More weapon effects

[andersgrim 0]

I'd like to see some more effects availible at the weapons.

As of now it's not possible to stick a flashlight onto a gun, mabye it could be possible to make a real laser effect. Place a laserpointer at the weapon, and the laserdot would be visible for everyone.

And make the magazine as a proxy would be nice. Then the magazine model would change if you reloaded ie. a Cmag, normal mag, double mag and so. And at the same time, it would be easier to make reload animations where the magazine (proxy) is stuck to the guys hand!!!

[BAD ASS JACK 0]

Yeah and when you place a grenade or a a mag they look like bags that are called mags?

Better recoil effects would be gr8 to:D

Trip wires, claymores that sort of thing would make a nice effect to, espeshily if it is set in nam, punji sticks to

[BAD ASS JACK 0]

oh yeah about the LAW...

The LAW is a fire and drop weapon, not a fire, re-load fire- reload again weapon yet in OFP he reloads it?

[Baron Hurlothrumbo IIX 0]

Its simulating carrying more than one LAW launcher

[haunted 0]

You tried carrying a single LAW Launcher, let alone 2 or 3.

[Harley-Davidsen 0]

How about to give some weight to the weapons.

The more weight the slower He runs.

[haunted 0]

Because thats not realistic. Give me a pistol and I'll run just as fast as I would if I has a LAW launcher on my back and an SA80 in my hand should someone be shooting at me. LAW Launchers arent heavy anyone (latest ones used by the British Army) and every unit in squad uses one, however, its not so much the weight that keeps you from carrying more than one, but the size.

[Harley-Davidsen 0]

Yea, but there is a difrence between a HandGun and a full loaded M60 with 4 Mags of ammo.

What about 2 more rockets in LAW. Arent they weight some thing?+M16 with 3 mag of ammo

And AT soldier?

Btw. Now the dude with a Handgun runs slower then the Soldier with M16. How is this right?

[hellfish6 7]

</span><table border="0" align="center" width="95%" cellpadding="3" cellspacing="1"><tr><td>Quote (haunted @ 01 May 2003,15:17)</td></tr><tr><td id="QUOTE">You tried carrying a single LAW Launcher, let alone 2 or 3.<span id='postcolor'>

They're not all that heavy.

[Guest]

Its a balance issue, if everyone ran at different speeds, then the squad would fall apart... sometimes too much realism is just that.. too much.

For example, look at ofp multiplayer, do people wait for one another before attacking?  No, they just charge ahead...  and also, I would HATE to see the knife-running effect brought into my beautiful flashpoint like in Vietcong or "you-know-what"-strike.  

In real life, soldiers are trained to run "together" not "as fast as they can".

[Baron Hurlothrumbo IIX 0]

</span><table border="0" align="center" width="95%" cellpadding="3" cellspacing="1"><tr><td>Quote </td></tr><tr><td id="QUOTE">For example, look at ofp multiplayer, do people wait for one another before attacking?<span id='postcolor'>

Yes. On the server I play on.

[haunted 0]

</span><table border="0" align="center" width="95%" cellpadding="3" cellspacing="1"><tr><td>Quote </td></tr><tr><td id="QUOTE">They're not all that heavy. <span id='postcolor'>

Not saying they are, but you try hauling 3 of em along with a weapon, bergan, webbing, sleeping bag... hardly practicle.

</span><table border="0" align="center" width="95%" cellpadding="3" cellspacing="1"><tr><td>Quote </td></tr><tr><td id="QUOTE">For example, look at ofp multiplayer, do people wait for one another before attacking? No, they just charge ahead... and also, I would HATE to see the knife-running effect brought into my beautiful flashpoint like in Vietcong or "you-know-what"-strike. <span id='postcolor'>

In Ladder matches attacking as a team is the only way to go, at least for us, we have some exceptional players but without the support of at least 3 or 4 guys they arent getting anywhere near that flag, let alone taking it back to base...

The knife running effect would suck too, as if actually putting an m16 on your back makes it lighter and easier to run. Of course not, and you dont put your gun on your back when you know the enemies close.

[andersgrim 0]

</span><table border="0" align="center" width="95%" cellpadding="3" cellspacing="1"><tr><td>Quote (rufusmac @ 02 May 2003,01:18)</td></tr><tr><td id="QUOTE">In real life, soldiers are trained to run "together" not "as fast as they can".<span id='postcolor'>

True. And soldiers are also trained to save one's strenght so they are able to cross large-scaled areas as a part  of their mission - not use all their strenght on running as fast as they can the 200 first meters. Ofp is a game which focuses more on the battlefield - not the soldier abilities...

I think the have solved the LAW pretty good. Only thing to point the finger at here would be the size of the LAW when it is on his back. Actually its about half of the lenght as it is ingame now. But, as said, I think the LAW is good enough as it is.

[Skul 0]

</span><table border="0" align="center" width="95%" cellpadding="3" cellspacing="1"><tr><td>Quote </td></tr><tr><td id="QUOTE">The LAW is a fire and drop weapon, not a fire, re-load fire- reload again weapon yet in OFP he reloads it?<span id='postcolor'>

'Cause it's a game...

[Tamme 0]

</span><table border="0" align="center" width="95%" cellpadding="3" cellspacing="1"><tr><td>Quote (Skul @ 02 May 2003,10:25)</td></tr><tr><td id="QUOTE"></span><table border="0" align="center" width="95%" cellpadding="3" cellspacing="1"><tr><td>Quote </td></tr><tr><td id="QUOTE">The LAW is a fire and drop weapon, not a fire, re-load fire- reload again weapon yet in OFP he reloads it?<span id='postcolor'>

'Cause it's a game...<span id='postcolor'>

Thats no excuse. I want it as realistic as possible.

[andersgrim 0]

That is an excuse. If a game was 100% realistic it wouldnt be any fun. You can die by being stinged by bees. You can suddently fall everywhere. You can get cancer. Thats realism, but it's not fun. A game has to balance between realism and fun.

If adding 3 lawrockets to a soldier makes the game better than adding 1 lawrocket to each, i'd say "hurray" and start playing.

[Baron Hurlothrumbo IIX 0]

Nope, you are confusing 'REALISM' with stupidity.

You can make games incredibly realistic and still have them be fun, it is NOT the case that games operate on a sliding scale from 100% fun at one end to 100% realism at the other, they are totally independent.

[haunted 0]

</span><table border="0" align="center" width="95%" cellpadding="3" cellspacing="1"><tr><td>Quote </td></tr><tr><td id="QUOTE"> You can die by being stinged by bees.<span id='postcolor'>

LOL

You are forgetting that the majority of the people that play this game are ex-forces or young guys or gals in the army cadets, or those fans of realistic tatical shooter. So yes, it should be made as realistic as possible, but not too hard for the newbie.

</span><table border="0" align="center" width="95%" cellpadding="3" cellspacing="1"><tr><td>Quote </td></tr><tr><td id="QUOTE">You can get cancer. Thats realism, but it's not fun. A game has to balance between realism and fun. <span id='postcolor'> Thats just a stupid thing to write. I hardly think BIS are going to put things like "Drop dead from heart attack" or, soldiers which are HIV positive just because they might be in real life.

We are talking battle realism here, not life realism, I dont want soldiers to be struck down with flu, or a head ache, I just want realistic battles, even more so than the first one.

[andersgrim 0]

i think someone missed my point.

What i am saying is that if a group is easier to control as they have one guy with three LAW missiles than a group where everyone has got one missile (which may cause that EVERYONE in the group engaged at a tank because of it's high priority, and forgot normal units) I would rather had a game (as ofp) with one 3rocketcarrying soldier.

Another example would be that many people (most newbies) miss a jump button for the game. To jump is realistic, but it is not really needed in such a large-scaled battle game as ofp.

hope you got my point now mates

[Eviscerator 0]

I think BIS really need to develop weapons and attachments to weapons a lot more, also the amount of ammo should not be always limited to 10 mag slots it should be decided upon what equipment they are wearing, which should also be chosen, as in many RPG games.

So, something like this, albeit a basic, quickly made example:

I'll use the example of say...a modern M4A1, so for the options there would be something along the following available:

Stock Type:

Solid

Solid with Spare Mag strapped on

Collapsible

Magazine:

Standard

2 Strapped together

C-Mag

Scope:

None

Carry handle

Aimpoint

ACOG Reflex

ACOG 4x32

Underbarrel:

None

M203

Masterkey

Overbarrel:

None

IR Pointer

Barrel:

None

Silencer

Flashlight

And so on...

Also something similar for the loadout, so you pick what type of webbing/puches your soldier wears instead of what ammo he gets, so you could chose canteens which would make your soldier be able to run for longer periods, a grenade puch, with two grenades in, and then the various ammo pouches, smoke grenades, M203 grenade pouch, making it a lot more like the real thing, although the weapon side of things is probably more for spec ops....

[andersgrim 0]

best post seen today

agree to everything, and the last thing - weapon effects is probably most neccessary for spec ops. And the sad thing on ofp is that ofp is not very good at close combat at the moment.. That you can pop through some walls and so. So mabye some CQB fixies would be nice too.

And it's not hard to make player able to choose gear/loadout/pouches/backpack and so.. The problem is, as you know, to add ammo slots depending of what loadout you choose...

mabye a script command for adding/removing magazine slots via script would be able..

and another command for reducing max speed..

Mabye even make ofp calculate maxspeed itself depending on how much you choose to carry... that people can add "weight=1" or so to their config...!

[Commander-598 0]

</span><table border="0" align="center" width="95%" cellpadding="3" cellspacing="1"><tr><td>Quote (andersgrim @ 02 May 2003,10:14)</td></tr><tr><td id="QUOTE">I think the have solved the LAW pretty good. Only thing to point the finger at here would be the size of the LAW when it is on his back. Actually its about half of the lenght as it is ingame now. But, as said, I think the LAW is good enough as it is.<span id='postcolor'>

The LAW you see ingame is a victim of no weapon anims. Because you can't animate it, it is shown as "ready to fire".

You do have to "ready it" sort of.

[andersgrim 0]

yes...

[haunted 0]

We're not dealing with modern weapons, we're dealing with vietnam

[Eviscerator 0]

</span><table border="0" align="center" width="95%" cellpadding="3" cellspacing="1"><tr><td>Quote (haunted @ 03 May 2003,08:47)</td></tr><tr><td id="QUOTE">We're not dealing with modern weapons, we're dealing with vietnam<span id='postcolor'>

These type of things were still added to vietnam era weapons, just about everything i mentioned except the modern sights/IR pointers were used in vietnam, but then they would have had the choice between various scopes albeit obviously not on an M4 and there would not have been the modern day accomadations on the weapons for it (so it would involve a lot of tape).