Show us some bolt-action! =)
- Thread starter Fedorov
- Start date
I just hope they properly balance it, it looks like smgs are going to be overpowered.
Before everyone goes into a tirade, would you care to expound? Balance what and how?
Damage structure, Range, Accuracy, Hip Accuracy, Reload times...etc.
If they're going to make SMGs atleast somewhat realistic there's no real point to force artificial balance.
Uh oh. Get ready for the onslaught. 
(you've been warned....)
Out of curiousity. Have you ever played RO:OST?
(you've been warned....)Out of curiousity. Have you ever played RO:OST?
Well this isn't real life. Everything is artificial.... They have to assign a value to every weapon. They can't just type in, set mp40 "REAL"
There is going to be a specific damage, accuracy, spread, etc. assigned by numerical values to each weapon. There is no real in gaming. Starting to wonder if you guys have any grasp at all on game design.
There is going to be a specific damage, accuracy, spread, etc. assigned by numerical values to each weapon. There is no real in gaming. Starting to wonder if you guys have any grasp at all on game design.
Last edited:
Smg's got less stopping power than rifles and with a slow dead someone can perhaps still kill you after you put a round into someone that will eventually kill him. Requiring you at times to put additional rounds at enemies
Smg's got lower bullet velocity than rifles meaning that over distance the bullets drops quicker.
Smg's have less barrel accuracy than rifles, sure you can hit a standing target up to 150 meter probably. But most people will be fighting with a very low profile from behind cover.
In Red Orchestra a rifleman can kill by placing a bullet nearly every where on an enemy soldier from a safe distance. If one bullet when hit pretty much always kills you do not necessarily need a lot of bullets.
As long as Red Orchestra got good open areas with perhaps less stuff blocking longer range vision (especially on roads etc). Then a rifle will continue to be a strong weapon.
Remember that back in the second world war there was a reason why soldiers were not only equipped with smgs but actually with rifles as well. If weapons obtain their realistic properties then that realistic balance will form.
SMG's have clear weaknesses, if balance is your concern then Snipers, MG's, Semis and Assault rifles should be your concern. And luckily all those classes are extremely limited in their amounts.
SMGs will have less recoil than in Ostfront, this is more realistic. The POV on the K98 sight looks to be improved, and shooting rifles in general appears to be a much smoother operation than in Ostfront.
I would say that shooting in RO2 should be overall much smoother, a bit easier, and more realistic. With realistic weapons, balance should come naturally.
Last edited:
Limiting the amount of a weapon is not a valid way of balancing it. That's a lame attempt. And the sights on the K98 seems very very close to the way they look on mine.
We aren't even disagreeing, you guys are just so threatened by the word balance. You guys are saying it'll be balanced, but you have to say realistic in every sentence. If it's balanced and real thats great, but balance has to determine the latter. Happy new year.
We aren't even disagreeing, you guys are just so threatened by the word balance. You guys are saying it'll be balanced, but you have to say realistic in every sentence. If it's balanced and real thats great, but balance has to determine the latter. Happy new year.
There's no-one here denying that coding certain stuff is mostly playing with numbers, but there's pretty huge diffrence between simulating and creating realistic results that makes sense under universal knowledge of physics and some other stuff like that and between making things feel 'real' as in what your senses would tell you which is already impossible, because there is no such thing as virtual reality and probably won't ever be.
Of course unless you want to put it a whole new level by bickering about problems of between 'real' and 'realism' as those two terms have awfully lot of conflicting things once you start applying or investigating things more thoroughly.
Zetsumei said:
Which basically also means it takes around 1\3rd of a second for a bullet to travel that far (using 400m\s as rough base, sure PPSh has bit higher muzzle velocity and MP40 has slightly lower IIRC), and taking the bullet drop into account you'd need to aim ballistically notably above the target or even if you adjust sights to the range roughly, if the target is moving in some direction with notable speed the odds are you're going to miss the guy unless you're experienced in deflection shooting with 'low' velocity weapons.
Have you ever bothered playing RO before or a game with "no such thing as real thing but only wnb-realism" stuff, like ArmA2 or so? There are things in which limiting or reasonable map design can greatly fix by itself without having to resort to rock paper scissors or jumping the shark.
Last edited:
We aren't saying that the weapons are going to balanced, we are saying that the maps are going to be balanced.
This is achieved by map design, respawn times, weapon load-out, etc.
Weapons don't have to be (and shouldn't be) "balanced" in your regular CoD way, where attributes of weapons are directly altered to "balance" them against other weapons. This also means that a semi auto will be vastly superior to your standard bolt action in nearly all combat situations, nearly the same accuracy, same damage, same bullet-drop, etc.
What's wrong with the sights on the Kar98k you ask?
Well, from what it looks like on the short video, the front sight is too thin and also a bit too long.
This is achieved by map design, respawn times, weapon load-out, etc.
Weapons don't have to be (and shouldn't be) "balanced" in your regular CoD way, where attributes of weapons are directly altered to "balance" them against other weapons. This also means that a semi auto will be vastly superior to your standard bolt action in nearly all combat situations, nearly the same accuracy, same damage, same bullet-drop, etc.
What's wrong with the sights on the Kar98k you ask?
Well, from what it looks like on the short video, the front sight is too thin and also a bit too long.
Last edited:
You should take a little time to think about the actual differences between rifles and SMGs. Just because SMGs fire more and faster doesn't negate the power and utility of rifles. Rifles should usually drop the enemy in one shot while the SMG may only wound. Take into account the advantage that rifles have with distance.
If I have a rifle, I do not mind going against SMGs. I change my style of play to fit the challenges that I am facing. It's silly for you to say that class limitations do nothing for balance. If you want extra 'balance' detached from realism, then perhaps this isn't exactly the game you're looking for?
Mate, you haven't even played the game (no less than 5 people have asked you if you have, and you allways dodge the question, and then keep posting things that makes it painfully obvious you never have), and yet you profess to know exactly what the game needs and doesen't need..
You really think anyone's going to take that seriously? It's painfully obvious you don't know what you're talking about, and have no clear concept of how HoS will actually play or be balanced (and it will be balanced, just not in the Battlefield way, that allways causes as many problems as it tries to solve).
I could say the same thing to you. This isn't your baby. But I'll give you one thing, this certainly is the most elitist forum i've ever encountered. Not to worry though, I can handle it.
There is little difference in a realistic sense between 2 and 3 bullets killing someone. However for the sake of balance this can be an issue. I've begun to picture some of you rocking back and forth in your chair muttering "realism" to yourselves over and over for hours.
Yes I have btw, since you all care so much.
There is little difference in a realistic sense between 2 and 3 bullets killing someone. However for the sake of balance this can be an issue. I've begun to picture some of you rocking back and forth in your chair muttering "realism" to yourselves over and over for hours.
Yes I have btw, since you all care so much.
Are you serious or are you just trolling on behalf of the COD forums? Let me guess, you got shot in the face 5 times in a row on Black Ops and now you want RO2 to balance (nerf) SMGs to cartoonish levels.