more patch info from guys who tested it

[triumph]

Re: more patch info from guys who tested it

This is true. I think people are going to be surprised when they try bouncing but forget about the arming distance.

But question. If the M203 hits an object before its arming distance, and rolls onto the ground, is it going to go off, since its not a normal grenade?

In SOCOM US navy seal games the M203 grenades would never activate unless they went a certain distance. This prevented accidental back fire shots incase lets say you leaned out and had a bad angle and shot into the wall, the grenade bounces off the wall, no harm, no foul, i think this is how they actualy work, even m79's nades.

[gurkha_warrior]

Re: more patch info from guys who tested it

I believe that changes should be made for the sake of realism and to prevent cheating. However, changes should not be made simply to "balance" things out. I do believe that the paper-scissors-rock system of BF2 makes the game quite enjoyable, but I do not believe the game should detract from reality too much to achieve this.

Have the game followed reality, many problems would have been fixed:

1) AA missiles would actually work. In reality, AA missiles have cruising speeds of MACH 3, that is around three times faster than an airplanes top speed of MACH 1.3 (with after burners). AA missiles are also more maneuverable than airplanes and are also more agile. Additionally, they do not need to actually impact the airplane since they are fitted with a proximity fuse that detonates the explosive warhead at a distance from the airplane. AA missiles also have tracking systems that detect friendlies and force the missile to explode should it lock to a freindly aircraft. The only way to defeat a missile would be chaff and flares. As you see, you wouldn't have to reduce airplane's hit points or force them to land if you made the AA missiles behave realistically. AA missiles are EXTREMELY effective... that is why we invented stealth airplanes (besides... the F-22 is one of the least detectable airplanes in the world and also one of the most agile, with a cruising speed of more than MACH 1.5... but I will let that slip for now)

2) Most projectiles, including full metal jacketed small-arms rounds, will penetrate solid objects. You cannot have one weapon or vehicle be able to penetrate these object without having the other weapons do the same.

3) 40mm grenades are really powerful and are actually designed to defeat INFANTRY and lightly armored vehicles. It is a very powerful explosive and requires the shooter to aim at distant targets to prevent "fraticide" or to kill himself. Keeping the explosion powerful would prevent the abuse of the M203 launcher while keeping the effect of the weapon intact. The arming time should be enough.

4) Airplanes are fragile by nature. Attack helicopters are not. These helicopters are design to defeat tanks and vehicles and are designed to take alot of punishment. The game should reflect this fact by having helicopters be more resilient than airplanes or to make airplanes have realistic hit points.

5) The accuracy of some weapons, rates of fire and damage of the rounds should also be revised by using publicly available data on the weapons. You cannot complain about the accuracy of the AK-47 because the real weapon is actually inaccurate! Besides, the soviet round is more powerful than the NATO rounds. A .50 caliber round would pierce a kevlar helmet with ease.... it makes no sense to have snipers fitted with a M95 have to shoot twice to kill someone. Even the AK-47 rounds would penetrate body armor!

6) Disparity of forces is a reality in this world. We allow forces to be pretty much equal for the sake of fun, but marked differences should exist between armies as to force playes to utilize different tactics to suit national doctrines. Variety is the spice of life!

7) How come soldiers carrying an average of 60 pounds worth of equipment cannot run more than twenty feet before getting tired, but can jump as many times as they want with no penalty? This should be revised. This would have also helped with "bunny hopping" without changing the game's mechanics.

8) An apache helicopter can only carry 8 Hellfire missiles in two clusters of four missiles each. However, they carry around 15-30 conventional rockets on the round launchers. This should have been reflected in the game from the beginning.

9) Mines contain explosives inside. They explode is they are near another explosion. How do you destroy enemy laid mines if they cannot explode? Will you make engineers able to remove them?

I could go on for a couple of more minutes, but as you can see, many of the problems that plague BF2 come from the fact of an unrealistic aproach to the battlefield. More time should have been spent researching the effect or the weapons prior developing the game.

No one can complain about how reality works. We complain when reality has been randomly change by artificial "balances"

[imported_The 13th Raptor]

Re: more patch info from guys who tested it

9) Mines contain explosives inside. They explode is they are near another explosion. How do you destroy enemy laid mines if they cannot explode? Will you make engineers able to remove them?

Engineers have always been able to wrench away enemy mines, Dice should have made mines less visible, or even invisible to enemy's. But since they are so visible, i think its only fair that they cant be destroyed by just any explosive.