Grenade Limit

[druid]

Lets just go to a D20 system for grenades. If you roll a 20, it lands spot on and sticks like glue, and if you roll a 1, you fumble and blow your arm off. All in favor...?





Disclaimer: this post is entirely a BS post. Do not be alarmed. Please carry on your regularly scheduled posting.
​

Hehehe phear my Grenade of Antioch +4, +2-3 Holy Damage to Nazis.

 

[Agenda_Suicide]

What if they made it so that lets say each side starts out with 100% grenades. Each person still gets 2 nades when they spawn but slowly the nades start to be used up, so at 50% nades each person gets 1 nade until the they reach 0% nades. Then that team who spammed the hell out of nades are out of luck. Just an idea ive posted it before a long time ago.

 

[Ronan]

I think that the grenade limit itself is ok , just that I think that some players need to pay attention to whats happening around them, because I have seen one guy kill 5 of his teamates due to one grenade in Rakowice. (Bunker).

So aslong as people kill less of there teamates and more of the enemy its fine with me.

 

[stebbs]

I can understand the point that the long throws should be more random, but if the randomness increases, shouldn't the strength of the nade be increased as well? If you can't throw it exactly where you want it the strength of the nade should make up the difference, IMHO. I still don't want them changed, I'm still just getting used to the way they are.

 

[CaptRanger]

What if they made it so that lets say each side starts out with 100% grenades. Each person still gets 2 nades when they spawn but slowly the nades start to be used up, so at 50% nades each person gets 1 nade until the they reach 0% nades. Then that team who spammed the hell out of nades are out of luck. Just an idea ive posted it before a long time ago.

I would totally support this if I felt that 2-3 people on a team wouldn't consistantly screw things up for everyone else. Let's face it, there's at least a couple of people on every team that don't give a hoot about the unit and will spam the nades until they are out. Those that will work as a team and save nades will simply get the short end of the stick. So, in essense, this solution would be taking additional nades and giving them to people that don't deserve to use them and taking them away from people that do.

 

[REZ]

These nade nerfing arguments are made by people who cant deal with dying from a grenade.

So, after they changed the fuse timers and the power, you all still want less nades and now even random flight paths for the nades??

I'm one of those guys who can land a nade on a dime, because I've practiced it. Much like a soldier would have done, he would have practiced it. I dont recall in any of the maps the wind being so strong as to blow a nade off course, so what would cause such a drift in accuracy? Someone said you couldnt throw a nade to the exact same spot twice irl... but we are talking about an area of effect weapon here... they are lethal in a 30 meter radius... if the nade lands 6 inches to the left, how is that going to make a difference? Besides, they rarely land in the same exact spot in-game anyway... even coming from me.

So along with adding randomness to nade throws, you want a cone of fire added to the guns then right? Because not only I, but alot of others can hit you at a full sprint from a good distance. Practice. Lots of it.

I feel there is nothing wrong with the amount, power, fuse time, or flight paths of nades. Change it anymore and you are making the game gun-centric... which isnt how it was in reality.

Unfortunately, you dont get to choose how you die. This time its a bullet, next time the butt of my gun, grenade the next. Answer me this, does the PPSH have too many bullets? Maybe y'all should come up with a mutator for that too.... or lobby the devs to change it.

If you and I are shooting at each other from behind cover, after the first shot, if neither of us is dead... you can BET a nade is coming your way. Thats how you kill guys who are behind cover! Personally, I dont stay still long enough for you to hit me with nades (most of the time). Take that into consideration.

Remember people, they're going to be adding alot more content in the future. They're trying their best to make it as real as possible given the engines limitations, but I wouldnt expect them to skew the game because your skill level says there should be less nades, and random to boot.

Up your skills and you'll see a big difference in how the game plays. Learn to accept being killed by nade and all these complaints about the nades will cease to exist.

 

[stebbs]

I'm really tired of all the bullet spam, it's just not realistic. We should limit the amount of bullets that can be fired because too many people just fire at random, whether they can actually hit me or not. lol

 

[Theodrake]

As for nades bouncing, these aren't tennis balls. They are fairly heavy, about a pound or so, and made of metal, so they aren't going to hop around much. They'll bounce some off walls and stuff right now in game (in my opinion, little too much, but that's another thing...), but there's no reason make to make them bounce at all when thrown on the ground.

Sure, but a round nade will not stop on a dime on a cobble street. I'm not saying bounce like a superball but it doesn't just land on the street and immediately stop.

 

[CaptRanger]

These nade nerfing arguments are made by people who cant deal with dying from a grenade.

Obviously you've never played with me. I can throw a nade to great affect and I never complain about being killed. My argument is for realism and this means realistic flight paths. It also means that nade spamming should be made to be used in a realistic way.

And no one in this thread is talking about bullet trajectory... don't confuse the subject with a poor argument. Bullets are shot out of a machine at a really high velocity, so they will go fairly straight. Nades are thrown at a relatively low velocity and by comparitively ineffective arms. They won't go as straight and true.

If nades are used to get people out of entrenched positions, then a slight randomness to a trajectory at shorter ranges isn't going to effect this much. However, if they are used to be thrown at the enemy from long distances at the start of a map or whatever, then the increased randomness will help keep this to be an ineffective tactic, just like in real life.

 

[CaptRanger]

Sure, but a round nade will not stop on a dime on a cobble street. I'm not saying bounce like a superball but it doesn't just land on the street and immediately stop.

My remark wasn't in reference to cobble streets. It was about where nades land most in this game... the dirt.

 

[REZ]

It also means that nade spamming should be made to be used in a realistic way.

What? Nade Spam, as I see it, is a negative term used by those who dont like being killed by a nade that they didnt see where it originated from. How are you using it in this sentence?

My argument is for realism and this means realistic flight paths

What would that be? How much of a deviation are you talking about here? Obviously it's to a degree where you might miss, even though these things kill in a 30 meter radius. Thats quite a random cone... I could never accept that degree of randomness. You see, whether it lands 6 inches to the left or right, it's still going to kill you. The difference in flight path from where you aimed it would never be so great that you'd actually miss your target. It's an area of effect weapon, man!

Can you show me a realistic flight path of both the F1 and ST39 thrown at long distance... or are you just guessing and being speculative. Are we supposed to accept something 'you feel' should be changed, without accurate proof?

I hate to be so challenging in my post, but I feel very strongly about this. Dev's, the nades should not be changed.

 

[CaptRanger]

What? Nade Spam, as I see it, is a negative term used by those who dont like being killed by a nade that they didnt see where it originated from. How are you using it in this sentence?



What would that be? How much of a deviation are you talking about here? Obviously it's to a degree where you might miss, even though these things kill in a 30 meter radius. Thats quite a random cone... I could never accept that degree of randomness. You see, whether it lands 6 inches to the left or right, it's still going to kill you. The difference in flight path from where you aimed it would never be so great that you'd actually miss your target. It's an area of effect weapon, man!

Can you show me a realistic flight path of both the F1 and ST39 thrown at long distance... or are you just guessing and being speculative. Are we supposed to accept something 'you feel' should be changed, without accurate proof?

I hate to be so challenging in my post, but I feel very strongly about this. Dev's, the nades should not be changed.

I've never thrown or held a F1 or ST39 or even seen either in real life. I have thrown plenty of m-67 and other sorts of modern grenades, though, during my time in the army. But that doesn't really add anything to my point.

You can validate my point by doing a simple experiment. Put a target of about 1-2 square feet on your yard. Mark out increments of 10 ft, 20 ft, 40 ft and so on until you run out of space. Take a fairly heavy ball (a lacrosse ball or billard ball would work well) and throw it a few times at the target from the first increment. Repeat at each increment. Record the deviations from the target from each.

Now, even playing playing baseball all the way through high school I'm positive that as the space between me and the target increases, so will the deviation. I'm not talking 30 feet or something, but it will increase.

This sort of deviation at distance kept people in WWII from throwing nades at long distances because it would be far less effective. It is clearly noted in many historical accounts that I've read that nades were profusely used (spammed) at short ranges, mostly during assaults. That is why assault troops were equiped with more than normal.

In game I see people throwing them at targets that are at the max of the allowed range, and it's effective much of the time. This is simply not accurate.

 

[CaptRanger]

Oh and no need to apologize for being "challenging"... I'm always up for a mature and healthy debate

 

[REZ]

I can conduct that test... and I'll even give you 4 feet of deviation (which is too much even at 40 ft)... but what you seem to forget is the blast radius. I believe it's somewhere near 30 meters. You're still well within the kill range.

 

[lumberg]

i dont have a problem with being killed by a nade, what i have a problem with is 20 nades being spammed in a row as if they have an automatic grenade launcher......the way people are currently playing is totally unrealistic and the number of nades need to be reduced so that the nade spammage is put to an end, i certainly agree that there should be short bursts of nade spammage, but the way it is currently playing it is just crappy

 

[Avenger]

i dont have a problem with being killed by a nade, what i have a problem with is 20 nades being spammed in a row as if they have an automatic grenade launcher

Who has 20 grenades to throw at you?... Ten enemy soldiers. That's right. If you're getting that many grenades thrown at you, then you're probably rushing a little too aggressively and the whole enemy team is trying to take you out because you're a target of opportunity.

 

[MadMax]

As long as the weapon switch to nades takes only 1 sec, as long as the nade throw accuracy is 100% and as long as the amount of nades is oversaturated is RO for me a arcade FPS game, at least in major parts. Sorry for the harsh words.

 

[CaptRanger]

I can conduct that test... and I'll even give you 4 feet of deviation (which is too much even at 40 ft)... but what you seem to forget is the blast radius. I believe it's somewhere near 30 meters. You're still well within the kill range.

Where are you getting 30 meters (a m-67 with 6.5 ounces of HE has a range of 15 meters)? I'd like to see the source, but I'm guessing that its giving the maximum distance of shrapnel. That's going to be far different from the effective kill zone. Basically, the kill zone of a frag is going to be what we have in game.

I'd guess that in game the kill zone of a nade for a target that is standing is about 10-20 feet right now. Your guestimation of 4 feet would clearly be a sizeable margin.

Remember that damage can be caused by a nade if you're outside of that zone, but it won't necessarily be enough to make a soldier combat-ineffective. Just because a piece of shrapnel was recorded to travel 30 meters doesn't mean enough shrapnel was going that distance to kill/heavily wound someone.

 

[CaptRanger]

I just found at wikipedia that a F1 grenade has 2.107 ounces of explosives and its blast has a circumference of 30 meters. This equals a blast radius of about 5 meters. Obviously with a blast radius of about 16 feet, 4 feet is gonna make a heck of a difference.

c = 2πr
circumference = 2 * pi * radius
so
radius = circumference / 2 pi

​

 

[[5.SS]Strother]

You see, whether it lands 6 inches to the left or right, it's still going to kill you.

There is a lot of cover in the game, 6 inches could mean landing it in a guys face or it will hit the cover he is using and he survives. I want to see a slight randomness as well. Mostly because with the randomness, cover will be much more useful against grenades. You can toss a nade right through a window EVERY SINGLE time from distance (lets say 20 feet). In real life if you could do that you would be a pro pitcher or you would be a NFL QB. Even if you were I still doubt that you would make it into the window everytime.