we've heard that argument plenty of times. have you ever ran for your life?
Fortunately, no. Have you?
we've heard that argument plenty of times. have you ever ran for your life?
we've heard that argument plenty of times. have you ever ran for your life?
Well, if I was getting shot at, I'd have so much adrenalin that I would suspend the laws of physics and simply teleport into cover.
"Adrenalin" is just a hormone fellas. There's only so much performance you can squeeze out of the human body and the more often you do it, the less effective it is.
The way adrenaline works, it only gives you a boost for one or two minutes. Your perception of that length of time will be longer, but that's your max, even in a life-or-death situation.
I have a statement to make. If you've ever played the original Ghost Recon game a
@ 140 ping it's not worth playing any shooter.
yes.Fortunately, no. Have you?
lets try it with me shooting one of my mosins in your direction? i bet you win the race by a bunch then!This guy is exactly right.
Source: I average about 40 miles running each week. I have an excellent diet, which includes various nutritional supplements; I sleep a minimum of 7 hours and a maximum of 8 per day; I cross-train with swimming and weights. I follow a training routine that includes speed and endurance work, and taper before races.
I may never have been shot at whilst running, but I've raced and wanted to beat other people extremely badly. If your adrenaline isn't pumping like hell at a race with 3,000 entrants and running against friends of similar ability, you're a machine. There comes a point at which the mind doesn't want to give up, but the body hasn't got any more to give. The way adrenaline works, it only gives you a boost for one or two minutes. Your perception of that length of time will be longer, but that's your max, even in a life-or-death situation.
Also, try running in army boots and carrying a rifle. One handed or two, you won't be able to balance when running at speed.
Is there a realism server with unlocks and enemy weapon loadout removed, no peripheral indicators and no spawn on SL?
Those are the things that bother me the most in realism. Just cheesy gimmicks and super soldier feeling that can see through smoke if in the periphery there is an enemy etc. Friendly sounding weapons shooting at me from the start? Sprint-align weapons in no time? Respawning behind enemy lines or on the wrong side of the cover?
No thank you, I had enough of that.
The running speed argument has been done a hundred times since Classic release. It goes something like this:
Realism dude - Classic speed is BS! I ran faster than those guys at my highshool PT!
Classic dude - Sure. Now try doing the same after not eating or sleeping enough for months, carrying 15 kilos of equipment and clad in bulky winter gear, with feet blistered and tendons torn from previous "adrenaline sprints", over piles of snow-covered rubble while suffering from multiple concussions and various explosion aftereffects.
Realism dude - But this is no fun! It takes like 10 seconds longer to run to cap, and I can no longer cross wide open areas under fire!
Classic dude - Use tactics or GTFO.
Come on dude, we don't need more strawman arguments thrown around here.
Even the realism mode's speed is noticeably slower than average male's running speed and people accepted that as the the whole gear/fatigue factor.
Hold on a second. You might call that strawman, but I've been reading a lot of the posts around this issue (Classic vs Realism) and that's the sense that I get too. He isn't alone in summarising it like that.
Also, the only reason I think classic mode is on the decline (and it is, lets face it), is because in Classic mode, attacking is a lot harder. It just is. Play Red October Factory in classic as the allies, and you'll see what I mean. Classic mode on Station as Germans? Same story.
Attacking is too hard and that ruins classic mode for 32 out of 64 players at a given time. Thats why classic is dying.