Laser weapons are back?

[[R-DEV]Rudd]

How about satart by making it so that when you do get shot, you actually get shot and its a bad thing rather than "oh no worries, medic will revive and we are off again".

.86 medic changes are awesome

In CA with much more accuracy but ballistics infantry was much more fun and it was harder at range to hit someone, very hard in fact without thinking about and lining up your shot. Close range it was how it should be, easy enough to hit your target but not spammy.

tbh CA ballistics with a dumbed down form of PR deviation would = win

[DankE_SPB]

proper ballistics is a way to go imo, it solves most of "why i have to wait 10 seconds before i can shoot accuratly?", we tried in combined arms and it worked good, wasnt hard to kill somebody 100m away and was very hard to kill enemy beyond 300m, when i 1st tried it i had to spent 6 mags of my G3(we were fighting at kashan bunkers, ~300-400m) to kill 3 guys(+2 or 3 who were revived) and enemy team called me as 1337 sniper

[[R-DEV]motherdear]

as the other guys have stated, mainly alex i do believe that we (if possible) should try and make a small test build with a dumbed down version of the CA ballistics and accuracy groupings so that we could see what effect it would have in the conventional PR. this would combined with a poll make it possible for the players to evaluate the current and possible future PR weapon handling.

pros:
1)poll makes it possible for the devs to evaluate what way to do the deviation instead of only relying on tester, and all respect to them, but this is almost the most crucial part of PR and deserves evaluation by the community

2) could possibly make close quarters much more deadly and fast, but still maintain an advantage for defensive positions since they have time to line up sights etc.

cons:
1)might speed up the fights making PR revert more back towards vanilla (at least when i comes to a round of insurgency where close quarters is much more common)

2)are grenades still going to be usefull for close quarters or are people going to rush you and take the chance instead hoping to get a one shot kill


this is basicly what i see as advantages and disadvantages by this and i really feel it should be tried out by PR, of course i'm only a lonely grunt but would it hurt to have a test even though it would probably delay .86 (.9 is in a while i guess)

[SocketMan]

Originally Posted by Farks

I have noticed almost every time I've been playing PR lately that myself and others get shot and killed by one single bullet. This wasn't the case a few months back. For example, me and another player were supressing an enemy at least 100 meters away, and he just pops up and shoots both of us with our bullets landing all around him. And that's just one example. Have players gotten used to the weapon handling and learned to "exploit" it?

Perhaps he had a medic-nurse behind him shoving painkillers up his wounds.

[TheLean]

Originally Posted by Gaven

What?

Yes, groupings greatly reduce in a combat situation but never to the point where they can't hit a target. A trained soldier should be able to hit a target standing out in the open without taking 4 seconds to aim at him. Guns in real life are not like paintball guns.

I also generally don't bother trying to find cover because it's usually non-existent, or my screen is so dark I can't see anything.

Well, irl there is physics. Soldiers dont run at full speed to instantly stop and kneel while mantaining the weapon in an attack position. Ideally, the game engine would recognize the difference between taking a small step and jumping of a roof but it doesnt, so a general deviation of a few seconds before getting perfect aim is necessary. Hopefully, when PR is changing engine, improvements can be made in the physics department. I am absolutely blown away by physics improvements such as momentum and weight in games such as Mirrors Edge.

[Jay]

Originally Posted by Scot

Que?

Yeah, that was the 0.8 train of thought, and that was friggin horrible. Shooting is fine as it is. It is a video game, I will never be scared for my life, no matter how much suppression, how bad you make my deviation, I will never be scared, if anything, decreasing the accuracy will make me less scared, and I can get more up close an personal to the enemy.

On Ross Kemp Returns to Afghan, there was a soldier from the Scottish blokes, he said, he saw two guys, brought up his rifle, fired two shots, gave the good news to one of them, the other got away.

Seriously, people take it too far on how difficult it is to shoot under fire. Yes, I admit, it is hard, however soldiers are trained to do that everyday, under fire and tired and probably hungry If deviation is decreased more, it will make things worse.

+1000

IMO suppression is flawed because of the way the deviation works. If you spend 6 seconds shooting at a guy 300 meters away, trying to suppress him, then you've just wasted 6 seconds that could have been used to lower your deviation, to a point where you're guaranteed a hit. I'm sure in real life I wouldn't dare stay in an area that's being suppressed, but in PR I'd rather wait it out, and just headshot the guy.

[503]

CA ballistics and deviation is perfect. More than half the time, in long range firefights, I find myself looking for cover instead of going out into an open field and shooting from there.

Here's a video of infantry firefights in CA. It's in the second half of the video starting somewhere around 1:40. Mostly long range firefights.

[Arnoldio]

Headshot=kill, is a part-solution for this fear/suppresion problem.

[Leeu]

In 0.86, just use the AK or RPG, you'll be guaranteed that they wont shoot like lazers.

[R.J.Travis]

Originally Posted by motherdear

as the other guys have stated, mainly alex i do believe that we (if possible) should try and make a small test build with a dumbed down version of the CA ballistics and accuracy groupings so that we could see what effect it would have in the conventional PR. this would combined with a poll make it possible for the players to evaluate the current and possible future PR weapon handling.

pros:
1)poll makes it possible for the devs to evaluate what way to do the deviation instead of only relying on tester, and all respect to them, but this is almost the most crucial part of PR and deserves evaluation by the community

2) could possibly make close quarters much more deadly and fast, but still maintain an advantage for defensive positions since they have time to line up sights etc.

cons:
1)might speed up the fights making PR revert more back towards vanilla (at least when i comes to a round of insurgency where close quarters is much more common)

2)are grenades still going to be usefull for close quarters or are people going to rush you and take the chance instead hoping to get a one shot kill


this is basicly what i see as advantages and disadvantages by this and i really feel it should be tried out by PR, of course i'm only a lonely grunt but would it hurt to have a test even though it would probably delay .86 (.9 is in a while i guess)

We do not test the deviation in the since that we tell them how it needs to be.

they set it and we give feed back like.

Wow it way to high needs lowered

or

its just right I like it.

both answers would not determined if they change it or not they well set it to what THEY think is right and only taken what we say in as concern testers are not the people setting your deviation (: