Optional sight hood for k98
- Thread starter D3terioNation
- Start date
I LOVED the Kar98 mod version - without hoods - but I got to admitFelix Ostheim said:Now that we have hoods back I hate them
that the 'hooded' version ain't as disturbing I thought it would be.
Upvote
0
Zbojnik said:
The front site hoods became standard for the k98k in 1942. Rifles manufactured prior to 1942 would only have one if they were sent back for repairs. They were then suppose to be retrofitted for them, as they didn't have the grooves on the front site. I have read that soldiers who lost their front site hoods were severely disciplined, though I don't know how much truth is in that. They are fairly difficult to get off, and an major pain to get back on.
I have a Erma 1939 without and a dou 1942 with and I can say it is easier to shoot with them on. The hood blocks the sun and the shadow it creates makes it much easier to see and line up your sites correctly.
Last edited:
Upvote
0
Now theres a different perspective. Not that that would have the same positive effect in the game though but interesting nonetheless.
Upvote
0
I personally could live with or without them in the game. I prefer with but that's purely based on aesthetics. In reality though it doesn't affect the game play one bit and that's what is important. I've always wanted to see games such as RO have multiple models for the same weapon. Different stocks, different scratches and wear, and small missing parts such as lost site hoods or cleaning rods. Not that it would really affect the game in any way and it should be about as much of a priority as getting the correct belt size for the average Russian soldier in 1943. Just would be one of those "that's cool" kind of thing.
Just would be one of those "that's cool" kind of thing.
Upvote
0
No, because:Elton said:Is it just me - or does anyone else find this discussion utterly bizarre?
Amerikaner said:
Upvote
0
Yeah it would be cool to have small variety for each gun, but i assume each different version would be handled by the game as a different gun, thus increasing net-traffic... the last thing we need.[RWTD]Burn[GKR] said:I personally could live with or without them in the game. I prefer with but that's purely based on aesthetics. In reality though it doesn't affect the game play one bit and that's what is important. I've always wanted to see games such as RO have multiple models for the same weapon. Different stocks, different scratches and wear, and small missing parts such as lost site hoods or cleaning rods. Not that it would really affect the game in any way and it should be about as much of a priority as getting the correct belt size for the average Russian soldier in 1943.
Upvote
0
Perhaps it's not like that it's more along the lines of 42% of people voting that way because they want a hood, what else is there they could be voting for..Amerikaner said:
"not wasting time and effort on trivial **** that doesen't effect gameplay on a scale that makes changes worth the development time."
"voting against spending development time on **** that doesen't matter when there's a stack of things that seriously deserve attention that would actually improve the game as a whole before satisfying your visual needs"
Who knows!
Last edited:
Upvote
0
gonzman said:
Oh true true. I forgot that loading up the mauser model in a 3d modelling program and deleting a half-circle would take about 4 months of hard, dedicated development time.
Upvote
0
And what would happen then? The screaming for "I WANT THE SIGHT HOOD BACK" would begin.
Optional sight hood would require a new gun class or an additional menu point "sight hood yes/no?". So there's more effort to it than the modeling. Better spent on fixing the bugs.
Optional sight hood would require a new gun class or an additional menu point "sight hood yes/no?". So there's more effort to it than the modeling. Better spent on fixing the bugs.
Upvote
0
Greger said:
Actually, read the thread and youll see it would be more realistic if they were totally gone instead of forced on.
Upvote
0
This thread should be buried. For all the times I've read this thread and for all the times I've played the game I've never once thought about the sight hood and whether it should be on or off. You know why? Coz I'm always looking at the actual sight /\
Comon guys get a life.
Comon guys get a life.
Upvote
0
of course I can leave with the hood but...
I was used to the old mod-Kar sight (without hood). I was better with and prefer it over russian hooded weapon that also hide a bit your overall aiming view. Also quite embarrasing when target is moving.
But the old mod-Kar had also a bit different sight alignment. The point of the front part sight was exactly aligned with the rear part sight top border. How usefull it was ! Now the rear part sight didn't help that much to aim. U have to found where is the exact point of the front part sight.
The only advantage in Ostfront over mod is that your aim view is less obstructed by the rear part of the K98 sight.
Sry for bad english. Didn't know if i am clear.
I vote for an addition of a K98 without hood if not too complex for dev.
I was used to the old mod-Kar sight (without hood). I was better with and prefer it over russian hooded weapon that also hide a bit your overall aiming view. Also quite embarrasing when target is moving.
But the old mod-Kar had also a bit different sight alignment. The point of the front part sight was exactly aligned with the rear part sight top border. How usefull it was ! Now the rear part sight didn't help that much to aim. U have to found where is the exact point of the front part sight.
The only advantage in Ostfront over mod is that your aim view is less obstructed by the rear part of the K98 sight.
Sry for bad english. Didn't know if i am clear.
I vote for an addition of a K98 without hood if not too complex for dev.
Upvote
0