Suggestion to change support kit

[imported_RpTheHotrod]

I use the support kit, but why not make this change?

Give a new key where you go prone and literally deploy the tripod (not instant-automatically). You then fire with good accuracy while in that position. Have it be very inaccurate when the tripod is not set on the ground, or on a small wall.

In other words, to be accurate with it, you MUST have it setup in a solid position and firing away. No more would you be able to run around and treat it like any other rifle. I don't see how a solider could bring up a MG while standing and have pinpoint accuracy firing in single shots.


Overall, the MG would be inaccurate unless the tripod (which takes a small amount of time to setup) is deployed on a solid surface. You setup a position and give covering fire for your advancing troops.


At the moment, I am able to run my butt off, stop on a dime, and instantly fire single shots while standing and pick off enemy snipers.

[slidero]

Re: Suggestion to change support kit

Uh all they need to do is the increase the min deviation a little, noting too much. Just to make it reasonable and balanced.

[SargeJp]

Re: Suggestion to change support kit

no...?

[WarGimp]

Re: Suggestion to change support kit

How about they need to dig a fox hole, properly calibrate their weapon, mount it, then they are allowed to shoot?

Hehe, sorry, but what you're asking for isn't a simple tweak. It would require that new elements be coded in. That's not as simple as you might think. Just look at the odd bugs that 1.2 brought in. Whenever you start futzing with one element, you're likely to break something else.

[imported_RpTheHotrod]

Re: Suggestion to change support kit

Hmmmm....true...it is EA we're talking about, after all. :O


The change would require a new key, Deploy Weapon, which plays an animation and locks you in place but increases your accuracy.

[WarGimp]

Re: Suggestion to change support kit

Then there's the matter of new animations... and a new rule set for deploying weapons. For example, could you set them up on walls? You'd have to preform checks to make sure that any deployment attempt was made in a valid location.

Then you'd have to worry about your field of fire. How far can you swing your gun? Can you belly crawl around your tripod to get 360 degrees? Or would it be resticted like mounted guns are now. That brings in another series of checks that would have to be preformed with ever deployment.

Ya see how something that seems simple can snowball?

This is why making games ain't an easy thing.
:p

[ActiveMatx]

Re: Suggestion to change support kit

It costs people $$$ just to throw in some zip lines and some night vision.... if the coding requires anything more than a number change, its going to take a few months and cost you a expan$ion pack.

[imported_RpTheHotrod]

Re: Suggestion to change support kit

Heh, I make computer games, so I understand the difficulties

[WarGimp]

Re: Suggestion to change support kit

It costs people $$$ just to throw in some zip lines and some night vision.... if the coding requires anything more than a number change, its going to take a few months and cost you a expan$ion pack.

Hehe... "just", he says.

It's obvious that ya don't know what kinda math is involved in doing dangly ropes vs surfaces. The fact that that isn't bugged all to hell is rather amazing really. I spent my first hour with SF just trying to break the ropes... and didn't find a flaw.

Be nice if they could take the jaggies of 'em by rendering them as an series of sprites averaged against the contact points... but I can understand why they wouldn't want to go that way. Headache + CPU overhead = better off with the jags.

[ActiveMatx]

Re: Suggestion to change support kit

Hehe... "just", he says.

It's obvious that ya don't know what kinda math is involved in doing dangly ropes vs surfaces. The fact that that isn't bugged all to hell is rather amazing really. I spent my first hour with SF just trying to break the ropes... and didn't find a flaw.

Be nice if they could take the jaggies of 'em by rendering them as an series of sprites averaged against the contact points... but I can understand why they wouldn't want to go that way. Headache + CPU overhead = better off with the jags.

I'm not sure if your ranting me or not, but i'll just assume your being sarcastic... I said "just" because, comparing the math involved with adding in zip lines, to the math compared to adding in a new animation and timing sequence is more comparable. In contrast to just changing the minimum deviation and power of a rifle (as in, the changes in a lot of patches)...

Nevertheless, I know the math/programming involved in creating such tasks, as I am a programmer myself.

[WarGimp]

Re: Suggestion to change support kit

I just find the use of the word "just" in relation to implementing anything to be kinda amusing.

I'm not being specific, but why too many people like to make comments on how to "just" fix something without taking the time to think about what their suggestion would really mean in terms of implementation.

BTW, I code too... but not very well. My field is design and mechanics.