Where's the realism?

[MadTommy]

Oh god this conversation has been flogged to death on these forums. There is a 700+ thread covering it FFS and numerous other ones to boot. I think accusation of troll is spot on.

Wanna talk about realism in RO2, why not talk about the numerous other things that RO2 has that is lacking from the majority of FPS games...

• No cross hairs
• Bullets that actually kill you!
• No HUD indicator telling you how many bullets / mags you have.
• No glowing flag over enemies say I"M HERE SHOT ME!
• No bunny hopping
• No dolpin diving
• Mantling
• No parachutes when jumping off 6 foot drops
• Excellent and varied reload animations at realistic speeds
• Realistic collision of rilfles against objects
• Realistic collision of bodies against objects, (can't turn here, can't prone here etc)
• Player movement speed.
• Breathing system
• Resting weapons against EVERYTHING.
• Tank mechanics, positions...etc etc

Just to name a few things off the top of my head....

Now if you can't see how RO2 includes realism compared to the big titles like BF,COD,MOH that dominate the market you need to get your head examined.

TW-I were never going to be able to please everyone.. but by making it mod friendly with the SDK we are able to please ourselves.

That is all... (stupid fing repetitive forum!)

 

[Leo4444]

Accessibility != ease.

Just because I can shoot a gun with reasonable accuracy doesn't mean that I'm a good player. If I tried to run-and-gun, I would quickly be punished by more adept players for my insolence. If I don't value my life or contributing to my team, I can just throw myself at my enemies.

Or, as flavin420 said, you can chose to play like you want to play, and it's remarkably successful. Just because I have the option to sprint across an open field doesn't mean that it's the best option or the one I should take to play well. Even if I don't get shot, I just announced to any enemy looking my way that I was there.

With the right trial-and-error, I can learn how to use the terrain, cover, and concealment to my advantage to sneak behind the enemy lines and wreak havoc. This is how I usually play machine gunner, flanking the enemy by slowly crawling through the map, inch by inch, and taking up a well-concealed position where I can hit them from an unexpected angle without them shooting me. It's a stealth-em-up for me, and it plays brilliantly. It took me a long time to figure out how to make it across an open area without drawing attention, and that's led to new challenges, like learning how to inflict casualties without giving my location away and when to stick around and fight it out and when to bolt like a scared rabbit.

Just because the controls aren't clunky and obtuse and you aren't forced to hobble around like you have broken legs doesn't mean that the game is any less challenging or deep.

It does mean its less challenging, I can rambo the whole game with a mkb and easily be the top player and if you dont believe me i can show you. Atleast in Ro1 ramboing was a bit harder and mastering the bolt action took time. In this game every gun is easy to use and super accurate because of the lack of sway.

 

[Dayve]

I'm glad quite a few people feel the same way. I wasn't troll posting, this isn't a troll account, it just so happens that the OP here was the first post I made after creating my new account after my game arrived from Amazon and I tried it out.

There seems to be a sort of elitist attitude built up by a lot of people who play this game, like it takes more skill to play and because it's a bit more realistic than CoD, yet when we have soldiers in Stalingrad in 1942 using a weapon that wasn't distributed until mid-1944, and even then only a handful in number, some people, some how, make excuses for it.

There were assault groups in Stalingrad equipped solely with the PPSH whose job was house to house fighting but from what I've read they must have been very few and far between because a lot of the fighting, especially in houses, was conducted with pistols, grenades, rifles, bayonets and spades. They were lucky if they even had a rifle, and even then they were lucky if they had more than 1 clip.

Also there's the semi-automatic rifles whose names I forget. They certainly weren't available to either side at the battle of Stalingrad as far as I'm aware.

Basically, what this amounts to is people have a choice to choose weapons that require some skill and weapons that require none. They are obviously going to choose the ones that require no skill, unless you're weird like me and love bolt action rifles so much you'll never use anything else except a sidearm and grenades.

Yesterday for example I got killed by the same guy about 20 times in a round, he had around 50 kills by the end of the round. Everytime I passed a window I'd see something to shoot at so I'd take cover, poke my head around to get a look and BANG BANG BANG BANG BANG, 4 or 5 shots in ridiculously rapid succession, under a second, me dead. See, there's no skill with those semi-auto rifles. You don't have to aim, you just start firing and move the rifle in to position as you're letting off rounds.

If I'd been shot at with a rifle, it would have missed, I would have had to move position, it'd be realistic. Instead I got killed by a weapon that didn't even exist yet... about 20 times.

 

[|Brothers|-ktabz]

You ought to look at the actual TO&E of the units. Most units have bolt-rifles by far.

i agree that most soldiers had rifles, however as you moved closer to the front line, more soldiers had smgs.

smgs from different companies were grouped together to carry out assaults. chuikev's order specifically insisted that individual companies and battalions shouldn't carry out assaults so i fail to see how a to&e table would be an accurate depiction of loadouts of what really happened on the front lines.

the smgs got sent into the main assault (what is depicted in our maps on ro2) while the riflemen were guarding against counterattacks some distance to the rear and flanks.

 

[vyyye]

i agree that most soldiers had rifles, however as you moved closer to the front line, more soldiers had smgs.

smgs from different companies were grouped together to carry out assaults. chuikev's order specifically insisted that individual companies and battalions shouldn't carry out assaults so i fail to see how a to&e table would be an accurate depiction of loadouts of what really happened on the front lines.

the smgs got sent into the main assault (what is depicted in our maps on ro2) while the riflemen were guarding against counterattacks some distance to the rear and flanks.

Source?

Seriously, I'd love to read some about infantry tactics of WWII. Preferably not in Wiki form.

 

[grothesj2]

i agree that most soldiers had rifles, however as you moved closer to the front line, more soldiers had smgs.

smgs from different companies were grouped together to carry out assaults. chuikev's order specifically insisted that individual companies and battalions shouldn't carry out assaults so i fail to see how a to&e table would be an accurate depiction of loadouts of what really happened on the front lines.

the smgs got sent into the main assault (what is depicted in our maps on ro2) while the riflemen were guarding against counterattacks some distance to the rear and flanks.

Again, can't make these groups when the troops don't have the weapons. He could order to fly to the moon and bring back moon rocks but it doesn't magically produce the rocks...or the smgs. Might want to have a look at Glantz's books on Stalingrad. His books are well footnoted directly out of the Russian archives. The troops were hanging on by their fingernails through most of the battle till the encirclement. Counter attacks were made with what was on hand and it was usually by depleted rifle regiments with a paucity of smgs. Sure there were some special assault companies formed but the vast majority of the troops on the line were just rifle equipped. ATRs seem to outnumber smgs in some of the regiments.

 

[Sah.]

whatever happened to the custom server mutators where you could pick the amount of weapons allowed per map ?! what happened to 2/3 of the stuff we were promised ?! why did i spend my money on a game that's laggy, buggy and imbalanced ?!

 

[|Brothers|-ktabz]

Source?

Seriously, I'd love to read some about infantry tactics of WWII. Preferably not in Wiki form.

see the end of page one

 

[Rrralphster]

First of all: not sure if troll... @OP

In the time period stipulated by the title - not really. As for Stalingrad on the Russians - they were lucky if they were issued a bolt rifle between 2 people. What we have is a smg/semi f fest on most maps.

It would be preferable to severely limit the amount of smg's and semi's on a map and have the majority playing with bolts.

Myth: Rodimtsev's 13th Guards (10.000 men initially) was regrouping and rearming before the battle. 1000 men were poorly equiped.
Poorly equiped does not equal not having a weapon or having to share 1-2 bullets among men.

actually the russians started using assault platoons in stalingrad with 30+ guys all using ppsh's. so really if we want to be totally realistic every russian should have an smg. also in stalingrad the russians decided to use the tactic of hugging the german front line. in other words, stay within grenade range to negate the german advantages in artillary, close air support, and tank support. so if the game feels like you spawn close to the enemy, well no **** sherlock, that's how it really happened.

as for the mkb, well yeah its annoying and not realistic, but what ww2 game ever made didn't have the stg44 (essentially the same thing) and didn't have the stg44 as the most dominant weapon in the game? i can't think of one and i've played most of them. ww2 shooters are all i play.

theres a reason why all modern armies have assault rifles as standard general issue now, because it is simply better than the alternatives. so what to do when you encounter one and you have a measly mosin-nagant? shoot him in the chest, just like you did in every other ww2 shooter you're ever played.

+1 Good grasp of the facts (http://www.tandfonline.com/doi/pdf/10.1080/13518040902918089[url]http://www.tandfonline.com/doi/pdf/10.1080/13518040902918089[/URL] this is not Osprey...)

Thats like saying every russian in stalingrad had a smg, do some research and you will find the majority of soldiers were equipped a rifle ammo and some had grenades. Yes there was some russian assault platoons but not many. Even in 1945 when smg numbers had quadrupled the majority of soldiers were equipped a mosin nagant, dont give out false information.

In stalingrad, the Russians used more grenades then in the rest of the war (starting '41)

my source is World War II Street Fighting Tactics by Dr. Stephen Bull, published by Osprey Publishing page 17. the guy is an expert in every way shape or form. the section is titled "Stalingrad, the Academy of Street Fighting" and begins by describing the crude tactics used before Chuikov's Order No. 166 which stated "that operations were not to be carried out by whole units like companies and battalions. The offensive should be organized chiefly on the basis of small groups, with sub-machine guns, hand grenades, bottles of incendiary mixture and anti-tank rifles... As Chuikov's memoirs observed, this meant that only portions of each battalion were committed at any one time, in 'storm groups' on limited sectors, while other troops remained on the defensive."

+1 Spot on observation

That source still doesnt support your claim that "every russian should have an smg" you could make the case that in certain house to house battles this was the case but not for all. So in certain ro2 maps the current loadout would be realistic but not on most. Certainly not early in the battle or in more open areas where huge charges took place. Since the standard RO2 mode is territories lets say the russians are pushed back into their defensive lines, the defensive troops were not all equipped with smgs because the groups equipped with smgs were in the author's words "small". That book has been quoted many times and just because some groups were equipped with smgs, it does not mean the majority were and my apologies if a appeared rude with my first comment and I do agree with the rest of your statement about the mkb/stg44.

http://www.tandfonline.com/doi/pdf/10.1080/13518040902918089[url]http://www.tandfonline.com/doi/pdf/10.1080/13518040902918089[/URL]

You ought to look at the actual TO&E of the units. Most units have bolt-rifles by far.

Please show me some Russian "TO&E". I have been looking for teh Russian ones for 2 weeks now. I can find German "TO&E" all over the place. No Russian ones though

Of course they were used. So were King Tiger tanks, Me-262 jet fighters and V-2 rockets. That's not the point. The point is the amount and types of SMGs that were available and in what numbers during the battle. MKB42, like King Tiger tanks just wasn't around in the numbers the game uses them if they were in the battle at all. King Tiger tanks are as out of place as the MKB should be. Even the vastly more produced PPsH was a minority compared to bolt-rifles. Just go look at the TO&E of the various Soviet units and you'll see that rifles far and away outnumbered smgs.

See above. What Russian "Tables of Organisation and Equipment"??? Where??? I must see them, specifically from Stalingrad.

This ignores the fact that all of those men carrying rifles includes REMFs. Russian men hand picked for assaults in Stalingrad would have a much greater number of SMGs than some random unit's official issued gear.

No way, Russians relied on induvidual qualities of their soldiers and sub-commanders since Stalingrad
http://www.tandfonline.com/doi/pdf/10.1080/13518040902918089[url]http://www.tandfonline.com/doi/pdf/10.1080/13518040902918089[/URL]

Look at the TO&E of any unit regardless of nationality during WWII and you will see that the vast majority of frontline infantrymen were issued rifles, not just REMFs. Yes, the Soviets fielded submachinegun companies. But look at how many companies are in a single regiment or battalion and then get back to us on how a majority of frontline troops were armed with automatics.

Even Guards Rifle (RIFLE) Divisions (DIVISIONS) were equiped with scores of PPSh's

Guards Rifle (They all have them, but the guy holding the binocs is most clear. Red Star medal (Hero of) and the medal below id a Guards Rifle medal):

I expect atleast a couple of "staged foto's" for this:
Battle of Stalingrad 42-43 - YouTube

Have you even looked at the TO&E of Soviet units in the battle? I'm guessing not. Many a rifle regiment had none or almost no smgs at all.

Source?

Seriously, I'd love to read some about infantry tactics of WWII. Preferably not in Wiki form.

Here you go: [url]http://forums.tripwireinteractive.com/showthread.php?t=66954[/URL]

Again, can't make these groups when the troops don't have the weapons. He could order to fly to the moon and bring back moon rocks but it doesn't magically produce the rocks...or the smgs. Might want to have a look at Glantz's books on Stalingrad. His books are well footnoted directly out of the Russian archives. The troops were hanging on by their fingernails through most of the battle till the encirclement. Counter attacks were made with what was on hand and it was usually by depleted rifle regiments with a paucity of smgs. Sure there were some special assault companies formed but the vast majority of the troops on the line were just rifle equipped. ATRs seem to outnumber smgs in some of the regiments.

Hanging by their fingernails, but new troops and weapons and ammo and food came in from the east bank on a daily basis.

 

[grothesj2]

http://www.amazon.com/Gates-Staling...6306/ref=sr_1_2?ie=UTF8&qid=1317302038&sr=8-2

http://www.amazon.com/Armageddon-St...6640/ref=sr_1_1?ie=UTF8&qid=1317302038&sr=8-1

Two volumes right there. About 1600 pages of Stalingrad goodness. Third one not out yet

 

[Rrralphster]

http://www.amazon.com/Gates-Staling...6306/ref=sr_1_2?ie=UTF8&qid=1317302038&sr=8-2http://www.amazon.com/Gates-Staling...6306/ref=sr_1_2?ie=UTF8&qid=1317302038&sr=8-2

http://www.amazon.com/Armageddon-St...6640/ref=sr_1_1?ie=UTF8&qid=1317302038&sr=8-1http://www.amazon.com/Armageddon-St...6640/ref=sr_1_1?ie=UTF8&qid=1317302038&sr=8-1

Two volumes right there. About 1600 pages of Stalingrad goodness. Third one not out yet

Thank you very much. I was looking to buy some new material in the near future.
Which one would you recommend to buy first?

P.S. never mind, ordered them both...

 

[Drecks]

 

[Stahlhelmii]

Oh god this conversation has been flogged to death on these forums. There is a 700+ thread covering it FFS and numerous other ones to boot. I think accusation of troll is spot on.

Wanna talk about realism in RO2, why not talk about the numerous other things that RO2 has that is lacking from the majority of FPS games...

• No cross hairs
• Bullets that actually kill you!
• No HUD indicator telling you how many bullets / mags you have.
• No glowing flag over enemies say I"M HERE SHOT ME!
• No bunny hopping
• No dolpin diving
• Mantling
• No parachutes when jumping off 6 foot drops
• Excellent and varied reload animations at realistic speeds
• Realistic collision of rilfles against objects
• Realistic collision of bodies against objects, (can't turn here, can't prone here etc)
• Player movement speed.
• Breathing system
• Resting weapons against EVERYTHING.
• Tank mechanics, positions...etc etc

Just to name a few things off the top of my head....

Now if you can't see how RO2 includes realism compared to the big titles like BF,COD,MOH that dominate the market you need to get your head examined.

TW-I were never going to be able to please everyone.. but by making it mod friendly with the SDK we are able to please ourselves.

That is all... (stupid fing repetitive forum!)

Much of this is kind of irrelevent as other games have hardcore modes and a few I find flat out wrong:

• No cross hairs - removeable in hardcore mode
• Bullets that actually kill you! available in hardcore mode
• No HUD indicator telling you how many bullets / mags you have. removeable in hardcore mode
• No glowing flag over enemies say I"M HERE SHOT ME! removeable in hardcore mode
• No bunny hopping - can't argue with this one, although many players have developed that "cute" little habit of dancing from side to side strafe-firing at you will giving you no target to hit!
• No dolpin diving - that is the claim, although I've seen far too many players running several feet behind me suddenly dive in front of me to steal a piece of cover, so I think can be manipulated either through macros or through hacking
• Mantling ? Have yet to grasp the concept and seems to be nothing but a better 3rd person visual view of hopping over an object ....
• No parachutes when jumping off 6 foot drops-true, but COD doesn't have this, either, and this is the only game that kills me every time I try to jump from a 4 foot ledge or object!
• Excellent and varied reload animations at realistic speeds that cannot be stopped and cause the player to die if attacked at close range while reloading
• Realistic collision of rilfles against objects making it possible for you to have to watch 5 idiots run around bayonetting brick walls at the start of every game, while quite unrealisticly the idiots' bayonets are neither blunted nor broken ...
• Realistic collision of bodies against objects, (can't turn here, can't prone here etc) maybe, but I don't think being able to pass through a teammate like a ghost is very realistic, and the "can't prone here" system is obviously semi-broke ...
• Player movement speed. ?
• Breathing system ? Hearing yourself breath (to me) is just annoying
• Resting weapons against EVERYTHING. doesn't really work; you can't prone or set up weapons on flat areas where there is no visual, physical reason you could not
• Tank mechanics, positions...etc etc

I would add that rifles that don't fire 50% of the time on the first shot, and ADS'd, center chest shots that don't register 2 out of 3 times at ranges between point-blank and 29m is HIGHLY unrealistic.

Not slagging the game, just pointing out weaknesses and what I view to be extreme prejudices in your argument. If you're going to claim these matters to be features "lacking" in other games, you can't ignore their shortcomings ...

 

[Rrralphster]

Ga ff een dutje doen dan....

 

[Dayve]

Except this isn't a silly discussion. I spent money on a game that claims to be realistic, instead I get CoD 1 with better graphics and the nastiest controls I have ever encountered in a game in my life. The STG prototype is epic, it has less recoil than an SMG and is as powerful as a rifle and should not be in the game at all, the semi-automatic rifles shouldn't be in the game at all because I'm pretty sure they either didn't exist at the time or existed in such few numbers as not to warrant their inclusion, and running around spraying an SMG is a valid, working and very effective way to play, just like in CoD.

Honestly, I just played again for an hour and if the Germans were as heavily armed with assault and semi-automatic rifles in real life as the German team I was playing against in the game were just now - the invasion of Russia would have been over by Christmas 1941.

It just doesn't feel authentic at all. Bolt action rifles were THE most abundant weapon used by Germany and Russia in WW2 and it was no different in Stalingrad. If Tripwire want to be taken seriously when they call this game realistic then it needs to reflect the reality of the battle.

 

[vyyye]

Thanks for the recommendations, few books on my to-read list when I have time over.

 

[6S.Maraz]

Source?

Seriously, I'd love to read some about infantry tactics of WWII. Preferably not in Wiki form.

Please look here:
[url]http://soldatinidicarta.altervista.org/[/URL]

Especially the document named "The German Squad in Combat - Special Series No.9". This is the English translation of a German handbook about infantry squad tactics.

Maraz

 

[Cyper]

Oh god this conversation has been flogged to death on these forums. There is a 700+ thread covering it FFS and numerous other ones to boot. I think accusation of troll is spot on.

Wanna talk about realism in RO2, why not talk about the numerous other things that RO2 has that is lacking from the majority of FPS games...

• No cross hairs
• Bullets that actually kill you!
• No HUD indicator telling you how many bullets / mags you have.
• No glowing flag over enemies say I"M HERE SHOT ME!
• No bunny hopping
• No dolpin diving
• Mantling
• No parachutes when jumping off 6 foot drops
• Excellent and varied reload animations at realistic speeds
• Realistic collision of rilfles against objects
• Realistic collision of bodies against objects, (can't turn here, can't prone here etc)
• Player movement speed.
• Breathing system
• Resting weapons against EVERYTHING.
• Tank mechanics, positions...etc etc

Just to name a few things off the top of my head....

Now if you can't see how RO2 includes realism compared to the big titles like BF,COD,MOH that dominate the market you need to get your head examined.

TW-I were never going to be able to please everyone.. but by making it mod friendly with the SDK we are able to please ourselves.

That is all... (stupid fing repetitive forum!)

Seriously, I doubt people compare RO to BF,COD, or MOH. They compare it to the orginal RO. By doing that it becomes quite obvious that RO2 isn't more realistic than RO1. Rather the other way around.

 

[pomp]

This may be the unpopular opinion, but I actually feel the amount of smgs is fine, i play in 32 player servers mainly, and I dont find the amount of mkb to be much of a problem. I use an even mixture of bolt/smg/mg in my matches and I can tell you I dont feel like im at an unfair advantage when not using or fighting against users with an mkb.

In RO1 i was stictly a bolt man.

 

[Dr. Pierre Chang]

i also dont understand why people get hung upp on historical corectnes and what regiment had what wep and so on

its a freaking game not a blody interactive history leson RO 1 was also a game

history can be found in books

hell if this was a historicaly corect game the outcome of every battle and everything would already be decided before you even started playing! jeez

get out.