• Please make sure you are familiar with the forum rules. You can find them here: https://forums.tripwireinteractive.com/index.php?threads/forum-rules.2334636/

Two Primaries

Jump to latest Follow Reply
Sort by date Sort by votes
#41
It's a more realistic thing to carry two rifles than to carry two Panzerfausts. The rifles had slings. Panzerfausts did not.

My suggestion for weapon slots according to the number you use to select them:

1 = Rifle, submachinegun, light machinegun, Panzerfaust, or satchel charge.
2 = Grenades: Frag, concussion, or smoke. Spawn with two. Maximum of four.
3 = Sidearm
4 = The catch-all for extra ****: A second rifle or SMG, Panzerfaust, satchel charge, or extra ammo for the MG.
 
Upvote 0
#42
Rogers1337 said:
Amerikaner, Ive got nothing against you. Saying that now, I'll say this.
It dosnt fit with the style of teamplay and class based teamwork that ROOST tries to teach the player. I would perfer the class based system as opposed to even a few german rifle men running around with kar98s as well as pappashas... No thanks. It turns into a one man army. It eliminates the need for a team to work effectivly together. It also encourages the whole run and gun "metallity" If you allow a player to have his rifle from the start, then pick up lets say the stg 44 the best gun in the game IMO, he could be an unstoppable force if he just sat somewhere and camped a chockpoint. It destroys the team and class system that I think works well.
Thats my take on all this.
regaurds.
-Rog
Click to expand...

Ok this point I can see. The problem is, you are restricting the player's freedom and forcing him to play his class. If a soldier would be of more use with a different weapon, especially in a life or death situtation, I dont see whats stopping him from using a different weapon. That "unstoppable force" at a checkpoint is a good thing because it opens up more dynamic scenarios. It doesnt destroy any team aspects of RO, it actually opens up more scenarios for the player to deal with, thus making the game more realistic.
 
Upvote 0
#43
Amerikaner said:
Ok this point I can see. The problem is, you are restricting the player's freedom and forcing him to play his class. If a soldier would be of more use with a different weapon, especially in a life or death situtation, I dont see whats stopping him from using a different weapon. That "unstoppable force" at a checkpoint is a good thing because it opens up more dynamic scenarios. It doesnt destroy any team aspects of RO, it actually opens up more scenarios for the player to deal with, thus making the game more realistic.
Click to expand...

No, it doesn't make the game more realistic. No one is restricting anyone from using whatever weapon they want, you just have to drop your weapon first. I won't go with this unless I see significant evidence of eastern front soldiers going into combat with more than one "primary" weapon AND all the ammunition for both weapons. That just doesn't happen.

However with the addition of smoke grenades, I can see gamey things like this happening in the future.
 
Upvote 0
#44
K.Johansen said:
No, it doesn't make the game more realistic. No one is restricting anyone from using whatever weapon they want, you just have to drop your weapon first. I won't go with this unless I see significant evidence of eastern front soldiers going into combat with more than one "primary" weapon AND all the ammunition for both weapons. That just doesn't happen.

However with the addition of smoke grenades, I can see gamey things like this happening in the future.
Click to expand...

Ah, this is really going to be difficult if you arent even going to bother to read my posts. Heres what you missed:

1. Soldiers dont go into battle with 2 primaries. They go in with one and have the ability to pick up another.

2. You dont have all the ammunition for both weapons. You must split your ammunition to make room for the new ammo.
 
Upvote 0
#45
Amerikaner said:
Ok this point I can see. The problem is, you are restricting the player's freedom and forcing him to play his class. If a soldier would be of more use with a different weapon, especially in a life or death situtation, I dont see whats stopping him from using a different weapon. That "unstoppable force" at a checkpoint is a good thing because it opens up more dynamic scenarios. It doesnt destroy any team aspects of RO, it actually opens up more scenarios for the player to deal with, thus making the game more realistic.
Click to expand...

Kaner, you can always drop your primary and pick up an enemy weapon. That is what I do when I find a weapon that is better than what Iam carrying. Oh an stg44, dont mind if I do. If we would NOT be able to pick up captured weapons I would agree with you, but the player has choice. He can pick up a mosin, or a papasha, if he dosnt like what hes got. I normally see alot laying around the battlefield. :)
 
Upvote 0
#48
Geeze all you people whine too much. Ok first of all it did happen they did grab other weapons in combat if they had the chance. anyone that thinks a riflemen wouldnt throw his rifle over his shoulder to pick up a sub machine gun mid fight in a city fight is just flat out retarded. they were responsable for the rifle they were givin but they would do anything to stay alive and if it ment ducking down to grab a ppsh to use to clear a building out with or whatever they would do it. the germans picked up the ppsh so often they even had some rechambered to use german rounds because they were so effective.
however... in the game i think it should be possable but it shouldnt be something everyone would want to do. they should have a tradeoff for picking up the extra gun. maybe have stamina drain slowly whenever they move not just when they sprint so they have to stop and rest every now and then. Or maybe trade off nades for the second gun. and while holding two main weapons they shouldnt be allowed to pick up any other weapons. no panzerfastes or satchels or nades. They shouldnt be allowed to carry two rifles. two smgs one rifle and a smg sure but not two rifles. thats just too okward and basicly totaly pointless. and yeah no picking up a second weapon if your running around with a heavy machine gun or a ptrd. Switching weapons should take a little longer then it does to reload whatever your main weapon is. That way its basicly pointless to carry around a second weapon unless you really want that weapon for what it is. not just a second chance when your first weapon is empty.

And whoever it was that said troops go into combat holding 82lbs of gear and they couldnt add another 20 lbs from picking up a second weapon to that while in combat.... someone hit him with a fish. no way in hell anyone is going into combat lugging around 80lbs of junk. that 82lb load is counting all the gear they have. tent food extra socks water and all the other basics to live with. they do not haul that into combat. it gets dropped and left behind whenever they are moving into combat.
 
Upvote 0
#49
D3terioNation said:
If this was ever implemeted (which it wont) you will see every player worth his salt, with a primary weapon and a another slung on his shoulder.

EVERY PLAYER!!

Hows that for an immersion destroyer..?
Click to expand...

Ok well theres the first counterpoint that I actually I agree with. That would suck if that happend. Still, if you add the negatives, this would not happen. You rarely have the option to pick up a rifle in the middle of the fight. And when you do, most players would get killed slinging it on their back and/or get killed swapping them out because of the added annoyance of having two rifles.
 
Upvote 0
#50
Well I think in a situation where they needed to do it quick they would just drop their first weapon, and then the next weapon would be brought up. A lot of people do this with rifles when they have a pistol. What's the point of having a rifle class if most of the time they are using an automatic to clear out a house? Or smg class that is using a rifle to camp back? There are times when you are stuck, as an smg and can't kill an mg or w/e and you need yo rely on your team that has rifles to kill it. Or as a rifleman you need an smg to go through that first door to kill the automatics. If you add two weapons whatever negatives you add with it means that a player will rely on himself more than his team as a mind set. It will be bad for gameplay overall.
 
Upvote 0
#51
Carrying 2 primary weapons would be unrealistic and stupid.

Why do you guys think assault rifles were invented? Because soldiers couldn't go in combat using both a rifle and a SMG.


Seriously, stop watching Chuck Norris movies.

cover.jpg
 
Upvote 0
#52
Plaid13 said:
Geeze all you people whine too much. Ok first of all it did happen they did grab other weapons in combat if they had the chance. anyone that thinks a riflemen wouldnt throw his rifle over his shoulder to pick up a sub machine gun mid fight in a city fight is just flat out retarded. they were responsable for the rifle they were givin but they would do anything to stay alive and if it ment ducking down to grab a ppsh to use to clear a building out with or whatever they would do it. the germans picked up the ppsh so often they even had some rechambered to use german rounds because they were so effective.
however... in the game i think it should be possable but it shouldnt be something everyone would want to do. they should have a tradeoff for picking up the extra gun. maybe have stamina drain slowly whenever they move not just when they sprint so they have to stop and rest every now and then. Or maybe trade off nades for the second gun. and while holding two main weapons they shouldnt be allowed to pick up any other weapons. no panzerfastes or satchels or nades. They shouldnt be allowed to carry two rifles. two smgs one rifle and a smg sure but not two rifles. thats just too okward and basicly totaly pointless. and yeah no picking up a second weapon if your running around with a heavy machine gun or a ptrd. Switching weapons should take a little longer then it does to reload whatever your main weapon is. That way its basicly pointless to carry around a second weapon unless you really want that weapon for what it is. not just a second chance when your first weapon is empty.

And whoever it was that said troops go into combat holding 82lbs of gear and they couldnt add another 20 lbs from picking up a second weapon to that while in combat.... someone hit him with a fish. no way in hell anyone is going into combat lugging around 80lbs of junk. that 82lb load is counting all the gear they have. tent food extra socks water and all the other basics to live with. they do not haul that into combat. it gets dropped and left behind whenever they are moving into combat.
Click to expand...

Thank you thank you thank you. Someone who can actually reason and takes the time to think over whats been said. Thank you.
 
Upvote 0
#57
K.Johansen said:
I highly doubt in the midst of combat soldiers are worrying taking off there 98k ammunition pouches and hooking up ppsh gear, all this while under fire. its just stupid.

Im not going to say this will never be put in though because i said the same about smoke grenades and here they are.
Click to expand...

Especially since most soldiers were trained to use their rifle, which they knew how to clean and operate. Switching to a whole new weapon that require different ammunition was a big deal.

 
Upvote 0
#58
Remember, there also has to be a balance between realism and balance. If this game were to be absolutely realistic, then the Russians should be forced to outnumber the Germans, whilst the Germans have dwindling ammunition in the late-war era maps whilst the Russians would have much more tanks than the Germans in tank maps. However, this is not the case. Red Orchestra is a balance between the most realism without having detrimental effects on balance. Keep this in mind in your arguments, people.
 
Last edited:
Upvote 0
#59
Mobius One said:
Remember, there also has to be a balance between realism and balance. If this game were to be absolutely realistic, then the Russians should be forced to outnumber the Germans, whilst the Germans have dwindling ammunition in the late-war era maps whilst the Russians would have much more tanks than the Germans in tank maps. However, this is not the case. Red Orchestra is a balance between the most realism without having detrimental effects on realism. Keep this in mind in your arguments, people.
Click to expand...

very well put mobius
 
Upvote 0
You must log in or register to reply here.
Top Bottom
Back
Jump to latest Follow Reply
Jump to latest Follow Reply
Community News
Forums
Merch
Menu