Bullet velocity?

Discussion in 'PlanetSide 2 Gameplay Discussion' started by AllRoundGoodGuy, Sep 29, 2016.

  1. Ghoest

    You are the one who seems to be arguing about realism.

    I simply said how I wished the guns behaved more like real guns(ie using physics.) But I get it was not the devs visions.

    You are the one making fantastic counter arguments for some reason.
  2. Iridar51

    Seriously? You don't see a problem with these two statements in the same post?

    Just arguing against your claim that
    Really don't like when people bring real life into sci-fi, a genre that specifically uses advanced technology to break away from the mundane. And as we know, advanced technology will look like inexplicable magic to a less advanced civilization.

    Saying that a modern rifle would amount to something in the world of PS2 would be like saying that a big hammer from 500 years ago beats a modern pistol because it can kill someone wearing full body armor, while pistol cannot.
  3. Ghoest

    No conflict in what i said.
    Perhaps conflicting with your convoluted physics defying fantasy.

    I stand by my point that the bullet mechanics in game are fantastically absurd.

    And I I wasnt arguing for a change - because its based on what the devs feels will be the best game play.
  4. Iridar51

    I disagree with every single letter you said, but there's no point in an argument. Not like anything important is at stake.
  5. ReptilePete

    when did the bullet?
  6. Obscura

    If you notice also, continents are more like the size of islands rather than continents.
  7. PyroPaul

    What is hilarious is the fact that the M1 Garand or M14 would do absolutely no damage in this future space game in spite of their higher velocity... Again this is what happens when you simply directly compare 2 things with out understanding all of the components at play here... which is why you can't do simple direct comparisons.

    Simply Said - the average soldier is wearing a High Density Composite Armor of Ceramics, regenerative metals, and Carbon Nano-Tubes woven into body armor. In modern day analogues - this soldier is wearing effectively Tank Armor.

    a 30.06 firing a ball of lead encased in a coat of copper is going to do jack all to this guy... in fact, he probably wouldn't even notice he got shot with the amount of protection he has on top of him.

    The most common method to defeat armor is to shoot a denser material at like velocities and allow the inertia and kenetic energy of the munition simply force itself through the armor. Except denser material requires more energy to fire - and if you use the same energy to fire as the Copper Coated Lead Ball ammunition - then you end up shooting at a lower velocity.

    So while you're 1880's Mauser rifle can hit at long ranges and modern day assault rifles fire at twice the velocity of weapons we see in Planetside 2 - you do not know the dimensions, composition, or properties involved to make a direct comparison between the two. It is not only plausible that the weapons have lower velocities because they are being forced to shoot denser heavier rounds in order to defeat the body armor in question, it is entirely likely considering the average shot-to-kill ratio we have with most fire arms in the game.
  8. AllRoundGoodGuy

    Thank you all for your input, I really did not want this thread to get into how rifles today compare to the ones in the game. I was simply curious on why they chose to use the velocities that are currently in-game.

    Once again, thanks.
  9. Pikachu

    Where you get nice diagram software?

    About the damage numbers, in a ps2 style game the best thing you could hope for is to scale down damage exponentially. Or perhaps limit vehicles to ww2 equivalents. Or limit to modern ones with minimum fire power. No higher than that of an APC, even if you limit ammo to solid shot and hollow charge. Perhaps WW2 style tank destroyers could work. Anyway weaponry would be limited to LMG, GPMG, ATMG, low pressure cannons, possibly high pressure cannons for tank detroyers. No rapid firing weapons above GPMG.
  10. Demigan

    You know, as Gundem already pointed out there is this thing of "range compression" going on in PS2.

    Look at the "continents". These entire "continents" are no more than 10x10km. Biolabs are supposed to be something akin to hospitals and food production for the entire continent in one go, most of the larger bases, most notably the Tech plant, are actually part of the space-ships they used to get to the planet. These spaceships were pretty darn big, the remainder of the fleet still housing in the tens of thousands of people while in a Techplant you would be hard-pressed to get 200 people crammed in there with some space left to move.

    So we can assume that everything happens on a much larger scale, the game is just compressed so that we can understand and enjoy it much easier. We can assume that the size compression is far more than 16 times, meaning that the tanks in PS2 are actually pretty close to "real life".

    Ofcourse the tanks in PS2 are worth as much as 120 dollars if you look at the price of C4. This is an easy explanation as to why 90% of the infantry gear is completely free, and even why tankshells, which are normally pretty darn expensive, are completely free to buy.

    Also keep in mind that when they never intended to go to Auraxis, that they lost more than half of their spaceships getting there and that they only had scientific equipment to measure but nothing to build. So we can assume that everything they have in weapons and armor had to be re-invented. Add the nanotechnology which allows them to build things on a nanoscale and that explains the rest: Why players are relatively tough to see on heat vision Why players are capable of running&gunning with relatively low loss of accuracy, especially considering the size compression. Why the tanks are so "vulnerable", since if you can construct something complex with nanites within a second, it would be far easier to create deconstructor nanites that randomly deconstruct things, since these are easier to make they are free. Add deconstruction nanites designed to deconstruct specific things like tank armor and you can explain why some weapons deal more damage to one target and less to another.
  11. Savadrin

    Range compression is the answer, as others have stated.

    And I find it hilarious that we are always having a reality fight in a game where you push a button and literally watch a vehicle get fabricated from nanite soup in 2 seconds before your eyes. Except those aren't your eyes, you're made of nanites which is why you don't die when you...die.

    In actual war, most weapons are designed to nullify human reaction time, because the object is to kill, and they stay dead, you win.

    In this game, you need to feel like you've got a fighting chance. PS2 is already straight chaos and mysterious death for any new player. Giving real life velocities/mitigation would put the uninstall rate in the first day up around 99.7%
    • Up x 1
  12. Ghoest

    Actually you can.

    Recoil in game is not particularly out of line with normal weapons we use now.
    You can look at shot gun patterns and compare to we use. And they use slugs.
    Most helmets ave open faces.
    Players strength is roughly that of asimilurly builtpreoffessional athlete.
    Extremely slow traveling massively heavy projectiles is not a good way to increasing penetration or damage over modest velocity with correspondingly less mass..