Project Reality Forums

Couldn't kill any infantry with MG3 coax of Leopard on Kashan, at a normal engagement range of 400-700m because of muh kinetic energy.

If you wanted to make guns entirely useless and force armor to simply only use main gun, you succeeded. Though, if that's what was wanted, just removing the coaxial gun from armor would have had the same effect.

Also,

Murphy wrote:Basically you are ruining the balance that worked for many years because you want to change something. The overall reception has been negative, so obviously things need to be reconsidered. I hope the players feedback is going to adjust the balance

Vista wrote:Zwilling just XD'ed the gameplay mechanics

Have I ruined the game more than Mats yet?

Allahu Akbar wrote:Again, which 7.62x39? M43? M67? Where are you hard data on those?

Using Type 56 (Chinese M43 clone) and 57-N-231 for most factions. The problem is that the damage drop in BF2 is linear instead of curving as far as I can tell. Right now damage drop starts immediately at muzzle and slopes straight down to the transonic range (450m for 7.62x39). For the next part I plan on fitting a line to the actual energy curve and setting damage loss so it starts wherever it meets that. This should help with such anomalies. Trash paint illustration:

inb4banned wrote:I just played Vietnam and if you don't see the one shotting M14 as a problem then idk what to tell you. That gun is ridiculously over powered and completely unbalances the whole minimod. On the other hand PPSH is **** now and Mosin isn't even always 1 shot kill. G fucking G.

I played it twice just yesterday and our squad still died plenty to AKs and DPs even though most of us had M14s. I guess we just need crosshairs and certain soundcards

Again, I did say removing some M14s was on the table in the devblog if it was imbalanced. I just haven't seen that to be the case myself. But it does appear our kit layout for Ia Drang is inaccurate - from what I've been reading, the 1st Air Cav deployed pretty much exclusively with XM16E1s. Given some disagree with me on the balance, I'll kill two birds with one stone and see if one of our mesh hackers has or can make a proper XM16E1. Then we could have a separate kit layout for Ia Drang with only those in standard kits. I think it would be good to keep the current kits though for maps like Charlie's Point that tend to favor the NVA already.

viirusiiseli wrote:Couldn't kill any infantry with MG3 coax of Leopard on Kashan, at a normal engagement range of 400-700m because of muh kinetic energy.

If you wanted to make guns entirely useless and force armor to simply only use main gun, you succeeded. Though, if that's what was wanted, just removing the coaxial gun from armor would have had the same effect.

7.62x51 at that range has barely changed, it is still 2-3 hit kill depending on distance.

EDIT:

Sorry missed this:

Fracsid wrote:Zwilling or any other developers, did you see my comment about changing damage from a static value to a pseudorandom damage range for each caliber/weapon? Is it possible?

There was a strange method K4on found a while ago, but I never got more than about 5% variation when I tried to reproduce it.

Vista wrote:We've been giving plenty of sensible feedback, however they've made some seriously bad changes to infantry mechanics.

...

Please stop using terms like 'whining', because people that are fine with these recent changes have no fucking idea of what they're talking about.

Sensible feedback, yes. But stuff like this takes time, and if I was doing it myself, I would first correctly input the kinetic data for each bullet type used in game, and then when the baseline is set, adjust depending on barrel lenght, which creates more work since different guns with different barrels have to be assigned different bullets (most probably), and only then when the template, the basis, the foundation has been set, you adjust damage per range per bullet type.

You can come back to the original "shots to kill" values after doing all that and ask yourself why the f did you waste 3, 4, 5 months on crunching numbers to get the same result? Idk, but this is how modding works and atleast this time there is reasoning behind the numbers.

So I quite possibly believe that in a few months the system will be well adjusted in regards to wound types and whatnot.

People seem to be forgetting what project reality is...

Pr is an authentic game for its realistic touch, focused on teamplay and fun as shooting games, it is this combination that has brought so much success to this MOD

Is not called reality because it is similar to reality... it is a comparison to freaking battlefield 2 made many many many years ago, this mod never had the pretension of being a simulator. Having to explain this is just ridiculous

There's plenty of things in PR that are not realistic but are like this for the purpose of fun gameplay while still maintaining an authentic experience that seperates it from the big budget mainstream shooters...

Thinking that people play PR in 2017 because it is realistic is just absurd, today there are several games much more realistic than PR, both mechanically and graphically, and yet, some people still prefer to play the PR, Simply because it's more fun!

It should not be allowed to make a change like this, which affects all players on all maps without the consequences of it being anticipated and discussed. As result, the gameplay is worse. Just look at the vast majority of the feed back…

Also insurgent mode is unplayable

With that change assuming both sides have players with the same skill level, it is absurd to think that one side will start to play better because it is now at a disadvantage, especially in a game where sides have the same number of players.

It is more likely that team favored with better weaponry will seek to use and abuse that advantage even more, not that the disadvantaged team will magically start playing professionally and balance the difference.

the old damage was good, the gameplay was fun and overall balanced, there was no need to change it so drastically. It took years and years to get most maps balanced, why do you think changing the most basic part of the game, shooting, is a good idea now?

I would like to know what gameplay balance aspects were taken into consideration before pushing this update?

All for the sake of muh reality? It is something so simple to understand, this engine does not support this wacko stuff you guys want to force in.

[quote=""'[R-DEV"]M42 Zwilling;2163442']I played it twice just yesterday and our squad still died plenty to AKs and DPs even though most of us had M14s. I guess we just need crosshairs and certain soundcards [/quote]

Brain, positioning and aim would work too but I know that's too much to ask for

[R-DEV]M42 Zwilling wrote:Again, I did say removing some M14s was on the table in the devblog if it was imbalanced. I just haven't seen that to be the case myself. But it does appear our kit layout for Ia Drang is inaccurate - from what I've been reading, the 1st Air Cav deployed pretty much exclusively with XM16E1s. Given some disagree with me on the balance, I'll kill two birds with one stone and see if one of our mesh hackers has or can make a proper XM16E1. Then we could have a separate kit layout for Ia Drang with only those in standard kits. I think it would be good to keep the current kits though for maps like Charlie's Point that tend to favor the NVA already.

Your system broke a ton of things so now you have to do damage control by changing more stuff while still ignoring the main complaints. Well done. Removing 1 gun or making it less accessible won't fix this.

[quote="Heavy Death""]Sensible feedback, yes. But stuff like this takes time, and if I was doing it myself, I would first correctly input the kinetic data for each bullet type used in game, and then when the baseline is set, adjust depending on barrel lenght, which creates more work since different guns with different barrels have to be assigned different bullets (most probably), and only then when the template, the basis, the foundation has been set, you adjust damage per range per bullet type.

You can come back to the original "shots to kill" values after doing all that and ask yourself why the f did you waste 3, 4, 5 months on crunching numbers to get the same result? Idk, but this is how modding works and atleast this time there is reasoning behind the numbers.

So I quite possibly believe that in a few months the system will be well adjusted in regards to wound types and whatnot.[/quote]

Or just identify the faults of the current system, think the whole thing through then implement it. But no, months of broken balance without a benefit is just fine, same as the 1 shot bug was.

Mostacho wrote:People seem to be forgetting what project reality is...

Pr is an authentic game for its realistic touch, focused on teamplay and fun as shooting games, it is this combination that has brought so much success to this MOD

This pretty much sums up my opinion, People enjoy playing PR not for it's 'realism' but for the teamwork and fun. The realism part that people enjoy isn't the damage values, it's the realistic factions, kit setups, the interesting maps based around real battles.

If you were apply the balance ideology here to the rest of PR it would be a disaster. Imagine the power of Armour(dead-deading everything it touches), tank shells going through walls to kill everything in sight (to simulate building destruction), mortars penetrating buildings..

It's amplified by high ping, requiring more shots to kill at range. One of the reasons that PR was unique was the slow pace of the combat compared to other games, having high ping wasn't that disadvantageous. Now i find myself just getting more and more frustrated. Maps like the falklands and vietnam just are not enjoyable.

These changes do not make infantry gameplay more enjoyable or balanced. I figured maybe i'd warm up to the changes, but i haven't. They're just not fun.

[R-DEV]M42 Zwilling wrote:I played it twice just yesterday and our squad still died plenty to AKs and DPs even though most of us had M14s. I guess we just need crosshairs and certain soundcards

Nowhere has anyone stated that having an M14 or similar was granting you super powers and made you unstoppable. You die just as easily to grenades and unless the name is PPSh or MAT, every NVA weapon has increased in killing potential. What's the point of having a medic when 2 shots are all it takes to kill you?

Again, I did say removing some M14s was on the table in the devblog if it was imbalanced.

That's not solving the issue, that's masking that there is one! "It's not broken if hardly anyone has it", that's, with all due respect Zwilling, stupid. YOU wanted us to use the M14 etc. more, now you want to remove it? What kind of absurdity is that?

In my opinion it would be perfectly fine to make 5.56 a bit weaker so that the player can decide between a 2-shot weapon with 20 rounds at 600 RPM and a 3-shot weapon with 20 rounds at 900 RPM, after all burst was implemented on the US rifles to reduce ammo consumption while giving them the ability to quickly down an opponent in CQB(3-shot burst=1 opponent killed, that was the reasoning back then). And while to me personally the 2-shotter sounds more desireable, other people prefer the higher RPM and more forgiving recoil. But it's up to the player to work with these considerations in mind, which currently we can't because the M14 is screaming "LOL 20 ROUND ONESHOT FULL AUTO RIFLE LOLOLOL". Furthermore the "realistic" system betrays the fact that the M14 got replaced because it wasn't as combat effective in 'Nam as expected, so the system is completely backwards of how modern rifles emerged from beyond WW1.

Adding to that an eventual M14 removal doesn't work with Falklands or WW2 - unless we're supposed to fight over Goose Green with Sterlings and M3s and Omaha with MP40s and Tommies(the gun). Having the Kar98k be the superior choice is something I haven't seen since Day of Defeat Source, and DoD is an arcade game, again showcasing that a "realistic system" doesn't equate to reality necessarily.

Then we could have a separate kit layout for Ia Drang with only those in standard kits. I think it would be good to keep the current kits though for maps like Charlie's Point that tend to favor the NVA already.

Am I reading this correctly? Are you trolling us?

if map is "NVA" favoured
then
give US "oneshotautorifle"
else
give US "theirmostmodernofrifleatthetimebecausebalance"

error 1337: logic not found

Zwilling, hello??? Make it easy on yourself and balance 7.62 damage, like seriously

Mostacho wrote:People seem to be forgetting what project reality is...

Pr is an authentic game for its realistic touch, focused on teamplay and fun as shooting games, it is this combination that has brought so much success to this MOD

Is not called reality because it is similar to reality... it is a comparison to freaking battlefield 2 made many many many years ago, this mod never had the pretension of being a simulator. Having to explain this is just ridiculous.......

[/B][/U].

I agree with you on this one. +1

[R-DEV]M42 Zwilling wrote: EDIT:

Sorry missed this:



There was a strange method K4on found a while ago, but I never got more than about 5% variation when I tried to reproduce it.

It seems to me that it would be an excellent method to simultaneously improve realism and appease people crying for balance. Namely, the full power battle rifles could have an 80% chance of killing in one shot, simulating shot placement, angle of impact, and acts of god.

What's your take on steep damage dropoff to 5.45mm levels below the fragmentation velocity threshold of M193 and M855? It looks like it's possible in the model you posted.

[R-DEV]M42 Zwilling wrote: 7.62x51 at that range has barely changed, it is still 2-3 hit kill depending on distance

I fired 5+ magazines of coax on a single run, killed maybe 1-3 enemies with each. Before this change with the MG3 coax I could usually get a few dozen enemies with 500 rounds. You know, because it actually worked.

But sure, the damage is still nearly the same, right?

Removing the M14, or coming up with new kit layouts for Vietnam (as ridiculous as that sounds) would be like turning left 3 times instead of turning right once.

Just revert these changes and put some thought into the balance please. Revisiting PR's gun balance is a welcome initiative, but not like this. Take your time speaking with the players instead of implementing it first and then asking questions later

How to balance 7.62 rifles and MGs. Extra recoil and disable undeployed MGs, oh wait that's already there.


>meme arrows in 2017
>7.62 AK two shot to chest
>Vietnam unplayable
>muh 900rpm
>US bias
>muh G3
>dropoff
>reeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeee
>AK-74 is shit pls fix

ok i was on Sareema the other day as a USMC sniper...

right up on the hill near industrial port i came across a Russian soldier who was looking for me....

he was like ~10m-5m away from me, i took my time and aim between his **** and abdomen... bullzeye shot right on target and somehow he managed to survive my shot!!
i had to finish him with my M9 with 3 shots in his face.... !!!

now idk what type of body armor the guy was wearing but No way he can survive a 7.62×51mm NATO bullet from that close range for a sniper Rifle..

i didn't test long range but still...and didn't test out the other sniper Rifles so please let me know if this is intentional !!?

my connection and ping was perfect at that time.......

Check the table again and you will see that it is the same for every other weapon with the same cartridge, intentional.

DogACTUAL wrote:Check the table again and you will see that it is the same for every other weapon with the same cartridge, intentional.

well that's Bullshit... no way you stand still if you get shot at by a M40 that fires 7.62×51mm at that range....

any type of bullet IRL is deadly in close range if you get hit in your Abdomen or chest....
(Vital Organs)

also Muzzle velocity and Barrel Length have effect's, not by Cartridge...

i really don't mind any change that happen around PR cause i have little time to play games but when things like this happens, it's just not right... !!

im sure you understand what im talking about here....

That's the thing mate, it may or may not stop the person, depending on what it hits exactly and the circumstances, like how much adrenaline there is involved and the specific composition of that persons body.
Even a hit in the vital organs isn't necessarily an instant takedown, the guy might still be able to keep walking for a good while.

DEVs said that the effects of the difference in ammo types and barrel length will be added later, so we'll see how that will affect things.

Yeah and IRL a motherfucker missing half his leg from a .50 round ain't gonna be jumpin around from a cheeky epi pen.

Weak excuse for a weak update.

Frontliner wrote:Insurgents going 30:150 is of course much more desireable than having a rather level playing field.

Zwilling's values are equally as arbitrary though the ratio is not. I much rather have a game that reflects reality rather well than having a game modelled after reality when reality causes the gameplay to suffer. Which is absolutely the case currently and was even more strongly in the first iteration.

Zwilling might deem the WW2/Nam/Falks one-shot fests fine, but I do not, and I don't care what empirical data has to say on this matter either. The game was fine before, why go out of your way to completely fuck up what worked? I don't get it.

This, this and again - this. I've yet to met someone ingame who likes the changes in weapon damage.

I'll repeat it one more time (just in case): " I much rather have a game that reflects reality rather well than having a game modelled after reality when reality causes the gameplay to suffer." / Frontliner

Why don't we add nuclear weapons, deaddead from headshots, tickets according to RL amount of soldiers, 10km view distance and so on. It's called project REALITY.

X-Alt wrote: >meme arrows in 2017
>7.62 AK two shot to chest
>Vietnam unplayable
>muh 900rpm
>US bias
>muh G3
>dropoff
>reeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeee
>AK-74 is shit pls fix

Can someone translate?