This is all wrong.Īs for Arma 3, all it needs is a bit of AI tuning, so it has more trouble finding you and returning fire, when you have a suppressor and engage from a distance. On the other side of the barricade, are stealth games, where you can shoot someone with a suppressed weapon and another person, sitting next to him, won't notice a thing. Others cut weapon's damage or accuracy like in half. For example, current Arma 3 bullets are slightly weaker, when shot through a suppressor and I can't find any reason or physical principle, to explain or validate such behaviour. So in reality there are more good than bad consequences of having a suppressor, yet game designers invent artificial disadvantages, supposedly in the name of "balance". Sure, you won't find suppressors in regular infantry units, but it's almost guaranteed, that special forces field them everywhere where possible, because of all the advantages. added maintenance (negligible from a gameplay point of view, because we don't have weapon maintenance and cleaning anyway).longer weapon (could make more trouble indoors).I'm not sure here, but probably the amount of dirt kicked up, when shooting in prone position, is reduced as well.your weapon is much quieter and while you can't shoot people "James Bond style", the distance of detection is reduced.recoil is reduced (the exact amount of reduction depends on a given weapon).muzzle flash won't give your position away at night.the enemy can't hear the direction you're shooting from (the enemy hears muffled muzzle sounds and bullets' supersonic cracks, so he knows that someone is shooting, but the characteristics of such sounds prevent direction estimation, the sound appears as coming from everywhere at the same time).Suppressor, even with standard bullets, offers a number of advantages: On the other hand, I don't think that current suppressors are overpowered. In Arma 2, my favourite combination was suppressed weapon + supersonic bullets and it really made a difference, when used properly. It would make everyone happy, if implemented correctly, for example without forcing subsonic ammunition only, when using suppressor. I agree, that Arma3 needs two types of bullets: standard and silent (supersonic and subsonic, respectively). Note: There's a good reason modern armies are barely using silencers, mainly because the range of the weapon would be significantly decreased and subsonic ammo is more expensive though. Slow bullets that are fired with silenced weapons down below the speed of sound.(In case Subsonic ammo is not going to be implemented into the game)ĭecrease the maximum range of subsonic bullets/silenced weapons. My suggestions to make silenced weapons more realistic:Īdd in Subsonic Ammunition but make it possible to use supersonic and subsonic ammunition in all weapons, regardless wheter it has a silencer or not(that wasn't implemented realistically in ArmA2 as well btw.) Currently in ArmA 3 there is no reason not to use a silencer, the weapon will still have the same accuracy, same range, same bullet drop behaviour, same bullet speed and various other effects which would never occur in real life, especially not when using subsonic ammunition which would usually be mandatory to use in order to get a weapon actually silenced, thus currently silenced weapons are just regular weapons with different sounds and a barrel extension, this is not only kind of game breaking because everybody is using these "broken" weapons to take out enemies from ridiculously far distances without getting detected at all, but it is also physically impossible because while using supersonic ammunition the bullet will still emit a sonic boom which can't be heard while using silenced weapons in ArmA3 as well while the bullet still flies at supersonic speeds.
0 Comments
Leave a Reply. |
AuthorWrite something about yourself. No need to be fancy, just an overview. ArchivesCategories |