View Full Version : Prone Stance and a few niggles...

6th Oct 2005, 03:05 PM
I would like there to be a prone stance if possible.

Also in my opinion the weapon recoil needs reducing slightly, especially for the pistols.
Thanks for your time.

I also think smoke grenades would be an interesting idea.

6th Oct 2005, 06:26 PM
Thanks for the suggestions! We'll keep them in mind :)

7th Oct 2005, 10:16 AM
I think some sort of indicator as to how many turrets there are on the map for the mechanic is in order also. For instance one that shows how many there are and how many more you can build before all the slots are filled.

7th Oct 2005, 10:30 AM
Your 2nd request will make it into our new redesigned HUD thats coming up in 1.1

8th Oct 2005, 08:28 AM
First off, Thank you for all your time!

In regard to turret balancing issues, a possible suggestion would be to make them have limited ammo, thus needing mechanics to re-fill them. (I can't quite remember but didn't the turrets in DA need refilling?)

8th Oct 2005, 09:21 AM
yes this is true... but its something we could look at. Say if a Turret was fireing non stop for 2 minutes it would run out of ammo otherwise the mechs would be running all over the place, as atm they are kept busy rebuilding.

However some of the newer turrets like the ones which fire rockets could require refilling only (not in beta 1.0)

8th Oct 2005, 10:17 AM
Yeah, the machinegun turrets aren't too bad but the "crusher" turrets and other powerful ones should need refilling.

8th Oct 2005, 01:52 PM
I also think it would be a good idea if the turrets need to be refilled. But why dont let the machine gunner or medic do it. In later versions there could be a comperativeley weak laser turret that doesnt need to be refilled.

The ability to deploy the MG on sandbags or while proning would also be a nice feature.

Besides it is a really great game.

10th Oct 2005, 06:21 AM
I really would dislike it if DA2 had a prone stance. This is suppose to be an arcade game with lots of action not a camper sim. Prone stance does not encourage exciting fast game play which as far as i can tell, is what this game is aimed at providing.

10th Oct 2005, 06:59 AM
I dont think prone stance will be added, dont forget they are already cloaked when they stand still ;) I think a prone sniper on a hill somewhere will be impossible to detect... Thats why we added sniper fire trail to help you find where they came from.

10th Oct 2005, 08:16 AM
should have a glint of light flashing off the scope on sniper rifle

10th Oct 2005, 09:49 AM
My opinion on proning is: preferably not.. It's not really that neccessary, crouching does the job very well..

And about the recoil.. I'm not sure it should be reduced, but sometimes i get the idea that its not very reliable: Sometimes when i shoot the shotgun my crosshair barely moves, and sometimes I'm watching the sky after I shoot.. Is this in the game? or Is my sensitivity way too high and am I drinking too much coffee?

10th Oct 2005, 09:57 AM
Please DONT take the recoil off. . .
its perfect, it stops noobs who cant aim and find targets from pwning.
Prone sounds slow and unlogical, imo, go play infiltration or some realism mod :?

10th Oct 2005, 10:13 AM
I was asking in the last post about the recoil, but i think i know what was the problem...

I think in the situations where i was "looking at the sky" I was probably in the air at the time i fired the shotgun.. (i saw in another thread that being in the air doubles your recoil)

10th Oct 2005, 10:19 AM
I think it's when u manage to hit someone, the recoil is doubled aswell.

10th Oct 2005, 10:21 AM
Hmm, the flame (if you can call it that) wasn't directed at you. . .
My opinion on recoil is just that, its perfect for the sniper rifle and assault rifle, i dont play the other classes too often, i dont really like the anti-armor supports' handgun but, all in all I think weapon recoil / power distribution is fine.
Prone just has no place in da.

10th Oct 2005, 10:30 AM
I think it's when u manage to hit someone, the recoil is doubled aswell.

:rolleyes: nope...

In what way would that make sense ? As far as the code goes, you get recoil before anything hits another player, in a way, its client based (i.e. has nothing to do with you hitting another player).
You might just notice the recoil more when your trying to shoot someone because its more annoying, because your trying to shoot them. . .
As far as i can tell, recoil is ) increased when running, more notecable when zoomed in, increased when jumping, slightly random.

10th Oct 2005, 12:06 PM
Let me give a hint...If you sit behind sandbags or bunker emplacements the code reduces your recoil by a lot, what we call "supported fire"

New hud will ensure you get an indicator for this.

10th Oct 2005, 01:17 PM
i noticed that when i was playing machine gunner last game. . .
very very cool.

10th Oct 2005, 03:23 PM
Yeah, some more feedback about your accuracy would be nice... ^^.. (I had *NO* idea that i had more accuracy from cover)

A bit weird to have a number saying "1.3 Recoil Modifier" in screen.. but i'm sure there are some creative ways of doing this..

(for example the Crosshairs in Call of Duty, crosshair becomes bigger when you walk or run, and smaller when you lie down, depending on your weapon)

10th Oct 2005, 04:17 PM
Hmm, good thinking. . . sadly I doubt it would work with a crosshair, seeing as that would indicate actual accuracy, not recoil.

The team can proboably think of a creative workaround though, mbe a small bar on the left hand side, high for lots of recoil low for little, dunno, lots of ideas as always ^_°

10th Oct 2005, 04:29 PM
Yeah true, a crosshair is for accuracy, but in most games the size of the crosshair doesnt actually match the size of your cone, so it could as well be an indication for the entire recoil/accuracy thing.. Just incalculating all factors that calculate how "stable" you are..

10th Oct 2005, 05:30 PM
Let me give a hint...If you sit behind sandbags or bunker emplacements the code reduces your recoil by a lot, what we call "supported fire"

New hud will ensure you get an indicator for this.

Ahh, that's interesting, thank you for the clarification!