[madrebel]

<BLOCKQUOTE><font size="1" face="Tahoma, Verdana, Arial">quote:</font><HR>Originally posted by [K@TZ]Tom:
Why limit grenades to 2? I read a veteran's tale of the storming of Omaha beach (he was an explosives dude in the 2nd wave) and he said he was armed with one of those explosive poles, a sachel charge, an M1, and ten grenades. Ten.

Why two? This is a realism mod, correct?

<HR></BLOCKQUOTE>wow the guy was armed to the teeth for the largest invasion in modern times. get out of here youve got to be kidding me.

that wasnt AVERAGE. on average soldiers had few to no grenades.

[madrebel]

<BLOCKQUOTE><font size="1" face="Tahoma, Verdana, Arial">quote:</font><HR>Originally posted by LordLovat:
that is a GREAT picture of the cat, L O L

very gunny

anyway, regardless of how cheap the M1 was, if it was not highly accurate and extremely deadly from long range (200 yards was an easy kill) they would have never used it.<HR></BLOCKQUOTE>200 yards is NOT 3 miles. actually the ratin for the m1 was 300 yards was the kill range. after 300 yards the bullet would tumble and just wound.

which isnt a bad thing because a wounded soldier takes on average 3 people to care for him

a dead soldeir takes 1 to dig a hole

also, never forget your weapon is built by the lowest bidder.

[[K@TZ]Tom]

<BLOCKQUOTE><font size="1" face="Tahoma, Verdana, Arial">quote:</font><HR>Originally posted by madrebel:
wow the guy was armed to the teeth for the largest invasion in modern times. get out of here youve got to be kidding me.

that wasnt AVERAGE. on average soldiers had few to no grenades.<HR></BLOCKQUOTE>

I kid you not.
http://www.ddaymuseum.org/oral_histo...ry_story3.html

------------------

[madrebel]

obviously your sarcasm radar is turned off.

[[K@TZ]Tom]

Obviously I made you look like an ass.

------------------

10 grenades at the first moment of the largest invasion in history was certainly possible, particularly if the guy new an ordinance officer.

but you can bet he did not have 10 ever again after that day, except when he was coming back from R&R behind the lines. For one thing they are BOMBS. Bombs go boom. Sometimes even when they are in your pocket.

But as for limiting grenades, this is a GAME and in the real war you did not have most of the soldiers running down the street at full gallop throwing grenades left and right because they knew they would be allowed to get up and brush the dust off of them after they got "killed". If you were close enough to the enemy to actually throw a grenade at them you were closer than anyone wanted to be.

Anyway, typical General Issue in the American soldier was two fragmentation grenades and then typically one phosphorus grenade or similar specialized grenade for concussion or what have you. Some even had Gammon bombs, but G.I. was two frags and one special grenade of some type.

Also, the grenades in the game travel a LONG way. I suspect longer than the average Joe/Fritz could toss them in real life.

They might have thrown them a ways but I dont think they would hit and then travel on the ground as far as they do.

[true]

Imo, and i've been playing ONLY realism since it came out on the -W- server, limiting the # of specific guns per team isn't needed. Here are my reasons:

(note: assume the team size is 12 people)

1) if a team has an overbalanced # of guns on their side, like 8 snipers, or maybe one round they have 7 MG's, the team won't win once the opposing team realizes this, here's why:

If EVERYONE had MG's, when they tried to run w/ them out in the open or line up a shot from a foxhole, an opposing team with any skill at all could easily snipe the hell out of them and win the match. If Axis had a load of snipers, Allied could penetrate using MG cover fire and nades and easily overtake the sniper positions.

2) In a match, the team leader would be an idiot if he let everyone choose whatever weapon they wanted. You need to have a balanced team composition in terms of good snipers, good MGers, good penetrators, etc., as well as good weapon distribution. If a leader let his teammates do whatever they wanted the enemy team would easily win the match.

3) If you *WERE* to limit the # of guns in public play, how would you then determine who gets to have what weapon? What if some newbies are using all the rifles and you just want to snipe?

4) Limiting # of weapon types in public play would make the game less fun, thus less sales, less playability and replay value, etc.

To sum it all up, my point is this: People will regulate themselves. If they refuse to then they will lose. If someone can't play the game the way they want to they simply won't play it.

It all balances out just fine as it is; the only way to over or underbalance it from this point would be to design a map in which a team with several weapons of the same type would win uncontested. So lets not fuck it up with bad map design =).

(p.s.: stop arguing about history, you're missing the whole point of why the thread was created in the first place. This obviously isn't real life, realism mod was just an attempt to make the gameplay less homosexual)

------------------
-W- true
Team Wolfpack

[This message has been edited by true (edited January 16, 2002).]

not sure how you do a quote so

"200 yards is NOT 3 miles. actually the ratin for the m1 was 300 yards was the kill range. after 300 yards the bullet would tumble and just wound.
which isnt a bad thing because a wounded soldier takes on average 3 people to care for him

a dead soldeir takes 1 to dig a hole

also, never forget your weapon is built by the lowest bidder."

One of the kids killed at Kent State by an M1 was a MILE away from the the guardsman, and the bullet is suspected to have passed THROUGH two other people on the way.


[This message has been edited by LordLovat (edited January 16, 2002).]

[true]

<BLOCKQUOTE><font size="1" face="Tahoma, Verdana, Arial">quote:</font><HR>"(p.s.: stop arguing about history, you're missing the whole point of why the thread was created in the first place. This obviously isn't real life, realism mod was just an attempt to make the gameplay less homosexual)"<HR></BLOCKQUOTE>

------------------
-W- true
Team Wolfpack

[Ydiss]

Ever seen an excellent player who knows how to use the Mauser play the game without the realism mod? Until you have I'd not go suggesting it's useless without being beefed up.

To see the Mauser even more powerful in this guy's hands would be scary.

Realism mod is fine and dandy for those who want to play it.

I think it's just a cop out for those who don't want to learn a gun properly. Reaslistic or not, it's just a quick fix for players who haven't the patience to use a gun how it's supposed to be used.

Btw, I've seen a lot of people say the Mauser is pointless 'cos 'you may as well use the sniper rifle'.

Try shooting a sniper rifle at someone 100 yards away on the move without using the scope and you'll see why the Mauser is a fine alternative. Mauser is incredibly accurate at range without a scope, and does a ton more damage than the Garand.

It's also way cooler to use. If someone can use the Mauser and kill a lot of players consistently, you know they're good.

CPR just takes that away. Anyone who only plays on CPR servers with rifles and thinks they're Gods of the game need to try and learn it the hard way for once.

I can tell you it's a lot more satisfying.

I don't mind the grenades and rockets being limited, so much. However, that's still just a cheap way to avoid death by those devices. I prefer to learn how to avoid them, rather than just cut them out.

But I don't need my SMG improved, thanks. Nor my Mauser, or Garand.

My choice, of course. As it is the choice of those who only play CPR to do so. Those who play CPR must enjoy it and that is all that matters. I just see it as a pussy way out and always will.

If I played CPR all the time I'd always have it at the back of my mind that I won each game with a little help of a mod.

Sorry, couldn't live with that

The funny thing is it's the very people who complain that shotguns, bazookas and grenades are cheap that have created this mod.

So... The shotgun's cheap, but changing the game to make it easier for you to beat them isn't?

Cynical way of looking at it, seeing as the mod is probably just to make the game more enjoyable for you, but it's a fairly clear point all the same.

-----------





[This message has been edited by Ydiss (edited January 16, 2002).]

[madrebel]

do you beleive everything?

you know oswald only firied one bullet and i passed through kennedy 3 times from 3 different directions.

in short your trippin if you think a .30 cal bullet could pass through 2 bodies, then travel a mile and kill another person. that is plain stupidity.

[snow]

The latest version is great in terms of the rifles - the garand and mauser seem spot on - I wouldn't touch them.

I would give snipers only 1 grenade though.

Perhaps include options to limit snipers on some maps. Apparently on the MP omaha, it's just no fun because EVERYbody just chooses a sniper...not exactly fast paced like it should be

[true]

hence my proclamation that the only way to go wrong from this point is bad mapping =)

------------------
-W- true
Team Wolfpack

[madrebel]

ydiss you would get owned on my server

im very good with the mauser and the garand. in both cpr and normal. oh and no scopin the sniper rifle is just as accurate as the mauser. but why wouldnt you zoom at range with the sniper rifle that is just stoopid. close range they are equally accurate on the move.

point is. these 2 weapons were the MAIN STAY of the war. you had to be a specialist to get an automatic.

wtf is the point of a ww2 themed game if youre not going to stick to the theme?

[This message has been edited by madrebel (edited January 16, 2002).]

[Ydiss]

Bring it on

CPR or not.

------------------