Infantry weapon damage changes
-
- Posts: 1185
- Joined: 2007-03-03 01:47
-
- Posts: 53
- Joined: 2016-12-19 12:12
Re: Infantry weapon damage changes
Yes, key word "variety". Exactly what I'm talking about on other threads. Bring back more layersMouthpiece wrote:them (this hasn't been the only "bad" update - the old map layers with assets have been changed to almost only INF, and it sucks because variety died, but it's a different topic).
-
- Posts: 234
- Joined: 2015-02-20 10:48
Re: Infantry weapon damage changes
It has been 2 months, the game has been less fun, playing INS is shite, playing vs 7.62 is no fun, getting 1 shot on Vietnam is no fun. Still nothing about improvement, quality work.
-
- Posts: 968
- Joined: 2008-06-16 05:08
Re: Infantry weapon damage changes
huh? .OriginalWarrior wrote:This is what happens when you give asset whores power.
-
- Posts: 1266
- Joined: 2011-04-30 10:36
Re: Infantry weapon damage changes
When asset players think they can improve infantry gameplay (when in reality they don't play much of it) this happens.chrisweb89 wrote:huh? .
-
- Posts: 13
- Joined: 2017-05-19 18:12
Re: Infantry weapon damage changes
i think he meant feedback coming from asset whores.chrisweb89 wrote:huh? .
as a INF only player i disagree with most changes made since 1.0, but asset whores probably would welcome most of those changes.
-
- Posts: 878
- Joined: 2016-05-21 01:13
Re: Infantry weapon damage changes
hahaha... nope. apart from the armour update assets got nerfed real hard, especially CAS.RaedTheManual wrote:i think he meant feedback coming from asset whores.
as a INF only player i disagree with most changes made since 1.0, but asset whores probably would welcome most of those changes.
-
- Posts: 13
- Joined: 2017-05-19 18:12
Re: Infantry weapon damage changes
yeah CAS and trans got nerfed, but APC and TANK got a buff.DogACTUAL wrote:hahaha... nope. apart from the armour update assets got nerfed real hard, especially CAS.
They got buffed so hard i rather have my squad not engage an APC because the LAT has become completely ineffective, so we rather play hide and seek and hope the thermal view won't catch us. And building FOB's has become Hide and seek as well, it's not worth it building a TOW just to fire a useless round into the side of a tank that won't even render it immobilized. in 1.4.11 it's more effective to tell your squad to go lonewolf than it is to stick together as teamplay has become obsolete. As a G3 MEC lonewolf you will do more damage to the enemy team than a MEC medic/squadleader or even commander, as long the APC won't see you.
In Insurgency Mode (as blufor) the necessity of squads has become entirely obsolete as i can make my way from blufor main to Ins main entirely without the need of any friendlies nearby. It's so easy i often find myself teamkilling/kicking squad members because as a sqleader i won't tolerate my sqmembers raping the INS main.
yeah the INS team should be weaker, but right now it feels like beating up a group of kindergarteners.
-
- Posts: 347
- Joined: 2013-06-29 13:42
Re: Infantry weapon damage changes
Who cares about gameplay when the changes are realistic. Why do you think it's called Project REALITY?
-
- Posts: 143
- Joined: 2017-02-18 16:03
Re: Infantry weapon damage changes
It's easier to destroy/disable chopper than APC for me now.RaedTheManual wrote:yeah CAS and trans got nerfed, but APC and TANK got a buff.
They got buffed so hard i rather have my squad not engage an APC because the LAT has become completely ineffective, so we rather play hide and seek and hope the thermal view won't catch us. And building FOB's has become Hide and seek as well, it's not worth it building a TOW just to fire a useless round into the side of a tank that won't even render it immobilized. in 1.4.11 it's more effective to tell your squad to go lonewolf than it is to stick together as teamplay has become obsolete. As a G3 MEC lonewolf you will do more damage to the enemy team than a MEC medic/squadleader or even commander, as long the APC won't see you.
In Insurgency Mode (as blufor) the necessity of squads has become entirely obsolete as i can make my way from blufor main to Ins main entirely without the need of any friendlies nearby. It's so easy i often find myself teamkilling/kicking squad members because as a sqleader i won't tolerate my sqmembers raping the INS main.
yeah the INS team should be weaker, but right now it feels like beating up a group of kindergarteners.
Spraying full mag of a scorpion towards anyone from 15m and not killing him is not realistic in any way. Pistol ammunition should get a huge buff right now. Devs should take into account there are more damage 'zones' on a body, and there is a huge possibility that bullets will hit someone in hands, face etc.fecht_niko wrote:Who cares about gameplay when the changes are realistic. Why do you think it's called Project REALITY?
-
- Posts: 49
- Joined: 2016-07-18 16:01
Re: Infantry weapon damage changes
The vast majority of feedback is negative;
No one, not even the guy who made the change was able to justify how did this improved the game;
These last two months should be more than enough time for the staff to realize this, and still they are avoiding to talk about it;
I think this has become a matter of pride for some, they will not revert the changes regardless of what the community says....
However, it is not become something that you can fix with small tweeks on the bullet weights and barrel lengths, to fix it will be necessary a sudden change in the direction of what it was before just like everyone is asking.
ppl are peing very reluctant to admit the mistake and go back on it, all that in favor of what?
No one, not even the guy who made the change was able to justify how did this improved the game;
These last two months should be more than enough time for the staff to realize this, and still they are avoiding to talk about it;
I think this has become a matter of pride for some, they will not revert the changes regardless of what the community says....
However, it is not become something that you can fix with small tweeks on the bullet weights and barrel lengths, to fix it will be necessary a sudden change in the direction of what it was before just like everyone is asking.
ppl are peing very reluctant to admit the mistake and go back on it, all that in favor of what?
Last edited by Mostacho on 2017-06-25 15:41, edited 2 times in total.
-
- Posts: 347
- Joined: 2013-06-29 13:42
Re: Infantry weapon damage changes
Maybe your reality is wrong. A high class special forces operator can easily win a marathon with a bullet in his hand or a full SMG mag in his cevlar.mebel wrote:
Spraying full mag of a scorpion towards anyone from 15m and not killing him is not realistic in any way. Pistol ammunition should get a huge buff right now. Devs should take into account there are more damage 'zones' on a body, and there is a huge possibility that bullets will hit someone in hands, face etc.
Actually real life tactics are working pretty well in PR, starting with swan formation in forests and ending with distracting a tank with an AR in order to build a TOW behind him.
REALISTIC gameplay in project REALITY!
-
- PR:BF2 Contributor
- Posts: 297
- Joined: 2013-03-30 18:51
Re: Infantry weapon damage changes
You would be right joking about strike-of-swan formations and uselessness of overstructuring applied to chaos-like systems in general but in game actor is a man with psychology trained by IRL events. It includes mental models, patterns, ability to adapt, synthetize new mental patterns and so on. This things do not vary from game to irl significantly for most of people.fecht_niko wrote:Actually real life tactics are working pretty well in PR, starting with swan formation in forests and ending with distracting a tank with an AR in order to build a TOW behind him.
-
- Posts: 347
- Joined: 2013-06-29 13:42
Re: Infantry weapon damage changes
Immersion is everything chuva.Chuva_RD wrote:You would be right joking about strike-of-swan formations and uselessness of overstructuring applied to chaos-like systems in general but in game actor is a man with psychology trained by IRL events. It includes mental models, patterns, ability to adapt, synthetize new mental patterns and so on. This things do not vary from game to irl significantly for most of people.
POV Russian division is waiting to join some ruski events, when is the next one?
-
- Posts: 40
- Joined: 2016-01-17 19:52
Re: Infantry weapon damage changes
But the changes are not at all realistic. One of the main concepts, for the changes, was to "realistically model body armor," and it isn't even close. As an example, real world 5.56 penetrates plates better than 7.62. The smaller frontal area of the bullet and the faster projectile speed of 5.56 makes it a better armor penetrator than the larger 7.62, even though 7.62 has more ft/lb of energy.fecht_niko wrote:Who cares about gameplay when the changes are realistic. Why do you think it's called Project REALITY?
The idea that a plate in PR will stop an entire magazine of 9mm, although realistic, is absurdly unrealistic in game play when we then unrealistically assume that the same plate will stop only one or two 7.62.
If it stops one 7.62, it will stop multiple. So to nerf the pistols and the sniper rifles for realism's sake, then have "magic" 7.62 from an MBR just doesn't make sense.
The sniper rifle is useless. The pistols are useless. SMGs are useless. Shotguns are useless.
Revert the changes and buff the 7.62 MBRs to give them a purpose. Problem solved.
-
- Posts: 347
- Joined: 2013-06-29 13:42
Re: Infantry weapon damage changes
Alternative facts say that 7.62 is better than 5.56.Bonecrusher76 wrote:But the changes are not at all realistic. One of the main concepts, for the changes, was to "realistically model body armor," and it isn't even close. As an example, real world 5.56 penetrates plates better than 7.62. The smaller frontal area of the bullet and the faster projectile speed of 5.56 makes it a better armor penetrator than the larger 7.62, even though 7.62 has more ft/lb of energy.
The idea that a plate in PR will stop an entire magazine of 9mm, although realistic, is absurdly unrealistic in game play when we then unrealistically assume that the same plate will stop only one or two 7.62.
If it stops one 7.62, it will stop multiple. So to nerf the pistols and the sniper rifles for realism's sake, then have "magic" 7.62 from an MBR just doesn't make sense.
The sniper rifle is useless. The pistols are useless. SMGs are useless. Shotguns are useless.
Revert the changes and buff the 7.62 MBRs to give them a purpose. Problem solved.
Alternative facts say that shotguns, pistols and SMGs are useless IRL.
-
- Posts: 1062
- Joined: 2013-07-02 22:35
Re: Infantry weapon damage changes
Alternative facts say that 5.56 is better than 7.62x51 at going through body armor and stopping a man.fecht_niko wrote:
Alternative facts say that buckshot and standard pistol cartridges are effective against level 4 body armor.
Alternative facts say that armor piercing pistol cartridges stop people dead in their tracks.
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/2009_Fort ... Casualties
Aim
Last edited by X-Alt on 2017-06-26 19:42, edited 6 times in total.
-
- Posts: 347
- Joined: 2013-06-29 13:42
Re: Infantry weapon damage changes
Im sorry x-alt but I have 100% trust in TZ#1 zwilling.X-Alt wrote:Alternative facts say that 5.56 is better than 7.62x51 at going through body armor and stopping a man.
Alternative facts say that buckshot is effective against body armor.
Alternative facts say that armor piercing pistols are very effective at killing people in non-vital areas.
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/2009_Fort ... Casualties
I also dont care about such stuff actually because immersion is everything!
We all play PR to all chat some tacticool stuff, defend superFOBs, walk in formations and say "copy that" all the time.
Watch those videos and you guys know what I mean:
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=8iLA3N_fTG0
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=JTDjxKwt_fY
Last edited by fecht_niko on 2017-06-26 20:11, edited 3 times in total.
-
- Retired PR Developer
- Posts: 608
- Joined: 2012-06-10 11:27
Re: Infantry weapon damage changes
One of the best posts in PR historyChuva_RD wrote:You would be right joking about strike-of-swan formations and uselessness of overstructuring applied to chaos-like systems in general but in game actor is a man with psychology trained by IRL events. It includes mental models, patterns, ability to adapt, synthetize new mental patterns and so on. This things do not vary from game to irl significantly for most of people.
Almost all of this is wrong. PR factions are assumed to use Type IV body armor (most modern armies either have this as standard or use it to some degree), which is rated to stop a single round of .30-06 AP point blank. Neither 5.56 or 7.62 will get through on the first shot, but 7.62's higher KE makes it more likely to break ribs and cause other internal injuries even without penetrating. They will break the plates and may get through on the second hit. 9mm hits won't wreck the plates as quickly or cause nearly as much internal damage.Bonecrusher76 wrote:But the changes are not at all realistic. One of the main concepts, for the changes, was to "realistically model body armor," and it isn't even close. As an example, real world 5.56 penetrates plates better than 7.62. The smaller frontal area of the bullet and the faster projectile speed of 5.56 makes it a better armor penetrator than the larger 7.62, even though 7.62 has more ft/lb of energy.
The idea that a plate in PR will stop an entire magazine of 9mm, although realistic, is absurdly unrealistic in game play when we then unrealistically assume that the same plate will stop only one or two 7.62.
If it stops one 7.62, it will stop multiple. So to nerf the pistols and the sniper rifles for realism's sake, then have "magic" 7.62 from an MBR just doesn't make sense.