Expanding Cone of Fire When Fired Upon. -1 reply

Please wait...

Guest

I didn't make it!

0 XP

 
#1 12 years ago

First please note, this is just a suggestion, an idea. That said allow me to brace myself. Ok, here it goes:

Two of the biggest issues I find in the original Forgotten Hope were; Firstly, even at close ranges the rifle was too equal or even superior to the submachine gun. The second issue I found was the ineffectiveness of suppressive fire, rarely did a BAR-1918, 30cal, MG-34 (or what have you) would send the riflemen looking for cover. Instead they would just go prone right in the open and a good portion of the time use the extreme accuracy of the rifle to land one in the gunners gut. I think one of the major factors involved in this is the fact you cannot actually feel the bullets zooming past your head, you have no fear of death, since you can just respawn. My suggestion does little to deal with that aspect of it (that is, increasing fear in the gamer), however I think it would improve both suppressive fire and submachine gun effectiveness. My suggestion would be to decrease to a significant extent hand weapon accuracy when there are a certain number of bullets a certain proximity from your body. You may think this is simply a gameplay booster, which it is however, I'm sure there is some realism benefits also. One, in battle humans are stressed, they are often afraid and when the bullets start firing close to you, you become rushed, therefore your ability to use the ironsights effectively decreases and you may be shaking so there may be a general increase in the amount of head rolling and weapons sway. All this will generally account for a decline in accuracy of the weapon. In addition it would mean that a few real life tactics would be employable. The first being a team in a fire fight having to establish fire superiority, meaning more bullets going out than coming in. So then the enemies weapons become less effective since they are having bullets pass close to them. Another tactic that would have the potential for better application would be the outflanking maneuver. Since the outflanking force is not under direct fire they have good accuracy and are able to attack the enemy force, with success, from the back or sides. As far as the employability of this feature perhaps it could be in some sort of equation. For example it could simply be

A=V/D Where A is the decline in accuracy. V is the volume, or number of rounds around you. D is the distance away from you the bullets pass a perpendicular vertical plane from the barrel of the person firing onto you, therefore bullets which impact close to you but hit, lets say some cover in front of you, would not be factored in. There should probably be some exceptions to this, these should be sniper rifles and handheld anti-tanks weapons (they're hard enough to aim as is). I'd also like to say, I am no modification developer so I have little idea if this is actually possible to put into Forgotten Hope. However if it was used I think the benefits to gameplay and realism would be endless.

Well thats my suggestion for the improvement of Forgotten Hope, I hope it was expressed in an articulate and understandable manner. Please let me know of any extension or critique you have to this suggestion and if I can elaborate on any of my ideas to improve your understanding, ask me that also. Anyways thanks for reading this.




McGibs

FHdev

50 XP

3rd October 2003

0 Uploads

4,064 Posts

0 Threads

#2 12 years ago

way ahead of yeh. :p




Wali

GF makes me horny

50 XP

18th March 2006

0 Uploads

95 Posts

0 Threads

#3 12 years ago
McGibsway ahead of yeh. :p

:] Yay




Guest

I didn't make it!

0 XP

 
#4 12 years ago

Thank you Mr. Gibs for your (eventual?) understanding and affirmation. However I believe (That is to say if I have any lucidity at all) your orignal assertion mentions something about having to cover this twenty times (for this allow me to apologize) and suggests reading the information thread. But I have read this thread in the order of three times, even more in select sections of particular interest to me. I am beginning to think that perhaps my understanding of the information article may be slightly skewed. Allow me to explain, I am from Croatia and my English leaves much to be desired, especially in the comprehension area. I am beginning to think that I misinterpreted some of your very insightful comments on the cone of fire and the factors which effect it. It would be of great service to me if you could perhaps clarify the following excerpt "The sights will behave around the screen according to three variables. Breathing (whose speed is effected by stamina, fireing position, and a few others such as supression), weapon weight (which will increase the ammount of movement when breathing) and weapon recoil (which will effect the ammount the sights are kicked around when fireing)" I am particularly interested in the effect of the "supression" on the sighting system. Is this alluding to incoming fire suppression and will this decrease weapon accuracy. I must say I feel foolish for posting that much (you must understand it takes a great deal of time to compile an entire post, this is due to my remedial understanding of English) when I could have just asked for a clarification of your words. Again McGibs, I am very sorry for wasting your time like this, you must be very busy. However I am glad that we will ultimately see the implementation of this feature. Perhaps I should leave posting in this forums to people who are more aware of the what is going on with this modification and can express themselves more clearly. Again, thank you for your time.




StrangerThanFiction

I live on Gaming Forums

50 XP

6th October 2003

0 Uploads

1,110 Posts

0 Threads

#5 12 years ago
Sam Hoy. Allow me to explain, I am from Croatia and my English leaves much to be desired, especially in the comprehension area.

Your English seems to be excellent, and you express yourself with much greater clarity than many native English speakers.

Perhaps I should leave posting in this forums to people who are more aware of the what is going on with this modification and can express themselves more clearly.

That would be too bad. The forum can always benefit from more mature and intelligent players. Please feel free to continue to make suggestions, or post about other things. It is generally a good thing to check to see if a suggestion has already been made, but people sometimes make too much of this. It does no real harm to bring up an idea again, especially when it is a good one.




Real-BadSeed

Science experiment

50 XP

5th December 2004

0 Uploads

3,799 Posts

0 Threads

#6 12 years ago

i personally dont like the idea of my aim been effected by an artificial system that decides im scared when nothing on the planet scares me. a gun shoots where its pointed, and so it should ingame...




FlyGuy45

*TRA* Spsk. Pilotka VVS

50 XP

22nd June 2005

0 Uploads

6,414 Posts

0 Threads

#7 12 years ago

No COF!

Either make hands/ body get nervous(decreasing aim). I rather see this than a COF(If first one is imposible), give a person the effect of standing near a firing tank(blurryness).




Fuzzy Bunny

Luke, I am your mother.

50 XP

2nd May 2005

0 Uploads

6,274 Posts

0 Threads

#8 12 years ago

Also, I have one problem with BARs and LMGs as such; as Don Hoy said, they're not great at suppressing fire, but for reasons external to the weapons themselves. However, if you've played Tulagi as Axis, you'll note how madly overpowered BARs are in that scenario, relative to rifles.

To be honest, that may just be due to their unrealistic commonness, but still.




Real-BadSeed

Science experiment

50 XP

5th December 2004

0 Uploads

3,799 Posts

0 Threads

#9 12 years ago

the problem with hmg's and smg's, is they are to inaccurate because of the COF system used by BF. and the opening crosshair deal... moving at all opens the crosshairs to max, and you cant hit anything even standing 5 feet away...forcing you to crouch and then wait for them to slooooowwwwly close, which by then you are dead. not realistic at all...its also why rifles own smgs most of the time. thats why i never use them unless im playing a map like berlin streets where im just camping and defending. if im on the attacking side and i have to move at all, i use a rifle. imo rifles are the the closest weapon to realistic ingame, and it suffers from the opening crosshair deal aswell, just not as adversely as the smg's.

the opening crosshair system should have only been used to simulate recoil effects imo




Fuzzy Bunny

Luke, I am your mother.

50 XP

2nd May 2005

0 Uploads

6,274 Posts

0 Threads

#10 12 years ago

Agreed. COF is buttox. However, I've yet to see (go go McGibs!) a mechanism that limits the inevitable pray-and-spray you'd get from unlimited, COF-less automatic rifles and LMGs. Ugh.

I loathe class limits, but there's a good argument for having all non-basic weaponry as pickup kits if I ever saw one.