@marxman-lmc said in The Steps I Think NWI Should Take Regarding The Current Damage Model:
(Also, why make a post plugging your own posts? You've posted them, they've been read, replied to, and discussed. this just seems like shamelessly bumping 4 of your own threads because you think they didn't get enough traffic. Anyone who is interested in an index of points you've made only has to go to your profile and check out your posts.)
The biggest reason I made a combined post of my other posts is because I'm honestly terrified that NWI's gonna make the wrong decision. A lot of players say the current TTK is good and I just don't think that's the case at all. The armor nerf was bad. 5.56x45 weapons are now stronger than 7.62x39 weapons in every regard.
@marxman-lmc said in The Steps I Think NWI Should Take Regarding The Current Damage Model:
@marksmanmax said in The Steps I Think NWI Should Take Regarding The Current Damage Model: 1) Buff armor back to the original values before the Sept. 6th patch. (The M24 isn't as bad now as when I made this post)
I really don't have an opinion on this. I haven't noticed much difference TBH. Armor is always a situational upgrade anyway, as headshots still happen.
You probably haven't noticed much of a difference because armor barely makes a difference lmao.
@marxman-lmc said in The Steps I Think NWI Should Take Regarding The Current Damage Model:
@marksmanmax said in The Steps I Think NWI Should Take Regarding The Current Damage Model:
- Give both bolt-action rifles a Long Barrel by default and remove it from every other weapon in the game.
Um, excuse me? In this post you were saying that rifles have an effective range of 120, and that its the marksmans job past that. This isn't true in game or IRL. In reality marksman rifles are used starting at about 300ish meters. The M16 can shoot accurately up to around 600m, more like 850 with a long barrel. AKs have a much shorter effective range because of the larger round and less efficient gas system, up to around 400m, which is still much farther than you were saying.
Im not saying that INS has to accurately reflect these IRL values, but rifles still seem to be effective at realistic ranges (aka farther than 120m) in game, as they should be. The marksmans job is intel first, shooting second. They have access to much more high power scopes, and they do have an easier time engaging in long range combat than rifles right now. They can see farther and shoot more accurately than rifles, but that doesn't mean the rifle shouldn't be able to do the same job at reduced efficiency. Most marksman rifles are just modded ARs anyway, like the MK12 which I wish was in game.
The long barrel allows any rifleman to operate as a marksman at a reduced level of efficiency, but not by much. This is how it should be, and if a team has too many of them they'll lose anyway.
Rifles do have an effective range of about 120-150 meters.
By effective range I'm specifically talking about the range at which your weapon's projectiles are instant (hitscan). Once you're engaging past that distance, your bullets follow a ballistic model instead.
The "realism" argument in general isn't very solid because Sandstorm isn't a milsim, nor do I ever want it to be.
The Marksman can't really provide much intel since he has no binocs or anything. Sure, he can use his scope to spot enemies but the scope is attached to what you should be using to eliminate that enemy. Reconnosaince isn't his job; otherwise, he would be called a Recon and not Designated Marksman / Sniper.
Most rifles can already snipe at long distances (especially 5.56 weapons; they can get a farther effective range than most weapons).
If you read my tagged post, you'd see that my biggest issue with the Long Barrel attachment is that it actually increases damage. It happens to be enough of a boost to make the G3A3, FAL, and M14 EBR one-shot Heavy Armor in CQB, and the EBR /w a Long Barrel is more powerful than an M24 /w a Long Barrel, even downrange. It's balanced-ish on the SVD compared to the Mosin but tbh it just needs to go for game balance purposes (although I suggested keeping the Long Barrel on the M24 and Mosin by default, and then allowing other muzzle attachments on the bolt-action rifles).
@marxman-lmc said in The Steps I Think NWI Should Take Regarding The Current Damage Model:
- Make the M24 a viable weapon and remove Compensators from bolt-action rifles.
Again, not too much opinion on this. Not sure why compensators are an upgrade for bolts in the first place. I rather like the M24, but I'm not trying to find the meta so it doesn't bother me. I use it often and effectively, and its fun. I dont think its a bad weapon atm. I could see why people would think it is, but I have a very similar experience with the mosin.
That's not the issue. At range, the M24 simply fails to take down targets. Even at maybe a hundred meters I can't get a consistent one-shot on body shots with that thing. It's terrible. The M14 EBR actually has better range for some reason. Currently, the meta is "Stay away from the shitty Security bolt-rifle".
On the other hand, the Mosin-Nagant is an absolute slayer. The only issue is that the Greased Bolt attachment doesn't work with a few scopes (specifically, the scopes that prevent the usage of stripper clips).
@marxman-lmc said in The Steps I Think NWI Should Take Regarding The Current Damage Model:
- Tweak pistols so the Insurgent handguns are more balanced with the Security pistols.
Have you ever shot the makarov? or the M1911? or the M9? The insurgent pistols aren't as good, as they shouldn't be in this situation. It makes sense that security has a wider selection with more toys. Sure they have a pistol that can 2 shot heavy armor. Oh well. I know for a fact they don't have the recoil control I have with a makarov. It seems like all of your comparisons are only taking damage and not ease of use into account. Back in the mod days the insurgents only had the makarov and the security had a fucking M9! One side had 21 rounds of doom vs the makarovs like 12 bullet mag or something. The M9 had a a high ROF with lotsa bullets + better dmg, and the makarov had better accuracy and recoil control. It was a preference thing, and I never felt that it was unfair. It was simply different. Just like how Insurgents always have an advantage in CQC if they have an AK and the other guy has an M16 because of the sights (at least iron sights). Insurgency works best when its asymmetrical (I wish they would bring security's semi-auto shotgun back) and I wouldn't have it any other way.
Again with the realism argument here.
Considering you typically get more pistol options than primary weapon options, I want pistols to be balanced across the board. Fuck, ideally I want everything to be balanced so every weapon has a purpose.
Both factions have a Colt .45 that two-shots Heavy Armor. The problem is that the Security L106A1, a 9mm pistol, also two-shots Heavy Armor, making the M45 redundant and also making it one of the best pistols in the game, tied with the Glock 17 that can get more rounds per mag than an Uzi with Ext Mags. Insurgent handguns just can't compete by comparison, with the Hi-Power that only holds up to 20 rounds with lower damage than the Glock 17 , an M9 that's slightly better than the Glock 17 and worse than the L106A1 in every regard, and the M1911 which is a shittier version of the M45 that also has a more expensive suppressor (why?).
Recoil control is one thing, but if you're up against a guy who already has good recoil control then the damage is the predominant factor. You're probably gonna lose in a Makarov vs M45 fight with two players of equal skill. Mind you, the L106A1 didn't use to two-shot Heavy Armor; that's only because of the armor nerf on Sept. 6th.
The "ease of use" of most weapons isn't a big factor because most weapons (like 75%) are fairly easy to use anyway. In fact, I just recently realized how shit the M1911 recoil is when compared to the M45, which doesn't seem fair at all.
Currently, Sandstorm isn't very asymmetrical. Both 7.62x39 and 5.56x45 kill in two shots in CQB, and most 5.56 weapons have a higher fire rate than Insurgent AKs, giving Security a noticeable advantage in TTK.