Grenade Discussion (Merged About 3000 Times)

[Cyion]

Whether it's a bug or not, it's extremely annoying and unrealistc. A grenade should not have the ability to kill anyone inside an APC/armored car if it explodes outside of it. Grenades just don't have enough power to penetrate armor. The only exception should be if the driver has his hatch open and the grenade explodes infront of the vehicle. Shrapnel in the face would be quite messy. Of course a well thrown grenade landing inside the open roof of the half track or BA-64 turret should kill everyone inside.

Another thing is SMG's and pistols should not cause any damage. They don't have the power to penetrate the armor of any vehicle in the game. Rifles and machineguns shouldn't either unless they're firing armor pierceing rounds.

Discuss

I agree 100 percent.

 

[Divinehammer]

i have to agree with the fact that the game has too much infantry anti tank capibility already. The ptrd goes through too much armor panzerfausts are too easy to come by. They shouldnt be able to hold more then 2 of these things ever and they shouldnt just be laying around for anyone to pick up with a fast respawn for the supply. Satchel charges are far too powerful vs tanks they should only be able to destroy a tank if placed in the perfect spot on lighter tanks and should only be able to disable heavy tanks not blow up and kill the whole tank and crew.

If... panzerfausts were more limited in supply and satchels were more realistic and the ptrd didnt blow up heavy tanks so easy then adding the anti tank mines and whatever else would be just fine. Just as long as they were done realisticly im all for it. I dont want to see them start the same problem that panzerfausts have with 50% of the infantry on combined arms maps running around with them. and the class that gets them shouldnt get a bunch of them. Only one!

On a side note... poanzerfausts bounce off armor way too often. Basicly all in all the whole tank destroyability system needs a total rework both vs other tank( rounds bounce off too often and dont destroy tracks nearly enough cant damage the gun and all that stuff.) and vs infantry far too easy for a infantry to destroy a tank as it is.

I will have to agree with most of this and that we should not add any more AT stuff tanks are to easy to kill as it is. But as for track damage I think that if that happens more frequently I think it will cut down on gameplay alot and you will see alot of drivers running back to spawn to get a fresh tank and gunners sitting waiting to die. So it would cut down on the action I think. I agree for accuracies sake that track damage would be more, but this is one of those fine line things of accuracy vs gameplay.

 

[Mormegil]

I would hope the addition of AT stuff would also go hand in hand with toning down the PTRD to more realistic levels and a limit of at most 2 fausts being carried at a time.

Something about soldiers carrying 3 fausts (totalling 45 pounds), along with an SMG just throws me for a loop.

This would all work a lot better IMO when the devs can put in more damagable systems in the tanks, like optics, better tread damage, turret rings, etc.

We may have to wait for the UE3 based game for this kind of fidelity.

 

[Rameusb5]

Tanks are only "easy to kill" by infantry if they close in too close to the enemy with no infantry support of their own.

I do agree that the PTRD is probably too powerful, but at the same time, the actual AFV weaknesses that PTRD's would exploit (knocking out optics for example) aren't modelled.


This exact same complaint is rampant in WWIIOL, and there aren't even any panzerfaust (or other rocket weapons) in that game. The problem is that players climb into a tank and feel that they should be invincible from infantry. Unfortunately, that isn't the case either historically OR in the game.

Teamwork FTW.

Tanks should be protected and covered by their infantry counterparts.

 

[Rameusb5]

I never have a problem hiding, flanking, then shooting the gunner in the back with my Mosin from an elevated position.

What I meant was that the Gunner NEVER dies from a grenade that kills the driver. The bug is that the Driver is dying from the grenade, not that the gunner doesn't.

 

[k98Lemur]

Reduce Nade Throwing Distance

Reduce Nade Throwing Distance

The devs should reduce nade throwing distance.

 

[jtkalal]

hell yeah way to much nade spam and long range nade kills

 

[Dav1d]

At least its not as bad as the mod was

I think they should be reduced only slightly though.

 

[Sgt.Rock]

well, just of the top of my head, Im pretty sure you can get a steilhandgranate out to 75m because of the extra leverage you get from the design, and from what I remember, the average throwing distance for the US m67 hand grenade is about 30m (most of the WW2 grenade designs are similar to this hand grenade).

Im not sure how far its represented in game (I dont know the scale), but someone could check


EDIT -just checked, the average throwing distance for the M67 is actually 40m, so its farther than I thought

 

[Reznor]

The distances seem also way further than they actually are ingame.

[insert long explanation including Field of Vision, Map scales and moans about how horrible it was in the mod days]

So I think the nade throwing distance should be reduced, but not much. Just a little.

 

[Kavelin]

I voted no. my nades never seem to go that far anyway

 

[Plaid13]

The only thing that should change about nade throwing is you shouldnt have to charge up a throw to throw far. Should be a long throw for main attack button and a short toss for alt attack.

 

[Avenger]

Nade throws need to be put back to how they were in the mod days.

 

[piller]

I wouldent mind shortening the distance, just slightly

 

[Recce]

The German grenade should have a longer throwing distance than the Russian "Mills Bomb" style grenades. That was the purpose of the stick after all.

 

[Varsity]

I somehow managed to throw a nade across half the map in Baskan Valley last night. It must have been at least three times farther than the normal toss. That sort of stuff without question needs sorting, but the normal distance is pretty good in my mind.

 

[fiftyone]

Run, jump, throw for a good distance, a quick lob just to get it over the wall and a underhand bowl to slip it into a bunker, seems to work pretty good to me.
I voted No !

 

[Rak]

I don't think they need to be reduced. They already got reduced with Ostfront, and I think it's just "below" the realistic range for nades. This is not the solution for nade spam anyway.

One idea though. Maybe how far you can throw a nade should be affected by your current stamina? So, no more 70mt throwing after 20 secs of "running wild". That would reduce nade spam dramatically.

 

[kapulA]

One idea though. Maybe how far you can throw a nade should be affected by your current stamina? So, no more 70mt throwing after 20 secs of "running wild". That would reduce nade spam dramatically.

Nice idea Rak;and I voted "no",this is nothing compared to CoD2 *starts to tremble on the thought of CoD2 Tomahawk nades*

 

[Ron]

I say yes reduce it to 70% of what it is now, they're better then laser guided bombs in alot of incidences not only can you throw them further then you can in rl but with ridiculas accuracy as well.
I find they really discourage rl tactics and encouage more everyone for themselves tactics and rambo tactics.
The nades are the biggest element discouraging tactical play imo an example of this is take odessa the secound russian spawn now as you know when the russians go out of the spawn to they're right at the end of the street there are sand bags usually there is a german rifleman behind said place.
Now in rl you would either ask for covering fire or go another way but in ro all you have to do is prime your nade sprint out of spawn down the street a tiny bit and do a jump and throw, nade hits the wall behind the sand bags and boom rifleman is dead.
Even if you can throw those distances and with such accuracy and consistancy in the interest of tactical play i say reduce it to discourage rambo's.