Flag throw animation

[duz]

I think that the great feature called flag throw needs an animation at this moment. A very short arm movement similar to the nade throw animation.
After countless matches it seems weird when you throw the flag without a player movement.

What you think about it?

[L[0ne]R]

Agreed. I think even re-using one of the existing animations (like grenade throw) would work just fine. Or the rambo bow animation where the soldier pulls out a new arrow from the back, which looks similar but plays a bit faster.

[%%%%%%%]

F12.

[Bistoufly]

Then throwing flags would not be instant anymore. I don't like that at all.

[duz]

Then throwing flags would not be instant anymore. I don't like that at all.

Yes and makes more sense. As I said, a veeeeery short animation (delay).

[%%%%%%%]

Then throwing flags would not be instant anymore. I don't like that at all.

Yes and makes more sense. As I said, a veeeeery short animation (delay).

Yeah, throwing a flag shouldn't be instant.

[L[0ne]R]

Then throwing flags would not be instant anymore. I don't like that at all.

Yes and makes more sense. As I said, a veeeeery short animation (delay).

Yeah, throwing a flag shouldn't be instant.

Why not? Delays just make the game feel less responsive.

Also the time you take to aim where you want the flag to be thrown is already a bit of a delay + there's also lag.

[%%%%%%%]

Then throwing flags would not be instant anymore. I don't like that at all.

Yes and makes more sense. As I said, a veeeeery short animation (delay).

Yeah, throwing a flag shouldn't be instant.

Why not? Delays just make the game feel less responsive.

Because even if we don't want the game to be a bit realistic, it should still be consistent with other game functions, such as throwing a nade (which is smaller and easier to throw, if I might add) and switching weapons.
Why not just have everything instant? Where does it end? Why don't I instantly prone with no transition?

What kind of argument is this ffs

[L[0ne]R]

So just because we have delays on some things, everything should have a delay? What kind of argument is this? Then let's add a delay to weapons as well, because it's inconsistent as hell that guns shoot as soon as you press the button. And jets too.

Consistency just for the sake of consistency is bad if it means detracting from gameplay.

[%%%%%%%]

So just because we have delays on some things, everything should have a delay? What kind of argument is this? Then let's add a delay to weapons as well, because it's inconsistent as hell that guns shoot as soon as you press the button. And jets too.

Consistency just for the sake of consistency is bad if it means detracting from gameplay.

No, things (like physical movements) should have a delay that's relatively proportional to the time it takes to do that action. This is common sense, bruv.


How is it inconsistent that a gun fires when the trigger is pulled? Guns fire instantly. No weapon, except maybe minigun (which might need a little bit of time for the multiple barrels to start revolving) should have a delay. It is indeed inconsistent that Barrett is the only gun to have a startup time/delay (which Shoozza promised to fix for "1.6.10"). Refer to a quote of myself to that extent:

How about we discuss the fact that no other weapon has bink and how that's completely unrealistic? I don't care what weapon you're using, if you get shot, you should be temporarily incapacitated. Even if you were to be shot with rubber bullets, you're accuracy is going to temporarily suffer. Granted, weapons with higher velocity/larger shells should incapacitate you more and have a higher bink (if they don't kill you), but it makes absolutely no sense for bink to be zero for any weapon.

As for Barrett start-up being too short, you've got to be joking. In real life, a sniper rifle is like any other gun: you pull the trigger, the shot is fired -- no delay. The start-up time should be virtually equal for all guns except guns like the minigun/gatling gun that require time for the multiple barrels to revolve.

No offense, but you're clueless about this topic.

[darDar]

So just because we have delays on some things, everything should have a delay? What kind of argument is this? Then let's add a delay to weapons as well, because it's inconsistent as hell that guns shoot as soon as you press the button. And jets too.

I hope you are not too serious comparing these 2 completely different things.

You can't throw a flag instantly and if you want to make an animation on something there obviously needs to be delay, which can not be said about gun fire.

[L[0ne]R]

No, things (like physical movements) should have a delay that's relatively proportional to the time it takes to do that action. This is common sense, bruv.

Gameplay comes first, and if necessary - you ditch common sense and laws of physics for the sake of better gameplay. That's why many platformers let you jump (or perform other actions) instantly, with no delays (and yet that doesn't stop developers from adding jump animations). Rolls and backflips in Soldat are a physical acton with a full animation, and yet those are also performed instantly.

How is it inconsistent that a gun fires when the trigger is pulled? Guns fire instantly.

No they don't. There is a small delay while you actually pull the trigger. It's a short delay, but nonetheless - a delay. Not even comparable to a button press on the mouse or keyboard (unless you have a strong finger I guess).

[%%%%%%%]

Yes, gameplay is important, and this doesn't negatively affect gameplay.

And have you ever fired a real gun, man? I have an AK at home and trust me when I say the delay of pulling the trigger, if you can even call it one, is negligible.

But have fun continuing to defend your ridiculously absurd stance.

[duz]

The first thing I though before suggesting was the gameplay. You think that something similar to the nade throw delay (few ms) could affect the gameplay that much?

[Bistoufly]

The first thing I though before suggesting was the gameplay. You think that something similar to the nade throw delay (few ms) could affect the gameplay that much?

yes


If anything I wish flag throws were more versatile. It's such a shame that you can't throw while rolling or backflipping. So many potential fun clutch moments denied.


Adding a delay is the same kind of deal. It will make you miss more opportunities for nice plays.

[L[0ne]R]

Yes, gameplay is important, and this doesn't negatively affect gameplay.

Elaborate please.

I can elaborate how it does negatively affect gameplay:  Character does not immediately react to player input, which creates a disconnect between player and character. Unresponsive controls can have their own charm of course (Dark Souls, or the more extreme examples - Flashback, Another World), but they do not belong in a game like Soldat due to its fast-pace where split-second actions are crucial. Delays reduces the chances of fun clutch moments - something Soldat is famous for. It's harder to make split-second actions if those actions already take time to execute.

But have fun continuing to defend your ridiculously absurd stance.

Not very open-minded, are you?

If anything I wish flag throws were more versatile. It's such a shame that you can't throw while rolling or backflipping. So many potential fun clutch moments denied.

Agreed, and perhaps this should be brought up in a separate thread even. Instead of adding delays and restrictions, they should be removed where possible if there's no harm to it.

[%%%%%%%]

Gameplay is subjective; what you think would be negative for gameplay, I think would be negligible, and another would think would be positive for it.

There needs to be symmetry between movements in the game, one that's at least based on the objectivity of realism.

By your logic, if people think throwing a nade instantly somewhere is good for gameplay, then the game should be changed to make it so.
Let's just make it so we can throw nades like an M79 fires them, shall we? Come on, it'd be better for gameplay! It's not good for gameplay to have that delay.
"I can elaborate how a nade delay does negatively affect gameplay:  Character does not immediately react to player input, which creates a disconnect between player and character. Unresponsive controls can have their own charm of course (Dark Souls, or the more extreme examples - Flashback, Another World), but they do not belong in a game like Soldat due to its fast-pace where split-second actions are crucial. Delays reduces the chances of fun kill moments - something Soldat is famous for. It's harder to make split-second actions if those actions already take time to execute."


Please.

[L[0ne]R]

Gameplay is subjective; what you think would be negative for gameplay, I think would be negligible, and other would think would be positive for gameplay.

Sounds a bit like a cop-out. Same thing can be said just about anything - "I think this is totally ok/not ok because there's always someone who will like it the way it is.". I can easily say that delay on Barrett is a good thing because it gives it some uniqueness to its playstyle that no other weapon has, and by your logic I'm not necessarily wrong.

There needs to be symmetry between movements in the game, one that's at least based on the objectivity of realism.

I don't understand why you're so eager to bring realism into a video game discussion. They have nothing to do with each other. Fun fact: reality often sucks.

By symmetry - do you mean consistency? If yes - I agree, and I have nothing wrong against consistency and I fully support it as long as it's done while taking steps forward, not backward.

By your logic, if people think throwing a nade instantly somewhere is good for gameplay, then the game should be changed to make it so.
Let's just make it so we can throw nades like an M79 fires them, shall we? Come on, it'd be better for gameplay!

If there was only one throw strength - yeah, that might be better for gameplay. At least I, subjectively, consider it so. However grenades have a chargeable throw strength, so adding an instant throw would remove that mechanic and some gameplay depth along with it. Another potential issue is it lets players shoot and nade simultaneously, which may be bad balance-wise (unless a cooldown of some sort is added after the throw).

What could be done is the minimum charge (aka "delay") for the throw could be removed, so grenades can be used with no delay but would simply drop at your feet if you don't charge your throw. I'm not sure what potential repercussions of this might be though.

Throwing flag at an enemy isn't gonna deal any more damage and will only cause the flag to get returned, so there's no balance issues there. Alternatively, a chargeable throw could be added just like for grenades, and there you have consistency.

Please.

Wow, that was a really deep and thought-provoking argument, everything I knew is a lie!

In all seriousness, if you can't make a point - don't post.

[%%%%%%%]

The point I made is that your 'elaboration' can be applied to almost anything in Soldat to claim it has a negative affect on gameplay, including nade throwing. I used your own point against you.

Loner, it's simple: one should treat throwing a flag exactly the same as throwing a grenade. To not do so is asinine.

I can see there's no persuading you, so that's the last I'll say on the subject.

[L[0ne]R]

Trust me, I'm not disagreeing just for the sake of disagreeing. I'm open for ideas, and if one makes the game objectively better - I'm all for it. However you've failed to make any points in how a delay is objectively a good thing, or at least didn't word it such. (Or in worst cases - moaned and rolled your eyes like a teenager mid-puberty.). You keep saying they should be the same because they shouldn't be different, without really explaining why "different" is bad, or why consistency is needed there. And when presented with arguments how this change may have a negative effect - you just dismiss it as negligible (not a fact).

Point me to one objective statement you made if I missed any. It's entirely possible I might have missed or misunderstood it.

Loner, it's simple: one should treat throwing a flag exactly the same as throwing a grenade. To not do so is asinine.

Perfect example of "it should be the same just because". No, this doesn't persuade me.

Like I said previously - making flag throw chargeable like a grenade may be a decent alternative because it adds some depth (varied throw strength) in exchange for responsiveness. (I repeat: I'm NOT against this idea, in case that wasn't clear enough.). But that makes it a trade-off - you get something, you lose something. And because grenade and flag throwing are used in completely different scenarios - whether or not this tradeoff is justifiable is up to debate. I'd be happy to have this debate, but seing how things have been going so far it's easier to just agree to disagree and end it on that.