That may be alright: The point is that bandaging shouldn't be something that you can do in a matter of a second and then go back to combat like nothing happend. In that way It's better to implement autohealing - because right now, the healing system works like in any other FPS - only diffrence is that it's done manually.
Agreed
In my opinion it does. If you get shot you wont bleed out in a matter of seconds. IRL it can take even take hours simply because our bodies are not blood fountains. If your injuries affect you, such as decreased running speed, increased weponsway, etc. it will affect the player.
True, but I was basing my view on how sometimes in the game currently, you die within a couple of seconds if you don't bandage right away.... if you fix it in Realism but not in Relaxed Realism, then Relaxed Realism becomes harder than Realism and that doesn't make sense. What I meant was that if you're going to tweak this feature, it should be tweaked for both game styles...... but again, the problem isn't in what's realistic, the problem falls under the gameplay.
People don't usually live long enough in the game to actually bleed out like they would in real life, unless they're camping somewhere the whole match. Making the bleed out last as long as you suggest basically defeats the entire purpose of having it in the game because nobody would have to bandage up.
Bandaging shouldn't be about restoring health but about surviving. If you don't bandage up at all, the players ability should be affected even more.
Agreed... I have no issue with simulated damage/injury as described, but bandaging in the game does not restore your health, it prevents you from continuing to lose more health. You could be hit once, wait for a while before you bandage up, and then get hit again and die, but if you bandaged up right away, that second shot might not have killed you because you might have had enough health left to take that hit and thus, have enough time to bandage once more..... but the third hit will be a kill, even if they only shoot your toe off.
Walking may be neccesary if the player want to walk - meaning not crouching or aiming down the sight. Simply walking. I personally use it quite a lot in RO1 especially when I hipshoot.
Well I have no serious objections of this being in the game, but I never used it myself. I just go into Iron Sights and clear rooms that way.... to each their own.
As soon as we move on to other maps this feature will make players reveal their position. The AI shouldn't communicate for you imo, that's the players job.
Perhaps, but this is WWII not a SWAT or a Spec Op..... noise, gunfire, explosions, people shouting & screaming, etc.... are all a part of the environment.
I personally have not experienced myself being exposed to the enemy by my character saying something automated.... you say that as soon as we move onto other maps, this feature will be more noticable.
That might be true and it might not be. If it becomes a serious problem, then I will completely agree with this feature being modified, but perhaps we should cross this bridge when we get there and then suggest ways to modify it, rather than trying to fix something based on what might or might not happen.
I'm not completely opposed to the idea, but I just don't see enough justification to change it now, that's all.
If it's gotta be done, it's gotta be done. If people want to play one match for a few days they should be allowed to do so.
Well all the power to them.... just seemed a bit long of a time range. It doesn't impact my any, so by all means.
No. It's up to the server admin. If someone want to create a server, they should be free to set the spawntimer to whatever they want. People that don't like it don't have to play on that particular server. Even if one minute spawntimer is set by default - it can be changed. This is up to the server admin once agian. So it doesn't force anyone at all. And 1 minute spawntimer is nothing - especially NOT if you play the game tactically as it's supposed to - because in that way you will survive for quite a lot longer time.
I play the game tactically.... I've been playing it like that for 7 years. Sometimes I last for a while, sometimes I am dead within seconds.... crap happens. But I have a major issue of waiting around, sitting at my computer desk, doing absolutely nothing for extended periods of time, when I could either be playing another game or doing something more useful with my time.
30 seconds has generally been my tolerance for waiting around doing nothing..... back in the mod, I enjoyed the map Warsaw, but I completely despised the excessive spawn wait on that map, where it was around 45-60 seconds long, thus I rarely played that map.
The longer the spawn wait, the greater the chance the player in question will begin to not only be taken out of the immersion of the game, but also start to lose interest.
People come in here and complain and wonder why so many people prefer Territory over Countdown, and the general response is because people want to play the game, not sit around doing nothing for 2/3's of their time.
Everybody has good days and bad days when playing RO, I have good days where I might only die a couple of times a match and rarely at spawn.... other days I have a really crappy day and things just don't seem to be going well for me.... add on top of me dying often with sitting around in spawn for 1 minute or longer and that'll just make me turn the game off and go do something else.
Sure it can/is a server side option set by the admin, but that again starts to not just break up servers people have to filter through even more than they already do, but it creates even more work for the player to actually find a server or two that they like and meets their enjoyment.
If I create a server and set the spawntimer to 30 minutes only players that LIKE that kind of gameplay will join. You won't be forced to play at a certain server. It's up to you. You choose the server as now.
With us already trying to filter through Bots, FireFight, Countdown, Territory, Relaxed Realism & Realism servers, now we're going to have to filter through even more servers which have reasonable spawn times..... but how does one go about filtering these unless they first join the server and die once to know how long the time is?
It's just a real pain in the arse and during a time where many are complaining about only finding 3-4 populated servers with decent pings, this will then limit many to probably just 1 server that they like.... or none that they like, and thus.... they're forced to play on servers with half hour respawns..... and I'm sorry, but if that's what my game ends up as, I'll stop playing.
That's the problem I see. If there is a way to resolve these issues, then I'd have no problem with this feature in the game.
If there were many more servers for players to choose from with decent pings, again, I'd have no problem.... but that's not the case. People only have 3-4 decent servers at present. There are piles of other servers to choose from, but their pings are well beyond 200.
It's funny that you're talking about ''being forced'', because right now, most of the RO OST players are forced to super arcade gameplay with absolutely NO OPTION at all, while my suggestion simply gives us the freedom to change it, but you say no.
Most of the "RO OST" players still have RO Ost to play.... with people who currently enjoy RO2 who only have 3-4 decent servers to choose from who then have those 3-4 decent servers switch to rediculous 30 min spawn timers or 1+ min respawns, their options are to play RO1, or RO2 that's just like RO1.... thus no option but to deal with it or stop playing.
If my 4 or so servers I have available to me with decent pings switch over to the above..... I will no longer play.
That's not a threat, that's reality. I want to play a game, not sit around doing nothing.
30 Min spawn timer?
fk that, I could play for a little over a min, get shelled by arty, and then go cook myself something to eat..... and if that's the case, I might as well save my internet bandwidth and quit.
Loads of fun, that sounds.
Or I could just stop playing my favorite game mode, territory.... and go play Countdown.... at least then I have a better chance at playing sooner.... which is pretty damn sad.
Sorry, I still oppose this idea.
I have no issue introducing ideas to please some of the so-called "RO1 Vets".... but seriously, meet people halfway here. You can't expect to have everything you want. I'm happy with how RO2 plays now, but I am willing to accept certain changes to make it better for those who liked some elements of RO1 within reason..... you can not expect me to just shut up agree with everything you say if I find issues with something.
These are serious issues I am presenting. If you can figure out a way to resolve at least some of these issues and show that you are willing to meet halfway, then I will do the same and have no issue with something being changed in the game.
Remember, you asked us for our opinions and I'm giving you mine.
I'm not a Yes man.
Because as it is now, you can walk into a capzone and do the most of the job, and then, before the capzone is taken you get killed, and someone that have done absolutely nothing may earn a lot of points. This makes no sense.
That's the way it has always been in RO.... if you are in the cap zone and your team gets the objective, you get 10 points (older RO's)..... if you are not, them's the breaks.
To meet you halfway, I can understand giving a player in the above situation some amount of points for being in the cap zone if for say, they were in there for 50% of the cap.... but to just hand out freebie points to everybody on your team for a capped objective when you contributed nothing doesn't make any sense.
Players who lay down support for your team outside of the cap zone already get extra points for taking out enemies who are in the cap.... they don't need additional points given to them.
Because the command radial in RO2 looks like a damn console command radial. If RO1 didn't have a command radial you obviously haven't played the game. You press ''V'' to use it by default. It's quite obvious to have a command radial in a tactical game.
I have played the game thank you very much.... I've played all the RO's except the 2k3 mod. RO1 doesn't have a Command "Radial", perhaps you should look up the word to know what it means.
RO1 had a command menu, and while I used it very often, to navigate the RO1 Command Menu, it is much slower than using the current Command Radial in RO2.
Perhaps allow the option in your menu to choose one or the other, but don't replace the current system simply because you don't like how it looks.
I don't care how it looks, I care about how better it works compared to RO1 and having to hit V, then 5, then 1, then 2, then 1 to get all squads to attack an objective...... currently I just hold down my command key and move my mouse.... click.... done.
They do make a lot of sense to remove. If you use cheats as skillpoints, perks, and unlocks, that has nothing to do with Hardcore mode
You have your own subjective view on what's "Hardcore" and hundreds of other people have their own views on what's "Hardcore".... and what are you talking about when you say people who use "Cheats"
What cheats??
and not even so much at all with RO.
Again, sez you.... Tripwire made these things a part of RO. They made the games we have played, they determine what direction it will head and they added unlocks and stats to the game. Many players enjoy and like them being in the game because it gives them something else to work towards.
Making it so that everybody is just handed everything with no work involved on their behalf is what I'd consider a cheat.
Yet agian, it is YOUR choice if you want to join a realism server or not. No one will be pointing a gun at your head and forcing you to do so.
As it currently stands, that's not correct. Again, with the limited amount of servers players have to choose from with decent pings, there is a very good chance people will either be forced to play on servers with settings they don't like, or not to play at all.
Maybe you're currently playing on servers that have settings you don't like.... but what sense does it make to just switch the roles so that you get what you want, and everybody else has to deal with it due to only having a couple of servers to choose from?
Again, if there were dozens of populated low ping servers to choose from, I wouldn't have an issue.... but currently, that is not the case.
But in your opinion, Red Orchestra, which is meant for a niche audience, should be completely changed into an arcade game that freezez out hardcore gamers?
You say it's a niche audience.... You say it's an arcade game. Besides a few extra things showing up on your screen from time to time, it's basically the exact same RO that existed since the mod days and is still far more "Hardcore" than any other FPS out there today.
It's the other way around. The reason why there is unlocks, perks, and skillpoints is because TWI wanted the game to appeal to mainstream gamers.
That's possible, but I'm not going to delve into what other people were thinking or not or the subjective reasons for why Trip did or didn't do something. As it stands, stats and leveling up is the next logical evolution to FPS's to make them continue to be interesting, just as the next logical evolution in FPS's after Wolf3D and Doom was using the mouse and 3D aiming, ie: Quake..... or having MP FPS's move from regular Deathmatch/Team Deathmatch, to Co-Op, Objective based matched, etc.
RO1 was completely dependent on pure skills and not any cheats such as perks or skillpoints. That's what RO is about, and it SHOULD be an option.
You're argument continues to fail when you keep resorting to calling these things "Cheats"
They would be cheats if nobody else could get or use certain elements of a game or if those things game them an advantage over other players. Since every single player can earn these levels and unlocks and since none of these unlocks give anybody an advantage like they do in other games like BF or CoD.... They're not cheats.
You keep talking about what RO is or should be..... clearly you have your view, I have my view, and many more people have many other different views from ours.... so let's try not to try and justify our arguments by saying what we think RO should or shouldn't be.... .it accomplishes nothing.
Instant kill or not, players shouldn't have the ability to take bullets and just run like nothing happend.
Perhaps, but again.... until one finds a decent balance that most will agree with, you will run into the problems I mentioned in my previous post. And until those problems can be decently resolved, it's simply not worth changing to solve one problem, when it can create several other problems.
RO's DNA has nothing to do with super arcade gameplay.
Again, what is "Super Arcade Gameplay?"
That to me means Quake III Arean or UT2004..... or even BF3.... but RO2 doesn't meet any of those levels of Arcade.
You continue to use subjective claims and absolutes to justify your position..... You talk about RO's "DNA"..... again, that's subjective and doesn't help anybody's argument. Many who have played RO since the mod days feel that RO2 goes back to what the Mods tried to accomplish. I know I feel that way, and I feel RO1 was the black sheep of the family. There were many things in RO1 that I didn't like and many of those things you are trying to either bring back into RO2 or bring in even more exaggerated features that are worse than what was in RO1 and bringing them into RO2..... so sorry if I don't agree with those things and sorry if I voice my opposition to those things, but again, you asked and while you may feel strongly about your views..... so do I.
Yet agian, hardcore mode should be hardcore mode, but you seems to think that RO only should be for COD players and that it should freeze out hardcore players, while it's perfectly possible to attract both of those audience.
So now you're going to start calling me a CoD player to try and win the argument?
I hate and despise both CoD and BF..... I play RO for a reason and while those reasons may not be your reasons, they are just as justified as yours or anybody else's.... and if you're going to start trolling by calling me and anybody else who doesn't agree with you "CoD Players", then don't expect this conversation to progress very well.
I'm not about to take the bait, so let's continue to try and agree, disagree or try to meet each other halfway by finding compromises and resolve issues with your ideas in order to apease everybody on both sides of the argument, shall we?
Squadleaders in RO1 could use smoke to cover their team, set waypoints, issue orders where to attack and defend, when to retreat, where to retreat, when to attack.... and they didn't do any good? Squadleaders are useless in RO2 compared to RO1. Squadleaders in RO2 simply works as spawnpoints to promote more forgiving and arcadegameplay.
Tit for Tat..... I can present the exact same argument to you by defending SL's in RO2 and trivialize the RO1's.
The SL's in RO2 can do all of the above you just described, but also have the additional feature of being able to have team mates spawn on them, which gives them a bit more of an importance on the battlefield than they had in RO1.
I already said that RO1 SL's had smoke, SMG's, additional capping power and it's obvious they can set rally points, arty, orders, etc.... that's common sense. What I was trying to relate to was how so few people in RO2 seem to choose the SL class.... taking that away will not give players anymore incentive to take that class, thus the chance of even fewer people picking it.
Solve that problem and I have no issue. Personally speaking, I don't normally spawn on the SL anyways.... I might have done it once since the beta, but I do see the value of this feature.
The current weapongameplay of RO2 doesn't match how it was in RO1,
And RO1 doesn't match how it was in the Mods.
and it's far from realistic since it's possible to run and gun. Certain features has to be added, and some removed, in order to make it realistic. For instance, in combat simulator such as arma 2 you can't jump, but that makes it more realistic since players wont be able to bunnyhop which you never do in real combat.
Baseless argument since bunny hopping doesn't exist in RO anyways, and was something specifically designed out of RO when the mod came out.
I personally don't care what it was like in RO1 because RO1 was completely unrealistic and inaccurate with how weapons are truly handled. Myself and many other players in these forums have noted their own personal, 1st hand experience with using firearms, including WWII firearms, and all, including myself, have stated just how crappy RO1's weapon physics were.
The weapon physics in RO1 were based on how the Dev's handled the weapons, while in RO2, from what I heard, they got fully trained soldiers to use the weapons as they should have been used and based the RO2 weapon physics on that.
You talk about what's realistic and that it's not realistic to run and gun..... running and shooting a gun while running is possible in real life, it's just not very effective and not very wise to do, so I don't know what you're talking about.
No it isn't. In some cases ww2 soldiers were so scared that they couldn't reload themself.
So you want to start randomly simulating an artificial script to make players turn into cowards or add artifical sway?
We're talking about a videogame.
Exactly.... a Video Game.... Not some Military Combat Simulator. Video games are supposed to be fun and entertaining, not mundane programs people spend more time trying to use effectively only to end up sitting in a spawn for 30 minutes doing nothing because they didn't do something right or were randomly hit by arty.
There are no fear in videogames. Certain thing has to be changed in order to prevent unrealistic behaviour such as quickreloading.
It's not Quick Reloading.... it's Normal Reloading and reloading your weapon isn't rocket science and it's something a monkey should be able to do..... which means a fully trained & experienced soldier should do even better than a monkey.
Fear in Video Games? You're never going to impliment fear of any kind in a video game unless you figure out how to send electrical shocks to the players through the mouse & keyboard.... all you are suggesting is to include yet more arcadey simulated script to fake people into being afraid, when in reality they're not going to be afraid, they're going to be annoyed and PO'd because they got shot by someone with an MKB42 halfway across the map simply because his character was fiddling too long with his clip.
And you call that "Hardcore" or "Realistic?"
I call that fake, cheap and annoying.
No it doesn't. In real-life, and especially in wartime, you wont be able to aim down the sight and hold your rifle almost perfectly still.
You know this..... How?
My suggestion is the same as combat military simulators such as Virtual Battlespace 2 portray weaponbobbing.
Again.... this is a video game, not a military combat simulator.... it's meant to be fun and if you want all of this in the game to make it into a combat simulator, perhaps you're playing the wrong game.
Aiming your weapon in Ro2 feels like you're just moving your mouse. The movement isn't natural. It's robotic. Move the cursor at your screen and it feels the same way as in RO2. Adding a float- and dead zone would make it even more realistic and natural and it would be possible to move your weapon without moving your whole body.
Geez.... of course it feels like you're moving a mouse.... that's what you're doing. Adding any of the above doesn't make it any different.... you're still moving your mouse with your hand, only now it's slower and delayed because of this "Float/Dead" zones, which then means my reaction time isn't what I'm used to in real life and I then have to increase my mouse sensitivity to compensate, thus canceling out what you are trying to accomplish.
Me being in Iron Sights in RO2 and moving my mouse with my wrist or fingers for an accurate shot is very similar to me moving my wrists or forearms to adjust the aim of the rifle in my hands..... unless you decide to have a rifle in your actual hands that you can plug into the computer via a USB port, you're never going to make it not feel like you're moving a mouse in your hand.
Of course it is. Bayonettes makes you more visible especially when you shoot from windows and it is not needed to have on open fields. You could even do this in RO1. Being able to detach your bayonette is a must.
Then again, have the option to remove or add them in the loadout screen. This feature in RO1 was pretty useless for the majority of players, as I've always seen the same players either with the bayos on the whole time or off the whole time..... when I spawned, I automatically attached the bayonet and left it there until I died, which I just reattached again when I spawned.... RO2 as it is just saved me the bother of doing this.
And a bayonet doesn't make you that much more visible from windows, especially at a distance.
I don't personally care if the option is added into the game (attatch/detatch in-game) but I don't see it as an important thing the devs need to work on at this stage. Out of all of the suggestions mentioned in this thread, this is the least important issue.
Yes it is. But when you're doing the movement the weapon sway isn't increased which it should be. When you stand up and aim with a rifle your accuracy will decrease when you do it.
Oh, do you mean when you're iron sighted in crouch, remain Iron Sighted when moving to standing and there isn't a shift between transitions?
Sure add a sway during that transition, I have no issue with that.... but there is a difference in sway between crouch and standing positions, in that the sway while standing is greater.... although not super great, but with my experience, it's realistic.
It's realistic. Because in RO2 you wont feel any pain; If I use bayonette at someone from behind in real-life he wont just turn around and shot me like nothing happend.
If you shove a bayonet into my arm, leg or the side of my back, I'm gonna feel pain and by reflex of simply wanting to live, I'm going to turn around as quickly as possible and shot or stab you.
If you hit me square in the back or in the head, I'm going to die and have no time to turn around.... but this already happens in RO2 as I have done it countless times already.
If I come up behind you and stab you in the leg or arm and that causes me to insta kill you.... sorry, but I'd feel that was a very cheap kill because it shouldn't have killed you and you should have at least a chance to try and fight back before I stabbed you again.
If you are not killing your enemy with one hit from behind with the Bayonet, then you need to aim better.
This is what will happen in RO2 - which is not realistic at any sense. Therefore, using bayonette at your enemy should cause instant death, and using your rifle butt should make your enemy to fall down.
Clubbed with the weapon from behind making someone fall down.... I can agree with that and would be neat to have in game..... but I still can not agree with an instant kill with the bayonet from behind.
Compromise:
A hit with the bayonet from behind does not produce an instant kill, but causes a slow death where the player fades to black and dies..... due to the fact the fade out death doesn't allow you to turn around very fast and your accuracy is greatly deminished, this would allow you to get that fatal stab you need from behind, but also still give the other player a slight chance at doing something.
No it isn't. Sometimes you can barely hear the arillery. IRL you will hear artillery no matter if there is a lot of gunfire or not.
I am not sure what you are talking about.... in every map I have been in, I can easily hear the arty, even if it's on the other side of the map.... gunfire or none.
More or less, no they don't. Sometimes you cant even hear (even when its quiet) when someone is running/walking behind you.
I usually hear the foot steps, the jungle of their equipment on their uniform, them talking, their weapon, and/or the peripheral view notifications.... I hear when they walk on glass, metal, tiles, dirt, etc.... I have plenty to help me know where an enemy is..... But I am not completely against the idea of increasing the sounds a bit more, however it will need to be tested in Beta first to make sure it's not too drastic in that it ruins overall gameplay.
Do you seriously think that it is possible to sprint and get shot by a Kar and just keep on going? No it isn't.
Depends on where you were shot..... yes it is possible. If I am shot in the hand, arm or non vital area and not in my legs, I still have the ability to use those legs to gtfo there.
If you're hit in the leg, then I completely understand doing something about that.
And when you get shot, especially when running, you WILL most likely twtich. The reaction to injuries in RO2 is highly unrealistic.
Twitching while being shot while still running isn't going to stop you from running.... of course unless it was a fatal wound or you were hit in the leg somewhere.
You talk about realism, so let's stick to realism shall we? If you are shot in the leg, have yourself slow or even drop to the ground.... I can live with that, but being shot in the arms shouldn't slow you down at all.... and since fatal wounds already either kill you or produce a slow death, which already stops you from moving, that's not an issue. Being hit in the arm can or should compromise your ability to use your weapon, but that's another subject elsewhere in the topic and shouldn't slow you down while running.
There is a diffrence between making sounds because of pain and screaming.
However some people react to pain differently than other people. Some will cry and scream, other's will grunt or moan.... others will just grit their teeth and make little noise.
How do you determine who does what at what stage?
Your characters doesn't seems to be very affected by bullet wounds, when in fact, increased breathing often occurs, and being able to sprint like nothing have happend while you have been shot in the leg - and without uttering any sound of pain - is not realistic in any sense.
Compromise:
If you are shot in the leg and it is not a mortal wound, it is more likely to be similar to a flesh wound and at the worst, you can still move at a somewhat decent speed, but the screen simulates you hobbling and one could also reduce the amount of stamina you have.
I've broken a toe before, which isn't the worst injuries out there in the world, but because I couldn't put it in a cast due to missing too much work, I had to let it heal on it's own which took almost a year. I was in pain and from time to time I cringed here and there depending on what I did.... but it wasn't constantly all the time..... so one needs to know how often the character makes the pain sounds without it being as annoying as how you feel the current automated voices are.
So do I. That's probably the most stupid argument I've heard;
Well you're the first person who has this issue who stated otherwise.... and personally speaking from my viewing of other people's comments on this subject, they're the majority, you're the minority. Let's keep in mind that people who do have this condition have varrying levels of this they're dealing with.... some worse than you and some less than you.
I personally don't care either way if it was added in the game, but if it is something that is a serious concern or bother to some people, then I prefer to side with them more than someone who just wants some fancy sound effects in the game.
We should't have beeping sounds when you're close to explosions in RO2 BECAUSE some people have a ringing sound in their ears in real life''. Maybe we should remove all flashing effects in RO2 since some people suffer from epilepsy.
What flashing effects?
In that way we should forbid the whole gaming industry since some people suffer from seizure when exposed by certain visual patterns. Makes no sense.
Actually most in the gaming industry either issue warnings to their customers about these things being in the game, or they modify it in a way that either removes the problem or greatly reduces it.
And sorry, but seizures are not the same as what we're talking about.
I'm trying to have a somewhat serious discussion with you and trying to take your ideas and arguments seriously. If you're going to continue to trivialize
(the above) exaggerate
(what's realistic and what's arcadey) or troll
(calling myself and others CoD Players)...... then don't expect my next post to be so friendly.
My personality is geared towards presenting ideas and working on ideas, but mostly, I focus on possible problems in ideas so that they can be resolved before they're put into action. If I don't see problems with something, then I have no issue with it and might actually even enjoy it. If I see problems arise from a specific Idea, I mention those problems so they're addressed now, rather than being addressed after the fact when those problems created a huge mess.
I agree with a few of the things you have posted, and I think some of them will be a good addition to the game, but there are others that I feel will cause a serious problem down the road.
There are only one or two of your ideas I outright oppose, while the others have issues that need compromise or additional features added to them to reduce possible problems later on.
I'm trying to be constructive to your ideas, I'm even trying to meet you in the middle of the road with some of them..... but I have yet to see you even bother to show the same level of respect or contribution.
I understand there are players who want things closer to RO1, but I also understand there are other players who prefer RO2 as it is.... I also understand the current state the game is in, in regards to the community population and the selection of available servers, which for many is quite limited. I'm trying to balance all of these aspects, but from what I gather from your posts, you're more interested in simply what you want and what you like & to hell with everybody else..... you're trying to defend all your ideas to the death without compromise or showing some level of understanding on what will happen to the overall game & community.... which is my primary concern.
Most of the above ideas are things that should either be in all game modes or not at all.
Some of your ideas I can see many people who current enjoy RO2 as is, will learn to enjoy and have fun with.... I might as well..... but what you propose are a lot of huge changes to how the game currently plays all at once.
If you want all of those features in the game, then it should be done in a slow transition or a couple of features at a time to give everybody from all walks of life a chance to try them out and get used to them, as well as work out any bugs that arise. To throw all of the above in at once will basically create an entirely different game, new players are going to get confused, old players are going to get annoyed and the amount of possible bugs to deal with at once will be tremendous.
When the Mod first came out, it hardly had anything in it except infantry, and then they started adding a couple of things into the game at a time, so they could get feed back from the community, as well as test them and focus on making them perfect or removing them completely.... then they moved onto the next idea and repeated.
Another big problem I see is that currently when browsing for servers realism and relaxed don't seem to be filtered very well in my browser...... or maybe I missed the filter setting *shrugs* I am bouncing between both Relaxed and Realism..... and if you make this Hardcore game style, it will be mixed with the other two and due to being so drastically different from the other two, new players (especially) are going to get screwed up real bad and will be trying to learn 2-3 different ways of playing one game mode, such as Territory.
The logical solution to please everybody is to not focus this "Hardcore" as something like Realism or Relaxed Realism...... it should be made into it's own complete game mode like Territory, Countdown or FireFight..... call it "Combat Simulator" or "CS" and you'll get what you want in the game, others will keep what they like in the game, people's limited server selection shouldn't be impacted as badly, it'll keep things less confusing.... and everybody wins.
![2Lt.Horvath [6th AB]](/data/avatars/s/36/36264.jpg?1568638684){kind=avatar}
