RO getting Gamier?
- Thread starter Dheepan
- Start date
F
Field Marshal Rommel
Guest
Somewhat rare yes when compared to other guns because unlike other guns the Ge-41 used machined parts which were hard to mass produce but they werent nonexistant there are plenty of ww2 pictures with soliders using Gewehr-41s.
http://www.gewehr43.com/battle.html
Upvote
0
Something known as support a good development team, rather. Believe me, TWI starts going the route of EA and I'll be the first one out the door.
Till then, your attitude ****s, and you have yet to make any valid points. Please come back when you have a valid reason to be pissed, and can describe accurately what it is that has you so.
Hearts n' love
Upvote
0
Err no it's more like kissingtripwire'sassyndrome...but whatever. Apparently it's an epidemic on these forums.
So yoshiro, you add the g41 to balance the game. But yet it's more accurate than the SVT, and it produces more RnG, and reduces realism. I would say the better approach was to remove autorifles all together.
So yoshiro, you add the g41 to balance the game. But yet it's more accurate than the SVT, and it produces more RnG, and reduces realism. I would say the better approach was to remove autorifles all together.
Upvote
0
As long as they were used in significant numbers in any one battle, we have no problem with adding a weapon. I just used the term "somwhat rare" as others where using it and I forgot my sarcasim tags it seems. My own personal opinion on the matter is over 100k produced is more then enough. If you have a problem with that Jono, so be it. Nothing I say or do will change your mind. I can only assume you would rather us change the weapons to be unrealistic for balance then.
I am changing my first post to reflect this.
Now stop bashing each other or several parties will be taking a vacation from these forums.
Upvote
0
Care to explain why you feel that way, instead of lashing out irrationally? Details people, it's all in the details. And the ****** bit is a might uncalled for, don't you think?
Upvote
0
No one has explained the autoweapon switch to me and as far as I am concerned the explanations for some of these changes right from the tripwire posts is pretty lame.
If you try to pick up grenades or a faust you have a 50% chance of dropping your main rifle when it said faust on the screen, this makes you drop your ammo too. Now just getting your rifle back and some ammo in your pocket can be impoissible from there since even if you pick your rifle back up you still have to pick up the ammo for it and you are right back where you started autoswitching your main rifle again.
DUDE!!!! EVERYTIME IT HAPPENS IT LOOKS LIKE A 3 STOOGES EPISODE TO BYSTANDERS FOR CRAPS SAKE!!!!!!!!!
YES I SAID 3 STOOGES YOU CLOWNS GET IT RIGHT.
If you try to pick up grenades or a faust you have a 50% chance of dropping your main rifle when it said faust on the screen, this makes you drop your ammo too. Now just getting your rifle back and some ammo in your pocket can be impoissible from there since even if you pick your rifle back up you still have to pick up the ammo for it and you are right back where you started autoswitching your main rifle again.
DUDE!!!! EVERYTIME IT HAPPENS IT LOOKS LIKE A 3 STOOGES EPISODE TO BYSTANDERS FOR CRAPS SAKE!!!!!!!!!
YES I SAID 3 STOOGES YOU CLOWNS GET IT RIGHT.
Upvote
0
I do feel that RO _feels_ like it's getting a bit gamier. Mainly due to the people playing it. At RO release, most people playing were hardcore realism nuts, and more casual players have catched on as we go along. Add to it that with time people have found features that are exploitable, and that us players have had the time to really find features that aren't quite right.
Take tanks for example, they're way better than in the the mod days with the penetration system and all. But after playing with them for a long time we've managed to determine that the penetration system has flaws (shots bounce instead of hitting but not penetrating, tanks start to smoke after a few hits even though neither engine nor ammo has been hit, t34-76 can penetrate front armour of a tiger, and so on). The MGs felt pretty spot on in the beginning, but after playing with them for a while the recoil on the MG42 just started to feel really silly since it was as easy to hit with a burst from that gun as from an MG34. The SMGs felt pretty good at the beginning, but in the end the recoil while standing just doesn't feel right since you can get quite controllable full auto fire while standing with a real SMG at 30-50 metres or so. The list goes on, it's all been written on these forums before.
Featurewise, I can't say that the game itself has gotten "gamier", but I would like to see some more effort gone into correcting all the exploitable issues and small gameplay flaws.
Still is the best game available at the moment though, and with the right people in a server it's still as enjoyable as ever
Take tanks for example, they're way better than in the the mod days with the penetration system and all. But after playing with them for a long time we've managed to determine that the penetration system has flaws (shots bounce instead of hitting but not penetrating, tanks start to smoke after a few hits even though neither engine nor ammo has been hit, t34-76 can penetrate front armour of a tiger, and so on). The MGs felt pretty spot on in the beginning, but after playing with them for a while the recoil on the MG42 just started to feel really silly since it was as easy to hit with a burst from that gun as from an MG34. The SMGs felt pretty good at the beginning, but in the end the recoil while standing just doesn't feel right since you can get quite controllable full auto fire while standing with a real SMG at 30-50 metres or so. The list goes on, it's all been written on these forums before.
Featurewise, I can't say that the game itself has gotten "gamier", but I would like to see some more effort gone into correcting all the exploitable issues and small gameplay flaws.
Still is the best game available at the moment though, and with the right people in a server it's still as enjoyable as ever
Upvote
0
Till then, your attitude ****s, and you have yet to make any valid points. Please come back when you have a valid reason to be pissed, and can describe accurately what it is that has you so.
Hearts n' love
My point is that the points people are making are wrong.
My reason for being pissed is because of the ignorant direction the RO community has headed.
love you too
So you're saying that if one side used quite a lot of faulty paintball guns in a battle on a whole front where a wide variety of other properly mass produced stable weapons were produced...you would implement them?
And err ( i honestly don't know, im not being sarcastic) what battle were the G41 used in significant numbers?
Upvote
0
Jono, you're stacking the deck here. I can present an equally leading question in the other direction. For example:
"So, you're saying that if one side used a fully functional weapon in a battle, that was produced in amounts of over 100,000, that adds balance to the maps, and exists in fronts where we ALREADY have a wide variety of the standard issue weapons, you'd tell the devs 'Don't make it -- it's too rare.'?"
Or, I can ask an even more pointed question. "Are you saying you don't want the maps to be balanced? You want them to favor one side in particular when we have a perfectly workable weapon that could easily balance the maps out?"
See? Stacking the deck goes both ways.
Look, it's obvious you ain't happy with the G41. Duly noted. But it's not like they're gonna take them out of the maps. Custom map makers don't have to use them if they don't want to, so if they feel the way you do, you're in luck.
And it's not like any of the other weapons that could be added would make a huge difference balance-wise the way the G41 does. What else SHOULD they add as far as weapon go? The C96? The Nagant revolver? A wheeled Maxim? None of those would make the difference in balance that the G41 does.
Implementing the G41 is realistic enough to make it work in this game. You disagree. And on that issue you and the devs (and others in the community) are pretty much at loggerheads. Neither side will budge on that fundamental point. You've made your case, you haven't convinced the devs, and you haven't convinced other folks.
In the meantime, instead of simply saying "I don't like it!!" over and over, why not try to gather some information that WOULD make you like it? Folks here who seem to share your opinions have said "It'd be ok if it jammed more", but we don't have any data on how often it jammed that can be represented in-game. Why not try to compile that information and present THAT to the devs? I bet they'd be a lot more receptive to the idea if you could back it up with data. You seem to dislike the current system a lot, so why not use that as motivation to change it?
"So, you're saying that if one side used a fully functional weapon in a battle, that was produced in amounts of over 100,000, that adds balance to the maps, and exists in fronts where we ALREADY have a wide variety of the standard issue weapons, you'd tell the devs 'Don't make it -- it's too rare.'?"
Or, I can ask an even more pointed question. "Are you saying you don't want the maps to be balanced? You want them to favor one side in particular when we have a perfectly workable weapon that could easily balance the maps out?"
See? Stacking the deck goes both ways.
Look, it's obvious you ain't happy with the G41. Duly noted. But it's not like they're gonna take them out of the maps. Custom map makers don't have to use them if they don't want to, so if they feel the way you do, you're in luck.
And it's not like any of the other weapons that could be added would make a huge difference balance-wise the way the G41 does. What else SHOULD they add as far as weapon go? The C96? The Nagant revolver? A wheeled Maxim? None of those would make the difference in balance that the G41 does.
Implementing the G41 is realistic enough to make it work in this game. You disagree. And on that issue you and the devs (and others in the community) are pretty much at loggerheads. Neither side will budge on that fundamental point. You've made your case, you haven't convinced the devs, and you haven't convinced other folks.
In the meantime, instead of simply saying "I don't like it!!" over and over, why not try to gather some information that WOULD make you like it? Folks here who seem to share your opinions have said "It'd be ok if it jammed more", but we don't have any data on how often it jammed that can be represented in-game. Why not try to compile that information and present THAT to the devs? I bet they'd be a lot more receptive to the idea if you could back it up with data. You seem to dislike the current system a lot, so why not use that as motivation to change it?
Upvote
0
Lono, you talk like you knew much about the rifle. So please enlighten us.
Production numbers of the G41:
1941: ~5000
1942: 6778
1943: 91597
1944: 24532
Compare this to the ~7000 MP41 (for the whole war) which are on much more maps and available to more classes, yet noone's *****ing about it as much. How many G41s are available in a RO map anyway?
People who moan about the G41 do so because they are pissed off by its strength, but frankly the G41 is done absolutely right given the games limits. To quote Gewehr43, the only one here who actually shot the gun:
You read in a book "The G41 was unsuitable for a infantry use ... and soon replaced by the G43" and you automatically assume the rifle ****s in every aspect?
The drawbacks of the rifle that are known:
a)slow to reload
b)front heavy
c)unreliable gas system
d)expensive to produce
a) and b) are represented in game, c) and d) are not.
You tell me it has to jam? Well then let me tell you this: ALL the guns we're shooting in game are supposedly in good condition: The Mosin bolts run smooth and the MP40 magazine springs are new.
Now to get a weapon that comes in mint condition to a condition where it is highly likely to jam you need A LOT of rounds. At least 100. Okay, let's be pessimistic: 60 rounds. How often do you shoot 60 rounds with any of the rifles in RO before dying... and respawning with a new, fresh weapon.
If they added jamming and the G41 would jam after say 15 shots... it would be plain unrealistic.
Production numbers of the G41:
1941: ~5000
1942: 6778
1943: 91597
1944: 24532
Compare this to the ~7000 MP41 (for the whole war) which are on much more maps and available to more classes, yet noone's *****ing about it as much. How many G41s are available in a RO map anyway?
People who moan about the G41 do so because they are pissed off by its strength, but frankly the G41 is done absolutely right given the games limits. To quote Gewehr43, the only one here who actually shot the gun:
You read in a book "The G41 was unsuitable for a infantry use ... and soon replaced by the G43" and you automatically assume the rifle ****s in every aspect?
The drawbacks of the rifle that are known:
a)slow to reload
b)front heavy
c)unreliable gas system
d)expensive to produce
a) and b) are represented in game, c) and d) are not.
You tell me it has to jam? Well then let me tell you this: ALL the guns we're shooting in game are supposedly in good condition: The Mosin bolts run smooth and the MP40 magazine springs are new.
Now to get a weapon that comes in mint condition to a condition where it is highly likely to jam you need A LOT of rounds. At least 100. Okay, let's be pessimistic: 60 rounds. How often do you shoot 60 rounds with any of the rifles in RO before dying... and respawning with a new, fresh weapon.
If they added jamming and the G41 would jam after say 15 shots... it would be plain unrealistic.
Last edited:
Upvote
0
The fully-functional part of the "equally leading question" kind of breaks down the whole bit i quoted of your post.
Although i guess your right , nobody's gona budge either way and that's why i'm not going to answer to "KrazyKrauts " post (which he posted while i was typing this) even though i have a rather good response already formed up.
Just before i leave this thread ( thats right im not coming back in because we're going round in circles of ignorance) I'd like to say when ArmedAssault is released and i'll need to make room on my comp, RO will be the game to go if it carries on in what i think to be an unrealistic, gameplay first FPS direction.
Cheers for the maturish discussion,
Jono
(the "maturish remark" wasn't sarcastic for those who presume the worst of everyone)
Last edited:
Upvote
0
So, just because people first complained SVT40 being too dominant, then TWI added G41 for balance (or possibly cause their rare weapon fetish?), now you complain about it.
Again, gun jamming, unreliable, balblabla, bllablablablba more, even though none of these things exists in game. However, it makes damm good argument to use the historical facts to bash & flame down something ingame, right?
Right?
Then again, considering RO as a game. It is game already, okay, how it can become more gamey? Oh, you mean that RO has just turned into big unrealistic POS just because they added G41 (based on lots of complaints about SVT40) and possibly this sniper icon thing?
Sniper icon is somewhat weird if you ask me, but does one rare weapon ruin the game? They did add MP41, now they added G41, mainly because the general complain. What next? Lend-lease Stuarts, Valentines, Churchills and Shermans? Well they all were used in eastern front, but okay that makes it too gamey. Or does it? It would make good balance though that German tanks could pwn them right in an eyeblink.
What then? What is this "gamey" making in RO with the expection of G41 and new sniper icon? I
Upvote
0
F
Field Marshal Rommel
Guest
I could say the same about the Svt-40 sniper variant which was taken out in 1942 yet it remains in later war maps.
Upvote
0