Project Reality Forums

dawdler wrote:But then what would be the point of the assault? In PRMM the body armor doesnt mean that much. Might as well scrap assault alltogether.

If you roll the SF and assault classes into one then the assault actually has a purpose. The SF class is, really, superfluous in a game like this. You've got all these conventional weapons and vehicles and unit types, and then you just throw in SF? Why?

For my two cents, I think you rename "assault" as "rifleman", give them the option of M4 or M16 (with appropriate tweaks to the weapons to make one more advantageous at short range with its full-auto rate of fire and one more advantageous at long range with accuracy). Give them grenades and C4. That way your basic infantry unit has some anti-armor capability and the ability to destroy enemy equipment.

You then change the SF class to "grenadier" and give him a 203 and a variety of grenades. If you can implement some of the suggestions above it becomes a much harder class to play effectively, but once mastered a good grenadier would be very useful to a team as he'd be able to take out light vehicles, blast troops through windows or in dead areas with plunging fire, and protect himself at close range or clear rooms even with "buckshot" rounds.

Sure, you lose some "unlocks" and special SF weapons, but so what? The US military doesn't use those weapons, anyway. And if the M16 and M4 are fixed (as well as the AKs) so they've got halfway decent stopping power you won't need the special "kiddie toys" to kill someone with consistently.

Someone earlier made the point that you might lose a certain type of player from your mod community if you got rid of some features, like jets, for instance. But think about it, aren't those the players you want to lose? The ones who just want to be "uber" or "leet" or whatever they call it these days and game the system? The ones who want to just rack up points or kills to feed their egos?

If you introduce a different style of play to the game based on realism you're certainly going to lose some players, but you'll end up attracting other players who are interested in the new type of play and are more team-oriented.

I'm not saying you completely sacrifice gameplay for "realism". Let's face it, no PC game is ever going to be "realistic". But with some changes BF2 could suspend disbelief somewhat. Right now it's just a joke. And having a realistic M203 doesn't necessarily kill the gameplay element, it just makes players adapt to a new gameplay element they're not used to because they're used to playing with M203s like they're high-explosive death rays.

I voted Other. I could have voted "just make them more realistic".

To that a few things should be done (IMO).

- Realistic kill range. (about 5 m iirc)
- Realistic casulty/heavy wounding range. (would be about 100)
- Realistic wounding range.
---> Best would be to have a gaussien distribution outside the casulty range. don't know if it's possible with this engine as I only did that with the UT one.
- Correct arming distance on the M406 (3 turns iirc, but shouldn't be under 15m).
- Correct arming distance on the VOP-25 (not sure, but I recal seeing 40 meters somewhere. Guess they are more worried about FF then the americans )
- Correct time-delayed fuze on the VOP-25. (no clue about the duration though...)
- Better aiming system, with 50 meters increments.

2. As posted in the unlikely solutions, I am unable to get nades to be affected by distance, only time. So please stop suggesting that it doesn't explode until it's reached a minimum distance, unless you can offer a way to do it fast and easy.

Muzzle velocity of an M203 is roughly 245 ft/sec which boils down to around 75 m/s which means with a 15m arming distance you'd have to put in a 1/5th of a second arming delay to achieve the desired results. Is that more helpful? I don't know what you can or can't do, I just thought it was a suggestion topic.

'[R-DEV wrote:Paladin-X']

2. As posted in the unlikely solutions, I am unable to get nades to be affected by distance, only time. So please stop suggesting that it doesn't explode until it's reached a minimum distance, unless you can offer a way to do it fast and easy.

No ranges or distances unless it's splash radius.

EDIT: I am probably not explaining this very well, so I'll try again

I cannot currently tell the grenade to arm at a given distance. I can set a grenade to arm after a given amount of time.

o_0 You know the speed, distance and acceleration. Computing the time is trivial. You can even ignore acceleration under 50 meters and the approximation would be good enough. Sorry, but replying here and saying "don't suggest disntance, I can only implement time" ins't very serious.

With the M406, even range is just an estimation as it is armed after a specific numbers of turns. So knowing the rotation speed should give you a better indication then range. Sadly I don't remember the exact figure. I have it in some obscure manual at home... I will try to find it out for you (both rotation speed and arming rotation count). Unless that was for another type of grenade. I'll check the documentation I have anyhow.

Computing the time it takes is irrelevant. People want the nade to not be able to blow in point blank range, which is something I can't do. I am on a very tight schedule at the moment and I want to make the right decision on a quick fix for the nade launchers. When someone suggests arming distances, then others tend to follow along, which doesn't help me since I can't do it. I am also unable set rotational arming. If I come off rude or 'not serious' I apologize.

While you take the time to set an arming delay, why not put the right arming delay right away instead of some random value. Sure it would have the same effect... but then the mod is called "Project Reality". Just my 0.02$

If you don't have the time to do the research and calculations yourself, I am sure you'll find someone who would happily do that for you on your team.

geogob,

Paladin-X and other Devs on this team take their work very seriously and spend a significant portion of their free time making a product for everyone to use and have fun in. I admire Paladin-X for trying to involve the community in so many decisions, and he does a great job at balancing it all. So next time you want to say his attitude isn't very serious, please think again. Many thanks.

Cheers. req

I can do that and I did put it as an option on the poll. However, when people are suggesting a distance to arm, they want this not only because it's more realistic, but also so that people can't use it at point blank range like they do now. So if I time it, people can still fire at their feet in point blank and kill within a second or two. This is what I mean when I say forget arming distances. I can set the time so that it would seem to explode after a certain distance, however firing at the ground in front of you, the grenade will still blow after that same amount of time.

Ah i see. So you have no way to replace the grenade by a dummy/inert grenade if it is trigger before it arms? Perhaps even just destroy the object without detonation?

---

Requiem, I'm sorry you see my comment that way. I know very well what it represent (to work as developper on a mod) as I am one myself. I know exactly what it involves both in time and efforts. And I also admire any developpers who are ready to go out and ask for people opinions and feedback as most of the time you only get lots of post bashing your work for no reason. But I have to say I am very picky on my own work regarding these sorts of things... I shouldn't be with others work. Sorry about that.

Although I am not questionning Paladin's attitude in general, I was only refering to what he said about not being able to implement an arming "distance" when all parameters to calculate the time it represents are available. I am quite sure he takes his work very seriously and the quality of the work done so far shows it quite well.

Well if you dont make the sat realese its ok by me HEE HEE, I been playing some good game with some cool guys.

What exactly would “set the time” do?
If you set a time for say 2 sec. and you fire at the ground in front of you, will it bounce away and blow up, leaving you unharmed? If you fire high up in the air, will it blow up before it hits the ground?

how about we make it realistic and call it a day?

?Timed delay (X secs) before it explodes like standard grenade?

Do they do this in real life...I dont think so?

just make the grenade launcher how it is in real life...to do that, ask some people if it explodes on contact or there is a delay (which sounds dumb)

Geogob, unfortunately (and in all honesty) I do not know how to do that (if even possible). All the items I listed in the poll I know how to do and would take little time for me to do it. Perhaps later in another patch we will be able to accomplish something like that, but for the time being I was looking for a quick fix.

Coderedfox, we will be releasing whatever we have by Friday/Saturday.

Unfortunately, I never figured out how to make the grenades roll more. So if you fire at the ground it will not roll very far if at all.

1. Lower splash and/or damage
well then why use them at all?
2. Leave as is
no something has to be done
3. Remove altogether (give assault weapon X)
Negative
4. Change nade from frag to something else
Could deal with that
5. Timed delay (X secs) before it explodes like standard grenade
this doesnt happen in real life?
6. Decrease rounds to (X)
Doesnt solve any problems
7. Decrease accuracy
Yeah thats Cool
8. Make new grenadier class (remove class X) and limit to (X)
I like this the best

edit. was insta-posted


Paladin, if you want to do a quick fix for the weekend that is fine. Nothing against that. Past experiences tell me that this is not how I would do it, but it's your project

I hope you will find a solution to make the grenades more realistic in the long run. Good luck with that!