Jump to content
Sign in to follow this  
CapybaraPaul

Punishment for toxic children?

Recommended Posts

I think someone posted a video in another thread from a Marines Instructor or something like that. The outcome was pretty much that even at distance like 50m quick precise semi auto fire is "better" than full-auto (in the sense of getting more bullets on the target in shorter time). Of course this is a came which definitely does not be a mil sim like shooter but I agree with Grey Wolf. That Semi-Auto fire is useless on 5.56 rifles is kind of an immersion breaker. And immersion is important I think. A major problem is flinching I guess. When I try to shoot someone on a somewhat longer distance the enemy suddenly returns fire full-auto and my shots land all over the place. Because he fires more in shorter time he likely wins the fight.
In my opinion it would be more immersive (and no worse gameplay wise) if short full-autpo bursts would be favoured over spraying a full magazine. I.e. the recoil becomes exponentially hard to control after 6 shots or so.

To stay on topic I really like the idea of longer respawn time after an unforgiven tk. Maybe this could even increase with the amount of intended team kills.

  • Like 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

It's a game you aren't meant to RP it like arma or squad as that is incredibly boring for very skilled players. Squad went with the hyper unrealistic recoil to nerfskill in order to recreates environment that semi would be practical which killed that game after co for anyone who wasn't interested in LARPing.

full auto isn't spraying unless you are bad at controlling recoil or bad at aiming. Many people use semi because they can't control recoil.

Similar to IRL there's full auto or rapid fire can be better and many guns have full auto but the main reason to not use it is conservation of ammo and the skill level of who is using it.

If someone spends thousands of hours practicing shooting you can see them do a hell of a lot better and even operating on a different level conducting rapid fire drills. I a gamer is spending thousands of hours in game then you will see similarities in skill level comparisons respectfully.

Flinching does favor who fired first and RPM for sure and deffinatly give a big advantage to the higher RPM weapon. I dislike it very much because the fights devolve make the fight just spewing at each other as accurate precision fire semi or full is not viable.

 

It's very un studying seeing your aim get pushed off RNG wise after you line up a great sight picture on the head and are expecting that reward feedback for skilled aiming to go down the drain and instead reward factors that go into getting a flinch off which could be unpercise body shots that are all over the place.

 

mag dumps are 3 seconds long and that's pretty long time when most engaugments are less then or at a second long and result in around 8 shots fired from the victor.

Immersion breaking for me and others is going too far with trying to push a perception of realism like what squad did after co in order to force a role play scenario by unrealisticly hindering the player and weapon platforms.

5.56 performs far more accurately and controllable with having usually higher tof then 7.62.

 

 

I really think that adding time onto the respawn for unforgiven TKs.

 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
On ‎12‎/‎9‎/‎2018 at 5:30 PM, CapybaraPaul said:

I don't know much about "real firefight" but when I play airsoft we hardly ever switch to semi-auto. I know we have no recoil, but still, there is such a thing like fire density. And that is what really matters.

Please, stop referring to realism. In reality, you sit behind the corner for 30 minutes to see 1 enemy and shoot him with all firepower you are available.

It's happening like: oh fck fck fck, there are enemies! Call aviation! Artillery! BRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRT *sounds of auto-fire overuse*


That's not funny to see in a videogame at all.
This is a TACTICAL SHOOTER, not real combat simulation. Those are 2 huge differences.

IMO the 'truth' is in the middle.

First off: there is a balancing problem with the damage/ballistics model I think. Assault Rifle engagements at 20-50m usually take at least half a mag... and if you don't hold down the fire button long enough… you will find out the hard way that the other player is still spraying. The game also 'trained' me to hold auto fire much longer in sudden close fights. Those encounters should be much deadlier, much faster. Somehow the chances of a good hit with an assault rifle are pretty low in a close fight. That is not realistic, but also no fun. At longer distances the game feels more balanced. If suppression is what you want, you spray away. If you want a good hit, you crouch/lie down... take half a sec and fire accurately. That's both real and fun.

Regarding realism: please stop discussing it if you don't know anything about it. Just stick to commenting on the fun/playability part please. That is just as important by the way. The game should (will) not become a sim, but it does have a WW3 theme. Copying 'rules'/'settings' of other shooters just because that is what people know, would be a shame. WW3 has the potential to be more/way cooler. I'm convinced you can implement realistic weapon, damage, ballistics models, but with a simple interface... and that it will be awesome to play. It seems to me that is what the devs set out to do, and it got me hooked! 

Bit of education: most infantry assault rifles have a single shot and full auto setting. Other army branches sometimes have single shot and 3 burst. Both full auto and 3 burst are inaccurate and waste ammo, they are mainly used for (quick) suppresion. Recoil is pretty heavy, if you fire auto without being prepared/properly shouldering your rifle, you don't hit shit. The common setting to have your rifle at is single shot. When in sudden close contact, you quickly fire 2 rounds towards your enemy while at the same time bringing your rifle sights towards your face. Immediatly after that you fire a single accurate round, which should seriously wound or kill. If you are walking (slowly) with the weapon already up, then 1 or 2 shots should do. Hopefully you see the game is very, very, very far from real life... it feels pretty close to Fortnite.

I think some tweaking could be done. The aiming mechanisms are already in. When looking through your sight, the weapon is shouldered… and auto fire should be doable. When not looking down the sights, auto fire should be all over the place. More important a good hit in a close fight should be much more deadly, taking away the incentive for firing auto all of the time. 3 Hits should be enough, but could be balanced if people start dying too often. I think this would not hurt the fun in the gameplay and it would improve the game... but hey that's me ;).

Edited by Shr!ke

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

What lead to this started a game before the one you recorded and may have started unintentionally, at least I thought so, however you provoke.

I got baited, triggered and got carried away, but I did stop, you kept provoking. It's your right to record and by the looks of it especially when it favors you and I can only tell you to keep up

the good work. 

The title of this thread, how you say "some idiot", your behaviour and reaction tells me something about your mindset and that you don't care about what you do to frustrate others. This

again is something you are totally free to do so if you like it and If it helps you, you are not the only one.

This isn't an apology to you. I apologise to the devs for my reaction.

 

Off-topic:

I notice ppl going about certain weapon mechanics like  full sprays on medium to long range with too less recoil and such. While I feel there could be made some improvements

on things like markers for friendlies and bases, bugs like spawning in destroyed vehicles or invisible players and optimisation, the game has imo great time-to-kill especially on the size of

these maps, which makes for great pacing and it should get better with more players. AR+RPG+med kit feels like a great combo. 1-shot sniper shots to the body feels refreshing. Armor that

can withstand not so precise shots feels amazing, then again being able to precisely burst and headshot enemies from almost any range on any armor feels rewarding. Hip fire in cqc is

great. If the devs start catering to ppl want to change the things that work to make the game another complete clone, well, then ok, if not, then, imo, the game have something great going

for it and could become even more amazing.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
On 12/9/2018 at 11:30 AM, CapybaraPaul said:

airsoft

Thats the difference. Now i'm not in the military, but all modern combat films I see and looking at combat footage from Iraq and Afghan, which is urban fighting. Semi auto is to kill. 

Insurgency source really had this feeling down. Sandstorm got a bit to arcade y. 

Airsoft is fun for what it is, but its by no means an accurate representation of real life military situations. 

 

I for one would love to see more situations where semi auto is the way to go in WW3. Well placed individual shots. 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
4 minutes ago, Butta On Tha Pancakes said:

Thats the difference. Now i'm not in the military, but all modern combat films I see and looking at combat footage from Iraq and Afghan, which is urban fighting. Semi auto is to kill. 

Insurgency source really had this feeling down. Sandstorm got a bit to arcade y. 

Airsoft is fun for what it is, but its by no means an accurate representation of real life military situations. 

 

I for one would love to see more situations where semi auto is the way to go in WW3. Well placed individual shots. 

https://www.independent.co.uk/news/world/americas/us-forced-to-import-bullets-from-israel-as-troops-use-250000-for-every-rebel-killed-314944.html

troops use 250,000 for every rebel killed
I know that numbers are just a ridiculously estimated, but even if we divide it by 100, 2500 bullets for each kill.
In reality, you shoot "somewhere that direction" and hope to land a shot on target.
Where are all those guys screaming out loud that they want a realistic game? No guys, you don't...

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
3 minutes ago, CapybaraPaul said:

https://www.independent.co.uk/news/world/americas/us-forced-to-import-bullets-from-israel-as-troops-use-250000-for-every-rebel-killed-314944.html

troops use 250,000 for every rebel killed
I know that numbers are just a ridiculously estimated, but even if we divide it by 100, 2500 bullets for each kill.
In reality, you shoot "somewhere that direction" and hope to land a shot on target.
Where are all those guys screaming out loud that they want a realistic game? No guys, you don't...

I know what you are coming from but they are suppressing enemies. You can see when they are shooting to kill they are using semi fire. 

Edited by Butta On Tha Pancakes

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
5 minutes ago, CapybaraPaul said:


Where are all those guys screaming out loud that they want a realistic game? No guys, you don't...

btw we've got tons of milsim games where the majority of the time you just sit around and wait and combat looks pretty similar to this, and theyre super fun. Not what WW3 goes for but we still do want realistic games. 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
8 minutes ago, Butta On Tha Pancakes said:

suppressing enemies. 

That is really 99% of what you are doing in real combat...

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
5 minutes ago, Butta On Tha Pancakes said:

btw we've got tons of milsim games where the majority of the time you just sit around and wait and combat looks pretty similar to this, and theyre super fun. Not what WW3 goes for but we still do want realistic games. 

Statistics say the opposite.

The most popular milsim is Arma3. 40k peak daily online for the past year. That's not even close to "popular" first-person shooters;)
So the vast majority of gamers dislike the actual realistic gameplay. Not mine opinion, just numbers.
 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
8 minutes ago, Butta On Tha Pancakes said:

btw we've got tons of milsim games where the majority of the time you just sit around and wait and combat looks pretty similar to this, and theyre super fun. Not what WW3 goes for but we still do want realistic games. 

And the other part of real combat looks like this

 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
1 hour ago, CapybaraPaul said:

Statistics say the opposite.

The most popular milsim is Arma3. 40k peak daily online for the past year. That's not even close to "popular" first-person shooters;)
So the vast majority of gamers dislike the actual realistic gameplay. Not mine opinion, just numbers.
 

ok yeah whatever compare arma3 to popular first person shooters. Not my point. 

I, speaking for just myself, like realistic milsim games and have a few in my library that I play from time to time. 

I am aware world war 3 is not one of these games. 

No need to be a dick :)

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
4 minutes ago, Butta On Tha Pancakes said:

ok yeah whatever compare arma3 to popular first person shooters. Not my point. 

I, speaking for just myself, like realistic milsim games and have a few in my library that I play from time to time. 

I am aware world war 3 is not one of these games. 

No need to be a dick :)

I am not. Sorry if seemed like that:)

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Let me try and put an end to this discussion. Fighting in Afghanistan has nothing to do with how WW3 will look (or how any big war looked before). All tactics were adapted to fighting a very specific enemy: dudes with beards, wearing gowns, with no body-armor, but crazy fast and a lot of RPG, rifles and some machineguns, zero tactics, but excellent knowledge of the environment and who had no artillery or armor. A lot of casualties would not be acceptable, so fighting had to be adapted. And even for fighting in Afghanistan these videos are really not representative.

In CQB as is mostly played in WW3, five attackers will die for every defender killed. In woodlands the rate drops to 3:1. Every attacker will have 10 magazines, so 300 rounds. Resupply is always unsure… so every shot should count. Full auto is not a common firing setting. You won't hit shit. Suppression is only briefly done with AR, and should be taken over by LMG/HMG... that’s what those things are for.

Edited by Shr!ke

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Guest
This topic is now closed to further replies.
Sign in to follow this  

×
×
  • Create New...