Stiletto Feedback Thread

[Minipily]

Feature Request

Reintroduce the "Spare Barrel" into the Arsenal.

 

I'm requesting this because I'm often finding myself in situations where I'm ordered to lay down large amounts of surpressive fire or otherwise eliminate high amounts of hostile AI, but after so long of shooting at a hostile platoon, my weapon begins to overheat causing huge weapon dispersion and jamming. Overall, that meant I was less effective in my duties, which are to lay down a absolute ass ton of fire.

 

Unsure as to why the spare barrel was removed in the first place, but word of mouth seems to have told me that it was because it slowed down the gameplay, which makes little to no sense considering that it takes longer for me to wait for my barrel to cool down before firing again than it does to quickly swap it out in the field.

 

Again, would appreciate its return as I understand its use and can clearly see the appeal of using it, I certainly have been needing it lately.

[Amentes]

IIRC part of the issue was the Spare Barrel could be used on weapons with no-change barrels.

[Minipily]

35 minutes ago, Amentes said:

IIRC part of the issue was the Spare Barrel could be used on weapons with no-change barrels.

Possibly look into locking the spare barrel to Autoriflemen only?

 

I see no reason why someone would even want to take a spare barrel if they are using anything other than a machine gun.

[GhostDragon]

My big question would be how much do you spray to need a spare barrel honestly I've never needed to change since I started playing modded arma in 2016

[Joebillibob]

5 hours ago, GhostDragon said:

My big question would be how much do you spray to need a spare barrel honestly I've never needed to change since I started playing modded arma in 2016

You clearly are not a believer of the good ol "spray and pray" tactic.

[GhostDragon]

indeed i would rather use the biggest gun in my fireteam to assist the fireteam

[Amentes]

Maybe that's a valid point though?

 

No spare barrel means there's a semi-serious consequence to continuous fire, and thus it might be that continuous fire will happen less frequently?

 

I'm not really for or against, just thinking out loud

[Joebillibob]

1 minute ago, Amentes said:

Maybe that's a valid point though?

 

No spare barrel means there's a semi-serious consequence to continuous fire, and thus it might be that continuous fire will happen less frequently?

 

I'm not really for or against, just thinking out loud

Well it all come down with personal preference.

 

If you know you will auto fire a lot, you can think ahead and bring spare barrel.

 

Be punished if you don't bring it.

[Amentes]

Thing is, there's a reason you don't do it in real life, and why quick-swap barrels are mostly used on machineguns intended to be emplaced.

 

I don't see it as personal preference, I see it as a skilled and an unskilled player

[Joebillibob]

2 hours ago, Amentes said:

I don't see it as personal preference, I see it as a skilled and an unskilled player 

Well now i am offended

 

I get the real life argument, but since AWE is more gameplay focused and less realism/milsim, i would have no problem to see it reintroduced.

 

As always, personal opinion.

[Johnson]

On 5/10/2018 at 7:45 AM, GhostDragon said:

My big question would be how much do you spray to need a spare barrel honestly I've never needed to change since I started playing modded arma in 2016

In the past few weeks where I have been playing Autorifleman quite realistically by putting down multiple bursts of fire to get EI on the move (supressing for Alpha), a spare barrel was certainly required. Yes I wasn't melting my barrel off but the rounds did become so inaccurate that it was needed.

 

SHooting = heat

Heat = less accuracy

Less accuracy = more shooting

More shooting = more heat

More cheese = less cheese

etc.

[Amentes]

If anyone's interested in what a barrel swap looks like on an M249:

 

 

Yes, it's the civilian semi-auto version, but it's the same exact process with all variants.

 

For the M240:

 

 

 

[Zeexe]

3 hours ago, Amentes said:

If anyone's interested in what a barrel swap looks like on an M249:

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

whats wrong with his left thumb ??

[BBFSGaming]

you haven't seen my middle finger then hahah

 

[Stanhope]

Feature request:
Rework how player factions work.  

Currently we have all the gear of one side in the arsenal regardless of the faction.  The only real difference is the vehicles we have access to.  Leading to people wearing whatever they feel like.  Now I don't have a problem with that but I do agree with the people who'd prefer if people were to be using the same faction specific gear.

So my suggestion:

• Create a new faction: private military contractors for each side (blufor/opfor/indep).  Give these factions all the gear and vehicles of their respective side.
• Give the other factions faction specific gear only.  (So US army only gets army vests, weapons, uniforms, vehicles ...  BAF get BAF weapons, uniforms, vehicles, ...)

In the mission params the random blufor param could be either altered to have a 50/50 (numbers up for debate) chance to spawn PMCs or a specific faction.  If the chance for a specific faction triggers one of the specific factions is chosen (Each faction having the same chance).  
Or it could be altered to PMC having the same chance as any of the other factions.

Obviously I'm willing to help create the new faction and help work on the arsenal restrictions.  I also have no problem with doing pretty much all the work and having it reviewed by steering.

[Cellhawk]

I shall take the liberty of posting this generally meaningless reply just to write "I second that".

 

Please do separate UK/US faction arsenals.

[Stanhope]

31 minutes ago, Cellhawk said:

Please do separate UK/US faction arsenals.

That'd be the idea yea, a separate arsenal for each faction.  So army, marines, baf, socom, ...  I'd even go so far as to get a separate arsenal for their different camo patterns so people aren't mixing OCP and UCP.

[hobnob11]

I Wouldn't do camo patterns, because the system that chooses a faction doesn't know which camo's should be used on which maps, so it will for example pick woodland on lythium.

[Stanhope]

13 minutes ago, hobnob11 said:

the system that chooses a faction doesn't know which camo's should be used on which maps, so it will for example pick woodland on lythium.

Doesn't currently know.  It could know, and i have no problem writing that code.

 

Edit: quick draft: https://pastebin.com/HqfrskZB

[Cellhawk]

I'd just settle with UK/US differences. I wouldn't go as far as separating Army from Marines and so on. Separating camo patterns seems even more extreme.

 

You see, going way too far with the factions arsenal we could as well pretty much settle with a default unmoddable kit. We don't want to go anywhere near that, afaik.

[Ryko]

So in the past we've explored this concept, but have decided to leave the arsenal as open ended as possible. Part of the appeal of the AWE server is that you can choose your own interpretation of the scenario: if your character is an IDF soldier or a South Korean spec op attached to US forces, you can choose to play that way. 

 

This philosophy also makes the mission much easier to maintain. If you want to have a scenario where everyone uses the same gear, consider submitting a game night. 

[Noah_Hero]

Sounds like a great idean @Stanhope and even greater considering that you would code it yourself!

 

Feel bad that the idea is just thrown away even though it would only limit the arsenal sometimes and not always wich sounds like a perfectly fair concept to satisfy not only the casuals but also the more serious players...

[Ryko]

28 minutes ago, Noah_Hero said:

Feel bad that the idea is just thrown away

I don't see how that's justified as I explained why Stiletto, and Gauntlet before it, was not structured this way. Locking down the arsenal to a bare minimum is something more akin to what a dedicated milsim server might do, and that's not the spirit of AWE.  You've always been free to choose your own level of realism and immersion, and that's not likely to change, for better or worse.

[Noah_Hero]

6 minutes ago, Ryko said:

I don't see how that's justified as I explained why Stiletto, and Gauntlet before it, was not structured this way. Locking down the arsenal to a bare minimum is something more akin to what a dedicated milsim server might do, and that's not the spirit of AWE.

Because it would still keep the casual approach while giving it a more serious one every once in a while. You could even make it so that it would only be a faction that can be choosen by PlatCo via the Whiteboard so players would only have to play as such if they would want to.

 

7 minutes ago, Ryko said:

You've always been free to choose your own level of realism and immersion

Yes but if you want to have immersion there is no way for you to make others wear faction-specific gear except for submitting gamenights.

[Johnson]

Surly it's at least worth polling for, if loads of people would prefer for the faction gear to be more specific then why not add it?

 

Separating the faction gear would also create a bunch of new scenarios and stuff, like having everything our modpack has to offer a little bit at a time (one day USMC, one day BAF, one day Serbs etc etc) rather than EVERYTHING at once. It would make each faction unique in multiple ways.

 

I'm all for it, I think it's a great idea and as someone who has played on EU#3 for years, I really don't think were swaying into "Realism" or "Milsim", it's just more specifc gear with no impediment on gameplay, still plenty of choice and customization. Would be nice to see everyone on the same side for once, rather than MTP here, MARPAT there etc.