Supported Weapons

Ugly Duck · Post by **Ugly Duck** » 2005-06-13 20:29

BF2 has the handy feature of fire selection. IE M16 is semi/burst, AK101 is full/semi, etc etc. However, it seems to me that all of the weapons with bi-pods only have one fire mode. Why not code(or script, dunno) a special fire mode that can only be uses when the soldier is prone, supported. You could have the animation with the bi-pod, wich is already half way done since the animation plays when you spawn. It could be used with sniper rifles too. I'm not 100% sure if it's possible, but I hope it is.

keef_haggerd · Post by **keef_haggerd** » 2005-06-15 02:35

you know i read this post liek 2-3 times before i realized what you were getting at. i think thats a great idea. and how about if your near a low wall or window you can use this feature to be more accurate =)

Figisaacnewton · Post by **Figisaacnewton** » 2005-06-15 03:14

I had this idea a long time ago, again, search button is your freind.

But basically, im pretty sure you could just code a fire mode that can either only be used while prone, or is really really accurate while prone and really incredibly innacureate doing anything else (that would be sloppy though) to simulate setting up a weapon's bipod.

snipurs · Post by **snipurs** » 2005-06-15 03:37

just look at the stationary gun it is possible!

keef_haggerd · Post by **keef_haggerd** » 2005-06-15 03:53

while talking about support weapons, PLEASE fix their accuracy. now, when standing up and crouching, these weapons can be as inaccurate as you want them to be, but in PRONE, they should be able to hit any target within 25 yards no problem. this isnt the case when i was playing with the bots just moments ago, every 5th round seemed to be hitting even though it was firing at a relativly decent speed (about bursts of 6 shots every 2-3 seconds) and i was missing ALOT. in close range like that, a SAW gunner should be able to take out at least 3 other men if they are unaware he is this. i also noticed how inaccurate these guns are in multiplayer, as i sat there trying to hit ONE guy and unloaded about 100 rounds with bursts of 2 shots. he was only 50 yards away near a tree.

snipurs · Post by **snipurs** » 2005-06-15 04:04

like i said in a diffrent topic i shot 3 clips prone, one clip 3 round burst, 2nd 6 round burst and 3rd full round(didnt explain in detail in that post) but there was a head sticking out i saw shoulders and a portation of teh upper body i should atleast hit him once not 1 round.. also he was a sniper i was sitting still and prone with no cover he couldnt hit me... that goes to show you how bad the weapons reallys are.

TaZ · Post by **TaZ** » 2005-06-15 16:48

how about like the bi-pods in AA? they really help with snipers.

Post by **BrokenArrow** » 2005-06-15 20:27

i think the way Day of deafeat handles bipods (at least machine gun bipods) is great although the controls would be a bit different because in that game you can only scope the sniper rifle and for other guns the right click either melees or does nothing. but its a big keyboard so im sure there will be an open button that allows you to set a bipod (if thats possible), otherwise i like the standing=innaccurate prone= very accurate idea for the MGs

stickyblue · Post by **stickyblue** » 2005-06-15 23:17

Well, in my oppinion (I have never fired one, just so you know

) Common sense would tell you that the constant firing of those round creates the loss in accuracy, becuase of all those recoils it would be hard to keep a proper sight. From what i've heard, the M249 is relatively easy to be accurate, as it only fires the .223 round and is rather heavy. Now I would think, that shot's fired in bursts, would be just as accurate as the M16, if not more.

stickyblue · Post by **stickyblue** » 2005-06-16 00:03

Lighter than a lot of other LMG's but still heavier than the M16 correct? So in theory, it should be more accurate when firing short bursts?

Beckwith · Post by **Beckwith** » 2005-06-16 00:46

stickyblue wrote:Lighter than a lot of other LMG's but still heavier than the M16 correct? So in theory, it should be more accurate when firing short bursts?

it should yes

Post by **BrokenArrow** » 2005-06-16 01:38

but obviously the m16 is smaller and lighter making it easier (i have not fired one either im just assuming) to fire accurately on the move or in snapshot situations because of that lesser weight. also its easier to reload, if not for these advantages every squad member would probably carry an m249 haha imagine that firepower

stickyblue · Post by **stickyblue** » 2005-06-16 01:45

lol, Yes exactly, the reasons behind the whole army not picking the M249 as there main assualt rifle. But still, when in the prone position WITH a bipod, it surely must be more accurate in short bursts?

Post by **BrokenArrow** » 2005-06-16 01:49

I guess so, but the m16 must be decently balanced for accurate firing after being in service, and being updated, since vietnam.

Ugly Duck · Post by **Ugly Duck** » 2005-06-16 02:51

The SAW weighs ~22 lbs with ammo, if I figured it right. The M16 weighs a bit over 8.5 lbs with ammo. When you're running around that could be quite a difference. They, of course, do the same damage as they fire the same ammo. The SAW can even use 30 round magazines instead of a belt if need be. I don't think it would be too hard to balance the 2 in game. The SAW would be harder to aim because of its extra weight, as in the crosshairs would move around more. But for the same reason it would have lower recoil. The M16 would be the opposite. These effects would be much less noticable when in the prone position, in wich case the SAW would excel due to higher ROF and more amunition. Sound balanced?

SGT-Kwint[75thR] · Post by **SGT-Kwint[75thR]** » 2005-06-17 09:08

Well the whole bipod constantly deployed in BF2 is great, why? Because you can do that in real life as well. Having a SAW with bipod out and then dropping to the ground would make a world of difference when needing to deploy it first, what takes 2 seconds instead of having it out already to give the suppressive fire your squad needs right away. But! Having the option to retract it is a must. Unlike AA which would only let you use it when in prone.

And the other thing about accuracy would be:

Standing and shooting: 35 to 45% chance of hit.
Standing and shooting with ironsight: 45 to 55% chance of hit.

Crouching and shooting: 55 to 70% chance of hit.
Crouching and shooting with ironsight: : 75 to 95% chance of hit.

Prone/Bipod and shooting: 90 to 100% chance of hit.

Prone and bla bla..

What you all think?

Post by **Wolfmaster** » 2005-06-17 10:32

SGT-Kwint[75thR wrote:]Well the whole bipod constantly deployed in BF2 is great, why? Because you can do that in real life as well. Having a SAW with bipod out and then dropping to the ground would make a world of difference when needing to deploy it first, what takes 2 seconds instead of having it out already to give the suppressive fire your squad needs right away. But! Having the option to retract it is a must. Unlike AA which would only let you use it when in prone.

the problem doesn't lie in bf2 having the bipods out but in them not really affecting accuracy. also having the bipods out, on the ground and being able to turn and turn and turn etc doesn't seem realistic. especially in the sandy territory bf2 is in. the bipod would work it's way into the sand when dragged across it. (i think, correct me if i'm wrong. it just would make sense to me)

SGT-Kwint[75thR] · Post by **SGT-Kwint[75thR]** » 2005-06-17 11:57

Yeah ok, about the accuracy yes, that needs to be implemented. And of course moving on the ground with bipod down can only be in a small semi-circle. And about it getting stuck in the sand, well not that important, why? To much variables to be reckoned with then.

Post by **BrokenArrow** » 2005-06-17 21:34

i think even standing you should be able to get off accurate controlled bursts at people, you just shouldnt be able to hold the trigger down as much as you could if you were prone, which still shouldnt be much.