lethality of weapons

(Valdez) #1

I have noticed a lot of people say you die too fast and that the damage of guns is too much. I do not agree with this at all, coming from rtcw where I thought the gun play was perfect, it would take about 7-9 bullets to take an enemy down but in dirty bomb its more like 15 bullets. These numbers could be off and obviously with headshots you can take a guy down faster. my point is you died a lot faster in rtcw/et than you do in dirty bomb. Obviously dirty bomb is not rtcw/et, but then again why not model the gun fights after a game that did it perfect??? for a reference you can look at any rtcw or et youtube video and see what I am saying.

Side note, if you increased the damage of the guns then you could actually take down multiple enemies. The way the lethality is right now you would be very lucky to take down 2 guys.

If you currently feel as though you are dying too fast in DB, it might be directly related to the skill level of your opponent. A lot of the testers are serious fps players with a history of competing at the top level. Make sure you take this into consideration.

In this post I am referring to medics/field-ops/engineers for dirty bomb not the soldier.

(Cup-) #2

I could not agree more and could not have said it any better. Good post.

(warbie) #3

I’m all for a return to RTCW gunplay, but you’re plain wrong about the speed of killing as deaths in DB are considerably quicker than either RTCW or ET - enough that the game has a very COD like feel at the moment. There’s also too much spread - giving the guns are rather vague, hope that headshot hits feel. Again, much like spraying smgs in COD.

But yeah, the key point of your post I agree with completely and am still confused why we don’t have gunplay and movement lifted straight from RTCW/ET. Two games that nailed it so well that people are chomping at the bit for more a decade later. It’s what the vast majority of everyone in the forums is asking for. Why this odd hybrid?

(tokamak) #4

If you currently feel as though you are dying too fast in DB, it might be directly related to the skill level of your opponent.

So when everyone is saying they die too fast then that means we all suck? How does this work?

I must say that constantly tying someone’s points to his supposed skill level isn’t really constructive. Disregarding that some might find it insulting, it’s essentially nothing more than an ad hominem.

Besides, people don’t just say they die too fast, they also say that they kill too fast.

Then, lastly, the lethality in this game absolutely needs to be discussed alongside the mobility and accuracy of the game. These three points can not considered in independently from each other.

Then actually lastly, making your own thread on an already existing subject is REALLY detrimental to the integrity of a board. It completely ruins the potential for having a constructive on-going debate on the same subject. Once people feel that the only way to have their points being read and adressed is to make a new topic then the forum starts being flooded with new posts, old discussions sink to the next page faster and before we know it we have really shouty and superficial discussions that last a few days before the next guy makes a new thread on the same subject.

(INF3RN0) #5

The number of bullets to kill is around the same, but unfortunately the spread of hip-fired guns have very low range accuracy due to the increasing bloom. This ends up requiring you to use around 15 bullets to kill someone in most scenarios (hip-firing). I still think that the rate of fire is a bit too high on most weapons. Soldier 2 has a really good feeling to it as you can hear each individual bullet firing. What I really don’t care for is the fact that iron sighting is really the only way to kill a bunch of people in one clip. I can pull 3-4 on eng2 rifle when iron sighted, but it’s a completely different scenario on hip-fire. I do think that a lower rof in general and less of a spread increase over time when hipfiring will make things feel a lot better and even out the field on hip/ironsighting. Weapon damage itself is around what I’d like it.

(amazinglarry) #6

From best I can recall from my RtCW and ET days, I personally don’t feel there’s really that much of a difference in the time to kill in Dirty Bomb.

Firefights seem to last an appropriate amount of time during a strafing war, and I can’t really think of too many instances where someone was able to get away who didn’t deserve to (due to poor shooting on my part). I feel like if anything I die a little too fast for my liking, but that’s probably because I haven’t been serious in an FPS since the beginning of QW.

I’d be wary about tweaking too much at once, especially since most of us have played enough to have a good handle on DB, so we’re used to the feel. Obviously I’m not saying there shouldn’t and won’t be tweaks to come – but as it stands I don’t think there’s too much wrong with TTK.

With that said, I’ll try to focus on how I feel about it from now on so I’m able to offer a better opinion as the Alpha progresses.

(Valdez) #7

Inferno, yeah I totally agree hip-firing vs iron-sights needs to be address also and agree with your points on that subject. Rtcw did more damage per bullet than DB, rtcw was 50 hs/25 bs… db is on avg 35hs/17bs. rate of fire is very similar and i clocked both at 3.6s to unload 30 bullets in both games, of course rtcw et had a different rof and i do not know the #'s from that game.

Tokamak, I did not bother to read anything you said. Normally you would need to play the game to have opinions on such topics.

(Maca) #8

The damage and RoF are not the problem (although I think the RoF could be reduced), the problem is the spread.
Some people feel like they die too quickly because they can’t turn to retaliate quickly and accurately while doing dodging maneuvers, because of the large spread and the fact that the crosshair doesn’t even have [EDIT]a god damn[/EDIT] center dot. Especially in mid-range which is the most common.

(stealth6) #9

+1 rof and “bloom”

Pretty sure the damage is similar to W:ET, but the rof is definitely higher.

EDIT: Also the fact that the audio is so fast and doesn’t seem to match up.

(Valdez) #10

DB fights for sure last longer than rtcw or even et fights on avg. However that does not mean DB does it wrong, what I am trying to get across is do not lower the dmg or even TTK more that it already is, because I think that is what a lot of ppl have been saying to do.

(INF3RN0) #11

I strongly feel that the rof and gradual spread increase are the leading reasons why most of the guns feel the same, mostly in hipfire. There’s little feeling of uniqueness to be found when the system itself essentially prevents them from gaining any sort of individuality.

(Valdez) #12

[QUOTE=tokamak;418946]
Then, lastly, the lethality in this game absolutely needs to be discussed alongside the mobility and accuracy of the game. These three points can not considered in independently from each other.
.[/QUOTE]

After reading your post tokamak, I do 100% agree when talking about anything in regards to ttk all things that are involved with ttk need to be discussed. I may not have clearly stated that in my opening post but this is exactly what I was going for.

(stealth6) #13

What’s this based on? I’d say fights in W:ET are longer since the rof is higher in DB, but the damage is the same (3 headshots per kill)

Only the spread is higher in DB, but in a close range fight does it matter that much?

EDIT: here are some numbers to back up my rof claim. (not 100% accurate since I recorded it with a stopwatch a few times)

(Maca) #14

I’m not commenting on the rest of your post, but to answer this one question, yes. If you hold down LMB, by the time you’ve gone through just half a clip, the spread has already grown quite huge.

But this has nothing to do with context you were saying that, so this post can be just ignored.

(Violator) #15

I’ve found that either (playing mainly as soldier2) the enemy dies in 3 or 4 bullets or I unload 20 bullets into the enemy and do around 10-20 damage and die instantly. This is with burstfire from hip and trying to aim for head.

(Humate) #16

TTK or lethality isnt an issue for me.

Its more the feel of the gun-play…
Rate of fire, spread and movement contribute to that.

If those things are fixed, lets just say its time for an upgrade.

(Valdez) #17

[QUOTE=stealth6;418966]What’s this based on? I’d say fights in W:ET are longer since the rof is higher in DB, but the damage is the same (3 headshots per kill)

I was comparing RTCW to DB, they are both right at 3.6 ms give or take a ms. ET had slower rof than rtcw.

(Valdez) #18

[QUOTE=Humate;418990]TTK or lethality isnt an issue for me.

Its more the feel of the gun-play…
Rate of fire, spread and movement contribute to that.

If those things are fixed, lets just say its time for an upgrade.[/QUOTE]

Yeah TTK currently is not really an issue for me either, but ive heard reports that they may increase the TTK. Just wanted to make sure that didnt happen.

(Humate) #19

rgr :wink:

(Valdez) #20

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=ghOS0HNGqnE

after watching this video of et, it seems to me the TTK was quite a bit faster in ET than DB. Obviously this is a frag video, but I think you can still determine which game has faster TTK.

Also from 6:40 to 6:47, he kills someone then gibs and kills 2 more guys with the same clip. We need to get that going in DB, currently you would kill the first guy and gib him then be out of ammo.
http://youtu.be/ghOS0HNGqnE?t=6m41s