• 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/

The XM-21 and PAX Reminder!

Jump to latest Follow Reply
Sort by date Sort by votes
#3
Engine-based cover nodes?
RO1 style 3D scope?
gpg3k75.jpg
 
Upvote 0
#4
****ING FINALLY!
(excuse my language.)
Cannot tell you how happy I am.
Will you add being adding a specific volume or giving SM's a Default Property that disables them from allowing mantling/cover? ie something like this in the StaticMeshActor class:
Var () bool bCoverSystemEnabled; //Enables or Disables CoverSystem
Click to expand...
Does this mean bots will use the dynamic cover system?
Also, would it be possible to set the cover system to optional in the settings? Or at least make it a completely different key bind than the interact/bandage key. I'm also liking that the scope moves!
 
Last edited:
Upvote 0
#7
This looks really great. I love how the enemy-soldiers blend into the scene well and do not stand out that much. Maybe you can actually hide into bushes this time around. :) The new scope effect looks realistic and clear.

A new system has recently come online in our latest build that allows for dynamic mantling/climbing and deploying (of machine guns) without the need for mappers to have to place nodes in their maps to facilitate this happening.
Click to expand...
This sounds very promising and could improve the flow of the whole gameplay. Good work TWI :cool: I don't have anything to hassle about this time hahaha :D
 
Last edited:
Upvote 0
#8
Sounds very good.

In the video, is the weapon first in the standard position, then normal aiming and then aiming with "zoom" (can't remember what it was called in RO2)? From this example I cannot see why I would ever use the middle one as the zoomed in view is much clearer and the peripheral vision doesn't seem to be bad either.
 
Upvote 0
#10
Patu.Kuovi said:
In the video, is the weapon first in the standard position, then normal aiming and then aiming with "zoom"? From this example I cannot see why I would ever use the middle one[...].
Click to expand...
You're correct I think. But you would use the non-zoomed aiming aswell because the zooming is restricted by your breath and you can't hear that well while holding your breath.

Lemonater47 said:
I mean it's not how scopes work at all but alright lol.
Click to expand...
Why do you think so? I don't know about RS2 right now but in RO2/RS scopes were not valueable enough. It was the opposite, they distracted sometimes and you lost your overview, especially while reloading.
 
Last edited:
Upvote 0
#11
nilsmoody said:
You're correct I think. But you would use the non-zoomed aiming aswell because the zooming is restricted by your breath and you can't hear that well while holding your breath.


Why do you think so? I don't know about RS2 right now but in RO2/RS scopes were not valueable enough. It was the opposite, they distracted sometimes and you lost your overview, especially while reloading.
Click to expand...

In reference to the video. And IOM scopes. They are simulating Scope misalignment when you move your head and aren't looking down the scope properly.

Only your head/rifle doesn't move at all in the game.

So it looks weird.
 
Upvote 0
#12
nilsmoody said:
You're correct I think. But you would use the non-zoomed aiming aswell because the zooming is restricted by your breath and you can't hear that well while holding your breath.
Click to expand...

You have to be still (and not under heavy fire) to use the 'zoomed' scope. When you're trying to move and fire, you can't keep your eye perfectly aligned.

Glad folks are happy about the dynamic mantling system. It should make things a lot easier for custom mappers to make cool content, which we want to encourage :)
 
Upvote 0
#13
Jackett said:
You have to be still (and not under heavy fire) to use the 'zoomed' scope. When you're trying to move and fire, you can't keep your eye perfectly aligned.

Glad folks are happy about the dynamic mantling system. It should make things a lot easier for custom mappers to make cool content, which we want to encourage :)
Click to expand...

Would it be possible to port this system over to Rising Storm and Red Orchestra 2?
 
Upvote 0
#15
Beskar Mando said:
Will you add being adding a specific volume or giving SM's a Default Property that disables them from allowing mantling/cover?
Click to expand...
Yes, there is a flag in the StaticMeshActor class that lets an object deny mantling, but it should be used sparingly. i.e. Only in places where you want to prevent players climbing out of the map, into an enemy spawn, or into a clear exploit position. Generally speaking, if something looks like you should be able to climb up it, then you should be able to climb up it.

Would it be possible to port this system over to Rising Storm and Red Orchestra 2?
Click to expand...
In theory, yes. But it won't be due to the negative impact it would have on all the existing maps. It would require an insane amount of work to QA every one of the dozens of maps, checking for exploits and problems where previously there were none, and patching it up to maintain the balance. Basically it's not going to happen. As Yoshiro said, it'd be more practical to bring old stuff forward.
 
Upvote 0
#19
From another thread:
skully172 said:
oh you reminded me! When i try to take cover on certain maps or jump through windows or rest my mg on top of something that i should be able to, i just cant! (for example i remember trying to go through a window in gumrak station and i couldnt, (or placing the mg on a rock, or on a broken vehicle on some other map)). This is mostly on community created maps though, but that makes me think that these features of cover and mg placement must be implemented into the map, is it going to remain the same on rs2?
Click to expand...

Thank you devs!
 
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