Your wrong with that.. the weapon should be worse when you have been using it for months..
Upvote
0
Weapons becoming shinier with use -- Does that make sense?!
- Thread starter herrhav0k
- Start date
Your wrong with that.. the weapon should be worse when you have been using it for months..
Ok, wait, so you actually want your weapon to look more and more ugly and in general behave worse the longer you play? I don't know, not really rewarding...
Upvote
0
If the gun is not broken, I bet veterans would go for their old approved model instead of carrying brand-new guns which they probably can't rely on. Especially in WWII. The gun itself shouldn't become or look worse. It should look well used. Perhaps they could add a darker tone to the wooden frame or model some damage on it. This is kind of reversed now.
Upvote
0
I was in the Air Force and though we didn't use guns much, the same sort of pecking order occurred with other things. Who got the brand new PC, the new chair, the best cubicle? It wasn't Airman Snuffy fresh out of technical school......
[let the Chair Force jokes begin!]
Dutch Airforce Stinger operator and guard here. Since we were using pistols and rifles on a daily basis (guard duty), we got the newest stuff assigned to the Airforce. (FN FAL, FN MAG (M240), Browning .50Cal, M72 LAW)
All other airforce personel got waterpistols (UZI smg and FN hi-power)
My service time was pre-AR15/Glock (which is in use in all branches of the Dutch armed forces)
No jokes about the Airforce from me...
P.S. had to turn in my FN FAL twice for maintenance/repairs in 4 years time. Mine had "auto-double-tap" (fired 2 shots instead of one in single-fire mode, no full-auto on these babies) damage to the front sight after a fieldtrip.
So even "modern" weapons suffer from wear and tear....
Last edited:
Upvote
0
Those guys with no experience arrive with brand new guns
Since when? Soldiers don't carry their guns all the way to the front. They don't get to keep the rifles they trained with. They are deployed to the front with their uniforms and personal effects, and are issued weaponry when they get there.
Modern soldiers don't carry their M16s with them on the plane to Afghanistan, and I doubt Soviet or German troops carried their K98s with them on the train to the front. Not enough room.
Hence, a new lump of fresh recruits has arrived on the front. You're the guy in charge of doling out equipment. Who gets what?
Edit: And those of you saying that a veteran would stick with his old rifle, have you ever had to maintain a firearm? Have you seen what heavy use can do to a firearm? These things are tools, not mythological weapons of war. Like any tool, they break down with use. Construction contractors don't stick with their old drill because it's seen them through several projects, the motor's burning out and the battery's wearing down. It'll be useless to them soon. If I use a hammer on a regular basis, and the hammer head is chipped and the handle is cracked, and someone offers me a new hammer, what do you think I'm going to do?
Last edited:
Upvote
0
Yes but guns have serial numbers, which are assigned to you when you enter your training (modern, not sure if this was the case back in WW2 though)
Your weapon is a personal item which you are responsible for.
I wouldn't want a gun used by someone else without a maintenance treatment. You don't lend your gun to anyone either...
But as I said, I'm not sure about '39-'45...
Upvote
0
Somehow, I don't think the Soviet's or the Germans were that organized...
Could be totally wrong, but hey, who knows.
Last edited:
Upvote
0
![[TW]Ramm-Jaeger](/data/avatars/s/0/2.jpg?1568638684){kind=avatar}
You should frame your poll so that it actually reflects what is happening in game, not your biased and incorrect view of it The soldier isn't "ranking up their weapon", they are ranking up their ability to access the "pick of the litter" weapons. The question should be:
Should more experienced soldiers get access to the newer/better condition weapons as they increase in rank.
The soldier isn't "ranking up their weapon", they are ranking up their ability to access the "pick of the litter" weapons. The question should be:Should more experienced soldiers get access to the newer/better condition weapons as they increase in rank.
Upvote
0
At least with the Soviets, all your field gear and weaponry was considered state property, not personal gear, except for maybe your belt, backpack, canteen, and mess kit. It was issued to you when you went to the front and turned back in when you were taken off the line, so you might be issued a different rifle every time your unit goes up to the front lines.
Upvote
0
Me thinks are there are prons and cons to both dirty->shiny and shiny->dirty, both make sense in some way.
Would be nice if in the future we could choose if we want to spawn with an old mosin or a new one (dependin on rank ofc), I for one simply love rolling with a rusty kinda thing and pwning people with the fancy stuff, same about wep upgrades.
Would be nice if in the future we could choose if we want to spawn with an old mosin or a new one (dependin on rank ofc), I for one simply love rolling with a rusty kinda thing and pwning people with the fancy stuff, same about wep upgrades.
Upvote
0
Jesus guys does it really matter? .. LoL
MAybe if there was some sort of potential with a older war torn weapon jamming from a dented magazine or lack of good lubrication then this would be a worthwhile topic. As it is now it's just asthetics.
MAybe if there was some sort of potential with a older war torn weapon jamming from a dented magazine or lack of good lubrication then this would be a worthwhile topic. As it is now it's just asthetics.
Last edited:
Upvote
0
Upvote
0
Because unlike a new weapon, a new uniform doesn't help you kill people. It just makes you more noticable. Plus, you know, rule of cool.
What's confusing I think is that the class and the weapon experience are broken out. Even though it's pretty much impossible to rank one up without ranking up the other because they're both based on honor...this makes the weapon seem like its divorced from your class role and experience....even though it's pretty much part of it.
Also the fact that there's no jamming to reflect how sucky the low-ranking infantry weapons are doesn't really make people crave that flawless weapon. The bonuses are passive and something you don't really notice...weapon jamming is something you can't ignore and you'd give your left testicle not to experience.
I'm guessing that didn't make the cut though.
What's confusing I think is that the class and the weapon experience are broken out. Even though it's pretty much impossible to rank one up without ranking up the other because they're both based on honor...this makes the weapon seem like its divorced from your class role and experience....even though it's pretty much part of it.
Also the fact that there's no jamming to reflect how sucky the low-ranking infantry weapons are doesn't really make people crave that flawless weapon. The bonuses are passive and something you don't really notice...weapon jamming is something you can't ignore and you'd give your left testicle not to experience.
I'm guessing that didn't make the cut though.
Upvote
0
Isaak Johnson
Grizzled Veteran
Why not have both?
Why not have both?
Well after reading through this entire topic, I think this could be a golden opportunity to do somthing cool and fun with this subject. Obviously at this point we have definitively proven that each person here has their preferences and know what they would pick for whatever their personal reason is, and that's a good thing. So I'm not gonna vote because I'm sitting here thinking to myself "Why not both?"
Right now we already have many players and topics clamoring over customization options for their character's look and weapons upgrades, so the overall condition of the players weapon could fall under this and everyone gets their choice.
My suggestion is, at regular intervals (perhaps a monthly event, or after acquiring enough game play) players would be given the choice to trade-in (reset) the condition of their current weaponry. Depending on your current rank/hero status would determine the newer condition your allowed to trade-in for.
A hero player, for example, could trade in their 'battle hardened' weapon for a 'pristine' weapon, but a player with only a handful of levels under their belt could only reset their weapon to 'lightly used'. The weapon condition could be separate from the players weapon level experience, but should obviously affect the weapons appearance and perhaps even slightly alter the sounds the weapon makes. (Basically I'm saying this should be cosmetic only, but that's just me.)
As the fighting resumes, perhaps over multiple games, the condition of weapons would gradually degrade and players could watch their shiny rifles slowly get dirty and worn, but once the opportunity came again to reset your weapon condition then each player can make the choice to stick with their worn weapon to complete their hero's appearance or go with a reset and kill some of the enemy with somthing shiny and new.
This would go with the concept that veteran soldiers would be given the opportunity to arm themselves with better equipment, but it would be up to each player individually on if they want to take that offer.
Otherwise this idea can be flexible on if all weapons are reset at once, or if the player can only pick one or a few to reset at a time. Also the requirements of gaining a reset offer are debatable, but I would be game for a monthly resupply weekend where all players get the opportunity to get new weapons and also get somthing else like double XP while playing during the event.
Why not have both?
Well after reading through this entire topic, I think this could be a golden opportunity to do somthing cool and fun with this subject. Obviously at this point we have definitively proven that each person here has their preferences and know what they would pick for whatever their personal reason is, and that's a good thing. So I'm not gonna vote because I'm sitting here thinking to myself "Why not both?"
Right now we already have many players and topics clamoring over customization options for their character's look and weapons upgrades, so the overall condition of the players weapon could fall under this and everyone gets their choice.
My suggestion is, at regular intervals (perhaps a monthly event, or after acquiring enough game play) players would be given the choice to trade-in (reset) the condition of their current weaponry. Depending on your current rank/hero status would determine the newer condition your allowed to trade-in for.
A hero player, for example, could trade in their 'battle hardened' weapon for a 'pristine' weapon, but a player with only a handful of levels under their belt could only reset their weapon to 'lightly used'. The weapon condition could be separate from the players weapon level experience, but should obviously affect the weapons appearance and perhaps even slightly alter the sounds the weapon makes. (Basically I'm saying this should be cosmetic only, but that's just me.)
As the fighting resumes, perhaps over multiple games, the condition of weapons would gradually degrade and players could watch their shiny rifles slowly get dirty and worn, but once the opportunity came again to reset your weapon condition then each player can make the choice to stick with their worn weapon to complete their hero's appearance or go with a reset and kill some of the enemy with somthing shiny and new.
This would go with the concept that veteran soldiers would be given the opportunity to arm themselves with better equipment, but it would be up to each player individually on if they want to take that offer.
Otherwise this idea can be flexible on if all weapons are reset at once, or if the player can only pick one or a few to reset at a time. Also the requirements of gaining a reset offer are debatable, but I would be game for a monthly resupply weekend where all players get the opportunity to get new weapons and also get somthing else like double XP while playing during the event.
Last edited:
Upvote
0
Sorry, Just because youre a veteran doesnt give you "pick of the brand new weapons". The only time a veteran was issued a new weapon is if his was damaged to the point it had to be repaired by the armorer or replaced. Half of the time the veteran would be reissued a previous used/repaired/reclaimed weapon.
If you think they had magical crates full of brand new shiney Mausers and Mosins that sat around for the sole purpose of "rewarding the veterans" youre on drugs. They didnt issue new weapons to "reward" them, or keep them around just incase Hans and Igor decided they wanted a newer rifle, they issued new weapons to replace the lost/damaged ones and to equip new recruits with one. 99.9% of the recruits were issued a weapon in basic and arrived the front with their issued weapons/equipment. There is photographic proof of soldiers being deployed in different locations later in the war with their original weapons. So the only brand new weapons near the front and at the armoureries would be there for the sole purpose of replacing lost/damaged weapons.
The Germans were completely **** about taking care of and cleaning their weapons. Theyd rather clean them than sleep if they had downtime, when you rely on a weapon to protect your life, you bet your as$ youre going to keep that rifle clean and in working condition. They were very attached to their particular weapon. So attached that ive heard stories of the germans keeping the bolts of their K98s when they turned in their rifles for nostalgia/defiance reasons at the end of the war.
Very unlikey that a veteran would turn in his tried and true weapon that he knows inside and out for a brand new one hes unccustomed to and subject himself to risk of life for the sole purpose of having a "newer" weapon.
The way weapon abuse/use is portrayed in game is a epic fail. The stock should have more scratches in it, the wood should get darker, the bluing should get thinner. Sometimes I believe this games historical decisions were made by uneducated 10 year olds.
But hey, if its "good enough" for the devs, its "good enough" for everybody else right?!
If you think they had magical crates full of brand new shiney Mausers and Mosins that sat around for the sole purpose of "rewarding the veterans" youre on drugs. They didnt issue new weapons to "reward" them, or keep them around just incase Hans and Igor decided they wanted a newer rifle, they issued new weapons to replace the lost/damaged ones and to equip new recruits with one. 99.9% of the recruits were issued a weapon in basic and arrived the front with their issued weapons/equipment. There is photographic proof of soldiers being deployed in different locations later in the war with their original weapons. So the only brand new weapons near the front and at the armoureries would be there for the sole purpose of replacing lost/damaged weapons.
The Germans were completely **** about taking care of and cleaning their weapons. Theyd rather clean them than sleep if they had downtime, when you rely on a weapon to protect your life, you bet your as$ youre going to keep that rifle clean and in working condition. They were very attached to their particular weapon. So attached that ive heard stories of the germans keeping the bolts of their K98s when they turned in their rifles for nostalgia/defiance reasons at the end of the war.
Very unlikey that a veteran would turn in his tried and true weapon that he knows inside and out for a brand new one hes unccustomed to and subject himself to risk of life for the sole purpose of having a "newer" weapon.
The way weapon abuse/use is portrayed in game is a epic fail. The stock should have more scratches in it, the wood should get darker, the bluing should get thinner. Sometimes I believe this games historical decisions were made by uneducated 10 year olds.
But hey, if its "good enough" for the devs, its "good enough" for everybody else right?!
Last edited:
Upvote
0
Let's the player choose in the weapon selection menu if he want a shiny or dirty G41 with or without scope.
All problems solved.
All problems solved.
Upvote
0
At least for me, I have no problem with any weapon/upgrade as long as I can reasonably imagine a story behind how my character managed to procure it. I can easily imagine my embittered veteran "trading" weapons with a new recruit he simply sees as fresh, dead meat or "appropriating" a new rifle in a rear supply area. And for the Soviets--yes, I can imagine a Russian unit commander requesting a better machine gun for his best soldier, an Order of the Red Banner-winner notorious for killing over forty enemy infantrymen. Given the cult of weapon expertise Chuikov directly sought to inspire in his men, I can easily see a deserving Red Army soldier get rewarded. It's fairly well-known that Mr. Vasily got to play around with an anti-tank rifle for a time before he decided it was too inconsistent for sniping. Who's to say that a more lowly but effective trooper wouldn't get first pick?
That's not to say that there's a mail-order system in place for both sides that allows soldiers with x amount of kills to get weapons air-mailed out to them. They just have methods of getting their hands on what they want, regulations shmegulations.
It's an interesting idea, and I'm not all that inclined to look at it negatively. At least your weapon doesn't get tiger stripes on it.
Stalingrad was a battle fought on an intimately personal level between both sides, with moments of unspeakable horror and brutality but also larger-than-life stoicism. I actually think that a properly implemented progression system does justice to that struggle. There are certainly issues with the current unlock/stats system, but it's not inherently unacceptable.
--Ability to select which unlocks to equip
--Limitations on rare weapons/unlocks
--Decrease in the potency of certain stat boosts
And we're golden, in my opinion at least.
This is all just my personal take on things. You don't have to agree with me, and I'm not trying to convince anybody. I just have a vivid imagination
That's not to say that there's a mail-order system in place for both sides that allows soldiers with x amount of kills to get weapons air-mailed out to them. They just have methods of getting their hands on what they want, regulations shmegulations.
It's an interesting idea, and I'm not all that inclined to look at it negatively. At least your weapon doesn't get tiger stripes on it.
Stalingrad was a battle fought on an intimately personal level between both sides, with moments of unspeakable horror and brutality but also larger-than-life stoicism. I actually think that a properly implemented progression system does justice to that struggle. There are certainly issues with the current unlock/stats system, but it's not inherently unacceptable.
--Ability to select which unlocks to equip
--Limitations on rare weapons/unlocks
--Decrease in the potency of certain stat boosts
And we're golden, in my opinion at least.
This is all just my personal take on things. You don't have to agree with me, and I'm not trying to convince anybody. I just have a vivid imagination
Last edited:
Upvote
0
You guys are acting like guns are fragile and wear out easily, and also that they are plentiful....
Just because a rifle has a few scratches on it doesn't warrant it being replaced, many of these guns are still around today! Guns are commodities, they don't fall from the sky.
Just because a rifle has a few scratches on it doesn't warrant it being replaced, many of these guns are still around today! Guns are commodities, they don't fall from the sky.
Upvote
0