Other > General Game Discussion

Introduce Minimum Range to Weapons

<< < (16/22) > >>

Parowooz:
Are you trying to tell me that you would risk lives of your men just to clear the building on the wasteland? Those buildings are just old, pre-war, almost destroyed piles of bricks. I would use a minigun for that kind of job to just blast throught the whole building, killing everyone inside. But, oh wait. Buildings are indestructible! That's not realistic, even thought - you didn't mention that. What else is unrealistic? Let's see:
-miniguns with only burst option - you can't shoot for any period of time using any amounts of ammo you want
-people don't die from starvation or lack of water
-travelling is incredibly fast
-bullets don't kill you in single shots! (or at least hurt you badly)
-you respawn after dying(!) (critical)
-you can craft high-tech guns from the infinite amounts of iron found in old mines

and so on, and so on...

After the long list of unrealistic things in this game, yours appear:
-guns have no minimum range

Considering how the WHOLE game has very little to do with real-life situations your suggestion to make the game more realistic is incredibly stupid, out of place and guess what: IT'S NOT REALISTIC in terms of in-game realism.


All this suggestion was meant just to nerf minigunners because some wannabe-Avatar fan tried to beat highly skilled soldier with minigun, using only sticks and rocks (like in the movie, yep).

corosive:
See Total Influence -> Guns have a minimum range which sucks ass. If a player is right in front of you your m16 can't hit him, only your pistol, melee weapon, or shotgun. LAME.
http://tionline.ru/ Main Website in Russian -> Playable in English with very rude Russian players (LOL)
Youtube videos:
http://www.youtube.com/results?search_query=total+influence+&aq=f

I personally think it just doesn't work. In RL no matter how close I am to you I can shoot you. But if a Rocket Launcher had a min range it might work, but defy the purpose of "Kamakazi."

avv:

--- Quote from: Parowooz ---Considering how the WHOLE game has very little to do with real-life situations your suggestion to make the game more realistic is incredibly stupid, out of place and guess what: IT'S NOT REALISTIC in terms of in-game realism.

--- End quote ---

Wrong. Even if the game has many features which aren't realistic it doesn't mean that a suggestion close to realism automatically sucks. Otherwise it would be completely okay to suggest - according to your logic - that we could salvage electricity out of stones. I mean screw the realism, the rest of the game isn't realism so let's just implement this. But if the stones were changed to old batteries the suggestion would suck - according to you - since it's more realistic  :o


--- Quote from: corosive on August 21, 2010, 06:12:09 AM ---See Total Influence -> Guns have a minimum range which sucks ass. If a player is right in front of you your m16 can't hit him, only your pistol, melee weapon, or shotgun. LAME.
--- End quote ---

Who's talking about not being able to shoot completely? So far it's only been accuracy penalty. The motivation of this thread was to implement more tactical factors to be utilized by players. This way combat will become more interesting, challenging and more reliant on player's cleverness instead of his char's.

TwistedIndoctrine:

--- Quote from: Parowooz on August 21, 2010, 04:43:24 AM ---All this suggestion was meant just to nerf minigunners because some wannabe-Avatar fan tried to beat highly skilled soldier with minigun, using only sticks and rocks (like in the movie, yep).

--- End quote ---

Except it isn't a highly skilled soldier at all period. It's some dude in a wasteland with a machine gun. The only people close to being "soldiers" by any traditional sense of the word would be in the Enclave, BoS, or NCR everyone else is technically just a guy with a gun in a desert. The methods to train actual soldiers for the most part faded away in a nuclear fire so what you're left with is a country full of guns and people, that doesn't make them soldiers though.

Soldiers have a training regime which includes among other things unarmed and bayonet drills with a rifle training in almost all cases (you know, minus clerks and medical technicans and other noncombat trades) precisely because the scenario of being disarmed can happen. You can be rushed and grappled by someone quick enough. You can have omeone pull a knife on you while you're struggling impotently to get that enemy in your firing arc, while he's actively stuggling against you. You can have your throat cut effortlessly in that time ending your struggle quickly. Meanwhile character builds typically feature 200+ ranks in their primary weapon skill and minimal in anything else - fallout characters are talented gunmen for the most part who lack the well rounded repetoire of skills to deal with that reality of combat.

I'm not suggesting minigunners die instantly in mellee combat, I'm suggesting that the difficulty of fighting in close quarters with a large weapon, not just minguns, but all the big guns and, hell, rifles among the small guns and energy weapons while we're at it be reflected through serious accuracy penalties at close range.

Why? Because it adds another dynamic to the game and dynamic combat in games is what makes them fun. If it doesn't work out then simply change it back later it's not worth not testing something that could be fun for everyone because some people are afraid crying "Don't nerf me bro". It's not a nerf, lets face it minigunners own and will own people most of the time even with this change in effect, seriously how often do you run into mellee range just to burst someone?

Machine guns and rifles are not and should not be treated as magical swiss army knives ideal for every situation - they're not. And reflectin that in game would add an interesting new dynamic to the game that's worth considering.

avv:

--- Quote from: TwistedIndoctrine on August 21, 2010, 02:17:29 PM ---Why? Because it adds another dynamic to the game and dynamic combat in games is what makes them fun. If it doesn't work out then simply change it back later it's not worth not testing something that could be fun for everyone because some people are afraid crying "Don't nerf me bro". It's not a nerf, lets face it minigunners own and will own people most of the time even with this change in effect, seriously how often do you run into mellee range just to burst someone?
--- End quote ---

I can already see what kind of problems it could cause if implemented without supporting features. A melee dude or a close range gun dude gets near big gunner, big gunner just starts running as long as he wants until he gains little more distance due to micromanagement. Then he bursts, if the melee dude didn't die, big gunner starts running again. This is called kiting, you can see it in WoW and starcraft and it looks extremely stupid. It's caused by instant acceleration to maximum speed movement and instant weapon readyness. Instead of planning your actions beforehand the game encourages constant movement, like fonline does now in some cases.

So TwistedIndoctrine if we ever get distance modifiers, we also need to rework moving a little. So that you just can't get away from unfit position immediately by running. Many players already hate the real time because it's not strategic enough and relies too much on reflexes. This is partially caused by the excessive running.

Navigation

[0] Message Index

[#] Next page

[*] Previous page