Grenade range: Why was it increased again?

[Case]

The rediculous distance

Maybe one of the devs (or a mapper) can provide hard data here but you most likely are overestimating the distances in game. Many times the distances have been discussed both in Ostfront and the mod and IIRC grenade tosses are on the order of 30-40 meters max. Devs? Mappers? Can someone provide accurate data on just how large the maps are?

 

[stebbs]

I agree, what is 10 feet to one person is 50 to another (estimation based on silliness) if you can throw a nade 30 - 40 meters, that's around 90 - 120 feet, right? Farther if you are elevated.

So really i just don't see how changing the nades will make the game BETTER, maybe just less challenging. If you have to watch every angle the whole time you are in a map it is far more intense than just getting a good camping spot and sniping. Also, if the nades were nerfed, then they wouldn't worry players as much, and they wouldn't change tactics because of a good nade thrower.

Personally i think they are too weak. I was playing Kongsplatz as a Russian, and was in the ravine just past the sieguselle (sp?) when i tossed a nade at an enemy that was setting up somewhere down the ravine to my left. He moved from one wall to the other, so the nade landed next to him, but at the distance of one ravine wall to the other and he was unhurt when it went off. In a closed space (of what, around 10-15 feet from wall to wall?) that should have wasted him, but it was like he wasn't even worried about it, just a few steps either way and you're fine.

That's not the way I think it should be, imho.

 

[[5.SS] Richter]

Maybe I have been misunderstood. I mean that by reducing the range on grenades they would be used more in the way that they were intended (ie. room clearing, close-range assault, etc...). I have no problem with being blown up by a grenade at close range but I think that the range which they are used now is far too long. I agree that you can throw a round object of about three pounds 30-40 yards. however, I doubt that you could do it under fire and ducking behind cover as a soldier who was actually fearful for his life would do. Grenades were also almost as hazardous to the life of the thrower as they were to the life of his target. Imho reducing the distance (and accuracy) would greatly add to the realism and make players use their rifles as their primary weapons not the grenades.

 

[stebbs]

I see what you mean Richter, and i don't totally disagree, but we don't really know how far a meter is in the game or how big the maps are. Some peopl see the distance differently, so perhaps when one sees it flying way too far, it's actually within real limits.


Case makes a fair point there, we don't really know how far the game is reading the distance. It could be overestimated, or underestimated, depending on the person.


I would like to see a screenshot from the devs showing us how far say, 50 meters is in gameplay. If we could find out that distance, then we could go on to see if the nades are approriate.

 

[[5.SS] Richter]

I agree, Stebbs. It would be helpful to your discussion if we had some sense of scale to base our distances on instead of personal perception.

 

[Rrralphster]

How much is a pound in Imperial measures? The grenades are aproximately 1 pound in metric (500 grams).
30 meters (aprox 33 yards) is realistic for a 1 pound object. And the accuracy is good as well.
You don't have to be a baseball pitcher to throw something with that weight accurately (When I threw my first grenade on the practice range, which was a real grenade, I passed the grenade test. And I'm more of a pool/snooker player myself then a baseball player...).
No practice whatsoever before that. Ok, I was quite althletic in my army days but still without practice I passed for the test.

 

[Tak]

Was your grenade blue and vibrating like the one in your sig?


I'm worried, sir, what army did you join!
​

 

[Teapot]

I agree, what is 10 feet to one person is 50 to another (estimation based on silliness) if you can throw a nade 30 - 40 meters, that's around 90 - 120 feet, right? Farther if you are elevated.

So really i just don't see how changing the nades will make the game BETTER, maybe just less challenging. If you have to watch every angle the whole time you are in a map it is far more intense than just getting a good camping spot and sniping. Also, if the nades were nerfed, then they wouldn't worry players as much, and they wouldn't change tactics because of a good nade thrower.

Personally i think they are too weak. I was playing Kongsplatz as a Russian, and was in the ravine just past the sieguselle (sp?) when i tossed a nade at an enemy that was setting up somewhere down the ravine to my left. He moved from one wall to the other, so the nade landed next to him, but at the distance of one ravine wall to the other and he was unhurt when it went off. In a closed space (of what, around 10-15 feet from wall to wall?) that should have wasted him, but it was like he wasn't even worried about it, just a few steps either way and you're fine.

If you check my first post I'm asking why grenades in RO have to be consistently effective within their effective range. There were many stories of people being blown out of trenches and knocked down within the effective fragmentation range of a grenade and not receiving any injuries.

Just to make sure you guys know. Grenades are the most effective weapon in the game and the easiest to use in more circumstances than firearms. If grenades remain the way they are then soon every competitive player will be zig-zaging up to your position and launching their tactical nukes in no time.

Alot of people on these forums seem to hate games like Counter-Strike, Quake, etc., but these games are successful for more reasons then adhereing to a certain audience or playstyle. They are good games, because they're fun for beginners and casual gamers and they still retain a great level of balanced comeptitive play.

 

[aag567]

Usually in a fire-fight this is how things happen:

1: Players exchange fire.

2: Players run for cover or are already there.

3: Someone decides it's perfectly ok to expend a grenade on just one guy.

I'm not a expert on supplies but it seems pretty strange to expend a grenade on one guy, I've read some books on World War 2 but I can't recall use of nades like that. They were usually used for clearing rooms and bunkers, taking out gun emplacements. I can somehow depict use of the "weapon rack"(you pick weapons up from it) that's being planned for the FH2 mod. Well I guess this game can't be that realistic, but that's why 1944: D-Day is being made.

 

[Darkseed]

3: Someone decides it's perfectly ok to expend ALL the grenades they have on just one guy.

Fixed.

I especially love the people that when under fire from an unknown enemy will go prone in cover and proceed to chuck away their nades in random directions hoping to hit something, which is quite possible, but it's more often than not a teammate rather than the enemy firing at them.

One thing that really needs to go is the instant switch to nades if you happen to have your weapon shot out of your hands, your hands should be empty and you should have to switch manually.

 

[REZ]

again...

If I'm in a situation where someone, even one guy, has the capability to kill me and he is hiding behind cover (or not)... I'm NOT going to stick my head up to have it blown off, just so you can have your precious firefight.... okay... In a real life situation, I'm gonna try to kill you as quickly as possible without exposing myself to harm... sounds simple right?


Lets put it this way... if you are in an enemies nade range, and you are able to pop off 3-4 shots... you've stayed in that one spot too long. Dont expect people to use their weapons the way you'd like them to, or how you think they would've used them because of what some book told you.... you guys have no idea how they were used in every little encounter in WWII, and to sit there and say they were exclusively used for room clearing... IS BULL****!


The nades are FINE... adjust your game my friends, adjust your game!

 

[Rrralphster]

Was your grenade blue and vibrating like the one in your sig?


I'm worried, sir, what army did you join!
​

Royal Dutch Airforce 50 sqn security detachment (formerly part of the 328 sqn Guided Weapons based in Blomberg Germany, where I also served), secondary job was Stinger operator. Why?

And the blue thingy is a watch...

 

[AKA]

The nade toss ranges are pretty much realistic except the german nade should go some 5m further at the expense of less fragments / blast radius.

For gameplay purposes it could be toned down slightly. The German nade could be as it is now and the allied grenade could loose 3-5m of its range but gain more shrapnel.

Grenades should have much more shrapnel than they do now. Because in RO right now if you're outside the radius, you can be pretty confident you will escape uninjured. That's not the case R/L. Also proning and minimising exposure would then have a greater effect.

I agree with this 100%

Shrapnel will give more of an incentive to get down rather than just sprint for a few seconds, although i dont think it should be a dead cert that you are hit with shrapnel if you are near a nade.

 

[stebbs]

ok, since we are getting back to how people should be using their nades, i am reposting the proper use of nades on the battlefield:

(part for laughs, and part to make my point)

Rules of Engagement in Regards to Grenades:

1. You can only throw one grenade in any one area, if you want to use them both you must go to a different part of the map where people won't mind it as much.

2. You can only throw a grenade if you are against more than one enemy. Grenades are to be used only for 'entrenched' enemies. Killing one single enemy with a whole grenade is just plain rude.

3. You can only throw a grenade if you are sure that someone is occupying that space, if you aren't sure, you cannot throw it.

4. If soldiers are involved in an intense firefight, you must assertain if they would prefer to fight it out with guns before throwing the grenade. Simply raise your hand and ask their preference regarding the matter, enemies must be asked as well, so that it's fair.

5. Remember, this game is about 'gunfights' i.e. deathmatches... if the enemy prefers to fight it out with guns, you cannot throw your grenade, as it would be rude to interfere with their preferences.

6. Remember, completing objectives, and winning the map comes second to preferential play style... after all, no one wants to be called a 'nade-spammer' or 'cap-whore'.

7. If, by chance, your grenade appears to have flown 'too accurately' from a far distance, you MUST apologize, and promise to never let that happen again.



These rules have been sanctioned by S.P.A.M. (Silly Preferences Among Members)

(Don't take this too seriously, I'm kind of a smartass by nature, but I'm sure you see the point I am trying to make)

 

[DucusSumus]

Bump. This is a really good thread with some excellent points made by both sides.

Here's my two cents:

The problem with grenades is directly related neither to their range nor their accuracy. The problem is that RO is a realistic game in a competitive atmosphere. When you combine these things you generally get two distinct types of players: those who prefer the immersion of combat simulation over competition, and those who prefer competition over the immersion of combat simulation. In other words, there are those that play chiefly for the realistic experience, and then there are those who play chiefly to win.

The single most unrealistic aspect of any first person shooter is the lack of a fear of death. If you die in RO, you'll just come to life again less than 30 seconds later, so it's not a big deal. This, combined with the spirit of a competition-driven player, leads to the development of "gamey" tactics. These are tactics, like running around in frantic zig-zag patterns out in the open, haphazerdly tossing grenades mid-jump in the general direction of the enemy, which simply aren't feasible in the real world due to a natural fear of death. No one, short of a lunatic, would ever attempt something so absurdly rash. The competition-driven player doesn't see a problem with this, but the experience-driven player cringes everytime he sees some crazy Nazi engineer run into the middle of a group of Russians and throw a magical bag of explosives on the ground, meeting certain doom yet very likely taking out three Russians in the process.

I believe that the ranges modeled for throwing grenades in RO are indeed realistic. Despite this, the lack of a fear of death has led to their unrealistic application. While lowering the range at which a grenade can be thrown is clearly an artificial limitation, it would lead to an ultimately more realisitic experience.

The question is: do the developers cater to those driven by competition or those driven by experience?

Personally, I play for the immersion that RO offers. I would welcome this change, but it is ultimately up to the developers to deciede where their loyalties lie. Either way, RO will continue to be an excellent game, even if the immersive experience is limited by the exposure to "gamey" tactics every once in a while.

 

[Divinehammer]

Very well put DucusSumus, I think that the obvious solution would just be a server mutator. then the server admins could just put a tag in their server title indicating realism enforced or just what we have now vanilla.

 

[REZ]

yeah, the bullets fly too far as well, while remaining accurate... we gotta change that <sarcasm>

While lowering the range at which a grenade can be thrown is clearly an (unrealistic) artificial limitation, it would lead to an ultimately more realisitic experience.

I dont see the connection. Pls explain how one has to do with the other. Also, you'll need to touch on 'how people play the game' and how nerfing the nades more is going to change how people play it. Because I dont think it will.

But then I read your post over again, and you start with 'The problem with grenades is directly related neither to their range nor their accuracy' then you finish off with a suggestion to 'lower the range'... so I'm confused to say the least.


(postcount.. /sparks)

 

[stebbs]

To DucusSumus:

I certainly see your point, but the only alternative (in my view) would be to take away respawns and give everyone only one life per map, which would really not go over well.

I also understand your view that people aren't playing in a 'realistic' sense, but the bottom line is that it is a game and the point is to win. Those are two aspects that will have an effect on how people approach a map. The game limitations are always going to be exploited because players are aware of what they are and how to use them to their advantage.

I also love the emmersion that RO offers, but more because the opponents are real people, and therefore unpredictable. If everyone used the same tactics every time it would get repetitive as well.

There are still those occasions when the teams are working together and the results show it. It's usually just one or two guys on a team who do suicide charges or toss nades at random. But no matter how many random nades are thrown or suicide tactics used, a team working together will always be victorious because they are using a superior strategy and will limit the amount of losses, while the suicidal tactics will almost never win.

Besides, the unrealistic tactics like this don't help a team cap an objective or keep players from winning, it only wastes their life in the long run.

In this sense i think the ones doing this only hurt their team's chances of winning the map.

I know when i am up against good teamwork, you can't even get close enough to toss a nade, let alone get close enough to drop a satchel or do a suicide charge.

I personally just don't think its as big a problem as everyone says. Every map requires different strategies and adapting to different encounters, including the rash suicidal tactics.

 

[[5.SS] Richter]

Very, very well put, DucusSumus. It would seem that RO has a "realism-based" style of play and , in my opionion, these "gamey" tactics, while based on realistic grenade throwing ranges, detract from the game's realistic feel. Again, very well put.

 

[SiC-Disaster]

reduce accuracy, reduce some range of the nades, not much though, they are pretty realistic, but still, a grenade is heavy and without the right throwing technique even trained soldiers wont lob their grenades very far.
( i know cuz none of my old sergeants or sergeants i knew could never throw as far as the physical training sergeant, its not that the latter is stronger, but his technique is honed to godlike states )
this would reduce nade spam for sure, but it could be annoying not being able to lob your last grenade near that mg when you know that in real life you would, so, the accuracy is kinda sticky... it has to be balanced very good.