Author Topic: Point of no accuracy in weapons?  (Read 5822 times)

0 Members and 1 Guest are viewing this topic.

Offline ginn

  • Camper
  • ***
  • Posts: 479
Point of no accuracy in weapons?
« on: October 24, 2013, 04:41:42 pm »
I'm not sure why the guns were made so inaccurate, it's just another RNG element. There are a lot of situations that will be decided by 1 bullet, and that bullet might miss because the RNG wanted it to go off. I think with this DE and ruger becomes even stronger, since they don't suffer from this while autos can't kill from distance anymore because of the inaccuracy.

Offline 14th_account

  • Soldier
  • **
  • Posts: 208
Re: Point of no accuracy in weapons?
« Reply #1 on: October 26, 2013, 12:43:39 pm »
I'm not sure why the guns were made so inaccurate, it's just another RNG element. There are a lot of situations that will be decided by 1 bullet, and that bullet might miss because the RNG wanted it to go off.

Random inaccuracies has been in this game since the first versions. They're in tons of shooters, even commercially competitive ones. They're used as a way to balance weapons and make the guns feel and behave like you imagine their real life counterparts would.

I generally dislike random elements in games as well, and I despised the inaccuracy system in the older versions. But the way it currently works in 1.6.6 I don't mind as much because it gives the autos a psychological drawback similar to the semis. The semis has always been the risky choice because they fire slow and hard, making every bullet matter. Missing once or twice will likely make you lose the confrontation.

The main random part (BulletSpread) of the inaccuracy on autos is also meant to discourage long-range combat - something which is boring, lame and slows down the game, and I have actively been trying to balance away. The way to counter that spread on your auto is to either get closer or move faster towards your target, making your bullets inherit more of your forward velocity, giving them less time to spread.


I think with this DE and ruger becomes even stronger, since they don't suffer from this while autos can't kill from distance anymore because of the inaccuracy.

They don't "become" stronger because of this. They have always been stronger because of this. But autos not being able to kill from a distance anymore? Hyperbole much? Autos have in the past been unfairly strong on long range, and I expected at least a little whine from nerfing them in that regard by people who can't play as effectively in the way that they used to.


Now, if you have a constructive idea or tweak that would be even fairer than the current system, while keeping the weapons' characteristics and maintaining balance, then I'm all ears.

Offline ginn

  • Camper
  • ***
  • Posts: 479
Re: Point of no accuracy in weapons?
« Reply #2 on: October 26, 2013, 02:17:27 pm »
But autos not being able to kill from a distance anymore? Hyperbole much?
The way you play against barrett, m79, ruger, DE is to be on long range, since there's either bink (barrett and ruger) or slow bullets (sorta DE and m79). Ruger for example is pretty good long range, and mid range, on close range it kills autos pretty much every time, because of nades.
I think the reason people don't play ruger and DE as much is because of reg issues, and that people are lazy, and not in mood to bother concentrating on the game to have good aim.

No idea how to tweak it, other than giving DE some draw back, like longer reload or even slower bullets.  Ruger could maybe have reverse bullet damage, the longer it's traveled the higher the damage (obviously it shouldn't be an extreme buff, and after a certain length it drops off again). It's unintuitive, but might be better, as it'd make ruger a long range weapon instead of an all range weapon.

Offline 14th_account

  • Soldier
  • **
  • Posts: 208
Re: Point of no accuracy in weapons?
« Reply #3 on: October 26, 2013, 03:19:24 pm »
The way you play against barrett, m79, ruger, DE is to be on long range, since there's either bink (barrett and ruger) [...]

Ruger doesn't get binked. If anything it's designed to be one of the best weapons at long range in the right hands. Though against Barrett that's a working strategy because with a single bullet or two you've managed to incapacitate the Barrett user.


[...] or slow bullets (sorta DE and m79).

Deagles are neither supposed nor balanced to be some tarded weapon choice that the other weapons can bully around by staying back and spraying. Staying far away from a rushing deagler can still work to some extent, but it shouldn't be your crutch. In this game of rock-paper-scissors gameplay, semis are destined to beats autos overall. If a deagler is giving you woes you should switch to 1-hitters or another semi.

Offline ginn

  • Camper
  • ***
  • Posts: 479
Re: Point of no accuracy in weapons?
« Reply #4 on: October 26, 2013, 03:49:51 pm »
If a deagler is giving you woes you should switch to 1-hitters or another semi.
Except the game doesn't work exactly according to rules. 1 hit weapons is a huge disadvantage, you can't really defend your base (basically you incapacitate your whole team), and you're down to 1 bullet that you have to hit (then you look at all the disadvantages you have while trying to hit with that one bullet). Imo ruger is one of the best weapons to use against a barrett, not the other way around, because of it's bulletspeed, steyr is good too.
Deagles and ruger in combination with nades almost always 1 hit kill, it's extremely strong in close combat (also easier to aim), while they're also decent at longer ranges.
I think the game should mainly be around autos, and semi autos and 1 hit kill weapons should be used for certain situations or game plans.

Offline Lapis Lazuli

  • Global Moderator
  • Camper
  • *****
  • Posts: 401
  • One Hand Clapping
Re: Point of no accuracy in weapons?
« Reply #5 on: October 26, 2013, 08:00:31 pm »
I don't see how a 1 hit weapon is a disadvantage. You hang back, take advantage of the distance between you and your enemy, and put them down before they have a chance to close the gap and force you out of your location. They're certainly a poor choice for the entire team (you shouldn't have more than 1 or 2 barretts on a 5- or 10-man team) but they do provide very effective long-range support. To counter them you need to either counter-snipe them or rush their position, forcing them out of their comfort zone.

The game has always focused on agility and situational advantages. Those with higher ground, higher velocity, the proper weapon for the situation or the element of surprise will do more damage and are more likely to win. You can't just take two weapons and two similarly skilled players and compare them. You have to factor in each weapon's advantages, their prime uses and favorable situations. You also have to consider an optimal team composition Yes, an auto or semi can rush a barrett and force them out of their location, but that guy with the barrett should have teammates carrying a variety of weapons, which will buy him time to provide long-range support.

I don't necessarily think any of the weapons have "weak" or "powerful". A lot of the recent changes and fixes have made the network very efficient and have also made hits register more often. This has made autos and semis more effective overall because of their spray, but even 1-hit weapons have been improved.

All weapons in Soldat have their place, and deserve to be considered equally in weapon balance. The game shouldn't focus on a small set of the weapons that are available, or else, why include them at all?
Steam ¤ Skype ¤ Soldat Wiki ¤ Need Help?
"Every thought you produce, anything you say, any action you do,
it bears your signature." - Thich Nhat Hanh

Offline ginn

  • Camper
  • ***
  • Posts: 479
Re: Point of no accuracy in weapons?
« Reply #6 on: October 26, 2013, 09:23:59 pm »
-snip-
I'm looking at it from "competitive" view, where 3v3 CTF is the main mode. 1 person using barret means he has to get out of the base alive, after he's out he has to somehow make use of his one shot. Skilled players know how to deal with a barretter, so being useful for the barrett player becomes very difficult while he's also not helping with defending his team. The only time M79 and barrett becomes useful is with special tactics or in flag standoffs (which imo is fine).
Semi autos are just good, they're unintuitive with their aim, but with experience they become extremely strong and an auto can't really fight them (because both ruger and DE have faster kill time).

Not sure how to balance it really, other than make them easier to aim with (no movement acc and 100% or 0% velocity inheritance) and decrease their damage so they can't just win straight up in an open field, that they instead have to use range and some coverage.

Offline Marfyn

  • Major(1)
  • Posts: 5
Re: Point of no accuracy in weapons?
« Reply #7 on: November 17, 2013, 08:46:56 pm »
I think you're wrong putting Ruger and DE in the same parameter of killing skills (Since DE is really easier to play with, by the way it's still an OP weapon imo).
Also I have to disagree with your comparison with semi and autos, this only applies for really experienced players, since aim/play with auto is easier than playing with semi weapons. For example, althought that Ruger is an awesome weapon it requires high skills, so an amateur player would be more able to kill with automatics.