• Please make sure you are familiar with the forum rules. You can find them here: https://forums.tripwireinteractive.com/index.php?threads/forum-rules.2334636/

Suppression in ROHOS

Jump to latest Follow Reply
Sort by date Sort by votes
#201
Only thing I am worried about is the 'duck, but don't move your mouse'. So if the enemy is still in the same place you just release c and fire to kill. Works like a charm in every other FPS, but felt like cheating anyway.
I know there is weapon sway, but when you go down the sight this is always exactly the same point as I was aiming before the duck (when mouse haven't moved)

Anyone know if this is taken care of?

(edit: just read the same suggestion few posts ago, completely overlookedthat one)
 
Last edited:
Upvote 0
#202
Actin said:
Only thing I am worried about is the 'duck, but don't move your mouse'. So if the enemy is still in the same place you just release c and fire to kill. Works like a charm in every other FPS, but felt like cheating anyway.
I know there is weapon sway, but when you go down the sight this is always exactly the same point as I was aiming before the duck (when mouse haven't moved)

Anyone know if this is taken care of?

(edit: just read the same suggestion few posts ago, completely overlookedthat one)
Click to expand...

Should be taken care of with Free-aim even in Iron Sights. At least that's what John Gibson mentioned.
 
Upvote 0
#203
i have only read the first page.....but

project reality does suppression very well. i have never tryed to get up when a mg was shootign at me.

in ww2 the MG-42 LITERALLY craced the **** out of people.
if you even hear it fireing a mile away you were scared ****less. my great uncle was in ww2 in the pacific. i was about 2 when he died, but my mom did a report on him for a school projecy back in the 80's.

he said that even the ****y jap MG's were scary. any bullet comming twords you would make you flinch. and when the **** was going down (every one shootign at you) you were basicly not able to move. you were always expectign a round to rip threw your body... he siad that you basicly knew how it would feel to get hit becasue you thought about it every time a rifle round cracked off.

he was hit 3 tiems on a beach. im not sure where. but in the arm, get, and neck...the neck was more of a graze. but he lived.

when you can see that MG42 fireign at some one thats NOT you...your ok. but if you cant see it...and that round can come out of taht bush with a red swasticka on it...you get scared. its not the battles that are scary...its the calm before the storm.

if your a raw recrute...your going to basicly cry to your mom
if your hardened...you may not cry..but you will get a littel tense.

flinching is REALISTIC, ro1 stock did have a small flinch..but i could jsut shoot the mg in the face that was shooting at me.

and PPSH causing suppression at point blank..... ya, thats messed up. unless you would cloe your eyes because HES RIGHT THERE!!!!!!! and your scared. so you close your eyes and simply hold the trigger down...only to open them and find your both reloading. immagen you hunting bear..or lions in africa ETC and you coem aroudn a bush only to find a charging loin 3 feet away in mid jump....ya, you would **** your self!

___________________________
sumerary

flinching is realistic

suppression in project reality is done right..as you DONT GET UP becuase it would be hard to shoot back with the blurying and other effects. mabey nto as hard core in HOS

the suppression at point blank is bull...but you would be scared. and SOME effect should be there.

as i said...bullets comming jsut a few inches from you is scary things. you are always expecting to be hit...even when its quite. ever paly BIA when your in the chirch and the one guy gets his head shot off...ya, becasue that happens!
 
Upvote 0
#204
I really hope that Machineguns will get more attention. They have been a pivotal point at least for the German infantry tactics considering the fact that it made aprox 70% of the firepower from a usual squad. But that is no surprise considering the mainstay of the usual infantry-men was the bolt action rifle.

I think one has to decide in supressive fire about what system or concept he is talking about as there is definetly 2 points to concider. The "killing" and "tactic". If you see the enemy you shoot and try to kill him. Sure thats a no brainer and Obvious but that does not really make the machinegun that much different from other weapons. But when talking about infantry tactics things become a bit different. The idea behind supression is not always to kill but to let the enemy know that you "shoot" him. Which means you will sometimes just shoot in the general direction not even always knowing his exact location. But the phsychological effect of weapons will force them to keep their head down. The US made a few very interesting training movies about the machinegun and the effect of it on its soldiers as well regarding the MG42 in particular even. I dont rememer the name of all of them anymore but it was done in WW2.

YouTube - American infantry weapons of WWII part 2

I think the best way to really make machineguns "supress" enemies in some game is to make them as realistic as possible. In other words they should be very effective, acurate and deadly on at least 200 meters (if not more). Not to mention that the recoil of deployed guns is pretty exagerated. To many times even under fire in either RO:O or DH single riflemen can take out machineguners. And that feels many times not very correct. I hope that penetration will make a real change here because you will have suddenly a much better chance of taking out enemies. And colision for the weapon hopefully will finally put an end to the "leaning around courner and shooting in a sec." No one should lean around with a rifle of the size like a broomstick AND expect to hit the enemy on range.
 
  • Like
Reactions: Das Bose
Upvote 0
#205
Crni-Wuk said:
I think the best way to really make machineguns "supress" enemies in some game is to make them as realistic as possible. In other words they should be very effective, acurate and deadly on at least 200 meters (if not more). Not to mention that the recoil of deployed guns is pretty exagerated. To many times even under fire in either RO:O or DH single riflemen can take out machineguners. And that feels many times not very correct. I hope that penetration will make a real change here because you will have suddenly a much better chance of taking out enemies. And colision for the weapon hopefully will finally put an end to the "leaning around courner and shooting in a sec." No one should lean around with a rifle of the size like a broomstick AND expect to hit the enemy on range.
Click to expand...


This! :IS2:
 
Upvote 0
#206
When someone shoots at you, at YOU you take cover. It is human instinct beyond a few situations like clearing a room where you shoot back because that will preserve your life better than trying to find cover. I hope with the emphasis on urban fighting, there is a more fluid movement system for clearing rooms, while being able to aim. I neither shot from the hip nor moved at a walking pace when clearing buildings, but that is another thread.

No suppression system in an electronic game that relies on a real life physiologic response will work, because it is a game. There has to be a level of arbitrary control exerted by the game.

On the one hand the machineguns don't control the field the way they did in real life, and on the other the means to negate them are not there the way they are in real life at times. (Mortars, flanking (maps have edges)) etc. I hope for a system that imposes some penalty for being the object of an enemies attention, as a fight between a machingun and a single rifleman in RO, all too often ends up with a rifleman victory. My only problem with this, is that it is contrary to reality. I think toning down the tracers would help machine gunners as well, though I don't know what the typical tracer to ball loadout was then.
 
Upvote 0
#207
You guys seem to be missing a huge factor in supression! A lot can be solved with audio. Sounds of bullets cracking through air, wizzing past your head, is a huge thing in my opinion.

For me, the majority of the time, sound can make or break a game, whether with a large aspect or acute aspect. If that makes sense to you.. :IS2:
 
Last edited:
Upvote 0
#208
NoxNoctum said:
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)
Click to expand...

Project Reality is such a great mod that has very unique gameplay. About supression in PR, I will give a brief story. I was playing on Kashan (A big desert like map with large bunker complexes in the middle of the map, mind you this map is 4kmx4km) and I was a DMR for my squad, we came under fire from an mg3 and a couple of rifleman with g3's, so I right away broke off from my squad by about 15 meters to their right and tried to get in a shot on the enemies that were shooting at my squad mates that were pinned down when you get pinned down in PR, you are actually pinned down). After breaking down and running to a wooden barrack type building I deployed my m21 and was about to drop the mg3 gunner when a round landed in the wood wall I was using for concealment and cover, followed by the mg3 gunner lighting me up and the edges of my screen going black and the sound deafening, suppressing me, making the whole entire wood building with a tin roof seem like it wasn't enough cover for me so I left the building entirely and went behind it using the corner to gwt in one quick pot shotin on the enemy squadbefore I would attempt to move to different cover.

Now besides me and my squad failing to reach the South Bunker, this really shows how suppression can be used in a realistic and not at all over the top way, not effecting my control oer my player at all just limiting my view and sound can make me fear for my life. Hopefully this can help others who do not yet get hat suppression is get an idea of it.
 
Upvote 0
#209
VariousNames said:
The only thing that needs to be changed to Ost Front's existing simulation of suppression is the snap of supersonic rounds, and I believe that's already been implemented.

Everything else is stupid and facilitates imbalance. Trying to tweak with a user's interface and make certain functions impossible in order to simulate a psychological effect a real soldier may be feeling is utterly nebulous and abstract even on a philosophical level. To put it into a game is oppressive and awkward. Unless the shockwave of a whizzing round PHYSICALLY CAUSES a soldier to move, I don't want it simulated.

If you seriously think that a rifleman coming out of cover should not be able to place a round between the eyes of an MG spamming rounds everywhere but his target, I don't know what the hell you expect. Why not have a god mode for every PPSH bullet spammer and any MG that throws bullets all over the place?

Frankly, if I don't physically flinch my mouse when I'm being shot at by fully automatic fire, then that should illustrate the lack of realism with a suppression system to begin with. Sometimes I do flinch. But sometimes I realize that if I lose control of myself, I will get shot.

There is no reason for a sniper lean and peaking out the corner of a window while an MG is throwing bullets roughly near his location to be afraid of the MG or to flinch, because the sniper is the guy that is going to win in that confrontation. Plain and simple.

Adding suppression effects makes bolt action rifles useless and facilitates imbalance.

And if you replicate the forced flinch of DH, I'm sorry, but I simply will not buy this game. Leave the suppression effects up to the mod community, PLEASE.
Click to expand...

Bravo, personally I believe if you're having to put in things to force the player to do/feel something they aren't doing/feeling because of the game-world itself you've failed to create that world properly. In Roost I would often flinch and pull back into cover because of my fear of being shot, not because some stupid mouse-jerk animation made me think "hmm, my mouse is moving too much to be able to shoot at that guy I better take cover and thing -" way too gamey, I want to feel the battle.

Roost's subtle blur effect was perfect, it told you you were being shot at without being in your face and left your behaviour up to you - if you wanted to try and shoot the MG gunner pinning your squad down with cover fire you can do that, whether you hit/miss or get shot is up to the players and the game-world.
 
Upvote 0
#210
Project reality does an excellent job with its suppression. That is the one game where I am absolutely terrified to stick my head out when bullets are flying my direction. When you are shot at in PR, you can't see **** and you hear only the bullets slamming into the area around you. Combined with the bleedout slow death for almost any damage with no really way to staunch the blood loss, bullets are truly frightening.

Also, the small/nonexistant muzzle flash makes it very hard to find out the exact place the shots are coming from, making it even more terrifying. The only thing that you usually know, unless you see the shooter directly, is the general direction that he shot came from. The amount of deaths that you typically get in a 2hr, sometimes 3, match (generally 5-7) is a good indicator of how effective this system is (granted there are medics).

From the sound of it though, the suppression system does a good job of making people want to move/not expose themselves in HoS. If they can make it effective without screwing with the screen too much, then I think that they could surpass any attempts at depicting suppression so far.
 
  • Like
Reactions: NoxNoctum
Upvote 0
#212
LJFHutch said:
Bravo, personally I believe if you're having to put in things to force the player to do/feel something they aren't doing/feeling because of the game-world itself you've failed to create that world properly. In Roost I would often flinch and pull back into cover because of my fear of being shot, not because some stupid mouse-jerk animation made me think "hmm, my mouse is moving too much to be able to shoot at that guy I better take cover and thing -" way too gamey, I want to feel the battle.

Roost's subtle blur effect was perfect, it told you you were being shot at without being in your face and left your behaviour up to you - if you wanted to try and shoot the MG gunner pinning your squad down with cover fire you can do that, whether you hit/miss or get shot is up to the players and the game-world.
Click to expand...

Pretty much sums it up for me.
Although I think any suppression system TWI comes up with I will be happy about it.
But to be honest the sound of a crack in BC2 even made me flinch (nice sound effect there) even though I normally rambo in that game.
So I agree that sound shouldn't be forgotten and is much more effectiove than a little screen blocking.
The vagueness you got when suppressed in ROOST was best imho, you can see but try to hit a vague block thats actually just a pixel.
 
Upvote 0
#214
I think most would probably welcome a supressive system that is as close as possible to a "real" situation.

I personaly think players should be "suppressed" from the simple fact that they dont want to die which can only be achieved by deadly weapons. If machineguns can compete easily with any other weapon even on range then you will see people geting their head down. Tanks often suppress infantry in the game (regardless if RO:O or DH) for the simple reason that you have no means to fire back unless you're some anti tank infantry. But even then its rather a suicide attempt from the front. Those which dont get in save cover will simply die fast. I found my self runing OUT of the room as soon I spoted a tank knowing there will be some HE shell flying trough the window in a couple of secconds. Its not a form of fear to speak so but knowing what will happen eventually. I dont have the feeling with machineguns knowing that
1. Almost anything can be used as "save" cover and
2. I can rather easily kill them with the superior accuracy of the rifle. ~ not to mention tracers pretty easily tell you the exact location of the MG
3. Unrealistic movement. Leaning around corners, standing up, etc. all with the ironsight and almost perfect accuracy

I think penetration will make here a huge difference. Weapon colision probably as well. Particularly when you try to hit the target where only a pixel is visible.
 
Upvote 0
#216
Mormegil said:
Should be taken care of with Free-aim even in Iron Sights. At least that's what John Gibson mentioned.
Click to expand...

In the test at TWI, ducking got you out of the way, but I did not pop up right on target, just towards it. I always had to re-aim.

Also anyone who thinks they could in reality just face down an MG mano-a-mano, is probably dead already with a Congressional Medal of Honor, or very lucky,

I liked the suppression system. You can't mimic fear via the "sound" only, everyone will just turn down the sound. Not everyone has or likes force feedback, so making a flinch is hard the balance achieved in the game with the increasing effect was perfect, you could buy a few seconds before teh "fear"/suppression took over. Probably very realistic given real world infantry suppression tactics.
 
Upvote 0
#217
Pagro182 said:
I liked the suppression system. You can't mimic fear via the "sound" only, everyone will just turn down the sound. Not everyone has or likes force feedback, so making a flinch is hard the balance achieved in the game with the increasing effect was perfect, you could buy a few seconds before teh "fear"/suppression took over. Probably very realistic given real world infantry suppression tactics.
Click to expand...

I don't know, Suppression in ARMA2 is pretty effective (bullet cracks as it whizzes by, impact effects around you)

But I think the suppression comes more from the fact that in ARMA it usually takes longer to get back to where you were if you die than in RO.
 
Upvote 0
#220
DiedTrying said:
I don't know, Suppression in ARMA2 is pretty effective (bullet cracks as it whizzes by, impact effects around you)

But I think the suppression comes more from the fact that in ARMA it usually takes longer to get back to where you were if you die than in RO.
Click to expand...
I think I know what you mean. And the reason it really worked so well for Arma2 is because most of the weapons have been VERY deadly. Even on range. It was like as soon you have been spoted by a squad you have been pretty fast dead. Even on quite some range. With all the flaws at least Arma 2 did the situation around "supression" somewhat well.
 
Upvote 0
You must log in or register to reply here.
Top Bottom
Back
Jump to latest Follow Reply
Jump to latest Follow Reply
Community News
Forums
Merch
Menu