- Best Roleplayer of 2012
- Posts: 4798
- Joined: Sat Jan 23, 2010 12:23 pm
- Ingame name: K Barklay - N Geller
- Location: #CRENSHAW
Like someone above me suggested, I would suggest making the damage of weapons like UZI's and TEC9s a little higher aswell. They are almost unused, while realistically a perfect weapon in a drive by or gang attack.
- - Silver Member -
- Posts: 625
- Joined: Sat Oct 25, 2014 6:41 pm
- Location: United Kingdom
The fact that a rifle is "military grade" means nothing in terms of how much damage it does. It is nonsense to say that the M4 should do more damage simply because "it's a military grade carbine"; carbine just means it has a shorter barrel than the "regular" version. The M4 Carbine in reality fires .223 Remington (AKA 5.56x45mm NATO) rounds in either semi-automatic or 3-round-burst mode (already "realism" is out the window), whereas the Desert Eagle fires .50 Action Express or .44 Magnum rounds (amongst others). Here's a comparison of what the two can do to a water container:Userone wrote:I personally wish all firearms to be deadly, because that's how they are in real life and I don't see any problem with that. Right now an M4 deals less damage per shot then a Desert Eagle, but because it has fully-automatic firemode and 50 bullets in one clip with high firerate we think that's too OP. Fact is - a carbine military grade rifle should be deadly. If we're talking realism - why does a handgun do more damage with each bullet in comparison to an assault rifle?
Many people have survived being shot in the chest by both rounds. To say that they should quickly kill anybody is ridiculous; in 2011, a congresswoman (Gabrielle Giffords) was shot in the head (right in the forehead too - not even a cheeky jaw hit) by a man carrying a Glock 19, firing 9x19mm rounds. Five years later, she is still alive. Other people were also shot that day, including a 74 year old, who is also still alive. "Guns are deadly" doesn't mean that guns are going to kill you if you get shot. Especially not with today's medicine.
You're right, it's not realistic. But neither is having a bunch of M4s around the place. The ideal way would be to have the price of M4s go up the more there are to discourage people from buying them, but alas this is not an ideal world. I agree, though, the current climate is good enough.Userone wrote:In my opinion the way it is now is alright, if there's an abundance of M4's all over the place(which in my opinion there isn't) - decreasing damage of an M4 is not a realistic solution, it's people trying to balance the game, and that would be great if this was a DM server, but this is a roleplay server.
Whatever you roleplay your Desert Eagle as, the fact of the matter is, it's a Desert Eagle that fires .50 AE rounds. You could roleplay your Desert Eagle as a Glock 33 Compact but that won't change the damage. I do agree that the TEC-9 and MAC-10 damages should be increased, but making the TEC-9 damage the same as the Desert Eagle based on the fact that a lot of people roleplay the Desert Eagle as a 9mm Glock 17 is farcical. The MAC-10 can be chambered in both 9mm and .45 ACP so who's to say that the damage should be changed to that of the Colt .45 instead of the Desert Eagle?Userone wrote:Uzi and Tec-9 do 15 damage per hit, that's right 15 damage per hit. Both of them use the same caliber the Glock uses(which we commonly RP as a Desert Eagle) yet somehow making weapons sub-machine guns they do 3 times less damage. If we want realism - we need to increase Uzi and Tec-9 damage.
My point is, the size of a cartridge shouldn't be the determining factor of how much damage the weapon does. While yes, firearms are deadly, there are far too many people on LS-RP that don't fear dying and so bring a gun into every situation possible. With this said, there doesn't need to be an incentive to use guns even more. If you suddenly have a major advantage because you shoot first, everyone is going to try to get the first shot off in any tense situation. At least the current system allows a somewhat fair fight even in the event you're caught off guard, and doesn't give a reason for people to shoot unnecessarily.
Having nuclear weapons should be to deter, not to gamble on who launches the first rocket. Make all guns "realistically" deadly and we may as well be playing with nukes. In the name of fairness and balance, however, MAC-10s and TEC-9s should get a damage buff, I agree.
Who is online
Users browsing this forum: No registered users and 1 guest