Suppression in ROHOS
- Thread starter NoxNoctum
- Start date
With a suppression system they should add that it requires more than one person to operate an MG just to make the game even more realistic. Also the MG42 would need more than one person to operate since it has a special tripod. It included a lever to fire and some twisty and turny thing I forget what those are called to adjust range but they had invented it becauce of the rediculous fast rate of fire it had and in fact when people fired an MG they first in short controlled bursts not full automatic, I think the reason why those guns suppressed so much was because they had alot more ammo than you did and they would put more lead in your chest faster than you could just get 1 shot off. 
i bought RO ostfront a few days ago and the only thing that makes MG guys easy to kill is every bullet is a tracer bullet so you can basically find out where he is and kill him quick, i doubt Hos will be the same if your getting shot at by a mg42 you can't immediately trace hit fire back. the suppression/screen blur is pretty cool but when i am getting shot my mouse jerks and i try to find the best possible cover i dont try to pull off a "cod" quick scope/iron sight shot and kill him.
Idk if im making much sense but the only suppression should come from my own eyes and my own mouse movement
Idk if im making much sense but the only suppression should come from my own eyes and my own mouse movement
Nox, could you please source these findings? I'd be relieved if this was a concrete fact, I think the DH suppression system is fantastic and an even more refined one? I can't bloody well wait, roll on release date.
Posted by Ramm on page 2 of this thread:
http://forums.tripwireinteractive.com/showthread.php?t=45155&highlight=suppression&page=2
Last edited:
I think the risk of death in the game, and the immersion of the game should be enough to make most people feel like they are being suppressed by fire. No need to add some wonky effect, that won't seem appropriate at times.
Cheers Nox, gotta say I think what Ramm is suggesting is pretty solid. I like the idea that as you progress further, the effect lessens over time, making you feel more like a battle hardened soldier. I would hope however, that the effect isn't diminished altogether at Hero/Veteran level. I like feeling as if my life is in immediate peril, as a machine gun peppers rounds over my head.
Wrong. Even in 3 hour long 1 life co-op missions in OFP/ARMA2 people do not play like their lives are on the line. The only games I've seen them act at least SOMEWHAT like they do are Project Reality and DH. (the former more just because it's a much slower paced game)
Yep. It's why players continue to shoot out of windows despite the fact that a tank is staring right at them. They just don't care.
my 2 cents
my 2 cents
i logged in to tripwire forum for 1st time in about 2 years just to "necromance" this thread
Although he (VariousNames) clearly displays signs of mental imbalance in some of his posts, the main thread of his argument I agree with, i.e. I don't think artificial suppression is a good idea and doesn't add to realism.
What would be better I think is to simulate those things about the MG in real life which cause it to supress more than other weapons. Obviously thats ROF causing you to be afraid to lose your virtual gonads if you bop around in the middle of it.
But what causes supression? the physical realisation of prolonged bullet impact in your immediate vicinity, so i'd suggest that whats required is toned up bullet penetration and deflection...ever watched a Western where one cowboy shoots at another and forces him to take cover as the the bullet ricochets off the wall is was peeping round?
That ought to stop your average rifleman from pop-shooting the MGer and its not artificial.
Qualification: that said i'm not preturbed by the idea of a very mild suppression effect if it makes the MG as feared as it should be in real life and it cant be acheived by other means.
my 2 cents
i logged in to tripwire forum for 1st time in about 2 years just to "necromance" this thread
Although he (VariousNames) clearly displays signs of mental imbalance in some of his posts, the main thread of his argument I agree with, i.e. I don't think artificial suppression is a good idea and doesn't add to realism.
What would be better I think is to simulate those things about the MG in real life which cause it to supress more than other weapons. Obviously thats ROF causing you to be afraid to lose your virtual gonads if you bop around in the middle of it.
But what causes supression? the physical realisation of prolonged bullet impact in your immediate vicinity, so i'd suggest that whats required is toned up bullet penetration and deflection...ever watched a Western where one cowboy shoots at another and forces him to take cover as the the bullet ricochets off the wall is was peeping round?
That ought to stop your average rifleman from pop-shooting the MGer and its not artificial.
Qualification: that said i'm not preturbed by the idea of a very mild suppression effect if it makes the MG as feared as it should be in real life and it cant be acheived by other means.
Last edited:
If bullets are hitting in your general area then they should be throwing up debris aswell. If this small amount of debris was modeled it would make supression. Perhaps even a blinking animation if it gets in ur eye.. Now thats suppressioN!
More smoke and debris would be nice... as well as having the smoke stay around longer. Smoke just disappears too quickly in games. The only issue is that it can be demanding on PCs.
Sorry, but wrong!
In the mod "Insurgency" when the blur system was not implemented, players were much more likely to pop their heads up to find the source of bullets hitting their cover. Once it was implemented it did two things:
1. the target was too impaired (scared) to find the machine gunner
2. allowed the machine gunner to do his job - that is suppress the enemy when your friendlies need it
This effect is definitely a must have at least MG fire.
I had to descend from Valhalla just to take part in this discussion. It's such an important one.
1) A suppression system based on immersion alone isn't a suppression system. A veteran knows not to flinch when he is fired at, while a rookie may not even realise he's being fired at. Only complete rookies would be suppressed by the noise of bullets whizzing past.
2) A suppression system with a mild effect, such as the one in ROOST, works to some extent, but once again veteran players get a free pass. Rookies will flinch and feel threatened, but veterans know that suppression effects don't kill them - only direct hits.
3) A suppression system with too strong an effect, such as the one described at the start of this thread (in DH), may take away too much from the players.
So, the ultimate suppression system, in my opinion, should be somewhere between 2 and 3 - not too mild but not too heavy either.
I like what Ramm described, and I have a feeling it may be enough to simulate suppression. However, I'd like to point out what I think is wrong in ROOST.
Despite its realistic approach, ROOST isn't a realistic wargame.
GASP! How can I say that? Let me explain:
In real warfare people die and don't respawn (unless you agree with the Hindus). That's why they are afraid of bullets. In ROOST people respawn in 10-20 seconds (much faster than any Hindu). This makes people take the risk and face the bullets in order to get a kill - especially since veteran players can place that bullet wherever they like.
From my personal experience, and I played this game quite a lot back in the days, MGunners were easy prey. From the second they fired their first burst, half a dozen riflemen hurriedly homed in on this target. They did not hurry because they thought the MGunner was so dangerous. No, they hurried to get the kill before others did.
The MGunner had three distinct disadvantages to the Rifleman:
1) Tracer rounds. The fifth bullet gave away his position, if not the first.
2) Firing position. MGunners had to dismantle their weapon before they could duck or reposition themselves - and remantle it if they wanted to fire! This gave Riflemen many opportunities to destroy their target.
3) A less accurate weapon. MGs weren't as accurate as bolt-action rifles, which gave Riflemen another advantage.
Coupled with the fact that Riflemen were many and MGunners usually solo, MGunners didn't live too long.
I agree that all of these three points (four if you count the ratio of Riflemen to MGunners) should exist in the game, which means that SOMETHING has to be done for MGunners to be competitive to Riflemen.
MGunners should be feared on the battlefield. Now they're just free kills.
Now, suppression is something that warfare is based on. Long-range combat isn't how it appears in ROOST. Let's have a comparison of the dynamics of suppression:
REAL WARFARE
In real warfare, you try to gain the advantage of superior firepower over the enemy: the more enemies you manage to suppress, the less they are firing at you. Having more firepower means more mobility, more tactical options and less casualties to you - and more casualties to your enemy.
ROOST
In ROOST you do not fire until you have a target, if you are smart. Muzzle flashes give away your position and good Riflemen will take you out in a millisecond after you have fired your weapon in vain.
Now, let's consider the role of MGs in this comparison.
REAL WARFARE
Combat is based on which side suppresses the enemy better. MGs are excellent at suppressing the enemy. The more MGs you have, the better.
ROOST
Combat is based on which side shoots more accurately while remaining hidden. MGs are obvious targets. The more Riflemen you have, the better.
What I'd like to see is a mechanism that supports firing blindly at the enemy position without it being too powerful. You just should not be able to lean out of a window that is being fired at by an MGunner and take the bastard out. No, that is the most unrealistic thing since rocket jumping.
A flanking rifleman or a rifleman in a position not being fired at should be able to take out the MGunner. The MGunner is trading concealment to suppressive fire, making himself a target. While the MGunner is exposed (just follow the tracers and the rat-ta-tat to their origin), his team should protect him from fire from other hotspots.
That's my wish. But frankly, even the suppression system in Bad Company 2 works to an extent. Although I still find myself firing coolly at enemies spraying me with their MGs, at least there is an indefinite amount of MGs in the game, not just one or two. (And thus making MGs superior in any way in BC2 would be pretty damn stupid!)
If you read this far, thanks. If you just read this line, you have to read the entire post to receive those thanks.
1) A suppression system based on immersion alone isn't a suppression system. A veteran knows not to flinch when he is fired at, while a rookie may not even realise he's being fired at. Only complete rookies would be suppressed by the noise of bullets whizzing past.
2) A suppression system with a mild effect, such as the one in ROOST, works to some extent, but once again veteran players get a free pass. Rookies will flinch and feel threatened, but veterans know that suppression effects don't kill them - only direct hits.
3) A suppression system with too strong an effect, such as the one described at the start of this thread (in DH), may take away too much from the players.
So, the ultimate suppression system, in my opinion, should be somewhere between 2 and 3 - not too mild but not too heavy either.
I like what Ramm described, and I have a feeling it may be enough to simulate suppression. However, I'd like to point out what I think is wrong in ROOST.
Despite its realistic approach, ROOST isn't a realistic wargame.
GASP! How can I say that? Let me explain:
In real warfare people die and don't respawn (unless you agree with the Hindus). That's why they are afraid of bullets. In ROOST people respawn in 10-20 seconds (much faster than any Hindu). This makes people take the risk and face the bullets in order to get a kill - especially since veteran players can place that bullet wherever they like.
From my personal experience, and I played this game quite a lot back in the days, MGunners were easy prey. From the second they fired their first burst, half a dozen riflemen hurriedly homed in on this target. They did not hurry because they thought the MGunner was so dangerous. No, they hurried to get the kill before others did.
The MGunner had three distinct disadvantages to the Rifleman:
1) Tracer rounds. The fifth bullet gave away his position, if not the first.
2) Firing position. MGunners had to dismantle their weapon before they could duck or reposition themselves - and remantle it if they wanted to fire! This gave Riflemen many opportunities to destroy their target.
3) A less accurate weapon. MGs weren't as accurate as bolt-action rifles, which gave Riflemen another advantage.
Coupled with the fact that Riflemen were many and MGunners usually solo, MGunners didn't live too long.
I agree that all of these three points (four if you count the ratio of Riflemen to MGunners) should exist in the game, which means that SOMETHING has to be done for MGunners to be competitive to Riflemen.
MGunners should be feared on the battlefield. Now they're just free kills.
Now, suppression is something that warfare is based on. Long-range combat isn't how it appears in ROOST. Let's have a comparison of the dynamics of suppression:
REAL WARFARE
In real warfare, you try to gain the advantage of superior firepower over the enemy: the more enemies you manage to suppress, the less they are firing at you. Having more firepower means more mobility, more tactical options and less casualties to you - and more casualties to your enemy.
ROOST
In ROOST you do not fire until you have a target, if you are smart. Muzzle flashes give away your position and good Riflemen will take you out in a millisecond after you have fired your weapon in vain.
Now, let's consider the role of MGs in this comparison.
REAL WARFARE
Combat is based on which side suppresses the enemy better. MGs are excellent at suppressing the enemy. The more MGs you have, the better.
ROOST
Combat is based on which side shoots more accurately while remaining hidden. MGs are obvious targets. The more Riflemen you have, the better.
What I'd like to see is a mechanism that supports firing blindly at the enemy position without it being too powerful. You just should not be able to lean out of a window that is being fired at by an MGunner and take the bastard out. No, that is the most unrealistic thing since rocket jumping.
A flanking rifleman or a rifleman in a position not being fired at should be able to take out the MGunner. The MGunner is trading concealment to suppressive fire, making himself a target. While the MGunner is exposed (just follow the tracers and the rat-ta-tat to their origin), his team should protect him from fire from other hotspots.
That's my wish. But frankly, even the suppression system in Bad Company 2 works to an extent. Although I still find myself firing coolly at enemies spraying me with their MGs, at least there is an indefinite amount of MGs in the game, not just one or two. (And thus making MGs superior in any way in BC2 would be pretty damn stupid!)
If you read this far, thanks. If you just read this line, you have to read the entire post to receive those thanks.
BC2 has suppression???? I didn't notice it...
Actually a very good post.
No it doesn't.
BC2 has the blur effect. Also your screen goes red when you are hit and your ears start humming. Furthermore, your cover will slowly disintegrate unless you are behind earthen obstacles or stones (and even some thick trees) and bullets penetrate light and medium cover.
I'd say suppression has been modeled into the game.
I'd say suppression has been modeled into the game.