Why "one strike you're out"? -1 reply

Please wait...

robert_x

I don't spend enough time here

50 XP

9th October 2003

0 Uploads

19 Posts

0 Threads

#1 17 years ago

I've been playing FH for a couple of weeks now. It's truely a great mod. Considering the fact it's under development, almost everything about it is just awesome. The music rocks, the models and skins are great, and the weapon sounds and explosions are the best. FH beats the crap out of vanilla BF.

That said, there is one major aspect of FH I don't like. It's a fundamental issue (which I am sure has been discussed before, but nevertheless): the 'one strike you're out'-principle. This counts for both infantry and armor.

Armor: anyone with a Tiger can knock out a Sherman with one shot. This is historically correct and I like it. What I don't like is that the destruction of the Sherman (or any other, inferior tank) always results in the death of the tank driver. Is this historically correct? I'm not sure about that. To my knowledge, the penetration of a shell doesn't mean the instant death of the crew by definition; it 'simply' destroys the tank. In my opinion, it would be more realistic if the driver could have the possibility of abandoning the tank after a direct hit. Currently, the tank always blows up, killing the driver. If it's possible to bypass this and to damage the tank severely yet giving the crew the change to bail out, it would be a huge improvement!

Infantry: it is far more easy to kill an enemy infantryman in FH than in vanilla BF; any decent aim will do. In my opinion, this is not historically correct. If you look at the KIA and WIA statistics of WW II, there are always significantly more wounded soldiers then killed soldiers. So, why should FH act elsewise? I think it's fun to kill, so it should be difficult to kill. Otherwise, the mod gets boring very quickly - meaning: the mod doesn't require special combat skills; any fool with a K98 can take out any experienced FH player with one shot. I think war is about survival and that's exactly what a realistic mod like FH should be. Unfortunately, nor vanilla BF nor FH pay much attention to this: a guy who never got killed but killed 14 enemy soldiers (a 0-14 ratio), always ends up below the guy who killed 28 enemies but got killed 14 times himself (a 1-2 ratio)! Conclusion: if it's possible to make the killing harder, FH would truely kick ass!

Thanks for your attention.




Austin Powers

The American Punk

50 XP

28th September 2003

0 Uploads

8 Posts

0 Threads

#2 17 years ago

my god your so right.then FH would own DC by so much.also,since the 1.5 patch is out,are you gonna use the 1.5 garand or use your own,also,HAVE IT ON EVERY AMERICAN MAP DAMNIT!I HATE USING BRITTISH GUNS AS A AMERICAN!




McGibs

FHdev

50 XP

2nd October 2003

0 Uploads

4,064 Posts

0 Threads

#3 17 years ago

Well, having a wounded soldier thing would be really hard to code, and probly wouldnt do much gameplay wise, but hopefully in the future, rifle accuracy whilst running will be nerfed.

As for the tanks, as discussed oh so many times before, codeing it so the tank is disabled (like if your tank is about 5% hp it wont move... only chagne it so its like 25%) Then the crew could either abondon the crippled tank, or stay and try to take out the agressor (or just get nailed by another shell before they get out). The whole "tank compleatly explodeing" thing is quite unrealistic, and looks really cheesey. Hopefully in the future, the majoritiiy of vehicals will have death codeing/models like that of the Stug3G.




Tommek

I hate arcade!

50 XP

13th October 2003

0 Uploads

49 Posts

0 Threads

#4 17 years ago

First:

If you get hit your out of the game. Don't see every falling soldier as dead, many are "only" heavily wounded, but they wont do anything more. If you want to tell me something else shoot in your knee and try to open a coke-can.

Second:

When the tank is burning xou can get out of it. Thats allready in the original BF42. If a Sherman gets hit in this short distance there ist no chance. The germans called the Sherman "Tommikocher" -> Tommycooker because the burned and exploded very easily (the Gas-Tank was not the best). But as I said, it's already in the game. It Burns -> get out.




BAM

I pretend I'm cooler than AzH

50 XP

27th April 2003

0 Uploads

3,415 Posts

0 Threads

#5 17 years ago

well i guess that when i penetates maybee it hits the ammo supply or gas tank ?




MkH^

FH tester

50 XP

24th September 2003

0 Uploads

2,286 Posts

0 Threads

#6 17 years ago

And even a hit of an AT shell from small caliber weapon rips off sharpnels from tanks armor sending them to fly at about the same velocity as handgun bullets inside the tank, which, as you maybe realized, can be quite lethal.




okiN

Duke

50 XP

26th August 2003

0 Uploads

495 Posts

0 Threads

#7 17 years ago

Well, I have to agree that it's quite possible, if not probable, for at least some of the tank crew to survive. The way the tank immediately explodes and kills everyone inside really is a bit cheesy, and I don't think that happened all that often. If the crew was killed, it was more likely due to shrapnel or a fire, at least that's the impression I have.




robert_x

I don't spend enough time here

50 XP

9th October 2003

0 Uploads

19 Posts

0 Threads

#8 17 years ago

Thanks for your replies. Two additional notes:

Armor: in order for a tank to explode, my guess is that a shell would have to hit the ammo supply or the gas tank. If you're actually aiming for this, it's realistic for a tank to explode. However, as mentioned by some of you, this is a bit overdone in BF and FH. I'm no expert, but I think a lot of the tank break downs in WW II were caused by other hits, like a damaged gun, broken tracks, battered turret and so on. It would be far more realistic if the tanks could be coded to act likewise - saving the crew. I don't mind the fact a superior tank can knock out an inferior tank with one shot, but it shouldn't always result in the death of the crew.

Infantry: in my opinion, the ultimate goal of FH should be survival, just like every war. This prevents FH from ending up as a regular shooter where nobody cares about the number of times they die. But to survive FH (meaning: getting killed only a few times; nobody lives forever in this game) is virtually impossible since it's so easy to get killed (and thus, to kill). I truely hope the developers will fix this.

Again, thanks.




McGibs

FHdev

50 XP

2nd October 2003

0 Uploads

4,064 Posts

0 Threads

#9 17 years ago
Infantry: in my opinion, the ultimate goal of FH should be survival, just like every war. This prevents FH from ending up as a regular shooter where nobody cares about the number of times they die. But to survive FH (meaning: getting killed only a few times; nobody lives forever in this game) is virtually impossible since it's so easy to get killed (and thus, to kill). I truely hope the developers will fix this

How would you propose they fix this? Infantry died. Alot. The fact that there is 30 some people in a battle as opposed to 30,000 should be taken into consideration.




Tommek

I hate arcade!

50 XP

13th October 2003

0 Uploads

49 Posts

0 Threads

#10 17 years ago

If you don't wanna die: hide.