Suppression effects in HOS?

[LemoN]

Suppression comes with bullet penetration and deadly fire so artificial effects are not needed, like in real life. You don't get some black blurred vision when bullets go past. You just hear the supersonic bullet snaps and know the fire is deadly. Like in AA3, you hear the supersonic cracks (which are real recordings) and know the fire is deadly so you keep your head down. No visual effects please.

Really?

Read this:

What people also have to realise is that if a soldier gets under fire his heartbeat rises.

The problem is, its hard to aim a rifle when your heart is pounding, which points to an irony of modern combat: it does extraordinarily violent things to the human body but requires almost dead calm to execute well. Complex motor skills start to diminish at 145 beats per minute, which wouldn't matter much in a swordfight but could definitely ruin your aim with a rifle. At 170 beats per minute you start to experience tunnel vision, loss of depth perception, and restricted hearing. And at 180 beats per minute, you enter a netherworld where rational thought decays, bowel and bladder control are lost, and you start to exhibit the crudest sorts of survival behaviors: freezing, fleeing, and submission.

It is a proven fact that soldiers under heavy fire can go up as far as 190 heartbeats.
Of course there are exceptions, like a football player being able to make an incredible shot at a high distance at 170 beats per minute, but this is acquired by years of training.

This also would give us the opportunity to make heroes less affected by suppression, as they are more "resistant" to it.
:IS2:

 

[=GG= Mr Moe]

I find it interesting that people are using bullet penetration as an example of something that will enhance suppression. On the contrary, I think that penetration will only serve to make any attempt at suppression (assuming an RO:Ost type system) even less useful. There's very little incentive to stay behind something if you know that bullets can come through it, so you might as well take your chances and try to nail that pesky MG, especially since you know that there's going to be almost no penalty to you for trying.

This. If anything, for thinner cover you might as well take your chances if you are already spotted and fired upon.

That is not to say I don't like bullet penetration, I think it will be great

 

[Xendance]

Really?

Read this:

Yes, that is called adrenaline. You start shaking after that effect has gone away

 

[REZ]

I find it interesting that people are using bullet penetration as an example of something that will enhance suppression. On the contrary, I think that penetration will only serve to make any attempt at suppression (assuming an RO:Ost type system) even less useful. There's very little incentive to stay behind something if you know that bullets can come through it, so you might as well take your chances and try to nail that pesky MG, especially since you know that there's going to be almost no penalty to you for trying.

But here you're talking about penetration alone. If you combine it with the other suggestions - making the MG more lethal by reducing the spread thereby increasing it's ability to kill; unalign the Iron Sights so it takes that extra bit of effort to aim; slightly randomize the initial Iron Sight point so as to stop pre-aiming (the latter two work together to stop pop-up shooting) - these three combined with penetration will have guys taking cover instead of trying to fire back, and if you're argument is that cover may be too thin to take cover behind, then people will quickly learn to make better decisions in the first place and find better cover from the get-go.

Or we could forget all of those more realistic solutions and just add meth laced Mexican jumping beans to the soldiers diets, cause.. you know, thats how soldiers really react... they twitch and flip about like a fish out of water when fired at

 

[Flogger23m]

Another thing so consider is adrenaline. There are plenty of articles out there in which people get shot, but they are still able to fight back during a fire fight due to adrenaline.

So I am sure if you are in a battle, with your adrenaline pumping, you might not even notice that bullets are going past you.

Now, it would vary from person to person, situation to situation.

Just something to consider.

I find it interesting that people are using bullet penetration as an example of something that will enhance suppression. On the contrary, I think that penetration will only serve to make any attempt at suppression (assuming an RO:Ost type system) even less useful. There's very little incentive to stay behind something if you know that bullets can come through it, so you might as well take your chances and try to nail that pesky MG, especially since you know that there's going to be almost no penalty to you for trying.

This is a valid point. I guess there can be come penetration, but it does not have to be completely realistic if it effects gameplay so much.

This can be done by making the bullets do significantly less damage when passing through certian materials (such as a car door). Or something else.

 

[LemoN]

This is a valid point. I guess there can be come penetration, but it does not have to be completely realistic if it effects gameplay so much.

This can be done by making the bullets do significantly less damage when passing through certian materials (such as a car door). Or something else.

No.
If you have bullet penetration, do it realistic.

 

[VariousNames]

What people also have to realise is that if a soldier gets under fire his heartbeat rises.

The problem is, its hard to aim a rifle when your heart is pounding, which points to an irony of modern combat: it does extraordinarily violent things to the human body but requires almost dead calm to execute well. Complex motor skills start to diminish at 145 beats per minute, which wouldn't matter much in a swordfight but could definitely ruin your aim with a rifle. At 170 beats per minute you start to experience tunnel vision, loss of depth perception, and restricted hearing. And at 180 beats per minute, you enter a netherworld where rational thought decays, bowel and bladder control are lost, and you start to exhibit the crudest sorts of survival behaviors: freezing, fleeing, and submission.

It is a proven fact that soldiers under heavy fire can go up as far as 190 heartbeats.
Of course there are exceptions, like a football player being able to make an incredible shot at a high distance at 170 beats per minute, but this is acquired by years of training.

I think you're on to something. This is exactly the route this debate should have gone months upon months ago.

I want you to do me a favor....no, do this whole damn forum and the dev team a favor and produce the evidence for this "proven fact." There should be research of some kind that illustrates that reaction to that stimulus. Show me, and I'm yours. No more haranguing or nonsense.

 

[Oldih]

There should be research of some kind that illustrates that reaction to that stimulus. Show me, and I'm yours. No more haranguing or nonsense.

Then we would run into the problem of the relation between psychological and biological functions. It's possible to 'cheat' your body even if you're under heavy stress to calm down if you know how to do so, and it's not really that difficult for example, but then we run into the inviduality problem. We can go and prove that X, Y, Z and other plethora of stuff happens in your body and brain once you're stressed or full of adrenaline but can you truly prove what the invidual itself is experiencing the whole phenomena? The basics are there obviously, but in comparasion I could bring up when you experience a nightmare. There's millions of ways to dream about one and they can be all highly unique, but if we were to measure your brain activity, heartbeat and other stuff with some sensors all of them would be almost identical regardless of what you saw in your nightmare.

And if you want some proof, well unfortunately since I'm too lazy to scavenge through about all those 20+ books about diffrent fields of psychology (and some about biology-psyhology relation) as for exact source it's tough luck.

 

[LemoN]

I think you're on to something. This is exactly the route this debate should have gone months upon months ago.

I want you to do me a favor....no, do this whole damn forum and the dev team a favor and produce the evidence for this "proven fact." There should be research of some kind that illustrates that reaction to that stimulus. Show me, and I'm yours. No more haranguing or nonsense.

I got this straight out of a book I once read, which based it's info on various US Army tests. Unfortunately I don't have it any more and can't point you to the right info.

Be aware thought that this info only relates to inexperienced personnel, recruits and people with shellshock/post traumatic battlefield experience (aka half of your Stalingrad fighters)

This does not mean that a Delta Force operator craps his pants and goes up to 180-190 beats per minute if he is fired upon.

 

[VariousNames]

I got this straight out of a book I once read, which based it's info on various US Army tests. Unfortunately I don't have it any more and can't point you to the right info.

Be aware thought that this info only relates to inexperienced personnel, recruits and people with shellshock/post traumatic battlefield experience (aka half of your Stalingrad fighters)

This does not mean that a Delta Force operator craps his pants and goes up to 180-190 beats per minute if he is fired upon.

I'm not interested unless you have evidence, sorry.

 

[LemoN]

I'm not interested unless you have evidence, sorry.

Source: On Combat: The Psychology and Physiology of Deadly Conflict in War and in Peace by Dave Grossman and Loren W. Christensen, PPCT Research Publications, 2004.

Is that good enough?

In case you are too lazy to check out that book, this gives you a rough overview.
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/On_Com...iology_of_Deadly_Conflict_in_War_and_in_Peace

 

[=GG= Mr Moe]

Source: On Combat: The Psychology and Physiology of Deadly Conflict in War and in Peace by Dave Grossman and Loren W. Christensen, PPCT Research Publications, 2004.

Is that good enough?

In case you are too lazy to check out that book, this gives you a rough overview.
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/On_Com...iology_of_Deadly_Conflict_in_War_and_in_Peace

Very interesting

 

[Galslacht]

Source: On Combat: The Psychology and Physiology of Deadly Conflict in War and in Peace by Dave Grossman and Loren W. Christensen, PPCT Research Publications, 2004.

Is that good enough?

In case you are too lazy to check out that book, this gives you a rough overview.
[url]http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/On_Combat:_The_Psychology_and_Physiology_of_Deadly_Conflict_in_War_and_in_Peace[/URL]

Interesting read and another argument to implement at least some kind of suppression system into the game!

 

[Atomskytten]

Interesting read and another argument to implement at least some kind of suppression system into the game!

Would be fun to laugh at the unlucky ones who mess their pants and leave a nice brown spot due to too high heart rate - could even be an achievement too: "Mr. Skids"

 

[LemoN]

Would be fun to laugh at the unlucky ones who mess their pants and leave a nice brown spot due to too high heart rate - could even be an achievement too: "Mr. Skids"

LoL.

 

[dogbadger]

if that heart rate-physiological reaction chart does nothing else, it opens up a couple of interesting steam achievement possibilities.