Bullet + Grenade = Boom

[Cato269]

Chance isn't fun. there is no skill in chance. it's either on fully or off fully, and i don't think it would be very smart to have nades in the game at all if it was on fully.

[Axel]

i definately agree with tybs. and debatein more wouldnt do anything besides a no it wouldnt, yes it would arguement.

1 like it, good idea, would make it fun

2 dont like it, would kill the game in ways unimaginable

are the 2 sides beh now.

[Tybs]

If u dont like it, simply press the "off" button... since this would be a toggable option

[ArmedManiac]

I dont like it also because I play inf. If i throw a nade, i want it to
A. Kill someone no matter wat by throwing it on the ground and him stepping on it.
B. Stall someone by throwing it in a tunnel making them wait.
C. Hurt someone and then take them out with socom.(or vice versa)
Most of these things i couldn't accomplish with exploding nades, so this would really screw up mly style of playing because I use nades a lot.

[Ivarska]

Cato, do you like any other of the ideas? is the health-thing better?

[Axel]

I dont like it also because I play inf. If i throw a nade, i want it to
A. Kill someone no matter wat by throwing it on the ground and him stepping on it.
B. Stall someone by throwing it in a tunnel making them wait.
C. Hurt someone and then take them out with socom.(or vice versa)
Most of these things i couldn't accomplish with exploding nades, so this would really screw up mly style of playing because I use nades a lot.

well wat about them doing it to you? i doubt that alot of people would be able to use this feature enough to foil you constantly(if at all)

Date Posted: October 12, 2006, 03:31:33 PMargh, wenever i quote it never includes the endquote..

[ArmedManiac]

THEN WHATS THE POINT IF IT DOES NOTHING, AM I MISSING SOMETHING HERE, YOU JUST SAID IT WOULDN'T HAPPEN VERY OFTEN!!!!!!!! That's why I don't like it, waste of precious coding time on something that just looks flashy.

[Ivarska]

I dont like it also because I play inf. If i throw a nade, i want it to
A. Kill someone no matter wat by throwing it on the ground and him stepping on it.
B. Stall someone by throwing it in a tunnel making them wait.
C. Hurt someone and then take them out with socom.(or vice versa)
Most of these things i couldn't accomplish with exploding nades, so this would really screw up mly style of playing because I use nades a lot.

i'm using nades alot too, and do you really think i'd suggest something that may make it all boring? don't think so...

[FliesLikeABrick]

THEN WHATS THE POINT IF IT DOES NOTHING, AM I MISSING SOMETHING HERE, YOU JUST SAID IT WOULDN'T HAPPEN VERY OFTEN!!!!!!!! That's why I don't like it, waste of precious coding time on something that just looks flashy.

User was warned for this post.

[Tybs]

It would not happen too often, but it would happen enough to keep things interesting. Thats the point of finding a good "middle point" between two extremes (no explosion when hitting nade - always explosion when hitting nade).

[Ivarska]

thanks, FliesLikeABrick
i think Tybs and me nearly have the same point

[Cato269]

If you want a chance game, go to the casino.

[Axel]

cato.....you act as if you arnt paying ANY attention to the conversation. we JUST SAID that that wasnt the system that we wanted and that YOU were the one that kept pressing on it. DO YOU UNDERSTAND ME?

[Ivarska]

Cato, like i sayed before: the chance-thing isn't the only idea! read the main-message and if it's none you're liking just try to come with a idea by yourself.

[Mr. Domino]

This gives autos a huge advantage since a quick burst could negate any thrown grenade while the other weapons would both have to be accurate in aiming and use up more vital ammo. An HK which fires off 8-10 shots to stop a grenade still has plenty left to kill -- you can't say the same about the Ruger.

[Axel]

well, see, thats the point. firstly, im thinking about how it actually works. we would make it so that, YES, there is enough left to kill, that way it would actually be used; if it takes 25 HITS from an HK, no one would ever go after nades and it would be pointless. also, one shot from things like a ruger would set it off, and now sub divisions:
a: hitting nades requires accuracy, even with autos. if your not accurate, you shouldnt be using a ruger.
b: with things like barret, ruger, deagles, etc, there could be a larger hit zone like how if a nade is in the reletive visinity of a roket, it would explode even if it doesnt get REALLY close. sub sub note: deagles would be hard to program for a balance, perhaps a one shot kill WITH a chance put in, so that the pros still might have to use the same amount of shots as a nuub, and doesnt make it so that they can destroy 5 nades and kill a person all in one clip.

now, again, the big thing is the balance, and again, the important thing to do is find a good middle ground where it all jives. so there!

[Tybs]

This gives autos a huge advantage since a quick burst could negate any thrown grenade while the other weapons would both have to be accurate in aiming and use up more vital ammo. An HK which fires off 8-10 shots to stop a grenade still has plenty left to kill -- you can't say the same about the Ruger.

Would not worry about this... when someone throws a nade at u, u hardly have time to fire 8 shots, not even mentioning that it would be hard to hit with all these shots. The chance to hit a nade with a ruger is smaller, because the refire rate is slower than an auto, but thats why the explosion chance whén hitting a nade is bigger for a ruger.

[excruciator]

its a awsome Idea!!!! except that the nades are too small, it hard enough to do a headshot
minigun would be the best to shot down nades

[Axel]

.....no, we're avoiding teh over-usage of teh minigun an such; duhhhhh. an, tybs!!! wats with the chance thing?! omg, no, if you shoot it with a ruger, it WILL explode cuz of balanceing all teh fire rates, ammo, etc.

[Cato269]

who the hell would be quick enough to shoot the nade before it was out of range from your opponent?