The name's Roland, and I fully endorse an inventory system.
That's a huge part of what makes ArmA2 so immersive in its cooperative nature. You lug around and share ammunition and equipment with your teammates.
This idea sounds a bit unrealistic. I've never seen any WWII footage where you can see a soldier with more than his primary weapon.
Each weapon has his own advantages and problems, it is one of the reason why ROII is better than COD (where you can kill a sniper with a colt at 150 meters for instance). If you can have all the weapons in the same time, it won't be fun. At all.
About the Ammo-share : why not ; sounds good and realistic for MG. One soldier in the squad should be able to take ammo for MG in order to resupply it (not all the soldiers like in RO, only a few of them).
It would be interesting if we don't have a lot of ammo like in ROI (where you had 9x5 bullets for rifles or 4x71 for ppsh, which is a lot). But if it is the case, ammo boxes is enough IMO.
How is it unrealistic to carry extra ammo or frags?
I don't see why it is unrealistic. As I said previously, most soldiers probably didn't want to lug around two weapons all the time since it would cause them to tire more quickly and inhibit their mobility.This idea sounds a bit unrealistic. I've never seen any WWII footage where you can see a soldier with more than his primary weapon.
Each weapon has his own advantages and problems, it is one of the reason why ROII is better than COD (where you can kill a sniper with a colt at 150 meters for instance). If you can have all the weapons in the same time, it won't be fun. At all.
About the Ammo-share : why not ; sounds good and realistic for MG. One soldier in the squad should be able to take ammo for MG in order to resupply it (not all the soldiers like in RO, only a few of them).
It would be interesting if we don't have a lot of ammo like in ROI (where you had 9x5 bullets for rifles or 4x71 for ppsh, which is a lot). But if it is the case, ammo boxes is enough IMO.
I don't see why it is unrealistic. As I said previously, most soldiers probably didn't want to lug around two weapons all the time since it would cause them to tire more quickly and inhibit their mobility.
But why take away the freedom to do something that you would be able to do in real life? Why not be able to carry another gun to give to someone else, or to use in a tight situation?
Let's say that you're behind some rubble and are pinned down by a distant rifle-firing enemy, you are carrying a PPSH, and there's a Mosin Nagant lying on the ground next to you. In real life, would you drop your PPSH and its ammo just to pick up the Mosin? Of course not. You would pick up the Mosin and return fire.
And in a generally less specific situation, if you were carrying a Mosin and knew you were heading into an area that was close combat, wouldn't it seem natural to acquire a PPSH if you saw one lying around, just in case? You wouldn't necessary ditch your trusty rifle, but you know that PPSH might come in handy. I can see lots of other situations where this would make sense.
If you don't have an inventory system in place that can account for this sort of thing, you get clunky gameplay like in RO1 where you get killed just for trying to pick up a nearby weapon. If the game had a weight-based inventory system, this wouldn't happen.
Again we know it will be a weight system but it will have some limitations thankfully, that is for instance you can't carry a heavy mg plus another weapon etc..
and you wouldn't loot the body in search for extra ammo in a combat situation.
I've always thought an animation for patting around the torso rummaging for supplies would be cool. Possibly a sort of menu shows up horizontally listing the items (with a picture of each) on the body that you can take, and maybe bind each item to 1-0 on the keyboard, pressing a number confirms you want the item, pressing again unconfirms, and then have another button that has you exit the menu and take what you selected.
Exactly ... I think alot of you guys are assuming that I see this system as something like Diablo II where you have a big *** inventory screen with little blocks where you can place items.Any reason why this "inventory system" has to be manually managed and not automatic?
Anything you will be using is just added to your own weapon list, and anything you can give to other players can be given just like ammo is in Ostfront.
The ideas so far seem needlessly complex.
Can you find the source, of which, where this was stated?
I agree with a few of the posters here...
A player should only carry weapons & equipment designated to him at beginning of battle ( his class ).
I also do not want to see players picking up weapons on the ground ( like in RO ) for use in the middle of battle...This is done after the battle.
I prefer just to see all equipment dissaper in a second when a player dies.
Joe
I agree with a few of the posters here...
A player should only carry weapons & equipment designated to him at beginning of battle ( his class ).
I also do not want to see players picking up weapons on the ground ( like in RO ) for use in the middle of battle...This is done after the battle.
I prefer just to see all equipment dissaper in a second when a player dies.
Joe