Ursprungligen skrivet av Nimbus:

MG 34/42 would be quite awesome. Potent calibre, would make short work of those bots, even with heavy armor. High rate of fire (very) 1200rpm thereabouts for the 42, 34 would be a bit more economical on ammo. Or a newer MG3 (basically a 42 in 308) still in service today.
An MG34 would even be quite a decent SAW I'd wager. Mostly operated with 75rd belts in a drum, not all too heavy and the bipod feautures as a makeshift frontgrip (see WWII footage). So just as the RPK74M you could have a frontgrip and bipod at the same time.

Just remembered that the MG42 is in DoI ofcourse.

Oh my I didn't even think of DOI stuff. Though since the models aren't set up for optics/rail mounts I'm not sure how easy this would be. I seriously hope it would be almost the same process as modifying a model from the INS Workshop because some of these guns are still common throughout the Middle East (more British surplus over there than the MP-40 and M1 Carbine for sure).

The only problem would be which guns wouldn't be redundant or outclassed?

TLDR: These weapons would be heavier and have less accessory options but could have faster handling (like having faster switching and reloading for no point cost) and higher damage over the modern guns. Sorted into sections of viability.

High viabilty/easiest to add:

MG3 would be oh so sweet. 1200 RPM of 308 with a 50 round drum[world.guns.ru] would be oh so handy for stopping a bot rush right in its tracks.

C-96 in 9mm may not be the most prolific version but a 20 round magazine is still nothing to sneeze at.

TNT charges are basically equivalent to timed IED charges. Maybe one version of the IED bots could have this instead of instantly detonating? 5 second delay would be fair.

Webley revolver is available in 38 SW and, with simple modifications, the 455 Webley versions can use 45 ACP (with moon clips but we can ignore that). With the top break action it should be the fastest revolver to reload.

Medium viability

Lee-Enfield rifle (308 conversions exist) would be interesting but it is fed by 2 clips into a internal magazine. I have no idea if INS can support this reload method. Meaning a fallback to 1 round at a time like the other bolt guns, which would kind of kill the utility I think. I would be okay with fudging it a bit. If the animations can be ported along with the model, then I imagine giving the gun loose spare rounds but it reloads 2 of the 5 round clips every time which subtracts individual rounds just like the Saiga with its "magazines". Could allow a scope but I think iron sights only with a fast bolt animation would be unique and viable. I believe it should be a basic bitch rifle that does one thing well (killing the enemy right proper) and doesn't need no stinking accessories.

Lewis LMG isn't a common gun but it did get shipped all over the world and is available in 7.62x54R among other calibers. Probably have to gift it the 97 round mag option as the 47 rounder would be too low. Also this workshop edit removes the obsolete/ungainly water jacket.

M1919 MG did have 308 conversions but it would be unicorn levels of rare. DOI has it setup with 150 round belts which could be balanced as this would be the heaviest gun by far (no AR500 armor for you!). I'm rather meh about it but I know there are some hardcore Browning fans out there.

Bren and BAR would be difficult to balance with the other 308 rifles already ingame (FAL with bipod would be lighter and replaced these types of guns IRL). With only 20 to 30 rounds to work with I'm not too sure how to make these guns viable. Maybe trading high weight for much lower recoil? Or maybe go so far as to give it the 200 damage 308 rounds the M40 has.

M1 Garand. There are so many of these out there, and versions built in 308, that it would not be impossible to run into this in the Middle East. I really don't care which direction or form this rifle takes, as long as it goes PING when empty I will play the shit out of it.

Sten SMG. DoI has 2 versions but they wouldn't be much more common or fulfill a different role than the MP40 or UZI for slow RPM 9mm smgs.

M3 Grease gun. Such slow, much molasses. Used up to the early part of Vietnam war but I doubt it would have a role in Sernix because the damage of 45 ACP would clash with the glacially slow fire rate.

Thompson SMG. Oh Tommy Gun how could I not want you even though you don't belong at all? 50 round drum mags for Team leaders and 30 round stick mags for everyone else. Increases "swell" factor by over 9,000.

Low to no viability:
Welrod... Um... 1 shot manually operated 9mm silenced pistol. Could have 0 detection radius or just forget it all together.

Ithaca's fast pumping shotgun role is already taken by Nova. Plus there is already a model on the INS workshop so no need to port.

Luger P08, Walther PPK, Walther P38, and Browning HP are redundant.

STG44's are actually not too hard to find what with pics popping up of them in the current Syria conflict. All wall hangers though because no ammo. If someone really wants this it could be fudged by using 7.62x39.

Time for the crazy stuff:

Flamethrowers, I mean the M2 was still used in the Vietnam War. While you're at it Daimyo, port over artillery as well. Only take a couple hours right?

PIAT launcher. Not even sure INS rockets allow for an arc. But this was a short ranged British AT launcher that could theoretically be found with ammo in a crate somewhere in the desert.

Rifle grenade for Lee-Enfield. Would require cutting the animation down to simply placing on the end of the barrel when switching to "underbarrel launcher" and taking off again when switching back to rifle. I know the DoI devs put a lot of work in the animations but it takes far too long to switch to these even in DoI. Another problem could arise if INS doesn't allow assigning a GL to a bolt action rifle. While I would like to have it, I imagine just getting the Lee-Enfield to work correctly will be a large enough hurdle without the headache of adding a rifle grenade option.

Bayonets. Actually a lot of the guns in vanilla INS and Sernix support bayonets. Would need a separate key unless it can replace the knife and instead of switching to the knife you stab instead. Would be extremely helpful after being revived with an empty gun.

Ursprungligen skrivet av D¹² Deadshot GT:

Choppah, this is where I'm going to have to stop you here man. Not to be condescending or anything, let me disclaim that, but I know no one likes to be wrong, so I apologize if any of this offends you. But I'm thinking of the weapons that I listed mainly due to the benefits that I see from the functionality of those weapons, and, most certainly not to toot my own horn or anything, but that comes from 12 years of military experience with a combat job, most of that time being in a combat environment or combat training, and 6 of those years being in spec ops with part of my main job description being to investigate the best weapons for specific circumstances (I was a door kicker)... I bring that up because it's an experience that includes knowing a lot about guns for a very specific reason and purpose. I am also a gun enthusiast, a Texas native (Yippee Ki Yay, gun laws...), and a lifelong member of the NRA (lol) ok now maybe I'm bragging a little bit.

No, most weapons are not really the same when you strip them down, each have a different functional purpose and capability (shorter/longer barrel, shorter/longer stock, caliber, rate of fire, etc) and should be selected depending on the scenario (circumstances, mission, etc). For example, there's a very definitive reason as to why there's a G36K and a G36C. Each weapon that is designed with different ergonomics very generally has different ballistic behavior, which influences their principal use. Both weapons are not exactly ideal for clearing a building CQB (this is what should be most considered in game). Yes, this fundamental even includes weapons that are chambered in the same caliber.

This is where I'm throwing in some realism in to improve gameplay.

Also, I see this as an opportunity for Sernix to grow further by catering to its community at the international level, by providing the opportunity for its members, no matter where they're from, to play with some of the different kinds of weapons and utilities that their respective country's special operations and police units use. This further helps to implement the "fantasy effect", which is very addicting. Think on behalf of the player, not just the modder.

While you most likely have extensive real world knowledge in regards to military weapon systems I must reiterate again that most all nuances are removed by limitations of the current engine and game. If you want to see a true difference between weapons of the same caliber I highly recommend Arma 3. That game has a purpose built engine that can account for every little detail about any weapon you can imagine. The devs also use older versions of that engine in actual simulations in cooperation with the US military. That all being said, the source engine, and by extension INS, is no where near close to that. The sheer amount of modding required to try and emulate what Arma does with just its weapons would cause incredibly low performance in the source engine.

Hopefully Insurgency: Sandstorm on the UE4 engine will allow what you are looking for without as many compromises. As of now it is as I posted before, the game solely looks up stats for "damage (caliber), recoil, mag size, reload speed, weight, +1 capability y/n?, compatible attachments". The next thing the engine cares about is what model, texture, and animation set its supposed to use. Essentially it is a series of neat tricks to make us think something more complex is happening. If you have played a COD or BF game you know how samey the guns feel because they have reached the limit of meaningful variations between similar weapons. Yet the devs kept adding more because they think its "content" or maybe the art department needs to justify its existence by adding ever more guns.

Sernix doesn't have a 100+ man team with the resources of a large corporation. It relies on the freely released work of others. While I would love to add just about every gun on the workshop, I know that is not feasible and I must remain objective. In my own thread I suggested way too much and other poster's request were beyond even that.

I know text doesn't really portray connotation, but I'm not trying to put you down or anything like that. I'm just being (brutally) realistic in that the amount of time allotted for development and testing should be spent on other things. I say that knowing it contradicts reality. Being super honest, I would never pick a G36C or G36K over a T21 or X95 to take into combat. In a game though? You better believe I'm gonna check that out asap (the aesthetics of the G36... such hotness, much boner).

Ursprungligen skrivet av Daimyo:

"rocket_rpg7"
{
"entity_class" "rocket"
"Model" "models/weapons/w_rpg7_projectile.mdl"
"DetonateDamage" "230"
"DetonateDamageRadius" "750" //25% reduction
"DetonatePenetrationRadius" "150" //25% reduction
"RocketTopSpeed" "3500" // you cannot go faster than 3500
"RocketStartSpeed" "200"
"RocketAcceleration" "400"
"RocketWobble" "1.4" //default 1
"RocketWobbleFrequency" "0.25"


Now that I actually think of it, 1.4 equates to .026 meters which is 0.08 feet which is ~1 inch which isn't that much if you calculate a flight speed + acceleration which should be (3.8 meters + 11.4 meters + 19 meters + 26.6 meters) in the first second. Calculated by: (rocket start speed 200 units, 200 + 400 acceleration, 600 + 400, 1000 + 400) assuming rocket acceleration is applied every 0.25 seconds, the same as WobbleFrequency. My math is probably horribly wrong so please fact check me. Based on my math though, In the first second it would travel ~60 metes and have a potential off-course trajectory of 4 inches which isn't much... Considering bots got a accuracy upgrade which reduces the RPGs "cone of fire" on the target so the Initial RPG launch is placed very well (same cone of fire is used for weapons as RPGs).

I've actually tested this on trenches before and set the wobble to like 100 or 1000 I dont remember and it was hilarious watching a rocket just go off trajectory like a mad man.

So we can add more wobble to the trajectory.. but how much you think? You also have to remember that the wobble is in any direction so a rocket that goes off course by 2 inches can get nudged back on course 2 inches in the opposite direction.. I think its best to measure potential off course though. I think anywhere from 5-8 inch wobble could be a good start. Ill probably just have to test.

I think you should start with increasing frequency first, then wobble amount. Starting there because, like you said, sudden drastic changes in trajectory would be strange looking and probably off-putting for players. Ideally the end result for players be should able to hit a 1 story building with a RPG at 50 meters, just not picking exactly where it lands on the building (which is sort of like now except less extreme misses or laser accurate window shots).

Ursprungligen skrivet av D¹² Deadshot GT:

I see a great benefit to adding a wider variety of firearms that are ergonomically different than what is already there; because, for the most part, most of what's available is all too alike. I'm not seeing many bullpups, or firearms that feature a standard weapon sight in the carrying handle.

Also, in order to be more diversely catering with the player base, I see a greater benefit of implementing a wider and more diverse variety of firearms in order to cater to every major special forces unit at the international level, so players aren't nearly as limited and forced to play as "Western special forces", if you know what I mean.
Should this ever mean that some of the firearms that are already in place should probably be taken out entirely? Probably. I've looked at some of them and thought to myself "WTF's idea was this?"

Cost of manufacture, reliability, overall length, balance point, ease of field stripping and cleaning, alternate ejection ports, etc. The game does not account for any of these things, nor should it. The devs didn't add the Galil because it has a bottle opener built into it (look it up), they added it because it increased gameplay variety and could realistically be found on both sides of a conflict in this game's setting. Just because an Israeli weapon would do well in this game's portrayed environment IRL doesn't equate to additional gameplay benefit.

When you strip away all the little things about firearms, they really are very similar (especially NATO and Warsaw pact weapons). When you ask for a new weapon to be added to a game all that is considered is damage (caliber), recoil, mag size, reload speed, weight, +1 capability y/n?, compatible attachments. If the weapon you want added doesn't sufficiently differentiate itself from weapons already implemented then why spend the time and effort to bother?

I'm not trying to come off as harsh, but when dealing with mods you really have to put yourself in the modders shoes. Sernix is awesome because Daimyo and others are willing to put the time in to add new and different stuff, but their time isn't unlimited, adding another cookie cutter weapon detracts from something "new and different". Ask yourself, "How much work is it to add this thing I want and will it substantially add to the game as to be worthwhile instead of adding something else?" Trust me as an firearms enthusiast, it pains me to skip over so many kickass guns that drop onto the workshop every week. However, I'd rather we get something we never had before than a really pretty weapon skin.

While I would love to have more weapons added, more 5.56 rifles doesn't really add anything meaningful. We already have practically every kind in primary and now secondary slots. Which is kind of why I have been inactive in my own thread, lots of redundant weapons are being released on the workshop. Something truly different would have to be come out to make it worthwhile. I would focus your search to guns with a caliber that is not being utilized as extensively (ex. 357 Mag, 38 SW, 50 AE, 7.62x54R, 30 Carbine). Or suggest a new caliber which provides different gameplay options entirely.

Defusing mines, traps, and IEDs would slow objective progression to a crawl, especially in maps with a single path. Of course if all those tunnel maps get cut to accommodate this, win/win in my book.

Ursprungligen skrivet av Daimyo:

The accuracy of the RPG was slightly nerfed over a year ago but may have gotten a little better since "bot upgrade".
Basically all rocket projectiles receive a nudge mechanic.

"RocketWobble 1.4 //vanilla = 1.0
RocketWobbleFrequency 0.25

Rocket is nudged 1.4 units off-course in any direction every 250 milliseconds. So basically the longer the travel distance of the rocket, the more potentially off course it can go. So in a way the rocket trajectory is pretty random after the bot launches. If its close range though, that wobble has little to no effect. I just realized the RPG damage radius is now the same as the grenades... Ill end up reducing grenade radius by 10-15% next update.

Can you look into this to see if bots are equally affected? I have had numerous deaths from a bot making a RPG shot through a window at 80+ meters. Watching these rockets as they head toward me, they don't wobble at all, straight like a laser. Extremely noticeable on maps like Trenches where there nothing to obstruct your view or Winter Rescue because of the amount of windows. I always thought they wobbled into the window, but I have seen bots fire at other players, giving me a nice perpendicular view of this laser trajectory.

RPG bots are fine, but finding away to make their accuracy more consistent and less BS would be great. Even with IED nerf I think it would benefit gameplay to reduce IED bot spawns from 2 to 1 at a time. Double IED rushes are straight up unfair and not fun.

As for explosion radius, its fine, especially after the nerf. It really is a compromise for lack of level destructibility. *Leans back in rocking chair* Back in my day explosions didn't do squat if you had small piece of level geometry to block its LOS. I frequently used this trick to save myself and levels were designed around to accommodate this. Nowadays with this newfangled Source engine and its physics witchcraft, explosions can be calculated through walls. Levels were better when we got stuck for no reason and you could spawn camp for days to pad KDR. *Little girl walks in* "Grampa are you talking about the 90's again to your Cee Dee player? C'mon it is time to take your medicine."

Ursprungligen skrivet av Ƈ ɧ أ ƥ ö Ƙ ö:

hey, was thinking that maybe team leaders could have a special rifle?

Team leaders have access to grenade launcher and drum magazines. Recon team leader is the only class with access to the Mosin.

I suggest holding off changing the ammo types until after the new armor system is finalized. Unless I'm misunderstanding what Penetration Power Loss is, in that it appears to solely affect penetration and does not factor into damage calculation. Therefore, there is no damage mitigation factor for a bullet that exceeded the penetration required factor by only a small margin. For example, lets say light armor has a Penetration Power Required (aka the minimum required threshold of armor piercing, PPR for short) of 100 and the bullet fired is 105 penetration power. It hits and does full damage even though it barely made the grade for piercing armor. On the flip side a 95 PP bullet doesn't go through at all and does no damage.

All I can say is shooting an enemy for 0 damage would make for awful gameplay. On top that, it is not even remotely realistic. Armor prevents bullets from entering the body, it does this by spreading out the force of a projectile. Broken bones, internal bleeding, and shock to organs while not instantly fatal, it could make a soldier combat ineffective. Hence the whole current problem with headshots not being 1 shot drops. While a helmet may completely stop a bullet, it is very unlikely the person wearing it would remain conscious and/or capable to continue the fight.

I know the objective is not to attain sim-level ballistics, but what we have now makes more sense. If I shoot a round that is less effective against armor then that bullet does reduced damage. If I empty a mag from any gun into a fully armored bot, it is going down no matter what. The current armor system beta would allow players to walk around like tanks against HP rounds. This is more akin to reality than treating armor as magic binary damage panels like Fallout New Vegas. I remember running into the first enemy I could no damage to simply because its damage threshold was high and I had no AP bullets, I had to run away like an idiot. Hell IRL even tanks can have fully intact armor but become combat ineffective by losing optics, turret jamming, engine disabled, etc.

I know, wall of text, and maybe I'm wrong. I just don't want to see the armor/ammo system we have now be replaced with something that reduces our options and feels super gamey/arcadey/rpg style numbers flying off every hit.