What Weapons For GR:FS

[OldGhost]

With the announcement that GR4 has been delayed, this gives us more time to suggest to the game creators what weapons we would like to see available to the Ghosts. Anything from a pea-shooter to a nuke.

For the assault rifles, I would like to see a variety of calibers from smaller than 5.56 to 50 caliber like the Beowulf. A special purpose 50 caliber round built into an M16/M4 rifle frame. Combat sights are a must but also give us the ability to equip them with a low powered scope.

For sub machine-guns, leave the MP5 to the enemy. Give me the newest stuff like the MP7 or anything based on or around the 6mm round. I did like the idea of the weight limit in GRAW1 but in GR4, give us the ability to equip any sub machine-gun with a combat sight included in the weight limit of the kit. Don't force us to carry a sub machine-gun limited to iron sights in order to be able to carry other things in the kit. I hated that and the weight of a combat sight is so very little more, it should have been included.

For sniper rifles, give us a variety of guns. Some in semiauto and some in bolt-action. And most with box magazines. And give us some really exotic calibers to play with.

As for pistols, I never had much use for them except when I wanted to be really quiet. So a suppressed pistol was a good thing to have. But I would ask the game creaters to build the game in such a way that you could get into situations where a suppressed rifle or sub-machine gun mite alert the enemy but a suppressed pistol would not be herd.

All rifles, pistols, and sub machine-guns should have the ability to be equiped with suppressers.

Anti-armor rockets are mandatory but please PLEASE give us a rocket with some speed and manoeuvrability. In GRAW1 and GRAW2 the Zuse MPAR was no faster than an enemy chopper and this gave the chopper the ability to manoeuvre and fire on you and your squad and the rocket could not catch up until the chopper stopped to hover.

In general, give us lot's of choices of everything and the more exotic the weapon and caliber the better.

Smoke grenades, flash-bangs, and claymores and other goodies are always welcome.

What do you all want to see?

OldGhost.

Edited August 9, 2009 by OldGhost

[oz-ares]

I agree. I liked the weapon selection of GRAW 1.

It tooked 2 months for me to leave GRAW 1 to play GRAW 2 ... because the weapon selection in GRAW 1 was more flexible.

I think "Claymore" and some other "bad surprises" should be added if the graphic is very good. There must be a way to see them.

GR was is and will be the "best" realistic tactical shooter. Plz dont do "Laser-Weapons" and "Mini-Nukes" ^^ ... I think they did a lot of good weapons in the last GR- Titels. Keep it on.

I like the ZEUS. Its not that fast. I think its difficult sometimes to destroy a chopper, but its possible. So plz add the ZEUS again.

But i wont miss the M416 + surpressor

Edited August 6, 2009 by oz-ares

[OldGhost]

"I like the ZEUS. Its not that fast. I think its difficult sometimes to destroy a chopper, but its possible. So plz add the ZEUS again."

Hay.....what can I say? In real life, a rocket is a lot faster than a chopper. That all I'm asking for.

P.S. How can I pull a quote from another post and get it to look like the way you guys post?

OldGhost.

[WhiteKnight77]

"I like the ZEUS. Its not that fast. I think its difficult sometimes to destroy a chopper, but its possible. So plz add the ZEUS again."

Hay.....what can I say? In real life, a rocket is a lot faster than a chopper. That all I'm asking for.

P.S. How can I pull a quote from another post and get it to look like the way you guys post?

OldGhost.

You mean like this?

Click on the button of the post you wish to quote.

[OldGhost]

You mean like this?

That's it baby.

OldGhoat.

RATS. Still didn't work right. Need more info. How do I edit out the stuff I don't want, Keep the stuff I do want, and put it in the "quote" box at the top of my post?

Edited August 7, 2009 by OldGhost

[krise madsen]

Heh, I was going to PM you about this from another thread Send me a PM and I'll give you a crash course

What were we discussing? Oh yeah, weapons.

The developers have to quite a balancing act on their hands with weapons, more so than with an ordinary action shooter: The weapons have to be realistic and authentic. But they also have to be reasonably useful and balanced. And, as OldGhost notes, they have to be "cool".

However, by far the most important issue is realistic behavior, physics and effects. Parameters like weight, size, inertia, recoil etc. must be realistically modelled. Furthermore, and this is important, ballistics, both in terms of trajectory, speed and terminal performance, must be realistic.

The selection of weapons is somewhat less important (hopefully, mod support will enable the community to add just about any weapon they desire), though diversity in performance (i.e. anything from compact assault rifles to heavy sniper rifles) is definately a good thing. Interestingly, both GRAW games missed an opportunity to create a very diverse arsenal with very little developer resource input: The SCAR-L and SCAR-H can both be compact assault carbines, allround assault rifles and long range sniper rifles, merely (more or less) by changing barrel length and sights; thus providing us with a diverse arsenal that covers most (though not all) tactical situations. Unfortunately, the GRAW games chose to keep us stuck with just two options: The medium barrel length SCAR-L and the compact SCAR-H.

EDIT: Rocket- and missile launchers is a tricky issue. I say realism first (unlike GRAW). I really don't mind that I'm screwed if I'm caught out in the open by a helicopter gunship. That would only be realistic. But that's a huge can of worms (or "worm of cans" as Colin likes to put it ) to open as its directly related to tons of other issues, such as the ability to enter buildings.

[Brettzies]

Interestingly, both GRAW games missed an opportunity to create a very diverse arsenal with very little developer resource input: The SCAR-L and SCAR-H can both be compact assault carbines, allround assault rifles and long range sniper rifles, merely (more or less) by changing barrel length and sights; thus providing us with a diverse arsenal that covers most (though not all) tactical situations. Unfortunately, the GRAW games chose to keep us stuck with just two options: The medium barrel length SCAR-L and the compact SCAR-H.

I put a long barrel SCAR-H in the last version of my weapon pack for both GRAWs - second pic down?

I think the GRAW games had one of the best methods for customizing weapons. Essentailly, once built and modded, most weapons had 4 optic sights, suppressor on/off, some had GLs. There were limitations w/anim sets and attachment id#s for coop/mp, but there was nothing stopping it from having a huge arsenal of weapons, other then lack of interest I suppose.

You can see what they did in their design though. One gun, one optic or scope for each - they didn't mix and match. I like the overall way they did it though, pick your weapon, pick your attachments. Of course, they screwed it up in Graw2 with the kit thing again.

[OldGhost]

Krise has it right. All aspects of a weapon must be modeled in order to be convincing. Which is why I have issues with the Zeus beyond what I have written above. It can't be that slow in real life.

[Nutlink]

SCAR L/H, HK416/417, M4, M16, M14, M249, M240, MP5A4 (or A5, prefer A4 and corresponding SD variant), M40A3, M24, Remington 710, Remington 870, and SR-25 should do it for the US side of things, at least for primary weaponry. Of course, the whole GRAW style add-ons would be nice too, especially if we have different optics to choose from.

For sidearms, I'd prefer to see the M1911, M9, USP, G17, Px4, Mk23, Sig P226, and FN Five-seven.

[NoQuarter]

Why even ask?

Why would they bother to include unlimited weapons options in the loadout inventory for the player to have to contend with when, more likely than not, they will just be adding a Directed Energy Weapon for the Cypher UAV (complete w/ different neon colors for the beams settings) and a Rail Gun for the MULE, both fully scripted to allow for a minimum of player input or thought.

Personally, I'd like a nuke and an armchair...but they're going to have to widen out the Tac-Map zone/zoom to make it worthwhile.

Edited August 10, 2009 by NoQuarter

[Tinker]

Couple of silent snipers would be nice.

[Sgt. Atoa]

Why even ask?

Why would they bother to include unlimited weapons options in the loadout inventory for the player to have to contend with when, more likely than not, they will just be adding a Directed Energy Weapon for the Cypher UAV (complete w/ different neon colors for the beams settings) and a Rail Gun for the MULE, both fully scripted to allow for a minimum of player input or thought.

Personally, I'd like a nuke and an armchair...but they're going to have to widen out the Tac-Map zone/zoom to make it worthwhile.

LOL

[GRAWChump]

GRAW2's MSG90 sniper......still the best sniper rifle I've ever come across....and they made the scope slow to activate which meant that it was only useful for long range, thus creating the need for the other mid range weapons.

[Combat_Jack]

I wouldn't mind having a standalone grenade launcher as a secondary weapon. Something like the H&K GL-06 or the FN40GL-S.

Plus, being able to put a high power scope on any rifle would be good.

[mordred]

don't give us 10 weapons, give us a 100!!!!!!

i hate the crappy choice of GRAW, always the same.

Im a sniper, i would love these versions with and without silencer.

m24,sr25,svd and a LOT and a LOT more, but dont forget the SR25!!!!!

Grtz

-M-

[WytchDokta]

Why even ask?

Why would they bother to include unlimited weapons options in the loadout inventory for the player to have to contend with when, more likely than not, they will just be adding a Directed Energy Weapon for the Cypher UAV (complete w/ different neon colors for the beams settings) and a Rail Gun for the MULE, both fully scripted to allow for a minimum of player input or thought.

I heard this too. There will also be a 40,000 kilowatt 2 million rounds per minute phased plasma rifle with built-in motion activated auto ammo replenisher and integrated auto-aim 'aimbot' computerised aiming module - aka "The NoobQannon"

Edited December 6, 2009 by WytchDokta

[oz-ares]

What weapons for GR4 ?!?

I think Brettzies should handle this. I trust him.

The regular weapons in GRAW 1+2 are not that amazing stuff.

But Brettzies Weapon Pack includes awesome stuff like the scopes and silencers.

Regards

Ares

[Clone_Ranger]

Rather than providing us with a plethera of 'guns' I hope more work will be done on accessorizing the weapons there are. Some sort of reward system allowing the player to access custom accessories...

Even flash hiders (in the real world) have a big effect on firearm proficiency. Take the Noveske or DNTC ranges which have a direct affect on the controllability of carbines, making shorter barreled weapons - like the M4 - far more controllable in full-auto mode. And then there are 'blackout' flash hiders like the BE Meyers, which are designed to reduce muzzle flash significantly during night operations.

So let's see accessories take a bigger role in the customization process - with real effects on the efficiency of the weapons they are applied to.

Finally, I would like to see calibers like 6.5mm Grendel and 6.8mm Barrett and even some of the experimental caseless rounds AND what about 'non-lethal' weapons, which is a booming industry?

Just a thought.

(OH and please, please, please can we have the 7.62mm DSA Arms SA58 range included! LOL)

Edited December 23, 2009 by Clone_Ranger

[petsfed]

I found myself occasionally frustrated with GRAW's weapon selection compared to the sequel. The weapon selection system was brilliant, but I just felt like there was insufficient choice in some weapon classes, too much in others, and unclear differentiation between each weapon. GRAW2 added more weapons, but that differentiation remained fuzzy. Whatever the individual weapons, I'd like to see each weapon actually feel different. If the Mk17 CQB is easier to move around but isn't as accurate or controllable as the Mk16 DMR, I'd like to be able to notice the difference. The impact of shorter barrels on effective range and accuracy should be modeled. I never, not even once, noticed any difference between the SCAR-H and the SCAR-L. The M416 felt exactly like the M8. Generally, I picked a firearm more because it looked cool than for any useful characteristics to it. It wasn't until Brettzie's mods that I noticed any difference, and that was between the SCAR-L and the M4, which are very different firearms.

So, for the next GR, I'd like to see the entire SCAR family, with all the pieces and variants (all 7) and what not, then the submachine guns currently issued to USMC, Army, and Navy special operations groups. Likewise with shotguns, sniper rifles, and LMGs. I don't really see the need to have hundreds of rifle models available. I'd love to see proper ballistics as well, with penetration, bullet drop, windage, etc modeled if not completely accurately, then at least in a believable way.

[Kingkat]

I agree. Most weapon systems MUST be customizable. (did I sp that right..?)

I also like true-weapons as well. I like to be able to research them and read about them as they are used in the military.

YEA, Brettzies are the best weps around!!!

[Phlookian]

Actually, I'm going to come at this from the opposite direction.

GR (as well as most other shooters i've played) seem to develop superior weaponry as a counter balance to an unreasonable enemy AI.

For example: the enemy may be able to turn on a sixpence, sight, aim and fire all in the space of about 3 milliseconds (this is especially true of the GRAW series) but the ghosts have better scopes. Therefore, if we do a bit of sneaky stuff we can outmaneouvre them.

This doesn't lead to a convincing firefight.

I'd much rather have the weapons modelled accurately in relation to the AKM's or whatever the tango's are using but have the rest of the game balanced to enable the subtle difference.

In addition to this, the load-out regarding secondaries and ammunition should reflect real world limitations and have some impact upon gameplay (has anyone actually picked extra ammo as a GR1 secondary?)

The danger of an ammo shortage is something I've yet to see in any shooter.

Lastly, if something like the SCAR is to be the prime weapon, I'd like to see an actual advantage to picking 7.62 ammo (I assume I just lost 10 rounds from my clip so what did I gain?)

Just my 2 cents

[krise madsen]

I found myself occasionally frustrated with GRAW's weapon selection compared to the sequel. The weapon selection system was brilliant, but I just felt like there was insufficient choice in some weapon classes, too much in others, and unclear differentiation between each weapon. GRAW2 added more weapons, but that differentiation remained fuzzy. Whatever the individual weapons, I'd like to see each weapon actually feel different. If the Mk17 CQB is easier to move around but isn't as accurate or controllable as the Mk16 DMR, I'd like to be able to notice the difference. The impact of shorter barrels on effective range and accuracy should be modeled. I never, not even once, noticed any difference between the SCAR-H and the SCAR-L. The M416 felt exactly like the M8. Generally, I picked a firearm more because it looked cool than for any useful characteristics to it. It wasn't until Brettzie's mods that I noticed any difference, and that was between the SCAR-L and the M4, which are very different firearms.

The thing is, the SCAR-L, M8 and HK416 are pretty much identical (roughly the same size, weight and barrel length, and firing the exact same ammo) so they ought to have almost identical performance. Which one you thought was the most cool really was the primary parameter. It's also why while it's nice to have lots of modern 5.56mm assault rifles to choose from, it' not terribly important.

While the basic principle of weapon customization was spot-on, one thing GRAW got horribly wrong was the rock-paper-scissors balancing act. A scope actually improving the physical accuracy of the weapon? Or the vertical grip reducing it? Really?

[petsfed]

The thing is, the SCAR-L, M8 and HK416 are pretty much identical (roughly the same size, weight and barrel length, and firing the exact same ammo) so they ought to have almost identical performance. Which one you thought was the most cool really was the primary parameter. It's also why while it's nice to have lots of modern 5.56mm assault rifles to choose from, it' not terribly important.

While the basic principle of weapon customization was spot-on, one thing GRAW got horribly wrong was the rock-paper-scissors balancing act. A scope actually improving the physical accuracy of the weapon? Or the vertical grip reducing it? Really?

Having not shot any of them, I really have no idea about equivalencies. If the only determining factor is "what will make my character look better?" we may as well play Barbie: Horse Adventures. At least then we'd be upfront about it.

Basically, I want clearcut differentiations between the weapons so that making a choice actually impacts the way I approach a mission.

There is some merit to the idea of changing the accuracy of the weapon based on the sight type, but since we had rendered iron sights, not old-school GR style crosshairs, the impact was already there. No need to program it in twice. I was so hopelessly inured to the way the world actually works that I consistently chose the vertical grips despite the in-game performance hit to accuracy. Similarly, I'd love to see the evidence for this gameplay dogma that suppressors necessarily cause lower accuracy and lower muzzle velocity. Unless its an integrated suppressor or it has rubber wipers that actually contact the bullet in the can, how does it slow the bullet down or induce some shot-to-shot instability that wasn't there to begin with?

[krise madsen]

Having not shot any of them, I really have no idea about equivalencies. If the only determining factor is "what will make my character look better?" we may as well play Barbie: Horse Adventures. At least then we'd be upfront about it.

Basically, I want clearcut differentiations between the weapons so that making a choice actually impacts the way I approach a mission.

I haven't shot any of them either, but it's fairly logical that weapons of roughly the same proportions firing the same ammunition are going to have fairly similar performance.

If you want clearcut differentiations, then you need more differentiations in the weapons availible, which more or less boils down to different calibers and different barrel lengths. Of course, a lot of games simply warp the performance of weapons that should have been near identical in order to give some variation, but that means realism goes right out the window.

There is some merit to the idea of changing the accuracy of the weapon based on the sight type,

Not really. Regardless of what sight is mounted on the weapon, the bullet exits the muzzle in the same manner. All sights do is help the shooter align the aim point with th etarget.

I was so hopelessly inured to the way the world actually works that I consistently chose the vertical grips despite the in-game performance hit to accuracy. Similarly, I'd love to see the evidence for this gameplay dogma that suppressors necessarily cause lower accuracy and lower muzzle velocity. Unless its an integrated suppressor or it has rubber wipers that actually contact the bullet in the can, how does it slow the bullet down or induce some shot-to-shot instability that wasn't there to begin with?

This was a fairly obvious case of rock-paper-scissors game play balancing, the way a lot of games does it. It just didn't jive with a realistic shooter.

[petsfed]

There is some merit to the idea of changing the accuracy of the weapon based on the sight type,

Not really. Regardless of what sight is mounted on the weapon, the bullet exits the muzzle in the same manner. All sights do is help the shooter align the aim point with th etarget.

I understand the physics. I mean that the same person, firing the same gun, same rate of fire, same shooting position, same target, same distance will not have identical groups with iron-sights vs. a scope. The reason for this is that the sight picture will be different so the same apparent shot from one round to another with iron sights will have a larger variance than with the scope.

As I pointed out though, programming the differentiation is only worthwhile if you don't simulate the differences between scope and iron-sights some other way (namely, how its done in all modern shooters).