Infantry weapon damage changes

Locked
Bonecrusher76
Posts: 40
Joined: 2016-01-17 19:52

Re: Infantry weapon damage changes

Post by Bonecrusher76 »

Rabbit wrote:
I knew someone was going to bring this exact video up... so here is my rebuttal.


A well trained NATO sniper with access to excellent weaponry and AP ammunition wouldn't be firing at a ballistic plate with a round that couldn't penetrate. Show me one reputable news article where NATO scout snipers from any country are being told to aim for the legs because their weapons can't penetrate an $85.00 ballistic plate. If the developers want to replace all of the .308 sniper rifles in the game with .338 or .50BMG sniper rifles, fine. That would be what would realistically happen in a conflict where armor penetration was important.
Last edited by Bonecrusher76 on 2017-04-24 20:43, edited 2 times in total.
Jacksonez__
Posts: 1086
Joined: 2013-07-28 13:19

Re: Infantry weapon damage changes

Post by Jacksonez__ »

Rabbit wrote:
seems like insurgent sniper is shit in real life also :roll:
X-Alt
Posts: 1062
Joined: 2013-07-02 22:35

Re: Infantry weapon damage changes

Post by X-Alt »

Frontliner wrote:I couldn't care less about real life. What I care about is that entire categories of weapons were turned into utter trash so much so that they didn't want us to know how badly the SMGs are now compared to everything else besides Shotguns and Pistols which are at the same level of suckiness.



Well, maybe it's the fact that a 9mm weapon is designed to be only good for close encounters and the update made 9mm totally pointless.

And of course a 9mm is designed to clear a building, the fact that armies don't clear buildings with 9mms anymore is that they are carrying assault rifles which do a good enough job at it while not sacrificing combat capabilities at 200m and beyond which most SMGs do due to their caliber.

MP5 stormstroopers were a cheesy strat, I'll give you that, but you wouldn't underestimate their capabilities in reality "just because it's only a 9mm weapon" if you had to go up against it. Reality aside, it's a game, I think weapon balance is more important and the update broke that.


No, you right, it's a cartridge, and there are plenty of 9mm weapons that can go more than double the distance with good enough precision.
xDDDDDDDD


The AK platform was designed as an SMG and then they realized it was better at everything.
Rabbit
Posts: 7760
Joined: 2006-12-17 15:14

Re: Infantry weapon damage changes

Post by Rabbit »

Jacksonez__ wrote:seems like insurgent sniper is shit in real life also :roll:
Seems like sapi plates are designed to stop medium caliber rounds. Esapi (what I used) can stop a 30-06 AP round.
Image

AfSoccer "I just don't see the natural talent."
Image
Bonecrusher76
Posts: 40
Joined: 2016-01-17 19:52

Re: Infantry weapon damage changes

Post by Bonecrusher76 »

Rabbit wrote:Seems like sapi plates are designed to stop medium caliber rounds. Esapi (what I used) can stop a 30-06 AP round.
I don't deny that some plates can stop a standard 30-06 AP round at longer ranges. However, a NATO sniper would never realistically be in a situation where they planned on using a gun that wouldn't defeat armor they knew or expected the enemy faction to have.

Replace the Project Reality .308 sniper rifles with .338 or .50BMG. That would be realistic in a conflict against an armored faction. It would also gives the sniper an even more unique feel compared to the marksman and standard battle rifles.

My point is that in a game where a medic can fix a headshot good as new in 30 seconds, a sniper shouldn't have to shoot more than once for the desired effect. For game purposes, I believe one sniper shot anywhere should be a kill, and one shot to the head should be an instant "dead dead."
Last edited by Bonecrusher76 on 2017-04-24 21:10, edited 9 times in total.
Rabbit
Posts: 7760
Joined: 2006-12-17 15:14

Re: Infantry weapon damage changes

Post by Rabbit »

Bonecrusher76 wrote: Replace the Project Reality .308 rifles with .338 or .50BMG. That would be realistic in a conflict against an armored faction.
They cannot even finish saf due to lack of an animator, it would be an even bigger task to replace just the m-24 for the xm2010.

Also I'm gonna say it, who gives a fuck about snipers? 2 kits on a map vs people legit concern of shit like the mg3 all over the place.
Image

AfSoccer "I just don't see the natural talent."
Image
FFG
Forum Moderator
Posts: 1463
Joined: 2014-03-18 04:47

Re: Infantry weapon damage changes

Post by FFG »

Auto rifles and MMG's are now effective at stopping and deterring INF from crossing open ground now? WAT! Must be OP, Its not like they are designed to kill people and lock down entire areas.

WHOAH, an M60 kill you in 1-2 shots because you push across an open field? Well fuck, maybe don't do dumb shit and die.
DogACTUAL
Posts: 878
Joined: 2016-05-21 01:13

Re: Infantry weapon damage changes

Post by DogACTUAL »

Wing Walker wrote:Body armor would stop the shot pellets from penetrating the vest at all and into the person, and you think that means you should be instadead?

The shot also looses energy extremely fast when hitting a barrier. So its most effective at close range before the shot pattern spreads.

If you test it, you will find the shotgun is a one shot kill up close, and loses effectiveness as it goes down range, as it should.
I suggest you read posts carefully before you accuse anyone of bullshitting.

Read my previous post again and pay close attention to the (parentheses) and you will see i was only refering to unarmored opponents.

No, shotguns are not a one hit kill ingame like someone else already pointed out, so much for your 'testing'.

And yes, i myself said that IRL many people initially tolerated many center mass hits from pistol calibers. But after still being able to fight back, they succumbed to those hits rather quickly afterwards. In most cases it took no more that one minute.

Also if your spinal column gets hit no way you will be able to stay up.

So unless the engine can simulate all those variables, it would be best to buff up the pistols/SMGs to actually better simulate their real effectiveness.

@FFG: Right on point m8, they are supposed to be OP.
saXoni
Posts: 4164
Joined: 2010-10-17 21:20

Re: Infantry weapon damage changes

Post by saXoni »

Rabbit wrote:Also I'm gonna say it, who gives a fuck about snipers? 2 kits on a map vs people legit concern of shit like the mg3 all over the place.
LMAO I've been lurking waiting for someone to say that.
Vista
Posts: 1266
Joined: 2011-04-30 10:36

Re: Infantry weapon damage changes

Post by Vista »

FFG wrote: WHOAH, an M60 kill you in 1-2 shots because you push across an open field? Well fuck, maybe don't do dumb shit and die.
Woah, an M60 user sees me 5m away from him, and 1 shot no-scopes me with his belt-fed Angel of Death weapon? xD

People don't just use ARs to cover open fields bro

7.62 ARs need to be rebalanced, no possible argument against it.
Bonecrusher76
Posts: 40
Joined: 2016-01-17 19:52

Re: Infantry weapon damage changes

Post by Bonecrusher76 »

Rabbit wrote:They cannot even finish saf due to lack of an animator, it would be an even bigger task to replace just the m-24 for the xm2010.

Also I'm gonna say it, who gives a fuck about snipers? 2 kits on a map vs people legit concern of shit like the mg3 all over the place.

Point 1: The .338 snipers already exist in the game and changing the kit gun from one to the other on a map is easy to do.

Point 2: Who cares about snipers? Your entire squad cares when they are pinned down by a good one. Your HAT and your AA care when they can't get a shot off. Your TOW gunner cares, your mortar team cares. Those "MG3s all over the place"? They care too... It's been my experience over the YEARS is that people in PR like to whine about how "worthless" snipers are, but whenever there is a good enemy sniper in a good position, the entire team begs, cries, and pleads for those "worthless" snipers on their team to counter-snipe.
Last edited by Bonecrusher76 on 2017-04-24 21:29, edited 6 times in total.
DogACTUAL
Posts: 878
Joined: 2016-05-21 01:13

Re: Infantry weapon damage changes

Post by DogACTUAL »

That's so true, a good sniper can turn a whole game depending on the map.
inb4banned
Posts: 234
Joined: 2015-02-20 10:48

Re: Infantry weapon damage changes

Post by inb4banned »

FFG wrote:Auto rifles and MMG's are now effective at stopping and deterring INF from crossing open ground now? WAT! Must be OP, Its not like they are designed to kill people and lock down entire areas.

WHOAH, an M60 kill you in 1-2 shots because you push across an open field? Well fuck, maybe don't do dumb shit and die.
Yes, because the new mechanics only apply when you cross an open field.

WOAH, you get a drop on an unsuspected MG3 user but he randomly shoots few bullets before dying and 1 of those hits your **** and you die. Great game design, very thought out.
FFG
Forum Moderator
Posts: 1463
Joined: 2014-03-18 04:47

Re: Infantry weapon damage changes

Post by FFG »

inb4banned wrote:Yes, because the new mechanics only apply when you cross an open field.

WOAH, you get a drop on an unsuspected MG3 user but he randomly shoots few bullets before dying and 1 of those hits your **** and you die. Great game design, very thought out.
So what your saying is you didn't get the drop on the AR. You just played it badly and died. XD
Vista
Posts: 1266
Joined: 2011-04-30 10:36

Re: Infantry weapon damage changes

Post by Vista »

FFG wrote:So what your saying is you didn't get the drop on the AR. You just played it badly and died. XD
Are you pretending to be retarded?

Friendly reminder of the 1.1 bug. Much rage was had. Automatic 1-shot weapons don't work.
inb4banned
Posts: 234
Joined: 2015-02-20 10:48

Re: Infantry weapon damage changes

Post by inb4banned »

FFG wrote:So what your saying is you didn't get the drop on the AR. You just played it badly and died. XD
You know I'm just glad I can take a look at prstats, compare our kds and see who knows what they're talking about and who's just trying to be funny.
Rabbit
Posts: 7760
Joined: 2006-12-17 15:14

Re: Infantry weapon damage changes

Post by Rabbit »

inb4banned wrote:who's just trying to be funny.
So your on to me.
Image

AfSoccer "I just don't see the natural talent."
Image
FFG
Forum Moderator
Posts: 1463
Joined: 2014-03-18 04:47

Re: Infantry weapon damage changes

Post by FFG »

inb4banned wrote:You know I'm just glad I can take a look at prstats, compare our kds and see who knows what they're talking about and who's just trying to be funny.
I feel like some of your hostility towards people with differing opinions is due to the fact deep down inside, You know they are right.
Azimov
Posts: 12
Joined: 2010-05-30 20:08

Re: Infantry weapon damage changes

Post by Azimov »

I don't want to get into a discussion on what is realistic and what is not. I appreciate the DEV's effort to improve the gameplay, but this update makes the game less fun imo. That's all there's to say.
FFG
Forum Moderator
Posts: 1463
Joined: 2014-03-18 04:47

Re: Infantry weapon damage changes

Post by FFG »

Azimov wrote:I don't want to get into a discussion on what is realistic and what is not. I appreciate the DEV's effort to improve the gameplay, but this update makes the game less fun imo. That's all there's to say.
PR isn't a run and gun, meme everyone with better mechanical skill game. I've always seen it as being a game of mentally outplaying the enemy.

You should be playing to the strengths of your weapons and being mindful of the strengths of the enemy weapons.
Locked

Return to “Infantry”