Santini said:What if they had a shovel that pops out ONLY if you have no other weapons?
theniffrig said:The incentive should be realism. RO is based on realism, and in war many soldiers surrender or get captured at the frontlines. Since RO is based at the frontlines, then the option to actually put your arms up and give up would only make sense to be put into the game.Also remember that no one is forcing you to surrender. You can just allow yourself to die and come back quicker. Or you can take the chance you might be spared, and "liberated" later by your team. What harm would the option to do that do to the realism of the game? Absoloutly nothing. It would only add to it. I'm sure you would agree.
Archeoptrix said:It would sort of detract from gameplay a bit if a guy has to stand over you and watch you, I know I wouldn't want to get stuck with that job. Maybe if they added a holding area that you automatically couldn't get out of to maps and capping the holding area released every pow trapped inside (maybe added to the reinforcement queue too or something). Not to mention it'd be REALLY boring if your team was losing and could have used you as an extra gun backing them (but then again I guess that adds to the aspect of realism too, but with 16 people per team, when teams are balanced, it would hurt more than help I think)
Archeoptrix said:But that's just the thing that I think could change with each map, with all the gunfire and explosions going on picking up a chunk of shattered brick or cinder block can't be impossible, they logically should be everywhere. Grabbing a clump of dirt in a field isn't a houdini task that you need green beret training for. It makes lot more sense to me that you do something under fire to prepare to defend yourself (Regardless of how dumb it seems, last resorts are last resorts) instead of leering into space. (Well maybe shellshock).
And the fact it you would only get one every 10-20 seconds or would sort of be a make up for looking for a rock (I know if you stand perfectly still one appearing is a little magical, but in 20 seconds I could go outside and find at least 3 hard things laying on the ground to hurl at someone)
It's why I'm saying the rock shouldn't do any real damage, you don't need to be a baseball pitcher to learn how to throw something in someone's general direction, and as hard as it is to get a grenade where you want it usually, I don't think everyone would be rock sniping and picking MG'ers off at 200 yards or anything. Especially if they know you are unarmed and are charging.
But yeah just how I see it, I do see your points though. But honestly those of us who tend to be at the forefront of a charge who find ourselves in this situation are really starting to wish you could at least flip the bird or something more than it turning into virtual jogging/scavenger hunt. (or is it just me who isn't happy with standing and wandering around like a dope praying that I find a corpse before the weapons shrink into oblivion for no reason, which I know why they do that, but still)
stebbs said:TBH, I just shoot the person who is without a weapon. It's so much easier in the long run, since you don't need a weapon to hide and cap.
PrussianMight said:This idea might seem a bit impractical, but could you guys imagine how gritty it would feel watching two soldiers trying to smash eachother with helmets and chunks of rubble?
Harry S. Truman said:From a realism point of view, surrender wasn't an option on the Eastern front, especially after Stalingrad. Prisoners were rarely taken....
Agree, but u forgot one option = hide & ambushmy options are 3.
1) I'd attack. (Punch, Kick, use helmet or whatever i could to continue to fight)
2) I'd leg it. (run back to friendly lines and pick up some weapons before returning to the front)
3) I'd surrender. (put my arms up and get taken prisoner)
Teq said:U got my point?
theniffrig said:I do. However, if that edition was made to the game, i think the difference between a person turning with a weapon in hand as opposed to one without would be so slight, as it wouldn't really be noticed and the only way to make it noticable would be to egagerate the slow turning more, which would take away from the realism. However, your point has got me thinking. What about being able to "grapple/wrestle" the rifle/weapon off your opponent. If you get close enough, they cant fire the weapon if your hands are also trying to pry the gun off of them. How this feature would work, i dont know, but it too would add another aspect of realality to the game.