Slot system

[M.Andersson(SWE) 4]

A more realistic one..

Were:

1: Grenades for Rifle Launchers DO NOT take up pistol magslots.

2: Disposable AT weapons dont take up PRIM weapon magslots.

3: AT missiles such as CarlGustaf ammo doesent take up PRIM

magslots.

4: A more realistic Backpak/Rucksack system based on item size.

[bhaz 0]

Are you suggesting they have their own type of slot, or just none at all? While the current system may not be all that realistic, carrying two AA missiles and half an armory worth of magazines in your pack does present a balance issue - after all, this is a game.

[M.Andersson(SWE) 4]

Sure its a game, its the "Best MilSIm game" in the world right?

MilSim, simulates REALWORLD features..

No i dont want to be able to carry 2 AA launchers.

But look on it like this.

When i did my service and later on was a 2nd Lt in the Swedish NG,

we were able to carry:

Prim weapon+4mags (NO war) in wartimes its 6Mags

2Nades

2-3 Smokes

Pistol with 4-6 Mags

2 At4s (DISPOSABLES)

Heavy AT soldiers carry

Prim Weapon (CarlGustaf) incl One shell loaded.

Sec weapon mostly a submahinegun incl mags.

Heavy AT loader carry Prim weapon, SubMG incl mags.

Add shells for AT Gunner (On back) 3-4 shells

Im just saying, with that eq we DID fight..

And why not, if i can stuf add mags in my pockets in my pants and jacket

and what not, why not.

Sure, there need to be a weight issue aswell..

But yes, if it is possible

Prim Weapon OWN slot

Prim Mags OWN slots

Pistol OWN slot

Pistol Mags OWN slots

Dissp AT´s OWN slot

Heavy AT launcher same as Dissp AT slot

Heavy AT shells OWN slots..

Smokes, Grenades, Satchels and so on have its own slotsystem

Something like Additional weapons/ammo

And NO, if you carry a Dissp AT you cant carry Heavy AT launcher

And so on....Limitations should be there..

Add eq like maps, radios, binocs, lasersights and so on

goes under personal items.

[CarlGustaffa 4]

Without weight (affecting stamina), encumbrance (affecting what moves you can do), and rocket ballistics and damage system (AT4s and CG being far too effective), I vote for keeping it the way it is. Lack of AT4 capabilities is easily balanced by excessive CG capabilities (SMAW gets outright ridiculous), by gunner having two shots and assistant carrying a whopping 6 rounds. So a medium AT Team gets rather extreme wrt firepower. A heavy AT team (Javelin, or any missile based) only gets 3 missiles (I think, maybe 4).

If anything it should be based more on slot types, depending on what kind of vest you were wearing. Only a SAW gunner and assistant should be able to carry 200rnd SAW boxes on his body, because they won't fit in a normal mag pouch. A grenadiers vest should be able to carry more grenades. 6 of the slots should be fully reserved for mags, and the remaining 6 (or less or more depending on vest) should not be able to carry mags.

Basically I'd like to see the whole slot system revised, but the game also needs to keep balance. The current system does that fairly well actually, sacrificing some realism to achieve it (which I'm fine with). Slot changes due to vest capabilities needs some changes to the model system as well. I'm a role player, and I'd like to have everything actually mean something.

[M.Andersson(SWE) 4]

Id just like to see a Acurate simulation

to the eq system. Whats possible irl

should be so ig aswell. I do realise the

limitations and gameplay aspects. But

i dont think things like a "reloadable"

disp AT launcher is what the game

need.

[CarlGustaffa 4]

Well it does the trick ;) It's a piece of equipment you can choose to carry, like for emergencies, but due to the drawbacks (inventory) it's not something you want to haul along. Although time consuming, I have no problems stashing up equipment in a vehicle. Makes you very aware on how the vehicle (i.e. a Domination MHQ without infinite crates) is utilized because you know the cargo it holds may make the mission a success if it survives and a failure if it's destroyed. Having to start all over again is really that much more painful.

I will also argue that "if something is possible in real life it should also be possible in the game" the same should apply to "if something is impossible in real life it should also be impossible in the game" too, to maintain balance. :p Carrying backpack or launcher should i.e. prevent you from rolling. Two launchers should make aiming a problem etc.

It's not that I don't want it, I just think it belongs more in the ACE realm of realism, because they also add downsides. Carry a shitload of equipment, but be prepared to pay the penalty for doing so. Currently I can provide about endless supplies of M136, they get the job done, but having a medium and/or heavy AT Team around is a much better option. If carrying AT4s didn't come at this cost, why even have proper AT teams around?

I think there are many "but you can in real world" that if implemented would actually have negative side effects on gameplay. It's fairly easy to script these things for the few times you actually need it, but trying to prevent it from being exploited is near impossible.

[DaveP 66]

gameplay vs. realism, ugl grenades used to be in main inventory and it sucked arse, having specific slots for types of gear would be a pain too. The ability to vary your load out on the trot adds a lot more flexibility and longevity to a role

Edited November 19, 2010 by DaveP

[nkenny 1051]

Mleh, just give us a universal slot system (all equipment share all slots) with a simple faux weight integration-- the more slots you use the less Stamina you have available. Backpacks can function just like now by adding extra 'slot/grid' space-- again at an abstract weight penalty.

Reasonable realistic and easy integration. (note that larger backpacks already work like this-- ie you can put anything into the slots)

-k