Machinegun getting worse...

Enforcer1975 · Post by **Enforcer1975** » 2005-10-29 12:01

Machine guns should be in a supporting role i guess, but why did the devs trade damage for less accuracy? A light or medium machine gun should be the worst fear of an infantryman.
You can't even hit a guy at 50m with a 3 round burst when prone, not even often in semi mode ( seems the xhairs are bad or it's the "programmed" bullet deviation that got increased, and the bumping while shooting is annoying ). In RL when infantry sees a MG pointing at them they usually take cover, not so in BF2. Most infantry i encountered just returned fire and mostly win at medium ranges - it is supposed to make them run for cover. Imo the MG should be able to shoot more rounds straigt at the enemy before pointing towards the sky. In 0.1 i could at least lay a short bust ( max. 5 rounds ) on infantry before i lost my aiming - i hope it will be fixed at 0.3.

Right now the supporting role is degraded to nothing else than just supporting with ammo packs. The only chance you have against groups of infantry is in backstreets where there is no chance to evade and deviation is no problem.

Artnez · Post by **Artnez** » 2005-10-29 12:24

You're right.. it aint cool.

I still suggest that they limit the amount of a certain class per server.

More often than not, the very powerful and effective weapons (like the M249) are not used by all infantryman because it is more expensive to produce them and it is counterproductive to have your entire unit carry an LMG.

If they can limit these things, they could make classes like the sniper/support/specops/engineer much more effective, as their real life counter parts. A group of 10 special operations soldiers can wipe the floor with a group 10 marines in ground combat -- which is not the case here. The question is, would they send 10 special operations soldiers (the government's big investment, or so to speak) to take out a measily 10 infantryman?

I know that many say the essense of BF2 is freedom... but the essense of the military isn't :] And we are trying to authentic here are we not?

Post by **requiem** » 2005-10-29 12:27

We wanted to include a bipod-mode for the MG's this release but it was too late to implement, will be in the next one.

Enforcer1975 · Post by **Enforcer1975** » 2005-10-29 12:40

requiem wrote:We wanted to include a bipod-mode for the MG's this release but it was too late to implement, will be in the next one.

You mean to simulate a supported mg ( that's how they call in in America's Army i think )?? Would be great.

Artnez · Post by **Artnez** » 2005-10-29 13:14

I wonder if that would work much like the M203 works in animation. WHen you click to the 203 the guy flips up the aiming thing and puts the gun into position. The problem occurs when you put away the M203, the M16 magically appears again

Dont know how to explain it exactly... would be good if there was an animation to deploy the M249 bipod and an animation when you want to switch to a different weapon.

Post by **fuzzhead** » 2005-10-29 21:17

bipod!!!!! YOU GUYS ROCK!

Qla · Post by **Qla** » 2005-10-29 22:24

Requiem, can you explain how the bipod will work exactly? I was thinking, if the bipod would automaticly turn on if you lie down or if you are close to a window or some wall that is high enough for a 2-3 second, and if start moving, your movement is slow for a couple of seconds and at the same time the bipod is turning off. Tell me what you think.

Post by **NikovK** » 2005-10-29 22:55

CoD: UO had deployable MG-34's and .30 cals, and the major gripe I had with them was that the deployable points were irregular and had to be manually put into maps. Running around a UO map with my MG-34 gave me a window I could deploy in, a low wall I could not deploy on, a bit of terrain at an odd angle I couldn't deploy on, and so forth. Then an original CoD or a custom map came around, and I couldn't deploy on anything but where I could go prone. Also, variations in the height of the window could mean the windowsill is right below my iron sights, in front of my sights, or two feet below with my belt up visible to snipers. Something of a pain. If a bipod system is employed, the extra work of making it automatically scale to a windowsill or curb without trigger areas added to the map would be payed back tenfold in avoided gameplay frustrations and having to pick around our maps placing machine-gun triggers.

Artnez · Post by **Artnez** » 2005-10-30 00:59

NikovK wrote:CoD: UO had deployable MG-34's and .30 cals, and the major gripe I had with them was that the deployable points were irregular and had to be manually put into maps. Running around a UO map with my MG-34 gave me a window I could deploy in, a low wall I could not deploy on, a bit of terrain at an odd angle I couldn't deploy on, and so forth. Then an original CoD or a custom map came around, and I couldn't deploy on anything but where I could go prone. Also, variations in the height of the window could mean the windowsill is right below my iron sights, in front of my sights, or two feet below with my belt up visible to snipers. Something of a pain. If a bipod system is employed, the extra work of making it automatically scale to a windowsill or curb without trigger areas added to the map would be payed back tenfold in avoided gameplay frustrations and having to pick around our maps placing machine-gun triggers.

Good point.

Can't imagine if that's even possible in BF2. If it isn't possible, i'd say just let the bipod deploy only when prone.. but make sure it takes a descent amount of seconds.

Post by **BlakeJr** » 2005-10-30 07:35

Actually, the descent part takes only a fraction of a second once the descent is initiated.

(Many a days of running back and forth on muddy field (was green grass when we begun) with a sadistic drillinstructor yelling "COVER!!", at which we had to drop like a sack of potatoes, thaught me that. )
What should take a second or 2 is the deployment of the bipods before you're ready to fire.

R.Johnson_USMC · Post by **R.Johnson_USMC** » 2005-10-30 07:43

I agree on the class limiting function. Most of the people should be Assault (spelling). And the others should be supporting roles. But the hard part is figuring out a system that can fairly distrubute the access of the support roles. Because I dont have the best computer and I dont load the fastest, but I dont want my medic or sniper role takin by some noob that doesnt even know how to use a sniper because he loads faster then me. I hope that makes some kinda sense, I noticed on another post a Alt Ranking system, maybe you can implement a shooting range and score the person on the rifle or maybe take stats from that ALT RANKING system and the person with the best stats gets to have the spot. And if they have that same stats rank should supercede. Something like that. Semper Fi

Enforcer1975 · Post by **Enforcer1975** » 2005-10-30 13:25

R.Johnson_USMC wrote:I agree on the class limiting function. Most of the people should be Assault (spelling). And the others should be supporting roles. But the hard part is figuring out a system that can fairly distrubute the access of the support roles. Because I dont have the best computer and I dont load the fastest, but I dont want my medic or sniper role takin by some noob that doesnt even know how to use a sniper because he loads faster then me. I hope that makes some kinda sense, I noticed on another post a Alt Ranking system, maybe you can implement a shooting range and score the person on the rifle or maybe take stats from that ALT RANKING system and the person with the best stats gets to have the spot. And if they have that same stats rank should supercede. Something like that. Semper Fi

Assault only would end in noobtube using. If this should be realized ( more assault than other classes ) the M203 should be taken away and given to another class. Not every soldier carries a Nade launcher on his weapon, in most cases it's a RIS system with PEQ, a flashlight and of course a red dot.

Imo snipers should be taken away from the game. I remember all PR games to have a great amount of snipers. Every second guy had one. And while we are on the bipod model of the machine guns, why not add a bipod model of the snipers, too? They sure take as long or longer than a machine gun to deploy.

Artnez · Post by **Artnez** » 2005-10-30 14:16

Enforcer1975 wrote:Assault only would end in noobtube using. If this should be realized ( more assault than other classes ) the M203 should be taken away and given to another class. Not every soldier carries a Nade launcher on his weapon, in most cases it's a RIS system with PEQ, a flashlight and of course a red dot.

Imo snipers should be taken away from the game. I remember all PR games to have a great amount of snipers. Every second guy had one. And while we are on the piod model of the machine guns, why not add a bipod model of the snipers, too? They sure take as long or longer than a machine gun to deploy.

Yes, snipers should be taken out. Sharpshooters and supporting designated marksman should be left in. The SVD is commonly used by insurgents in urban terrain and open terrain.

R.Johnson_USMC · Post by **R.Johnson_USMC** » 2005-10-30 20:11

Good point on the noob tube... I completely overlooked that.

Post by **NikovK** » 2005-10-30 22:37

The 40mm systems just need a distance-to-armed tweak.

Post by **Paladin-X** » 2005-10-30 23:13

NikovK wrote:The 40mm systems just need a distance-to-armed tweak.

We did try that, however the nades would go through objects and buildings. (AT missiles currently have the same problem, unfortunately I forgot to remove the arming delay)

Post by **NikovK** » 2005-10-31 06:38

Hmm... well, the hand grenades have functional arming delay, it seems. I'd look at those and see how they handle it. Following my suggestion to the letter, we'll have 40mm HE tennis ball launchers. Frightening.

Post by **Paladin-X** » 2005-10-31 06:52

Also, in regards to the lmgs, they are the same in .2 as in .1. This was an oversight on my part. In earlier test builds we had tweaked them and they worked rather well. Then we had tried something else and that didn't turn out. Forgot to revert the accuracy to the early test builds.

Post by **NikovK** » 2005-10-31 06:55

"CollideWithSolids" might be the trick, but honestly, I don't know.

Super6 · Post by **Super6** » 2005-10-31 13:52

21cw mod had the SAWS dialed in quite nicely when you are prone.