Forums

Username:  

Password:  

       
Login Help

  LATEST POSTS  
 
America's Army Launc..
Learning BASICS of A..
can u give us hints ..
AA3 New Patch Releas..
Better Realism Alter..

Keywords:
 

More search options

  HOT TOPICS  
 
AA3 & NASCAR
AA3 On Facebook!
AA3.0.6 Update
Community Sites
» See more topics
  

    « Previous Page        Page 2 of 2     

 Game balancing vs realistic 
 

Lilith

Sergeant Major
Posts: 7172
Joined: 08 Dec 2007

      Posted: 27 Mar 2011 08:31 Profile United States


viking_from_norway wrote:

I would recommend you not to compare aa2 and aa3, they are not the same. You could use the saw as a m16 in aa2, it's hell of a lot more jumpy recoil to be used for such in aa3. The SAW is a support weapon and is supposed to be used as that. But the devs made it useless on it's designated range.

I also remember a video from the devs, they were mapping a soilder's reloading the SAW. He was very confused, why anyone would want to reload while prone without the use of a bipod. But the dev said, well a aa3 player would do such a stupid thing. Laughing



AA2 comparisons are fine as long as you're just talking about the differences in the game and learn what works, and what doesn't. It's just the other games you shouldn't compare either of them to.

I agree, I don't understand why anyone would reload a SAW without the bipod. That depends on the situation.

A. Player previously used the bipod
B. Player never used the bipod.

In a reloading situation, Player in situation A would never need to take off use of his bipod to reload. It would be a waste of time just to reset it all again. In situation B, this is really up to the operator's preference, but never using the bipod requires a steady hand. You won't waste time having to deploy the bipod at all, that's for sure.

I think the problem may lie is that there's no SOP in how to operate these weapons, other than the players knowing what they can do with it. The you have these squad roles, which most have little training to do with the job, and more to do with how they can be a shooter in that job. I'm ot saying the shooting is not important (something players can improve upon as well). I'm just saying depth may be lacking.

AA2 example (yes I am comparing it, but you'll see my point if you can):

I choose to be a long range marksman. Most of the time, I know I am equipped with a long range rifle, a side arm (ammunition included), and mostly smoke grenades (if I don't pick up anything else that's left behind int he course of the mission).

At the very start, the rifle is loaded and primed to shoot. I immediately switch to the sidearm, and prep it (while I am moving as well, but I don't usually run to cover beforehand). Switch back to my rifle, and everything is normal. I don't know why this is not done automatically the way the Devs programmed it, but at least this was an opportunity for me to learn and set my own routines. I don't think many players do this.

Why do I first set the pistol? In my early days, I had no idea that using one within inches from the enemy could expose my position. When you pull the slider, it makes a distinct 'click' sound, that can be heard within a few feet. This means the enemy knows you have a pistol now, and you've taken time to set it. In a split second, this knowledge is to their advantage, because A they know where I am, and B they can immediately catch me before I'm able to defend myself. I do it at the start, so that they won't know where I am, and they won't know that I chose a different weapon.

Picking up a weapon can also be a tricky one, because it will do the same thing, and you would hope there's enough in the mag to shoot with. It'll have more firepower, fortunately, but the risk is just about the same. Fortunately for a sniper, he can carry 3 weapons (pistol included), so he's more armed. I would prefer to use my rifle for long range, because the distance to my targets is comfortable for me to act as my next line of defense, as well as being under cover.

Players can choose to either learn to improve their play style, or just treat it as an arcade game. I think encouraging improvement and personal growth can be beneficial, and I think people may feel a lot less critical of the game. They're saying the game sucks are so bad because of the bugs in it, that I think they just don't eel they can overcome it. I can remember a few situations I end up having nothing, but I was able to learn how to win matches no matter what challenges are thrown at me. I guess one could say I play smarter, not harder. I think many people with that mindset may have a better attitude about this game.

_____________________
Embedded Image
Cheezburger Operator 2007 -

greeneyes

Sergeant
Posts: 339
Joined: 04 Jan 2011

      Posted: 27 Mar 2011 08:53 Profile Satellite Provider


honestly don't know why the AA3 still is being compared with AA2.
if they wanted AA2 to be AA3 had done an upgrade to it and not a new game from scratch.
though i agree that an upgrade would have been a smart option.

_____________________

Embedded Image

dgodfather

Private First Class
Posts: 205
Joined: 04 Apr 2008

      Posted: 27 Mar 2011 09:01 Profile United States


It's fine that the topic has gone "bipod" talk, but it's funny that I started the topic about the angle at which bullets come out of the guns. Anyone have comments on that?

_____________________
Embedded Image
Can YOU handle the frag?

Embedded Image

Warlock08

Private First Class
Posts: 164
Joined: 13 Feb 2008

      Posted: 27 Mar 2011 09:04 Profile


greeneyes wrote:

honestly don't know why the AA3 still is being compared with AA2.
if they wanted AA2 to be AA3 had done an upgrade to it and not a new game from scratch.
though i agree that an upgrade would have been a smart option.



It would have been ok if the AA2 game-play was translated well into AA3 game. I am still baffled to this day why the Devs wanted to change so much when they had so much right in AA2. All AA3 needed to be was a graphical and environmental overhaul, but no they had to fiddle with core game play that made AA2 so fun. AA traded it's heart and soul for a new coat of pain. Personally, I don't think it was a very good trade off.

I really wish the Devs would spend more time in Border then Impact. Maybe then they understand why we miss AA2 gameplay so much.

greeneyes

Sergeant
Posts: 339
Joined: 04 Jan 2011

      Posted: 27 Mar 2011 09:14 Profile Satellite Provider


dgodfather wrote:

It's fine that the topic has gone "bipod" talk, but it's funny that I started the topic about the angle at which bullets come out of the guns. Anyone have comments on that?



you refer to the "bullet spread" in AA3. is unrealistic and no weapon fire ammunition like that.
the formula that was found for " bullet spread" is a perfect copy of which exists in cs source.

viking_from_norway

Staff Sergeant
Posts: 617
Joined: 27 May 2009

      Posted: 27 Mar 2011 10:01 Profile Norway


Yes I see your point Lilith but, rather than thinking how to improve you skillz with the classes. I noticed you will definitively not be able to use the saw effectively on medium range, anyway.

Also here a little fail on my side, I didn't want to have bipods like in aa2, I want to be able to put up the bipods you could in RL (well close enough). Here is an example:
http://www.gametrailers.com/vi.../711634
It's still in Alpha, but as you can see you can put the mg on different surfaces, and so on. Of course this has its plus and cons gameplay wise.

As to the questions as this will make it even more overpowered. As most of you are aware, the SAW is used as a SMG with 200 rounds. Brilliant for CQB. Well there is kind of not much to do with that, but swinging a 6kg mg around isn’t that good in CQB in RL.

This that could be added to lessen its effectiveness in CQB (yes yes rage on)
- Longer time to ready the gun after a sprint. (Yes those milliseconds after a sprint)
- Mouse acceleration (not while in sights)
- Less accuracy, when moving, or not using sights. (Rather dislike having this: P still....)

_____________________
Accolo usque ab beo
I say Yal Yal

Wonkss

Staff Sergeant
Posts: 584
Joined: 31 Jul 2003

      Posted: 27 Mar 2011 12:04 Profile Canada


greeneyes wrote:

dgodfather wrote:

It's fine that the topic has gone "bipod" talk, but it's funny that I started the topic about the angle at which bullets come out of the guns. Anyone have comments on that?



you refer to the "bullet spread" in AA3. is unrealistic and no weapon fire ammunition like that.
the formula that was found for " bullet spread" is a perfect copy of which exists in cs source.



CSS sucks as a game period second the firing of these guns are so unrealistic it hurts simple as that..Your gun points in a direction and the bullet travels straight out of the barrle not up and sideways and stuff like that and if your gun fired like that you would take it back to where you bought it with a few choice words.......

_____________________
Embedded Image

965be@4.0ghz, 4gb ddr3 1600,ga-790fxta-ud5,corsair f60 boot drive,hd6870oc,samsung 2494hm
Logitech g15 keyboard,Cyborg Rat7,magalodon hp

Lilith

Sergeant Major
Posts: 7172
Joined: 08 Dec 2007

      Posted: 27 Mar 2011 16:15 Profile United States


viking_from_norway wrote:

Yes I see your point Lilith but, rather than thinking how to improve you skillz with the classes. I noticed you will definitively not be able to use the saw effectively on medium range, anyway.



I don't even use them for medium range (unless I'm called to suppress). otherwise, I'm the one who drew the short straw for short range on a heavy weapon *sigh*

But this bipod talk is kind of important, especially if the topic is about the cone of fire. When a weapon as a bipod deployed, it's supposed to greatly reduce the margin of error. At the same time, its use changes protocol in how you operate it. that's why people do things that may not make sense if you don't know with enough sense not to do it (like going full auto all the time which increases your likelihood of jamming all the time). Some players are taught that through experience, with no formal training. others sometimes just make the same mistakes all the time (like camping in the same spot).

The bullets in AA3 are SUPPOSED to be random. This is to simulate the fact that each bullet can have a bit of a deviation of travel to the target. Can't really avoid comparing this to AA2, because this point has been deliberately recognized by the devs that this was intentional. They wanted to change the way it worked in AA2, which the bullets fired off like a laser (in a straight line). Occasionally ricochet and a random invisible bullet will appear in a hot spot, but it's not always from anyone's weapons. That probably made it easier for players to shot, because now the bullet can travel EXACTLY they expect it to (it's actually off-center in some sights, but that will exactly land where you shoot). Maybe this is the cause of the lag and bugs, because the server is expected to calculate all these "bullets" running at the same time, then finding which one had the victim's name on it. Thinking about that gives me a headache though.

greeneyes

Sergeant
Posts: 339
Joined: 04 Jan 2011

      Posted: 27 Mar 2011 17:36 Profile Satellite Provider


Wonkss wrote:

greeneyes wrote:

dgodfather wrote:

It's fine that the topic has gone "bipod" talk, but it's funny that I started the topic about the angle at which bullets come out of the guns. Anyone have comments on that?



you refer to the "bullet spread" in AA3. is unrealistic and no weapon fire ammunition like that.
the formula that was found for " bullet spread" is a perfect copy of which exists in cs source.



CSS sucks as a game period second the firing of these guns are so unrealistic it hurts simple as that..Your gun points in a direction and the bullet travels straight out of the barrle not up and sideways and stuff like that and if your gun fired like that you would take it back to where you bought it with a few choice words.......



thats how it works with AA3, you cant put 2 bullets in same place, with cs source is the same. only difference is AA3 has "bullet drop" and cs source does not. "bullet spread" is the same in both.
cs sucks, that depends of our personal taste. however cs is the most played game (pub or in competition) from all times, cant be that bad. i play it in both ways and i have always great fun because i'm not worried about ping, bugs, lag or whatever.

=NOLB=Kratos

Sergeant First Class
Posts: 1575
Joined: 04 Jul 2004

      Posted: 28 Mar 2011 03:01 Profile


yea i would have to agree although i did see this youtube channel of the this russian kid who got to shoot an ma41 not sure if it was the actual military weapon, but he signle shiot at frist then unloaded, the diffrence in refrence the real gun shoots more accurate then the ingame one, it might have been say 20 30 feet away from where he shot the weapon but he didnt miss the body at all, but you can see the target had a huge amount of bullet spary but it would have result in a death

_____________________
Retired from AA Forum.

dgodfather

Private First Class
Posts: 205
Joined: 04 Apr 2008

      Posted: 28 Mar 2011 07:35 Profile United States


For me it's the distance and speed at which the bullet travels before it comes out of the gun, along with the angle that it reflects after leaving the gun. Test firing in game would indicate that the bullets come out of the barrel at an angle which isn't possible. The angle at which the bullet leaves the barrel could only be say a varying angle of 10 degrees, but in AA3 it comes out at a varying angle of say 30-35 degrees. This is how it appears. Maybe when some bugs get squashed and rubber bullets and lag aren't effecting the game so much there may be a difference.

I would assume it has something to do with balancing the game, similar to all these complaint threads about leveling the game out between rookies and veterans. It's already there guys. Stop complaining... haha

viking_from_norway

Staff Sergeant
Posts: 617
Joined: 27 May 2009

      Posted: 28 Mar 2011 10:18 Profile Norway


Lilith wrote:

viking_from_norway wrote:

Yes I see your point Lilith but, rather than thinking how to improve you skillz with the classes. I noticed you will definitively not be able to use the saw effectively on medium range, anyway.



I don't even use them for medium range (unless I'm called to suppress). otherwise, I'm the one who drew the short straw for short range on a heavy weapon *sigh*

But this bipod talk is kind of important, especially if the topic is about the cone of fire. When a weapon as a bipod deployed, it's supposed to greatly reduce the margin of error. At the same time, its use changes protocol in how you operate it. that's why people do things that may not make sense if you don't know with enough sense not to do it (like going full auto all the time which increases your likelihood of jamming all the time). Some players are taught that through experience, with no formal training. others sometimes just make the same mistakes all the time (like camping in the same spot).

The bullets in AA3 are SUPPOSED to be random. This is to simulate the fact that each bullet can have a bit of a deviation of travel to the target. Can't really avoid comparing this to AA2, because this point has been deliberately recognized by the devs that this was intentional. They wanted to change the way it worked in AA2, which the bullets fired off like a laser (in a straight line). Occasionally ricochet and a random invisible bullet will appear in a hot spot, but it's not always from anyone's weapons. That probably made it easier for players to shot, because now the bullet can travel EXACTLY they expect it to (it's actually off-center in some sights, but that will exactly land where you shoot). Maybe this is the cause of the lag and bugs, because the server is expected to calculate all these "bullets" running at the same time, then finding which one had the victim's name on it. Thinking about that gives me a headache though.



I'll gladly continue this argument in the near future, but at the moment I have a bit much work to do. i'm not leaving the thread, I'm just too busy Sad


 Game balancing vs realistic 
 

    « Previous Page        Page 2 of 2     

  

Jump to: