Infantry weapon damage changes

[Kingy]

The damage system wasn't "fine" before either. (last I remembered, 4 pistol round to solid body armor will down someone before these recent changes)

And what was wrong with that? It was a glory kill, or (in certain situations), a better alternative to reloading your main weapon. Now you can empty the whole clip into unsuspecting enemies for them to shrug it off, turn around, and blow you away. It's so dull, and such a mind-bogglingly frustrating decision.

As for shotguns, they also have reduced damage to unarmoured targets.

-Pistol-calibers and buckshot will be worse against modern factions since they all have at least ballistic vests. They are nerfed somewhat against unarmored ones as well.

Also, what happened to Vista's thread with the proposed changes? Or was I on some sort of tedious lucid trip last night? I thought you might have moved it to the suggestions section, which seemed a more appropriate place.

EDIT:- I'm blind, ignore me.

[Mats391]

Also, what happened to Vista's thread with the proposed changes? Or was I on some sort of tedious lucid trip last night? I thought you might have moved it to the suggestions section, which seemed a more appropriate place.

Moved to correct forum section: https://www.realitymod.com/forum/f388-p ... ystem.html

[Vista]

I'd prefer it being somewhere else, since the whole point of that thread was getting the community feedback and not so much about the mod...

But as long as it gets considered, it's fine I guess

[Mostacho]

How much longer will it take to reverse this back to the old dmg?

[Allahu Akbar]

And what was wrong with that? It was a glory kill, or (in certain situations), a better alternative to reloading your main weapon. Now you can empty the whole clip into unsuspecting enemies for them to shrug it off, turn around, and blow you away. It's so dull, and such a mind-bogglingly frustrating decision.

What was wrong is obvious, too much damage.

Even Insurgency(source engine game, typically one-shot with everything on AP ammunition) makes you shoot up to 10 times with 9mm ball ammo to kill a target if shooting at armored part.

A
As for shotguns, they also have reduced damage to unarmoured targets.

So? Shotguns are not as devastating as movies make them out to be.

[Kingy]

It's not obvious to me, and I cannot once recall a significant body of people complaining that pistols were too powerful in PR prior to these latest changes.
Though I'm being too kind when I mention pistols alone, it's not just your sidearm that's affected, anything using that particular low caliber ammunition has been rendered impotent as well; the Skorpion, MP5, and presumably weapons like the PPSH are now virtually useless.

So? Shotguns are not as devastating as movies make them out to be.

Don't care, once again I'll stick up for the old model of damage. Why? Because in terms of gameplay there was very little wrong with it. And it was fun.

Let me ask you this: What is the point of sidearms, shotguns and weapons like the Skorpion with these new changes?

In so far as I can tell the shotgun is now a utility tool; it opens doors, blows up crates and arrests civilians (which is of course, very realistic). It's still fairly potent on insurgency, providing your Blufor of course, but conventionally it's rather useless.

Sidearms are a no go now, you might as well reload your main weapon instead. And if you're unfortunate enough to be caught in a firefight with weapons like the Skorpion you might as well give up and run away.

The Dev's have pretty much confirmed this themselves:

Kit changes to unconventional factions to account for the low-caliber damage nerf. Most submachine guns in particular got replaced with larger-caliber weapons in spawn menu kits. These were moved instead to ones that don't need firepower as much, like the engineer.

There used to be a very fine balance between realism and gameplay in PR, with the general consensus that it was the gameplay that would always come first. It's starting to feel like the scales are beginning to tip.

[Allahu Akbar]

It's not obvious to me, and I cannot once recall a significant body of people complaining that pistols were too powerful in PR prior to these latest changes.
Though I'm being too kind when I mention pistols alone, it's not just your sidearm that's affected, anything using that particular low caliber ammunition has been rendered impotent as well; the Skorpion, MP5, and presumably weapons like the PPSH are now virtually useless.

The only relevant one is PPsh which could go up against conventional forces that have body armor.

Damage value currently does not make sense as I have proven many pages ago.

I got tired of waiting for someone who is purposefully leaving out lots of damage numbers for less-common calibers, so I went into game files and found a lot of problems:

Code: Select all

ObjectTemplate.create GenericProjectile 762_25
ObjectTemplate.material 3556
ObjectTemplate.damage 13
ObjectTemplate.minDamage 0.6
ObjectTemplate.DistToStartLoseDamage 1
ObjectTemplate.DistToMinDamage 100
ObjectTemplate.gravityModifier 1.0
include projectiles_common.tweak

13 damage for 7.62x25 (not entirely sure how different material affect damage)

Code: Select all

ObjectTemplate.create GenericProjectile 900
ObjectTemplate.material 3900
ObjectTemplate.damage 20
ObjectTemplate.minDamage 0.5
ObjectTemplate.DistToStartLoseDamage 1
ObjectTemplate.DistToMinDamage 160
ObjectTemplate.gravityModifier 1.0
include projectiles_common_small.tweak

20 damage for 9mm

For reference, .45acp:

Code: Select all

ObjectTemplate.create GenericProjectile 45cal
ObjectTemplate.material 3900
ObjectTemplate.damage 16
ObjectTemplate.minDamage 0.75
ObjectTemplate.DistToStartLoseDamage 1
ObjectTemplate.DistToMinDamage 190
ObjectTemplate.gravityModifier 1.0
include projectiles_common_small.tweak

Only does 16.

The only sidearm that is truly useless is Makarov(without headshot) which looks like it does under 10 damage while the gun only holds 8.

Code: Select all

ObjectTemplate.create GenericProjectile 900_18
ObjectTemplate.material 3900
ObjectTemplate.damage 9
ObjectTemplate.minDamage 0.6
ObjectTemplate.DistToStartLoseDamage 1
ObjectTemplate.DistToMinDamage 180
ObjectTemplate.gravityModifier 1.0
include projectiles_common_small.tweak

Realistically 7.62x25 should do about 22(with 9x19 from a mp5 as baseline) at least.
Looks like Zwiling used +P 9x19 muzzle energy from a mp5 and compared it to low-end pistol-velocity 7.62x25 and called it a day, while entirely forgetting 1600fps+ of PPSH.
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/9%C3%9719mm_Parabellum
7.45 g (115 gr) Winchester JHP +P 1,335 ft/s (407 m/s) 455 ft·lbf (617 J)
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/7.62%C3%9725mm_Tokarev
5.5 g (85 gr) FMJ[3] 502 m/s (1,650 ft/s) 693 J (511 ft·lbf)


Again, the numbers can and must be tweaked; but that doesn't mean damage should go back to before.

Don't care, once again I'll stick up for the old model of damage. Why? Because in terms of gameplay there was very little wrong with it. And it was fun.
useless.

Don't care, once again I'll stick up for realism.

Let me ask you this: What is the point of sidearms, shotguns and weapons like the Skorpion with these new changes?

The purpose is to be a special tool(pistol - holster stuffer sometimes used for executing prisoner, shotgun - door opener) that isn't necessarily as good at killing as primary weapons.
(Shotgun is a primary weapon for some so it should stop being one)

In so far as I can tell the shotgun is now a utility tool; it opens doors, blows up crates and arrests civilians (which is of course, very realistic). It's still fairly potent on insurgency, providing your Blufor of course, but conventionally it's rather useless.

Blowing up crate is a side effect but if you want to argue for extra-useful shotguns then you would have to give Russian breacher one for "balance."

Sidearms are a no go now, you might as well reload your main weapon instead. And if you're unfortunate enough to be caught in a firefight with weapons like the Skorpion you might as well give up and run away.

Sidearms still work against unarmored targets.
Also, last I checked sawed-off mosin is also a sidearm.

The Dev's have pretty much confirmed this themselves:

And so kit change happened or will happen.

There used to be a very fine balance between realism and gameplay in PR, with the general consensus that it was the gameplay that would always come first. It's starting to feel like the scales are beginning to tip.

If gameplay always comes first then all regular rifles would be no higher than 600rpm, Russian breacher would have a shotgun...etc.

[Allahu Akbar]

Most of the people that are crying about the changes here are applying some fantasy to how a certain weapon works.

You too.

You've been used to things being nerfed or made into some God gun, and now that the performances have been corrected to reality, you want to come on here and cry about how you don't have your toy anymore.

You've been used to 7.62x51 being hailed as the god ammo because people complained about 5.56 being underpowered; now you can't accept reality that 7.62x51 FMJ isn't magic.

If you can only be good using fantasy weapons, you are not good.

If you were a good player then you would know that being able to one-shot someone at most combat ranges(because vietnam map) only makes good players a lot better.
Even if you were bad, you would have been saved by overpowered weapons once or twice.

No, it was mostly you.

The M14 is the better weapon when it comes to ballistics and internal ballistics. Which is represented with the changes.

The M16 or M4 is just better tactically, and is more universally friendly.

That moment when you realize you have been talking about yourself.



Assuming typical 10 in. average torso thickness (against malnourished/generally smaller vietnamese soldiers, most likely less), 7.62x51 passes through most of it before temporary cavity opens up unless hitting harder tissue/bone.

Therefore, the old-old model(of one-shot black&white against unarmored torso) would be much more realistic than current one-shot-kill.

Sure. 7.62x51 does more damage; but you don't get to pick and choose which part of "reality" you conveniently follow while disregarding M14's problems. (such as inaccuracy/not holding zero without properly bedded stock, which are not represented)

[Mostacho]

quotes real life ballistics

.

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=9Deg7VrpHbM

[RaedTheManual]

Sidearms are a no go now, you might as well reload your main weapon instead. And if you're unfortunate enough to be caught in a firefight with weapons like the Skorpion you might as well give up and run away.

Sidearms are one of the reason why i do Squad leading but they have become a joke. A few times already i encountered snipers sneaking up on me and emptying their pistol into me, only for me to flip around and spray them away.
Another time on Karballah i was walking trough the city when some ins medic started to shoot at me with the scorpion from a balcony he climbed with his rope, aprox. 50m, and i simply didn't care, i didn't start sprinting, i didn't start looking for cover, because i knew his stupid toy gun can't harm/hit me from there. And he was really trying to get me, waited 3 seconds between the shots, but that thing is just too inaccurate and even if he'd manage to hit me, i wouldn't even need to patch myself. which is really sad, cause when i'm not squadleading i like to do the medic myself but i can no longer get myself to play the medic on the INS team simply because i'm no longer allowed to defend myself. I get it that medics aren't supposed to fight on the front line (that's one of the reasons why i usually take the alt medic with the iron sights) but the scorpion is beyond useless at this point.
And when i'm playing ARF or Taliban i tend to pick the bolt action rifle nowadays, cause it will at least damage the enemy to the point where he retreats.

back in 0.6-0.8ish it was well establish that certain people prefer to play on the blufor team on INS maps, but i didn't want to take the easy route, i wanted to show these cowards ******** what they'll get if they rely on scopes and supreme firepower. So i genuinely started to appreciate playing in the underdog team over the years, it was challenging and therefor fun, and i found myself more and more often switching to the ins team instead of staying in the blufor team.

Until v1.0 came along. v1.0 was a mess, we had 10 servers with 100 players, people were hyped for PR but the changes to the game made the gameplay a miserable experience, and 2 weeks later we were back to 2-4 servers with 100 players. in v1.0 it wasn't unusual for the blufor team to get 250kills while the ins team got less than lousy 50 kills. after v1.0 i quite the game. at that time i was trying to make maps for this mod but the fun was gone, and i no longer cared. i mean i could have started switching to the blufor team as well but knowing what the other team has to endure...kinda ruined it.

at 1.3 i came back, played a few weeks and left again. at 1.4.5 i came back again because of all the good memories but holy fuck, TOW no longer kills a tank, APC eating LATs like it's a piece of cake, civi timer set to 2 minutes and will be reset for using a shovel like holy shit i couldn't believe this. but i sticked around because i still wanted to play some PR, weeks later you changed the weapon damage system. For me it feels like v1.0 all over again, you are choking the joy out of this game for the sake of pretended realism. Realism has always been a part of PR but Teamwork always came first. remember "Use voice chat to enhance your project reality experience"? There won't be any experience to enhance if the game is a unbalanced mess.
And unbalanced games have always lead to a frustrated and then toxic communities, i've seen this happening to Planetside 2 and Rainbow 6:Siege, both games had a great community until the devs went the wrong way with certain elements of their games.
And right now it's not just the bullet damage system, it's the OP apc's and tanks as well, and for some reason there are way too many of them on any given map. I don't mind a strong Tank, but i do mind 3 OP tanks.
In the end you are the devs, it's your decision, im just thinking you are neglecting the gameplay way too much. So much effort has been put into this game, the freaking tutorials by Rhino, the freaking assets, the coding and i know you don't like it if people yell and tell you how it should be done but a game without balance isn't fun. And i fear this game might die if the balance is not looked after.

/blogposting

[Kingy]

The only relevant one is PPsh which could go up against conventional forces that have body armor.

Are you essentially saying that these weapons ought to be useless against conventional forces? That may be true in real life, but surely you can see how this is detrimental to the game.

And if the developers are to persist with this ballistics model then such weapons will presumably be removed and replaced, rendered as they have been and as you freely admit; utterly pointless.

The purpose is to be a special tool(pistol - holster stuffer sometimes used for executing prisoner, shotgun - door opener) that isn't necessarily as good at killing as primary weapons.
(Shotgun is a primary weapon for some so it should stop being one)

So you agree then: the shotgun is now a utility tool and the pistol irrelevant. Fine. Great.

Blowing up crate is a side effect but if you want to argue for extra-useful shotguns then you would have to give Russian breacher one for "balance."

I made a thread about this quite a while back when they first removed the shotgun from the Russian breacher kit, this would be back in ~0.97(?). I'm assuming from your join date that this was before you started playing, but the Russians did use to have a shotgun for the breacher kit. I lost that argument against people calling for more realism, I'd rather not lose this one as well.

Sidearms still work against unarmored targets.

That's hardly relevant when we have maps like Fools Road where the unarmoured Militia go up against the heavily armoured British. It's on maps such as these where the glaring imbalance is at its most striking.

If gameplay always comes first then all regular rifles would be no higher than 600rpm, Russian breacher would have a shotgun...etc.

We have asymmetrical balance in PR, always have. And while the weapons have never been perfectly balanced they all had a purpose and a place in the mod. Generally rounds were decided by each teams capacity for competence and cohesion, not armament.

I don't actually mind the changes to rifles that much, I can live with a large degree of the alterations made. But I don't like to see sidearms rendered useless and shotguns obsolete. Neither do I like to see low caliber weapons made as ineffective as they have been.

I may be in the minority here on the forums when I say that the gameplay should always take precedence when developing the mod, but I don't think I am among the player-base.


EDIT:

back in 0.6-0.8ish it was well establish that certain people prefer to play on the blufor team on INS maps, but i didn't want to take the easy route, i wanted to show these cowards ******** what they'll get if they rely on scopes and supreme firepower. So i genuinely started to appreciate playing in the underdog team over the years, it was challenging and therefor fun, and i found myself more and more often switching to the ins team instead of staying in the blufor team.

Back when you could take Blufor kits and treasure them for the whole round Those were the god damn days.
You're right of course, INS isn't worth playing now (though in my opinion it hasn't been for some time), I just quit playing as soon as I see it begin to load. These latest changes only exacerbate the problem.

I would say that when I started playing (.8'ish) armour was quite rightly due a buff. To the extent it has been however? No, I don't think so.

[InfantryGamer42]

So this last few updated are bit controversial,and after playing few weeks I finnaly made my opinion. So from were to start. I allways liked PR because overall good,realistic and most import enjoying gameplay. I allways support more realisam in game,when It makes game more fun and gives more good experince. But, we need to ask ourselves do adding more realtistic staf will make this game more better. My opinion is this change didnt give that to do game.
First Its complitly doesnt work whit rest of game(I will explaine this later).
Second why we changed old system which was much more better than this.
And last it makes gameplay totaly unrealistic. Yes,maybe using real word gun data would be good in some games,but this is not that game. Drop off is complitly out of mind.
IMO we should get old system back and maybe work further on this,because this is not good. Still I fill I should give my opionion on all groups of guns and what could be made to fix them.

First battle rifle. I actualy liked change to battel rifles.It made them good,they finaly gived reason to player to played them.Still,IMO there are bit on op side now,they should get nerf,but there should be better on some way than assault rifles damage or accuracy.
Assault rifle I dont like right now. Old AR were much better.
Machine gunnes are overall now much better than I would like. The should be nerf.
Shoutgun should get back betwen this and old system.IMO shotgun should allway better than rifles CQB,but still not on op side.
Submachine gun should be KINGS of CQB. Right know I dont get point of tham. They need buff.
Pistols,again I dont get point of them right now? Same like submachine guns they really need buff.
Marksmane are good.
Last are sniper. So IMO snipers should be one shot instate kill if its headshot or one shot instate wounded if its body shot. I think that this is balanced in game where every player has patch which right know can heal him if his hit by sniper(our any other gun). IMO if we would keep this sniper(and other gun) stats than we should remove patchs and get only one medic in each squad if we wont balance to this system. I think that removing patches(and medics) would made this game even less fun(if thats possible).

[Allahu Akbar]

Are you essentially saying that these weapons ought to be useless against conventional forces? That may be true in real life, but surely you can see how this is detrimental to the game.

When it's Conventional forces AAS, all weapons that fire pistol rounds are used as PDWs and Sidearms, so it's absolutely fine(no more cod-player running around front line with MEC crewman kit).

And if the developers are to persist with this ballistics model then such weapons will presumably be removed and replaced, rendered as they have been and as you freely admit; utterly pointless.

Nope.
What would/should be changed is the likes of Insurgent Fighter whose primary(!) weapon is shotgun.

So you agree then: the shotgun is now a utility tool and the pistol irrelevant. Fine. Great.

Pistol is relevant against unarmored enemies.

I made a thread about this quite a while back when they first removed the shotgun from the Russian breacher kit, this would be back in ~0.97(?). I'm assuming from your join date that this was before you started playing, but the Russians did use to have a shotgun for the breacher kit. I lost that argument against people calling for more realism, I'd rather not lose this one as well.

You already lost. Should have asked for alternatives such as extra c4 or grenade.

Or rather, if at this point(post 1.4.10) he didn't decide to revert the change, it's probably not happening.

That's hardly relevant when we have maps like Fools Road where the unarmoured Militia go up against the heavily armoured British. It's on maps such as these where the glaring imbalance is at its most striking.

Militia could easily be changed to armored as they do have them on kit geometry.

As if lack of scope on Militia isn't glaring enough.

We have asymmetrical balance in PR, always have. And while the weapons have never been perfectly balanced they all had a purpose and a place in the mod. Generally rounds were decided by each teams capacity for competence and cohesion, not armament.

They still are, just to a lesser extent (as long as it's not skirmish map).

I don't actually mind the changes to rifles that much, I can live with a large degree of the alterations made. But I don't like to see sidearms rendered useless and shotguns obsolete. Neither do I like to see low caliber weapons made as ineffective as they have been.

Sidearms are called sidearms for a reason.

I may be in the minority here on the forums when I say that the gameplay should always take precedence when developing the mod, but I don't think I am among the player-base.

Then you should have argued against all of the other problems that goes against gameplay balance first.
*******************************
Everyone who is arguing against current system is doing so based on assumption that current system is correctly following real data.

It isn't.

That needs to be fixed and complaints will mostly be gone.

[Allahu Akbar]

Sidearms are one of the reason why i do Squad leading

That's the real joke, is it not?

If anyone has any "right" to say pistol rounds need buff(they do, but not 9x19), it would be people using certain non-crewman kit with smg as primary weapon.

And when i'm playing ARF or Taliban i tend to pick the bolt action rifle nowadays, cause it will at least damage the enemy to the point where he retreats.

Sad part is that bolt action rifles are nerfed too.
Ironsighted bolt action rifles used to one-shot to leg and black/white to bodyarmor.

back in 0.6-0.8ish it was well establish that certain people prefer to play on the blufor team on INS maps, but i didn't want to take the easy route, i wanted to show these cowards ******** what they'll get if they rely on scopes and supreme firepower. So i genuinely started to appreciate playing in the underdog team over the years, it was challenging and therefor fun, and i found myself more and more often switching to the ins team instead of staying in the blufor team.

I would say, 5 minutes before some idiot comes to call you "Opfor whore."

at 1.3 i came back, played a few weeks and left again. at 1.4.5 i came back again because of all the good memories but holy fuck, TOW no longer kills a tank, APC eating LATs like it's a piece of cake, civi timer set to 2 minutes and will be reset for using a shovel like holy shit i couldn't believe this. but i sticked around because i still wanted to play some PR, weeks later you changed the weapon damage system. For me it feels like v1.0 all over again, you are choking the joy out of this game for the sake of pretended realism. Realism has always been a part of PR but Teamwork always came first. remember "Use voice chat to enhance your project reality experience"? There won't be any experience to enhance if the game is a unbalanced mess.
And unbalanced games have always lead to a frustrated and then toxic communities, i've seen this happening to Planetside 2 and Rainbow 6:Siege, both games had a great community until the devs went the wrong way with certain elements of their games.
And right now it's not just the bullet damage system, it's the OP apc's and tanks as well, and for some reason there are way too many of them on any given map. I don't mind a strong Tank, but i do mind 3 OP tanks.
In the end you are the devs, it's your decision, im just thinking you are neglecting the gameplay way too much. So much effort has been put into this game, the freaking tutorials by Rhino, the freaking assets, the coding and i know you don't like it if people yell and tell you how it should be done but a game without balance isn't fun. And i fear this game might die if the balance is not looked after.

/blogposting

Civilian 2:00 timer is indeed bad. ("hey man can you check out A2 area? One of my squaddie died there." "Sorry man, I'm still waiting for 2 minutes to become civi.")

So is unarmed medic being treated as collaborator when/after using medkit. (despite the fact that they can already be shot if within 10/20(not sure which)m of armed insurgent.

For a long time it seemed like developers were unnecessarily nerfing more complicated mechanics(that makes PR...PR) in attempt to balance out tendency for less-skilled players to swap to Blufor(in hope that superior weaponry carries them, if only for a few cheap kills).

But APC should be less tanky now, from the side/rear(unless you have a low-damage AT weapon such as RPG-7).
Problem is that APC is now more or less pinpoint accurate if they tap one round at a time.

MBTs can be killed by LAT in 3-4 hits(again as long as your LAT isn't one of those low-damage RPG-7 on insurgent team) to side, and 2-3 to rear.

[Kingy]

This is getting rather repetitive. You clearly derive fun from a game based on how realistic you perceive the experience to be, that's fine, it's just not my idea of what PR should be, or in fact ever has been.

Nope.
What would/should be changed is the likes of Insurgent Fighter whose primary(!) weapon is shotgun.

So presumably these weapons should be replaced with rifles? For the sake of balance. Right? So now we are in a situation where, unless new weapons are introduced, all the insurgent and militia factions are clones of one another in order to balance the game, or we accept that unconventional factions will always be at a disadvantage and struggle to compete.

What happens to these low caliber weapons anyway? Do we give them to kits not typically used in direct combat? Giving them to medics seems unfair, and will by extension make the kit even more toxic.
"Here, have a weapon you can barely kill the enemy with, no no I insist, off you go, just run away if you see anybody."

It's not as if these weapons were particularly potent to begin with.

You already lost. Should have asked for alternatives such as extra c4 or grenade.

Or rather, if at this point(post 1.4.10) he didn't decide to revert the change, it's probably not happening.

Oh, you think? I thought they'd been mulling it over for a few years.

Militia could easily be changed to armored as they do have them on kit geometry.

As if lack of scope on Militia isn't glaring enough.

I don't think Militia having armour is particularly realistic, the main inspiration for the faction (and previous name) was the Chechen militia. In this instance I don't think realism need be sacrificed for the sake of gameplay; and I'm shocked to see you suggest it.

Lack of scopes has never been an issue on Fools Road, the map is emblematic of the kind of asymmetrical balance that PR does so well. Similarly Iron Ridge.

They still are, just to a lesser extent (as long as it's not skirmish map).

And you don't see that as a problem?

Then you should have argued against all of the other problems that goes against gameplay balance first.

When I said there was a fine balance that had been respected during the mods development; I meant it. This isn't my preferred version of PR, I find it extraordinarily hectic. The mod has changed a lot as I've played it but the alterations made never tipped the scales too far one way or the other. I think in this instance however, they have.

[RaedTheManual]

Everyone who is arguing against current system is doing so based on assumption that current system is correctly following real data.

/wrong

i base my opinion solely on the aspect of balance

[Allahu Akbar]

This is getting rather repetitive. You clearly derive fun from a game based on how realistic you perceive the experience to be, that's fine, it's just not my idea of what PR should be, or in fact ever has been.

So presumably these weapons should be replaced with rifles? For the sake of balance. Right? So now we are in a situation where, unless new weapons are introduced, all the insurgent and militia factions are clones of one another in order to balance the game, or we accept that unconventional factions will always be at a disadvantage and struggle to compete.

Re-re-read my posts a few pages back.

I can make gun damage balanced without detracting from realism and I posted data to do it with.

What happens to these low caliber weapons anyway? Do we give them to kits not typically used in direct combat? Giving them to medics seems unfair, and will by extension make the kit even more toxic.
"Here, have a weapon you can barely kill the enemy with, no no I insist, off you go, just run away if you see anybody."

It's not as if these weapons were particularly potent to begin with.

They were actually very potent, especially 900rpm SMGs.

For conventional forces that isn't a problem.
For unconventional forces medics are either fairly rare(how often do you see medic on iraqi insurgent side?) or rifles(Hamas, Taliban, Militia). There is also sawed off mosin as sidearm in one of militia kit.
The most common pistol-only kit for unconventional forces is Sapper and that is absolutely fine, because Sapper near front line should be holding cellphone if not planting IED.

Oh, you think? I thought they'd been mulling it over for a few years.

They probably stopped thinking about it when they implemented the change because you didn't yell loudly enough.

I don't think Militia having armour is particularly realistic, the main inspiration for the faction (and previous name) was the Chechen militia. In this instance I don't think realism need be sacrificed for the sake of gameplay; and I'm shocked to see you suggest it.

Chechen has lots of weaponry/bodyarmor from old Soviet warehouse.
Realism is not sacrificed. (they are also not exactly chechen rebels because of M60)

You can easily find photo of such chechen rebels on google:

Lack of scopes has never been an issue on Fools Road, the map is emblematic of the kind of asymmetrical balance that PR does so well. Similarly Iron Ridge.

So double standard, I see.

And you don't see that as a problem?

I saw the problem and I posted a fine solution based on reality many pages ago.

When I said there was a fine balance that had been respected during the mods development; I meant it. This isn't my preferred version of PR, I find it extraordinarily hectic. The mod has changed a lot as I've played it but the alterations made never tipped the scales too far one way or the other. I think in this instance however, they have.

"Balance."

There is reason why a lot of people were complaining about Hamas being OP(having similar 900rpm full auto 5.56 weapons).

Again, current state is bad but that doesn't mean going back to old system is good.

Not sure if you remember but M14 used to one-hit black/white; the only "balancing factor" is the fact that most people have not discovered it.

It may have been because of less-organized system of working on changes; but it looks like devs don't really consider the implication of two different changes that target(nerf) the same thing. Civilians got a 2:00 timer, cannot drop kit to become civi after being shot, and 20m radius at the same time at one point, in addition to very little intel required to reveal cache which made civilians basically pointless.

Instances of developers tipping the scale too far is not exactly rare.

/wrong

i base my opinion solely on the aspect of balance

Except being able to kill MBT with LAT (and if french, grenadier) in reasonable amount of shots is balance(also realistic).

[Kingy]

Re-re-read my posts a few pages back.

I can make gun damage balanced without detracting from realism and I posted data to do it with.

Can you post it in spoiler for me to read? Either I missed the point or I missed the post.

As for gun data, it really does mean nothing to me, I have no understanding of the coding behind PR and a limited knowledge of ballistics. Does that mean that what I have to say is now invalid? No, I don't think so. Afterall, I play the game don't I? And I don't think I'm alone in my ignorance.

They were actually very potent, especially 900rpm SMGs.

Personally I don't think they were, but opinion will inevitably vary. Whatever the case there is no denying now that they are incredibly ineffective.

I cannot recall any such occasion where kits equipped with the Skorpion were running riot. The Mp5 is a slightly different matter, and clearly was a good weapon. But the only people that made squads comprised of crewmen and medics were seasoned PR players, typically people of both competence and skill. They were also people who enjoyed a challenge, and a bit of fun; those squalid half-wits.

The most common pistol-only kit for unconventional forces is Sapper and that is absolutely fine, because Sapper near front line should be holding cellphone if not planting IED.

Why not just remove the Sappers weapon altogether? Give them an extra IED or mine to play with, you clearly cannot defend yourself with the kit, so why keep up the visual pretense that you can?

For unconventional forces medics are either fairly rare(how often do you see medic on iraqi insurgent side?) or rifles(Hamas, Taliban, Militia). There is also sawed off mosin as sidearm in one of militia kit.

And why are they so rare? In part surely because of the god awful weapons these kits are equipped with. If you want to change the attitude of the playerbase then you do it through the gameplay, and if you make the medic kit even more ineffective in a firefight then you are bound to see insurgent teams with even less medics. Running and dying gets old rather fast.

Chechen has lots of weaponry/bodyarmor from old Soviet warehouse.
Realism is not sacrificed. (they are also not exactly chechen rebels because of M60)

The M60 is a recent addition reflecting the militia factions broad associations.

Your English is clearly very advanced, so I have to assume your being purposefully ignorant of the difference between my very clear indication of the past and present. The Militia faction as we know it now used to be the Chechen faction, it was the main inspiration behind the development of the what we have now. The Chechen faction however is no more, it is a dead faction, an ex-faction, it has ceased to be.

At present the militia faction represents a far more generic force, with assets and arms pulled from a variety of conflicts. We could use body armour, as perhaps significant parts of the Chechen militia did, but what about those maps in which the conflict portrayed is for example, in the Balkans? There isn't really a realistic alternative here, the faction itself prevents that.

So double standard, I see.

I don't see the double standard at all.

My complaint is that sidearms, shotguns and low caliber weapons are now virtually obsolete in their role as weapons due to these recent changes. I don't have a problem with the balance on maps like Fools Road, in fact, before the removal of scopes from the Militia faction (0.97? I forget) the map was in fact unbalanced, in favour of the militia; it was also rather generic.

You may say that these changes were both necessary and appropriate, something which has added to the realism of the mod, and something you enjoy. On the other hand I think it has undermined the gameplay, which for me, has left the mod slightly less enjoyable.