PDA

View Full Version : Please read (backpack bulk suggestion)


Elite_Soldier
5th Aug 2001, 12:52 PM
I have been contemplating this for days, and have been weighing the consequences of it, and the positive benefits. I have also weighed the realism of it, and it tips highly in this favor.

All INF soldiers and player models wear backpacks, right? These are assumed to carry stuff... food, radio equipment, extra fatigues, sleeping bags and whatnot. All that stuff has weight to it. And as far as I can tell, this is a MILITARY simulation, with soldiers that lug stuff around with them; not special forces who only carry what they need for a one day operation.

So all that stuff in backpacks has a BULK value. Now, this suggestion would GREATLY limit carrying multiple weapons, as well as obscene running speeds.

It simply involves giving every player an initial bulk of 10, regardless of whatever else they may carry.

Before I get flamed for adding restrictions to players, think about it. People carrying multiple weapons now will be TOTALLY screwed, because they will be so damn slow, its not worth it. Snipers no longer have to deal with pistol maniacs running olympic speeds with the pistol they are holding. And with the new inertia system in place effected by bulk (I think), people will be alot more careful running around ledges, and running in general. And it reflects total realism, because right now packs are just there for nothing; giving them a bulk value would fix things.

Please tell me what you think. I think a bulk value of 10 would be just right for a pack that size. Any other suggestions/opinions?

Kisen_K
5th Aug 2001, 01:33 PM
Maybe INF's 0 bulk value is already including all the standard field equipment eh?

Or just slow down the movement in general...

NotBillMurray
5th Aug 2001, 02:25 PM
I'm with Kisen. I think the initial bluk of zero represents clothing and backpack supplies. So the initial bulk of 10 is implied. If they made the backpack optional, then this idea would be required.

A_Rimmerlister
5th Aug 2001, 06:46 PM
I think the roadmap once mentioned something like choosing to use a backpack or not (and thus gaining the use of 'extra bulk' & space for weapons).
Add some movement-restrictions (like a 'rolling'-move for ppl without a backpack) and you've got a neat system :)

Elite_Soldier
6th Aug 2001, 04:59 PM
But if everyone had an initial bulk of zero, than we have olympic class sprinters, carrying pistols and a few magazines. Has anyone ever outran your iron sights aiming on EP? Not the case in reality, not even sprinters can dodge bullets. By giving everybody an inital bulk value, people will now be even more careful carrying around too many weapons, and firing ammo like no tomrrow because they have to carry more. And it would make the M16/m203/acog combo even LESS desirable, because the player would be a tortoise than.

A_Rimmerlister
6th Aug 2001, 06:21 PM
Now if there was a backpack-option then it would be different :
the backpack itself could be assigned a bulkvalue, so people with the backpack would be (somewhat) slower. The reason being that running with a backpack (even if it's empty) isn't as "comfortable" (bulk is more than just weight ...) as running without a backpack ...

What's the use of a default bulk-value for everyone ?
You might just as well lower the speeds across the board, because that has the exact same effect.

Elite_Soldier
6th Aug 2001, 06:26 PM
You COULD theoretically just lower everyone's speed across the board, but it would be more realistic to give the backpack a bulk value. And I don't think the value "0" takes this into account, because you run too damn fast if this is true. So a bulk value of 10 would more accurately reflect how a fully outfitted combat troop would run and manuever. Adding to this weapons, ammunition and other accessories, and you have a standard trooper. Without the initial bulk value, we basically have a bunch of naked guys with guns (in weight terms). And although you don't use most of th stuff in the bag (rations, communications equipment, personal stuff etc.), it should still be there, and weighted as such, to reflect realism. And improve gameplay.