guy down the street at 100 yards caps me instantly and I die which is more often than not the case. It's been more useful to sit back and wait rather than try to advance 90% of the time in order to survive. Just seems unbalanced at the moment.

EDIT: let me clarify a little more. This is with weapons that use Ironsights I am noticing. I expect the commander weapon and the sniper rifle to be deadly at 100 yards or more but a gun with iron sights just doesn't seem right.

__________________

BHack

I also forsee people giving themselves an aimpoint from the hip with dry/erase markers. That would give you a pretty big advantage.

__________________

dawolf

I agree. Shooting without iron sights should have some kind of random deviation added.

__________________

Gillespie

There is. Try distance shooting from the hip. You'll lose.

Close-in... well, I don't even use the sights when I'm close in. Especially with the shotgun.

Also, we're all using assault rifles in the game. The M16 has a point target range of 300 yards, and the AK has a point target range of 100 yards. Iron sights are irrespective of this. Aimpoints give you quick target acquisition in MOUT situations. Ironsights are a bit more difficult to do this with (although I've done it... you don't really need to aim, just point and shoot using the front sight post). In any case, in real world if you're not a total retard and can't aim for crap, you should easily make 100 yard shots with regular, plain-jane iron sights.

If you've been leaning out and getting capped, then you've been sustaining head shots. And you can still very-well die from a shot in the leg or arm, provided it hits an artery (very quickly, I might add).

The biggest difference between an M68 Aimpoint and iron sights? One needs a battery to work, and the other does not.

I think the damage system is beautiful right now.

Vulcan

Maybe the problem does not lie in the actual aiming but rather the visibility of the models. When you think your covered you really aren't. In a leaning position around a corner, you feel as though everything is covered except a small portion of your head but this probably isn't true from the opposite view.

__________________

derdmeh

I read in the patch news that the hitboxes were a little messed up. Could it be that they are too large? I played sniper the other night and couldn't miss, even snap shots that looked off target.

Gillespie

That may be the problem. The hitboxes might be more-exposed than the actual player model.

Obi

Whoa whoa whoa...did you just call me Trooper?!

Atomic Dog

hahaha...woops...I fixed it.

__________________

Gillespie

I have to agree. Let's not tweak this thing to death. Fix the bugs, maybe modify spawn points and the like, but don't mess with the core gameplay. Not yet. Hopefully not ever.

CingularDuality

Let's get this thread back on topic, please. Take the CounterStrike discussion to the CounterStrike forum.



I dunno about the AK, but the M16A2 has a max effective range of 550 meters listed in the Technical Manual, and I've put ten out of ten shots in a man sized target at 600 meters on more than one occasion. I've watched someone hit a 6x6' target 20 out of 20 shots from a thousand yards with an AR15 (civilian semi-auto M16A2).

That said, I would like to vote for not messing around with this mod too much. I know I wasn't very good in the hour or two that I was on the server, but I really liked the way it felt. It seemed very realistic and also reminded me of Ghost Recon. The desire to not be shot at was great, and I think that's something that is missing in so many other games. In CS and BF, I hated the fact that everyone was willing to sprint across an open area that was being covered by an automatic weapon! You wouldn't do that in real life, but in most games you have so much health, or bullet hits do so little damage, that most of the time you can get away with getting shot a few times. Sure it's fun, but it's certainly not realistic. Getting killed with one shot from a hundred yards away is VERY realistic!

__________________

Become a supporting member! -- Shop at the Tactical Market!

Take the world's smallest political quiz! "I was touched by His Noodly Appendage."
TacticalGamer TX LAN/BBQ Veteran: