I know this has been talked about alot already but I think I have a simple solution. If it's true that Dice said the G/l was meant to be used against vehicles why not just lower the damage inflicted against troops. Say like in CS where the nades were'nt 1 shot 1 kill weapons. In CS nades served thier intended purpose of softening up or flushing out opponents. But in a one on one confrontation they were useless. This way noob toobers could start developing thier rifle skills to catch up with the rest of us and we could eliminate this "smart bomb-clear the screen of enemies" type weapon from the gameplay. Up till now I don't have any gripes with BF2 other than the totally lame way of killing people that the G/L offers. It truly is a lame and stupid weapon.
-
-
Re: Nade launcher solution...
That actually isnt that bad of an idea. I would be all for it, actually.
Would force the person to rifle first, and then pull out the noobtoob as second resort. Would force the player to use it stretegically as well for once. -
Re: Nade launcher solution...
Obviously the guy who told me to go back to CS was a noob toober. I think this is the simplest way to get rid of the problem without creating more problems. I also think this should apply to all explosives ( C4 included). This way it would become more combat and less spam warfare.Originally posted by D|ssoComment
-
Re: Nade launcher solution...
they are going to solve the noob tubing in the upcomming patch like it has to be solved
Smaller blast area, meaning they actualy have to aim (OMG)
and armed timer, meaning they can't use the noob tube anymore from close distance .
mnd, this is going to be great, all those noob tubers are going to be screwed now, no more being a noob with there so loved weapon, they are going to get owned, by the people who used there weapons like you should of used themComment
-
Re: Nade launcher solution...
muahaha cant wait till those noobs go away and learn to use a weapon instead of a tube, i am gonna OWN those newbs that only can fight with their tube:evil:Comment
-
Re: Nade launcher solution...
If you make the GL good against vehicles, than the AT is out of job.
If you make the GL nothing special against vehicles/infantry, then teh Assault kit is out of job.Comment
-
Re: Nade launcher solution...
then give the assault guys a weapon taht does more dmg instead of a tube.
cuz now they are using assault to camp a flag and bunnyhop till their legs are off..Comment
-
Re: Nade launcher solution...
all you need to do is make it so theres a fuse on the 203's like in real life or many other games depict.
Reducing the blast area is stupd seeing as the blast areas stupidly small already. Reducing damage is also stupid seeing as a 203 would kill you with a single shot in real life or again in most other games (CS doesn't count because its ****e).
If the damage was reduced so a single shot wouldn't kill then nobody would use the assault class anymore because it would be unbalanced and not worth using compared to all the other kits that would be more powerful.Comment
-
Re: Nade launcher solution...
Cant wait to noob you guys out after the patch.....cant aim my arseComment
-
Re: Nade launcher solution...
Correct me if I'm wrong, but the grenade launcher doesn't arm itself till it takes so many revolutions. This is to keep the troops from hurting themselves with it. I believe the kill radius is 40 meters?!Comment
-
Re: Nade launcher solution...
Yes, and that is one of the things being added in the patch (although we don't know exactly what the min distance will be yet). I think everyone who thinks the GL needs a fix will support this one. The damage radius reduction is the problem; they are basically making it so the GL is almost useless against infantry since you need to hit very close to the target at longer ranges than most people currently use it. Probably better off just using the rifle.Originally posted by ANGRYEAGLEComment
-
Re: Nade launcher solution...
A solution implies something is broken. In the case of the GL the only thing that is wrong is the min arm distance. Hop firing is a global problem
Lets model a weapon designed to take out Large numbers of infantry using its real world physics as a guide for our physics engine. Then tell us it’s intended use is for countering light armor and act surprised that people also use it as its physics would dictate it to be used, to quickly and effectively remove soft threats from the battle field.
Then we have those who say it is not fair when they have the option of implementing the exact same weapon to counter it; sort of the definition of balance.
Yet they give the BH laser beam mini guns while their opponents have nothing that comes close to equaling it’s fire power. ( personally I could care less. )
If you are going to discuss Fairness in this games balance system ,logic would dictate you start where imbalances actually exist instead of quibbling over a weapon that is only effective against an opponent that does not use cover effectively to advance and has an equal on the playing field.
To ask for it to be nerfed suggest you are generally feminine in nature. Men would discuss effective counter tactics rather than beg to the gods it be taken away.
"An Army is a team; lives, sleeps, eats, fights as a team. This individual heroic stuff is a lot of crap."
GENERAL GEORGE S. PATTON, JR.Comment
-
Re: Nade launcher solution...
use support if u dont wanna be a noob tube but still want to take out hordes of guys
Comment
-
Re: Nade launcher solution...
Have any of you actually used the GL? The blast radius is already tiny, you have to land the grenade on the target pretty much (at his feet basically) to kill him. I've landed the grenades 2 feet away on either side of the target and have it do very little to no damage. Shriking an already tiny radius is a retarded idea, reduicing the damage not so much. I'm not for such a move, but not entirely against it. I believe the GL's damage is fine since well it's a bleedin' grenade and I have a good idea of what kind of damage those things can inflict in real life (I like realism). But if it will make people happy then reduce the damage so we can just get back to playing.
Personally I think once the minimum distance timer is implemented the GL will be fine, provided they weren't also implementing a reduced blast radius. Both these changes together IMO are overkill and will only serve to make a very limited class even more limited.
As it stands they are changing assault into a limited version of anti-tank, since they are basically giving the grenades such a tiny radius that they'd only be good against vehicles. So assault (pre-unlock) will basically be an AT guy with a much weaker unguided anti-vehicle weapon, a smoke grenade and a marginally better main weapon *twirls finger*. Apparently this is what they intended, which in my opinion is stupid since we already have a very effective anti vehicle soldier.
Also why don't the AT rockets have a minimum distance? I've been killed point blank before by AT guys, yet no one complains about them. If DICE is basing it off reality most modern shoulder fired AT rockets also have a minimum arming distance like GL grenades (though it's usually longer due to the rocket's more dangerous explosive).Comment
-
Re: Nade launcher solution...
Wow well said.Originally posted by BusaComment
![[3SA]D|Sgt.Colinloves]( "[3SA]D|Sgt.Colinloves")
Comment