My opinions, flame throwers away plz.

[Dimebag]

It had to happen, this post was due for a long time now, just like CS before it where I complain and proceed to get grilled for my views, but straight off I can say that this game could be superb, but the way it is implemented is complete and utter gash.

Its great having some realism in a game, it enables you to create tactics and adds a great element to the game play, the problem comes when realism replaces common sense and is only taken half way.

Take the bazooka for instance, this is my main gripe to be honest, it is a joke. Plain and simple, it is a stupid joke. The game claims it is an "anti tank gun", which to me signafies it packs a punch and is used to take out tanks. Fair enough you might think. Now before anyone else goes on, I also am fully aware of how the tanks have armour etc before any patronising idiot starts trying to defend this, but i ask you one thing. Considering you have 5 shots with this gun until you have to restock the ammo, how many shots is viable to blow up a tank with an "anti tank" gun. The reason I say this is when i am trapped in a house, or exposed on the field, with a tank breathing down my neck, you would think it would be nice to have such a gun. Then when you shoot the tank 3 times with it and nothing happens, due to the tank having "armour" (what a pathetic excuse this is, the gun is DESIGNED to take out tanks), I start to get a bit angry.

So as far as I can see this needs a slight bit of balancing because what is the point of having anti tank personal that can't actually blow up tanks before getting utterly obliterated themselves? Another thing that seriously angers me about the bazooka is the splash damage, or total lack of it. Why in gods name do you have to hit a person smack on for an anti tank missle to have any affect what so ever? Seriously who thought this up? I've been in so many situations where ive shot such a missle at someones feet, blown them 10 feet in the air, not actually harmed a hair on their head, repeated it a few times, then been capped off in a couple of rounds while trying very very hard not to swear too much and throw things around the room. I had a guy trapped in a bunker getting ammo against a wall, i walked in the door, fired off at him from about 10 feet away, it blew him against another wall but didnt actually harm him and then he shot me... sort this out please EA? Im not saying i shouldnt have got hurt, it was fucking close range... but for it to do obsolutely nothing takes the fun out of the game.

Now what about the sniper rifle? I mean its got a zoom with a crosshair right? Now, someone who isnt "in" on the realism aspect would expect to aim at someone with the crosshair and shoot to kill right? Cept it doesnt does it, it misses even with the most accurate aim. The reason im told is that the guns in those days arent too accurate, that is kind of fair enough but there is one problem. For distance on rifles of those kinds, under the crosshair there was little tab markers for distance, obviously the person taking the shot had to estimate how far away their target was, then compensated for it by aiming on one of these distance markers. So the game is realistic to a point, but isnt taken far enough because there are NO markers of which to aim, its just a crosshair and anything else you have to guess, realism not being taken far enough i think? Whats the use of a sniper rifle that is utterly unusable by the average gamer? The only people ive found who can use it say things like "ah yes but you need to aim about 6 meters above/below the target!" shouting that out like it a) makes sense and b) is obvious, am i missing something here?


Next is the engine, is it me or is it a bit shit? I've got an athlon xp 2200 and geforce 3, sound blaster live etc, tried every fix under the sun and the game still runs utterly jolty even in 16 bit colour? This has to be shit coding as far as im aware because it seems to work fine on my gf 1 ddr. The general coding of the game is poor too, cant paste in IP's to the add server box, wouldnt even let my friend bring up a cursor in the box to type it in!

Like I said earlier this game could be awesome, the freedom it offers etc, the realism it HAS got is good. It really has struck me that whoever made this game has put a lot of effort into making it realistic but has sapped a lot of the fun out of it by not play testing it enough to realise its complete shit.

Dime

 

[lojik]

ok well 1st off the anti tank gun.. and i AM going to use the word "armour" here. See the ol tank has extra thick armour, but only on the front.. the trick with the ant tank gun is to shoot it up the arse!! if its even slightly damaged you can kill a tank with 1 direct hit to the rear. A totally undamaged tank MIGHT need 2. So you see you need to be a little smart, a little stealthy and get round the back. its why its best to attack a tank in a group, with a couple decoys aorund the front throwing grens.

I agree the splash damage against infantry is a bit crappy though.

As for the engine, the game runs smooth as silk on my crappy #2 PC which is a P3 800 with a GF4 MX. NO slow down at all really. You do need a graphics card thats good at T&L though.

 

[Insane]

Then when you shoot the tank 3 times with it and nothing happens, due to the tank having "armour" (what a pathetic excuse this is, the gun is DESIGNED to take out tanks), I start to get a bit angry.

you get 2-3 people with them attacking a tank you make short work of it, considering this game is designed primarily to be played as a TEAM where working together gives you more chance of success so instead of having it depend on needing a team to take out a tank (like before) you want to make it so a lone soldier can take on everything on the battlefield? uuhm this isnt quake you know...

Another thing that seriously angers me about the bazooka is the splash damage, or total lack of it. Why in gods name do you have to hit a person smack on for an anti tank missle to have any affect what so ever?

I think the game "Quake" comes to mind, specifically "deathmatch" and "rocket-jumping" spring to mind, think again, its an ANTI-TANK weapon, not ANTI-PERSONNEL

Now what about the sniper rifle? I mean its got a zoom with a crosshair right? Now, someone who isnt "in" on the realism aspect would expect to aim at someone with the crosshair and shoot to kill right? Cept it doesnt does it, it misses even with the most accurate aim.

So you have shot a real rifle? you know how to accurately compensate for arm sway, controlling your breathing, predicting the shot and dealing with wind drift? its accurate up to a point, you have to allow the bullet to travel the distance (it aint a RAILGUN) to hit the person, as well as the fact that your gun is swaying as the person trys to compensate for muscle strain. The gun is accurately balanced to show how difficult it IS to score a shot at 400+ yards under a scope.

Next is the engine, is it me or is it a bit shit? I've got an athlon xp 2200 and geforce 3, sound blaster live etc, tried every fix under the sun and the game still runs utterly jolty even in 16 bit colour?

Strange, I got an AthlonXP1600+ with Radeon8500 and SB Live! Value, and mine runs like a dream in 1024x768x32 with full details enabled? mind if a lower end machine can run it faster than your high-end brute there must definately be a problem with the engine, not with your drivers or hard disks!!!

It really has struck me that whoever made this game has put a lot of effort into making it realistic but has sapped a lot of the fun out of it by not play testing it enough to realise its complete shit.

or in other lines of thought, maybe you havnt spent enough time practicing and playing the demo to notice that it IS fun, if you put the determination of learning how to use the weapons properly. Not every game is "quake physics" where bullets are instant, shots strike where you point them.

there you go, nit-picked and prodded

 

[Dimebag]

I think the game "Quake" comes to mind, specifically "deathmatch" and "rocket-jumping" spring to mind, think again, its an ANTI-TANK weapon, not ANTI-PERSONNEL

I'm sorry but its a quote like that that SERIOUSLY fucking angers me. How in the hell did I know "quake" would be mentioned, how did i know rocket jumps would be mentioned. Is the fact I play quake relevant to the utter stupidity of this game / comment?

YES its called anti tank, NO it doesnt actually blow them up very well, NO its not called anti personell. How many times have I had thrown at me that this game is based on REALISM. You try taking an anti tank missle exploding infront of your face at 2 paces and see if you're uninjured yeah?

So you have shot a real rifle? you know how to accurately compensate for arm sway, controlling your breathing, predicting the shot and dealing with wind drift? its accurate up to a point, you have to allow the bullet to travel the distance (it aint a RAILGUN) to hit the person, as well as the fact that your gun is swaying as the person trys to compensate for muscle strain. The gun is accurately balanced to show how difficult it IS to score a shot at 400+ yards under a scope.

You're a twat

or in other lines of thought, maybe you havnt spent enough time practicing and playing the demo to notice that it IS fun, if you put the determination of learning how to use the weapons properly. Not every game is "quake physics" where bullets are instant, shots strike where you point them.

You're a twat.

Strange, I got an AthlonXP1600+ with Radeon8500 and SB Live! Value, and mine runs like a dream in 1024x768x32 with full details enabled? mind if a lower end machine can run it faster than your high-end brute there must definately be a problem with the engine, not with your drivers or hard disks!!!

Guess what? You're a... hang on some sense at last?

This was possible the most REASONABLE way I could have put forward an arguement for what i think and I still get utter cocks going on about "oh you play quake". That invalidates my opinion does it? Because i can see past the fact that you have to do rediculous things to actually get a result out of this game. The game DOES do stupid things, there IS NO reason to defend them. I'm not trying to change the game to make it something else I want it to be, im suggesting it be changed to actually make some sort of sense and be playable.

I'll say it again, this game could be great, but its actually shit.

Dime

 

[Summo]

Gah. Patronising tone. Discussion destroyed.

 

[Will]

Originally posted by Summo
Gah. Patronising tone. Discussion destroyed.

Lets pretend that didn't happen and continue ourselves.

I have to say that, the "rocket launcher against personnel non-damage thing" doesn't bother me. If I'm an anti-tank man, I think it's only fair I should suck really badly against infantry. And the "hit the tank in the rear only" thing is realistic I'm sorry. It does kind of suck though. I'd like to see a turret hit or a tread hit doing a bit of damage.

Sniper rifles are always a dialema in games. When you've got a gut in your sights, you want the gun to be a super accurate, one-shot-kill weapon. But when you are milling about at spawn, you don't want to get killed by a 1km headshot. That said, a slight accuracy increase or a scope/bullet drop guide wouldn't go amiss (is there bullet drop anyway? I'm unsure)

 

[Dimebag]

Ifantry dont suck against anti tank men, tanks dont suck against anti tank men, planes dont suck against anti tank men... boats dont suck against anti tank men... why should shooting infantry with a bazooka have no or very little affect? It is meant to be able to blow up a tank, can blow up smaller vehichles but cant kill flesh and bone, great realism and playability!

The sniper rifle needs an overhaul to be honest. Its all well and good having a "realistic" sniper rifle, but its impossible to use and doesnt work because of it it doesnt warrant being in the game. I play the game to have fun, cap some people off and do well if I can actually aim. Its not longer a battle of who can aim the best its who has worked out the utterly rediculous rules first and who can exploit them the best. As far as I am aware there is a bullet drop, it would certainly explain why shooting someone 5 times directly in the head had no effect what so ever.

The bad thing is this game probably wont change much now, I for one will not be buying it if it doesnt, its really dissapointing. Yes I think I will go back to "quake" which at least has a solid rule set that has a slight bit more continuity to it. As in if you shoot someone they get hurt / die, and if you have the ability to aim you can actually do some damage.

PS Thinking about it arent anti tank men just another form of infantry anyway? moot point.

Dime

 

[Will]

Its all about balance. Its nice in a way, the tanks totally dominate against infantry, but air power dominates the tanks. And its hard to take a flag with a tank, because there is always a little infantry guy hiding in one of the houses. I'll try shooting a tank up the arse tonight, and report back on my results.

 

[Scooba Da Bass]

We've had a lot of discussion in our clan channel about some of the points raised.

Anti tank is underpowered against tanks, especially as 3 grenades to the front of a tank will blow it up, exactly the same as an anti tank round. On the strength of Wake alone, playing anti tank is not a good idea, I expect this to be a bit different in the full release, and as mentioned above, team tactics do come into play, something it's very difficult to appreciate on the public servers at the moment. .

Onto Mr Sniper Rifle, I've had a small play around with the rifle (not much I'm an infantry whore), and the problem as far as I can see it is that you need to lead a moving target, exactly the same as any other gun. The lead distances are larger than you'd expect, the only way to get used to this is to grab a rifle, lay down (on the hill by the airfield is best), and see how much lead you need to hit a running target over distance (Incidentally, if better players are continually slaughtering you with the bar or the jap gun, I'd look to this first, you can't just aim directly at someone unless they are moving straight towards you). Once this is fixed in your head, switch over to the sniper, and try using the same ammount of lead relative to their speed, see if you can get some hits in. I've managed to get a few in, but it's on the whole an unrewarding experience due to the lack of teamply with artillery.

The engine seems to have suffered a bit since the patch, especially when a lot of people are on the server, however, if emptyish servers are causing a problem, there's something wrong with your setup as indicated above.

 

[Will]

What the sniper is crying out for is an impact mark from your misses, like in Operation Flashpoint. That was, your first miss is not lead right, your second miss is because you can't judge very well.

 

[xane]

Originally posted by Dimebag
why should shooting infantry with a bazooka have no or very little affect? It is meant to be able to blow up a tank, can blow up smaller vehichles but cant kill flesh and bone, great realism and playability

The anti-tank weapons in the game, namely the Bazooka and Panzerschreck, are improved versions of the original Rocket Propelled Grenades (RPG), the main difference being the warhead used, developed around 1941, which was the HEAT round, as opposed to simple HE rounds or fragmentation warheads.

HEAT works by using a minimal impact to create a concentrated chemical explosion out the nose of the round, this superheated supersonic discharged of concentrated gas melt through metal and does nasty damage inside. Because minimal impact is required the round does not rely on kinetic energy to penetrate, so the speed of the shot is quite slow.

A HEAT round will still travel fast enough to injure or kill a man, but unless the hot gases are triggered it is simply a big rock. Splash damage is minimal as a HEAT round does contain a fair amount of HE but this is directed forwards rather than outwards (like an artillery round).

Under realistic circumstances you shound not be able to fire this kind of weapon at a close target, be it the ground or a soldier, it is unlikely to reach the required speed to enable the impact mechanism to trigger the explosion. Unfortunately the game does treat it rather like a traditional "quake" rocket launcher, plus there is no backblast either which would injure you if you fired it indoors or someone standing behind you.

The realism aspect comes mainly from only being able to carry 5 rounds at a time and the very slow reload speed. Tanks should be feared, and the only time infantry will stand a chance against them is in close quarters. On the Wake Island map this is not apparent, but when Stalingrad comes along you'll soon see that getting in a tank is a death wish and infantry will rule.

 

[xane]

Originally posted by Itcheh
What the sniper is crying out for is an impact mark from your misses, like in Operation Flashpoint. That was, your first miss is not lead right, your second miss is because you can't judge very well.

If you keep the fire button pressed down it remains on scope, you can see where the shot impacts.

 

[Will]

Ah-ha. Thanks.

 

[Insane]

Funny how i put forward some serious points and dime counter-acts them with "you're a twat"

Just because your a "Q2 Moderator" doesnt mean that every time someone mentions the game "Quake" that they are taking a jibe at you, the game is specifically what the debate about the bazooka and panzerfaust is really about.

you scream about a game that plays realism wise, yet no blast damage for the bazooka? i wonder why??? maybe because some ingenious person's going to find a way to use that blast radius to get to awkward places? just look at how some people use detpacks already! If you give them the blast radius there will be an influx of people who use the bazooka like the rocket launcher in quake. who needs to be deadly accurate when you can run round with a bazooka blasting people out of the way?!? sod the realism lets just make it quake with vehicles!!!!

I notice that you manage to leave out the from one of my quotes, specifically regarding the system specs. I had put that in as a sarcastic reminder that most times its not the engine which is at fault but the persons configuration. by all regards do please mis-quote me if it feels that you have a leg to stand on.

oh and responses of "you're a twat" dont justify much, especially when its regarding the realism of the rifles.

 

[xane]

Originally posted by Scooba Da Bass
Anti tank is underpowered against tanks, especially as 3 grenades to the front of a tank will blow it up, exactly the same as an anti tank round.

TBH, Grenades should not actually harm a tank at all. No grenade contains enough HE to affect even the lightest tank armour.

The main problem apparently not addressed in the game is that Allied grenades (the "pineapples") are fragmentation explosives, whereas Axis grenades (the "stick") are shock/blast explosives. An Allied grenade is less likely to effect you, especially if you are prone or some distance away, whereas an Axis grenade will almost certainly stun you but not necessarily kill you.

However, it should be noted that Axis grenades did have fragmentation jackets that could be placed over the head of the weapon, thus making them similar to Allied ones.

Neither grenades are likely to cause significant damage to even a light tank, you'd have to bundle about six together and place them under the tank or on top of the engine cover to do some damage, the Engineer is really the only one who carries the required explosives to damage a tank.

 

[Summo]

Originally posted by Insane
stuff

Insane, let's not start this, yeah? You may have had some good points in your post but it was so saturated with that patronising tone that it was obvious Dime would respond with hostility.

Let's not attack him for rising to your provocation and just carry on the discussion like real people. I can't be arsed to have general forum style flames in here.

 

[S-Gray]

I agree that there is many problems with this game, ones which you have mentioned.

The tearing of Graphics is what pisses me off the most, i too have a Geforce3 and shouldnt be experiencing this.

The sniper Rifle is also poor, very inaccurate if the enemy is moving (even if your crouched / lying down)

I havent had much experience with a Bazooka, mainly because each time you aim it doesnt do its job, you aim, fire, it doesnt damage, enemy sees what your trying to do, bang one shot dead.

I think everything else is *ok* but ive not played it in a while (mainly coz of the Graphics Tearing)

 

[whipped]

Personally, I love the sniper rifle. Finding a nice quiet hill to lie on and killing people from a distance is great fun. Moving targets are very hard to occomplish. But everything gets better with practice. I find tracing someone around until they stand still for that split second is enough to cap or severly damage them.

I agree that no splash damage from the RL is a little annoying. But I have to wonder if EA did put this in early on and removed it for gameplay reasons. If so, it may be possible to turn it on and off at will via a server option in a future patch. This would ceratinly solve the argument.

 

[xane]

The only major gripe I have is that shots originate from the middle of your model, as though the gun were always held at waist height. This is particularly evident when you are firing downhill as frequently the shots just embed themselves in the ground in front of you even though your crosshairs are on the target's head, unfortunately the downhill guy doesn't suffer from the same problem and nails you before you realise it.

Using the "alt-fire" mode, which zooms in, should reposition the gun at eye height as if aiming normally, this would be a really nice enhancement as you could use the "iron sights" of the weapon to aim rather than the crosshair.

 

[xane]

Originally posted by whipped
I agree that no splash damage from the RL is a little annoying. But I have to wonder if EA did put this in early on and removed it for gameplay reasons. If so, it may be possible to turn it on and off at will via a server option in a future patch. This would ceratinly solve the argument.

I'd prefer the realistic option, unless the round has travelled a certain distance to achieve a certain speed it does not explode, and there should be minimal splash anyway, it is not an HE round.

 

[Scooba Da Bass]

I think you can bandy about realism too much, you've got to remember this isn't a simulation, it's a game, one placed in a real world situation, but nevertheless a game. Addressing flaws that are gameplay based is fine, yet moaning about a lack of realism seems a bit silly.

 

[stu]

Originally posted by Insane
I notice that you manage to leave out the from one of my quotes, specifically regarding the system specs. I had put that in as a sarcastic reminder that most times its not the engine which is at fault but the persons configuration.

Most times, but not this time - the BF1942 engine scales dreadfully, fact. It requires fairly powerful server hardware, and 'stacking' servers on single physical boxes (especially high player limit ones) causes client performance to turn to shit.

 

[xane]

I'm not advocating realism, otherwise I'd be rather concerned about the way I can repair a 16,000 tonne Aircraft Carrier using a spanner.

 

[Will]

Well, it falls rather nicely between Medal of Honour and Operation Flashpoint for realism. There are times when I wasnt a simulation, but this game has a certain pick-up-and-play to it that I like.

Its been a long time since I got out of bed an hour early to get a game in before work.

 

[old.TheGaffer]

Balance, balance, balance

Bazookas have been made this way for a simple reason; to avoid the MOH "let's all run around firing rockets at each other" situation. Sometimes its annoying if you've got the bazooka, you fire and it doesn't kill the enemy, but it doesn't matter! You should just play around the limitations of your weapon, just like you'd have to do if it was real. Frankly, in close combat, you're better off using your pistol, which is as it should be.

Ditto the sniper rifle. Personally I've found a few places where you snipe away to your heart's content (and in the full game there are some real sniper fests; Stalingrad and Berlin in particular) and it's not that bad. But the point is, the class is called 'scout' for a reason; you're not supposed to be running around shooting, you're supposed to be scouting for arty. They've made sniping awkward so you can't sit there as mr HEADSHOT god.

 

[Insane]

Originally posted by stu


Most times, but not this time - the BF1942 engine scales dreadfully, fact. It requires fairly powerful server hardware, and 'stacking' servers on single physical boxes (especially high player limit ones) causes client performance to turn to shit.

Thats true, the amount of information being hammered about by the server during a 12 player game is enormous I just wonder if there is any client-based drawing (like the wreckage, rockets, shells, etc) or is the server controlling that all?

Just wonder if it will turn out like Operation Flashpoint, a good game suffering with poor narrowband gaming potential I wonder how much IS being done by the server in-game, and what could be off-loaded to the client?

 

[Bazerka]

I'm not even going to bother reading the contents of this thread. All I have to say is, if you don't like a game, why expend all that energy getting stuck into it, if you aren't even gonna play it?

Or is this a case of "must-stick-my-oar-in-itius"?

 

[RedMercury]

I was discussing this with some people the other day at work (one of who is a complete WW2 memorabillia addict

Apparentley anti-tank weapons back then were much less of an incendurary device, and much more of a brute force device. They worked on the basis that when the large metal rod they fired hit the tank at very high speeds, the shockwave sent throughout the tank would cause shards of metal on the inside of the tank to cut the crew to ribbons (Just the same way that cannonballs shot from ships didnt actually explode, they were just designed to cause shrapnel damage). This may explain to some degree why the developers made the damage to infantry much more localised.

Whether this creates a better game or not is up to more debtate


Dan

 

[xane]

Re: Re: My opinions, flame throwers away plz.

Originally posted by RedMercury
Apparentley anti-tank weapons back then were much less of an incendurary device, and much more of a brute force device. They worked on the basis that when the large metal rod they fired hit the tank at very high speeds, ...

You are talking about something completely different and certainly not an infantry AT device. High speed projectiles create a hugh recoil action, there is absolutely no way a hand held weapon can shoot a large object at high velocity without sending the firer off in the opposite direction.

RPGs work by creating a backblast that partially counteracts the recoil, which is why they are cometimes known as "recoilless rifles", however, this is only possible on a slow-burn rocket motor.

AT Rifles, used by infantry, are basically very high velocity rifles, where developed in WWI, however, by WWII, and certainly by 1942, tank armour was way too thick for a flimsy little bullet to penetrate, consequently HEAT rounds were developed.

 

[Daffeh]

as long as the game has a medic class, i'll be buying it


i'll be buying RTCW for the same reason when i upgrade





from what ive heard about the game, i for one cant wait to play it