1.34 Feedback - RPATS

[monsjoex]

Should be pretty easy to implement too.

You already know when someone is indoors .. so just have that checked when you fire and you´re done. Then make its head nod when you are indoors.

[matt6767]

You already know when someone is indoors .. so just have that checked when you fire and you´re done. Then make its head nod when you are indoors.

What about some of the damaged buildings?

[fxmmauser]

we're working on the "can't fire from inside a room" problem at the moment

Oh no you going to ruin them! XD

There are many buildings that have enough space to fire safely I mean ground level.

Just lower the number of hits you need to destroy a house and allow 37m to also destroy buildings but requiring a higher number of rounds.

(easy safe fix)

[chiapet]

Should be pretty easy to implement too.

You already know when someone is indoors .. so just have that checked when you fire and you´re done. Then make its head nod when you are indoors.

what about the church tower?

[DOC]

current research is indicating that the "common knowledge" that RPAT weapons fired from room windows is suicide, actually isn't

this may be easier than at first thought

[kamel]

we're working on the "can't fire from inside a room" problem at the moment

The problem wasn't so much 'can't fire indoors'... it was 'don't fire with an obstruction behind you'. IE, walls, vehicles, or anything that could reflect the backblast back at you.

Why not just fire an invisible 40lb frag bomb out the rear at 10m/s that can only hurt the firer... and time it out after two seconds with no drop to gravity?

That neatly solves not only the 'indoors' problem... but obstructions to the rear in general.

You would be able to fire if the room was large enough... but rearward obstructions would be... bad.

[romzburg]

current research is indicating that the "common knowledge" that RPAT weapons fired from room windows is suicide, actually isn't

this may be easier than at first thought

Was it suicide in WWII for a lone tank to drive into the middle of an enemy stronghold in a town, park in front of a building and sit there and and start shooting stuff? Yes. Yes it was.

Why don't you work on a mechanism to stop *that*, as it is *actually* something that seriously hurts the game, whereas boomzookas shooting that idiot tanker from the shelter of a doorway is something that would *benefit* the game.

I want to play a simulation of WWII combat, but the tankers in WWIIOL make that an impossibility.

____________________

motormouth:

Much as Romzy's posting style can give me headaches (and the fact that he's "NEVAR WRONG!!"), that post pretty much nails it on the head.

sgtchief:

romz you['re] my damn hero

sydney:

Ya know, at first Romsburg, you rubbed me the wrong way and I wasn't a fan. But over the past 12 months, you have really grown on me. You're precise, well spoken and although you are sometimes a little harsh, you are most often correct and in proper context with your responses.

irelandeb:

indeed he's one of the few voices of common sense on these forums

jw:

If you're going to argue with Romz, do your homework before you post. He gets it, and you can't teach common sense, you have to be born with it.

pete, linc & julie:

I can't say [any]thing else [than] that the ban was justified considering that you have an 'impressive' TOS history....

owilde:

The only thing worse than being talked about is *not* being talked about.

[firebugs]

The problem wasn't so much 'can't fire indoors'... it was 'don't fire with an obstruction behind you'. IE, walls, vehicles, or anything that could reflect the backblast back at you.

Why not just fire an invisible 40lb frag bomb out the rear at 10m/s that can only hurt the firer... and time it out after two seconds with no drop to gravity?

That neatly solves not only the 'indoors' problem... but obstructions to the rear in general.

You would be able to fire if the room was large enough... but rearward obstructions would be... bad.

A 40lb grenade? That's a bit much.

I've been watching a lot of videos from WWII of the zooka and schreck lately, and from what I'm seeing of the blast of the weapon it's no where near as bad as say the AT-4. And that makes sense. They have about 1/3 of the velocity, and the M6 rocket is about 25% lighter. They seem much more comparable to the M72 LAW. I'll look around and see if there's anything about shooting them inside buildings.

I tend to think something like the concussion effect should happen when you fire the thing inside a building, but I do not think the exhaust from these early RPATs is enough to cause overpressure and kill. If there is testing out there that says otherwise, fine by me.. Just my opinion.

Edited August 14, 2011 by firebugs

[kamel]

A 40lb grenade? That's a bit much.

I've been watching a lot of videos from WWII of the zooka and schreck lately, and from what I'm seeing of the blast of the weapon it's no where near as bad as say the AT-4. And that makes sense. They have about 1/3 of the velocity, and the M6 rocket is about 25% lighter. They seem much more comparable to the M72 LAW. I'll look around and see if there's anything about shooting them inside buildings.

I tend to think something like the concussion effect should happen when you fire the thing inside a building, but I do not think the exhaust from these early RPATs is enough to cause overpressure and kill. If there is testing out there that says otherwise, fine by me.. Just my opinion.

Not the overpressure. Merely very hot, unbreathable exhaust. Causing burns and asphixiation.

Burns in the case of an obstacle reflecting the backblast onto the firer. Asphixiation in the case of enclosed spaces.

[chiapet]

typically backblast doesnt rebound direectly back as the blast is still hitting the wall after the first part of it hits, so it spreads out. someone already posted, but the main issue was ventilation if anything. faust has the dang shield just for that reason, of course all troops had gas masks anway, especially the shreck guys.

[noons]

Just playing with it offline and switched to pistol. When I shoot the pistol it sounds like im shooting smoke grenades. The initial shot is ok but when the bullet hits thats when the smoke gren sound starts.

[firebugs]

Just playing with it offline and switched to pistol. When I shoot the pistol it sounds like im shooting smoke grenades. The initial shot is ok but when the bullet hits thats when the smoke gren sound starts.

It's been ticketed, if not fixed already.

[dotsie]

Sights are fine, require practice and skill. DOC have you looked at the effect they have on fuel tanks? I found it very hard to cause them to flame in the limited time we had in beta. Just one flamed at the fuel tank area. More time on server would be nice.

PS.

One more question DOC. I noticed when the rounds detonate off angle to a plate a jet of smoke is produced that is always moving at right angles to the plate impacted not the angle of impact. Can you tell me if the perpetrator is moving opposite the smoke jet into the plate or does it follow the incident angle of impact. Like on the right hand side below.

PPS. I forgot to mention the 3rd person view. I noticed that when I was standing with some other players testing my view of their shots had the rounds impacting mostly at their feet when the were slightly behind cover and always falling wel short of the target they were hitting (sherman parked 175m to 350m away). It was horrible. Any way of getting the 3rd person view round to be non collideable for the first 20m or so? And making the rounds that dont collide land at least somewhere near the target they are hitting.

Edited August 16, 2011 by dotsie

[GOPHUR]

Effects only play perpendicular. Rounds do not have this limitation.