Project Reality Forums

I don't get it. Why do some people want to turn this game into a modern Battlefield title with all the 'balancing'.

If you are going to change the behaviour and stats of a gun from the real values you might aswell stop using the model and make a model of an imaginary gun instead, like in COD infinite warfare. Why would you continue to use the M16 model and textures if it is nothing like the M16?

PR shouldn't work like that, PR has asymmetrical balance, even in AAS. What is next? Give thermal optics to the BTRs? If everything had to be perfectly balanced the DEVs would have to remove the insurgency mode too.

DogACTUAL wrote:I don't get it. Why do some people want to turn this game into a modern Battlefield title with all the 'balancing'.

Because it poses a significant problem. Take the Hamas for example, if you're not taking the M16 if you have the option to do so, the IDF having Tavor and M4A1 coupled with better body armour means you're going to lose every engagement on equal terms. Similarly there is no need to use the M14 over it when playing USViet, so that totally undermines having an option for it.

If you are going to change the behaviour and stats of a gun from the real values you might aswell stop using the model and make a model of an imaginary gun instead, like in COD infinite warfare. Why would you continue to use the M16 model and textures if it is nothing like the M16?

The entire point of the whole 900 RPM debate is exactly that they flat out aren't behaving like they should. It's almost irrelevant how little the 5.56mm NATO kicks, at 900 RPM you will be off target really fast due to - guess what! - recoil. Which the recoil cut-off prevents.

Let's put it this way: The values are close to their real life counter parts, true, but the game executes them in a way that leads them ad absurdum. There is no weapon system that wins over another in every type of combat but that is totally the case here and thus something needs to be done about that. Just like ATGMs got nerfed as soon as it was possible because they totally broke the armour balance for over half a decade and made modern NATO tanks vs the almost antiquated Chinese and Russian tanks and even their IFVs worthless tincans.

PR shouldn't work like that, PR has asymmetrical balance, even in AAS. What is next? Give thermal optics to the BTRs? If everything had to be perfectly balanced the DEVs would have to remove the insurgency mode too.

We're not trying to mirror the factions here whatsoever.

RL C7 in full auto = noticeable recoil
Ingame C7 in full auto = Autowin in CQB

That is the problem.
900 RPM is the cause.
Nerf ROF unless you have a better solution.
Make AK74M great again.

I'd say git gud tbh. 1v1 ROF wins yeah. But it has nothing to do if your teams win or not. And that's the point of PR is it not?

Git Gud indeed.

The main disadvantage I see with the AK is it's scope, as said before that thing really doesnt handle well in cqb. So either someone (like me (hint huehuehue)) could make a new scope, or you just dont use it if you know you will be fighting in cqb. I tend to take the alt kits whenever I play Russian inf and even tho the enemy usually has better guns I really don't feel like the enemy has a huge advantage over me. To be honest, the way I see it all you need to compensate for the small advantage they have with their rifles, is a proper squad and a bit of tactic.

Quick example: You are on Dovre and you run into contact in one of those pine tree forrests. One of your squadmembers dies, he tells you where the enemy is. So what you do is you hit the ground, you find a tree, and you look for their feet. If you get the first shot you will win. Also, Russians get pretty good grenades which explode on impact. Yes, the German or the Dutch soldier has an advantage, but it is only small when you play it right.

I am always happy to see improvements in realism though. I have never fired a C7 whatsoever so I can't tell if PR is about right or if it is really not. ROF is just a fact we can google, but we cant get the spray ' 100% right'. The grouping depends on so manny things, I don't think I have to explain that. If we were to change anything then we should look into that, because there are no hard facts that would make it unrealistic to change the grouping a bit I suppose. I personally dont think it is actually necessary though. Also, that is a different topic, this is about if the AK should be improved. My thoughts on that: it could use a better scope.




D.J.

[R-CON]Mr.VdHeide wrote: The main disadvantage I see with the AK is it's scope, as said before that thing really doesnt handle well in cqb. So either someone (like me (hint huehuehue)) could make a new scope, or you just dont use it if you know you will be fighting in cqb.

Well, good luck fighting with your iron sights against the Brits with their SUSAT and ACOG scope on Hades Peak or any other large map. Not only that, the Russians don't even binoculars to help them spot enemies from far away and iron sights suck against targets that are farther than 150m. Also, if someone can change the scope on that thing, why haven't someone done something? The Russian scope debat has been alive for at least 5 years (i checked) and yet no action was made. I understand the realism purpose, but can you at least make it so it doesn't block your entire screen like the ACOG or all the other scopes in the game?

Hades peak is not cqb at all. It is a large map with large forrest area's which are usually kind of open, there is not a lot of undergrowth for example. It is really not that hard to use the 1P29 there.

I agree on the fact we should get a new scope for the Russians though, which is why I am working on a new one.




D.J.

[quote=""'[R-DEV"]camo;2160203']I think you very well know why that is, don't get too carried away all the time.[/quote]

I actually don't, do tell

[quote="DogACTUAL""]I don't get it. Why do some people want to turn this game into a modern Battlefield title with all the 'balancing'.[/quote]

Read this before further commenting please

viirusiiseli wrote:Read this before further commenting please

So what? I already said that the recoil might need adjustments, i just don't like the notion of changing the ROF because it defeats the whole point of PR imo.

For the fifth time Dog, you cannot adjust the recoil by adding more recoil because that fucks up the weapons in semi-auto.

Yes, i understood that, however it would be preferable over changing the ROF.

viirusiiseli wrote:I actually don't, do tell



Read this before further commenting please

The thread^ you're telling him to read has the answer to your question. Read airsofts post.

So why does the HK 416, an AR-15 derivative with almost the same rpm as the M4A1 IRL, have 600 rpm while the Colt C7/ AR-15 variants have 900 rpm?

It is firing at 900, just the sound isn't synced. Fixed for next version.

[R-DEV]M42 Zwilling wrote:It is firing at 900, just the sound isn't synced. Fixed for next version.

Hey, while you're at it, fix the projectile that it's firing, because right now it's firing the 762_51_dmr (58 damage) projectile and not the 556_45_r (39 damage) projectile like it should be. No wonder why i was getting completely destroyed by that thing
Talking about the HK-416 Aimpoint used by the Dutch Breacher Alt

IronFist wrote:Hey, while you're at it, fix the projectile that it's firing, because right now it's firing the 762_51_dmr (58 damage) projectile and not the 556_45_r (39 damage) projectile like it should be. No wonder why i was getting completely destroyed by that thing
Talking about the HK-416 Aimpoint used by the Dutch Breacher Alt

Shhhhh!


It should be fixed also.

Frontliner wrote: RL C7 in full auto = noticeable recoil
Ingame C7 in full auto = Autowin in CQB
Make AK74M great again.

I've always preferred the AK-74 since they redid recoils a few major patches ago. The C7 drains its ammo too mash and tends to spray all over the place. The AK-74 is pinpoint accurate on full auto, it is only really annoying that the scope is trash.

While the 900rpm auto recoil obviously is not ideal and we would love to change it (we are looking into solutions for long time now), I dont see it as the "auto win" some people make it out to be. I have just as much success with AKs or G3 in CQB as with AR15.

[R-DEV]Mats391 wrote:While the 900rpm auto recoil obviously is not ideal and we would love to change it (we are looking into solutions for long time now), I dont see it as the "auto win" some people make it out to be.

I do, the dutch weapons are quite litteraly god-like vs the AK74 for example, on dovre. I've had many situations where I shoot a full second eariler than the enemy while using the AK74 and they just turn around and rape me in 2 frames. It's quite ridiculous

Just (try) to give them more side-to-side and vertical recoil.

[quote=""'[R-DEV"]Mats391;2160412']I have just as much success with AKs or G3 in CQB as with AR15.[/quote]

You need a drop on someone + settled deviation to do that vs a decent player and many times that still isn't enough.

[quote="tankninja1""]I've always preferred the AK-74 since they redid recoils a few major patches ago. The C7 drains its ammo too mash and tends to spray all over the place. The AK-74 is pinpoint accurate on full auto, it is only really annoying that the scope is trash.[/quote]

The C7 is easier to control and also more accurate.

C7 is so much better than the AK in cqb. Best lasergun ingame.
The only downside is that you have to reload after each kill...