Grenadier kit

[RHYS4190]

We need a lot more splash damage on the nades, right now you have to land the nade right at the feet of another player for it too kill them, Which does not work in game very well, to do this you need a direct line of sight to get the accuracy necessary to get it close enough. With the splash damage this low makes blind fire extremely in effective which is in real life what nade launchers are used well as for direct fire,

What im proposing is increase the splash to make blind fire more effective, say a splash range of 20 to 15m

Now the other day i was able to simply walk through a bombardment of Nades with out even a scratch and they where only a few meters away from me,

i don't know about you i think that complexly screwed and it needs to be fixed.

[Expendable Grunt]

Grenades in general seem pants. +1, though 20m away from a 40mm shell shouldn't hurt TOO much, would it?

M.

[angellfall]

mm... i think 20m would be a bit too much granade will penetrate american's outdated kevlar vest from min 3m away and vest against fragemenst i dont really know the name but anyway from 9m away. On 4m area there will be around 15fragmenst per every m2. Those are the facts from real granade.

Anyway, imo you still should get wounded ingame like 15m away by splash dmg but not killed. but i think its quite easy to hit a target to right on his feet with current system and explosion is still quite "big bum" agaist inf.

And in IRL there is ofc "badluck" factor what we dont have in game... im sure one of those fragments could kill a man even if he is 70m away it just needs optimal flyingpath and hit to neck... This RNG factor, as said we cant have in games

[RHYS4190]

Still it not exactly realistic that nades have the killing power of a party popper.

[Eddie Baker]

The casualty radius on the NATO 40x46mm HEDP grenades is only 5m. Hand grenades have a larger casualty radius, but you can't lob them as far. Also, the HEDP rounds are good against light armor.

The Soviet/Russian VOG-25 grenades are listed as 6m in most sources.

[DankE_SPB]

20m is a real overkill, this is kill\wound radius of current BMP-3 HEF shell, and you know this thing is 100mm calibre and weighs ~16kg
and like always, old vid, where grenade blows up 2-3m away and do nothing

like always, eddie ninjad me

personally, i would slightly increase kill\wound radius, so you don't need to land it directly under enemy legs, but for sure not 15-20 meters

[Gore]

I stopped using them long ago.

[Jedimushroom]

I don't recall ever being killed by a rifle launched grenade, they seem utterly useless.

[hiberNative]

i kill people with the nade launcher all the time, and i get killed by em too.
and come on guys, they are also a weapon of intimidation. 8 explosive rounds which source is hard to trace.

[Kim Jong ill]

IMO The grenadier is far more useful for projecting smoke then it is for projecting fire power, I'd like to see a decrease in HEDP grenades and an increase in smoke round. With the grenadier firing smoke you can easily create a screen to an objective or obscure the view of defenders if you fire straight onto the mark.

[single.shot (nor)]

as previously mentioned, the GL is IMO more of a supression weapon than it is a "killing weapon". IMO the grenadier class is not for killing things, its for making ur Squaddies kill more efficiently.

[TheLean]

I think its fine right now. On the right map they are effective for kill, you need many angles such as a city. You can always hit something close to the enemy such as a wall. Asad khal comes to mind. On open maps they are not so useful. Launchers are best for suppresion and bleed overall though.

[RHYS4190]

Eddie Baker;1152715']The casualty radius on the NATO 40x46mm HEDP grenades is only 5m. Hand grenades have a larger casualty radius, but you can't lob them as far. Also, the HEDP rounds are good against light armor.
The Soviet/Russian VOG-25 grenades are listed as 6m in most sources.

1m in game meters are half of a real life meter im pretty sure, so if the kill radius is 6m in real life, in game it must be 12m, to be correct and realistic.

So me saying make the kill radius at least 15m's is not exactly unreasonable.

[RHYS4190]

as previously mentioned, the GL is IMO more of a supression weapon than it is a "killing weapon". IMO the grenadier class is not for killing things, its for making ur Squaddies kill more efficiently.

Every thing we do here is to kill people, there is no abstention to this rule,

[Redamare]

I Dont see whats wrong with the physics as it is?? the blast radius is Fair for such a small projectile i dont think we need to change anything

[TheLean]

1m in game meters are half of a real life meter im pretty sure, so if the kill radius is 6m in real life, in game it must be 12m, to be correct and realistic.

So me saying make the kill radius at least 15m's is not exactly unreasonable.

Unrealistic, and it would totally ruin gameplay if every grenadier had 8 equivalents of a tank heat round.

[single.shot (nor)]

Every thing we do here is to kill people, there is no abstention to this rule,

the LMG is also for killing, yet that isnt what it's best at.

[Jaymz]

1m in game meters are half of a real life meter im pretty sure, so if the kill radius is 6m in real life, in game it must be 12m, to be correct and realistic.

True that the measurements are off. But no way they're off that much. If you have proof please post it.

[Celestial1]

I consider myself to be a good grenadier.

I find that it is actually one of the most versatile and powerful tools in combatting enemy infantry, that is balanced by a complicated knowledge of the weapon to use it effectively.

I can pinpoint a grenade onto a marker from 300m, and land one within 10m from 3-400m.

I can fire for effect to scatter unsuspecting enemies (nothing say 'run' better than a grenade a meter from your feet), fire for kill on enemies in non-roofed cover or in roofed cover thru a door, or fire for suppression on enemies attempting to fire on our squad (smoke on the edge of a hill stops accrate fire pretty quick.

The tool needs experience, and a mathematical/physical connection in your mind. Without it, you'll estimate improperly or over-think modifiers in range or obstacles, and turn out to be less effective than someone who feels at home with the estimations and lining those up with the reticle.