Alena Ventrallis
Osmon Surveillance
Caldari State
5
   |
Posted - 2013.07.15 05:15:00 -
[1] - Quote
Poonmunch wrote:This is actually a fairly good observation. The speed of 8m/s translates to 28 km/hr (17mph). The fastest human sprinter (Usain Bolt) runs 100m in 9.58s. This is 10.4m/s, which translates to 37 km/hr (23mph). We are pretty fast thanks to our drop suits.
The explosive damage radius seems a bit small to me, but I'm not any kind of expert. Are there any people of the military persuasion who could help us with the numbers on this?
Munch
The ranges given for dust are laughable to military technology today. The M16 has a max effective range on a point target (read: human) of 550 meters. That's about 5 football fields and change. For qualification the farthest range shot is 500m mark at a Bmodified target (read, human sillouette) and I can personally hit it 9 times out of 10 in the black (not necessarily right where I'm aiming, but close enough that my round would be hitting the man somewhere on his body.) The max effective range of the AK-47, which in gun circles isn't known for its accuracy at range, can hit a man reliably at 300m. 30m is about the max effective range of the M9 pistol.
The reason for this accuracy is that modern troops are trained to take single, well aimed shots in lieu of spray-and-pray tactics. Part of the Rifleman's Creed reads "My rifle and I know that what counts in this war is not the rounds we fire, the noise of our burst, nor the smoke we make. We know that it is the hits that count. We will hit..."
Now I understand that the technology is different in EVE, and we can't expect such performance from the weapons we have (hitting a red at 500m with an AR, can you hear the screaming?) However, the ranges of all weapons should be buffed WITHIN REASON. Part of the advantage of firearms over other weapons of ancient war (sword, spear, bow and arrow) is simply one of range. An arrow causes far more damage than most modern rounds (excluding large calibers such as .50, which is technically an anti-materiel rifle designed to shoot equipment, not people) however, I can hit you with my rifle at far greater ranges than the bow, which is a far bigger advantage. I could go on (Spent 4 years in the military, and I'm a huge geek when it comes to military history) but suffice to say that the weapons in DUST are severely lacking, and some effort to buffing range should be made, especially once the larger maps come out.
I've gone severely off-topic, so back to the point. The AR should have maybe 80-200m effective range (lower than modern rifles, to keep it balanced, and lore wise blaster technology isn't that accurate) and then modify the other weapons to be balanced to that. For missiles, that will be a lot tougher to make realistic without turning it into the ridiculous OP it was pre-nerf. The 60mm mortar used by the Marine Corps has a kill radius of 35m, which even with the current faulty dust measurements is insane, so maybe if CCP fixes the range counter then an accurate 2.5m radius would be balanced, with a reduced ROF to avoid spam attacks (give reds time to find cover and avoid your assault.)
Sorry for the wall of text. :/ |
Alena Ventrallis
Osmon Surveillance
Caldari State
7
|
Posted - 2013.07.16 07:39:00 -
[2] - Quote
Or we would get vehicles to transport us over those distances. Dropships are already in place, but APCs are another option. In any case, having more realistic weapon ranges would make combat feel a lot more realistic (with an AR, even if I could throw a rock and hit the guy, my damage is reduced?) and would eliminate a lot of the annoyance of running over open fields dodging snipers and forge gunners just to get in weapons range. Especially if they do open up the maps like they say they are, and objectives do end up 1500m away, 30m AR isn't going to cut it. ESPECIALLY especially if there is a bunch of wide open fields like there is in the red zones now. Then most of the combat will be snipers picking off the people trying to get in range. |