Pistoleer Archive
Thread: Why doesnt pistol have a ranged death blow?
true_Kieran wrote:
Certainly not. Making a close ranged combat an anti-melee profession takes away the hole sense of melee professions. A ranged professioned character can take out melee characters at long range, a melee professioned character can take out a ranged professioned at melee range, that's how it is, how it has to be and always will be, not matter if you like it or not.
No it doesn't take away from melee professions at all. Remember circular balance. Part of circular balance is that melees have the advantage at close range. A melee at point blank should be able to decimate any ranged profession, except Pistoleer.
I see you misunderstood me. It doesn't matter at all how strong this armor is. Cops wear body armor, most use bullet proof vests, this doesn't make a headshot less deadly at all. Even the armor used by SWAT teams doesn't protect every since part of their body, because it's not possible! A suit of armor protecting your hole body for 100% will leave no possibilities to see, breath and move. Even the composite armor has it's weak points.
As for Rifle ammo, I have a hunting rifle myself and several books about rifles and pistols, I doubt you will be able to tell me much about it that I don't know yet. The ammo of a rifle is not more deadly, because it just can be deadly or not. Both are deadly as long as they hit their target where they should.
And by the way, the lowest rating does notprotect against all pistol calibers.
Body armor is rated by threat level. Cop body armor is level 2 armor. Within level 2 armor there are sub-sects A,B, and C. Level 2 armor will protect against all pistol calibers with a couple of exceptions. Notably the very high powered rounds such as .44 magnum and .50AE . Level 3 armor is made to protect against rifle rounds. Level 2 armor doesn't protect as well against rifle rounds because the high velocities allow it to power thru the armor. So a pistol to get a good shot on someone in level 2 armor would be best advised to go for a head or limb shot that isn't protected. While a rifle can blow thru the same armor.
Rifle ammo is more deadly. You have a hunting rifle you said. Do you have a hunting pistol? Why not? It's because the rifle ammo is more deadly over a longer range band. It's also traveling at a much higher velocity. Most states make it illegal to hunt with pistol unless they are of the high calibres. The reason being you are much more likely to leave a wounded animal then using a rifle.
Lets compare two rounds. The most common pistol round is probably the 9mm. That is a .38 calibre round. One of the more common rifle rounds for hunting is the .308 . As you can see they are fairly close in size. A difference indiameter of .062 inches. The 9mm has a weight of 179grains and velocity of 1263fps measured 15feet from the muzzle using a 6grain charge. This is a standard ball round, actually it's the M882 round issued for use by the military in their 9mm pistols the M9 (Beretta 92F).
The rifle round is the M59 ball. It has a weight of 393grain and muzzle velocity of 2750fps measured 78feet from the muzzle. It uses a 46grain charge.
As you can see the rifle fires a round with double the mass and a almost double the velocity. Now both close up are going to be very deadly. But as the range increases so does the damage curve. The pistol round looses lethality at a much faster rate than the rifle round. That is fairly obvious just looking at the velocities. The rifle was at almost double the velocity when measured from a range about 5X greater.
Waste93 wrote:
No it doesn't take away from melee professions at all. Remember circular balance. Part of circular balance is that melees have the advantage at close range. A melee at point blank should be able to decimate any ranged profession, except Pistoleer.
Then pistoleer would have to be a melee profession, that's just plain stupid! We are a ranged profession, we are meant for ranged combat, accept that!
Body armor is rated by threat level. Cop body armor is level 2 armor. Within level 2 armor there are sub-sects A,B, and C. Level 2 armor will protect against all pistol calibers with a couple of exceptions. Notably the very high powered rounds such as .44 magnum and .50AE . Level 3 armor is made to protect against rifle rounds. Level 2 armor doesn't protect as well against rifle rounds because the high velocities allow it to power thru the armor. So a pistol to get a good shot on someone in level 2 armor would be best advised to go for a head or limb shot that isn't protected. While a rifle can blow thru the same armor.
Rifle ammo is more deadly. You have a hunting rifle you said. Do you have a hunting pistol? Why not? It's because the rifle ammo is more deadly over a longer range band. It's also traveling at a much higher velocity. Most states make it illegal to hunt with pistol unless they are of the high calibres. The reason being you are much more likely to leave a wounded animal then using a rifle.
Lets compare two rounds. The most common pistol round is probably the 9mm. That is a .38 calibre round. One of the more common rifle rounds for hunting is the .308 . As you can see they are fairly close in size. A difference indiameter of .062 inches. The 9mm has a weight of 179grains and velocity of 1263fps measured 15feet from the muzzle using a 6grain charge. This is a standard ball round, actually it's the M882 round issued for use by the military in their 9mm pistols the M9 (Beretta 92F).
The rifle round is the M59 ball. It has a weight of 393grain and muzzle velocity of 2750fps measured 78feet from the muzzle. It uses a 46grain charge.
As you can see the rifle fires a round with double the mass and a almost double the velocity. Now both close up are going to be very deadly. But as the range increases so does the damage curve. The pistol round looses lethality at a much faster rate than the rifle round. That is fairly obvious just looking at the velocities. The rifle was at almost double the velocity when measured from a range about 5X greater.
Not sure you know the meaning of deadly, cause if you would, you should know there is no "more" or "less" deadly, just deadly or not. And read what I wrote again, I said nothing about armor piercing yet, neither did I say pistols would be as dangerous at long ranges.
Actually hunting pistols do exist, they just have another "job" at hunting. The main reason why you use a rifle is because a true hunter doesn't want the animal he shoots atto suffer, therefore, he shoots at long range with a lot of aiming and only uses one shot, or if you want it that way, we behaves like a sniper, and that's not possible with a pistol. What high caliber pistols are often used for at hunting is when he fails and the animal is only wounded, lies there in front of him, suffering and bleeding, then most hunters use the pistol because you can kill it with the pistol too and at that close range, it's much easier to aim fastwith a short pistol than with a long rifle. So the reason why pistols are not used for hunting itself is not because they can't kill the animal, but because you won't get close enough to aim right with the pistol because the animal will hear or smell you and run off. And I don't live in the states btw.
However, you just gave me a reason to ask for AP2 for Pistols, because like you say yourself, in rl, level 2 armor does not protect against the strongest pistol calibers, now a .44 magnum and a .50AE for example are not that uncommon inrl, and for sure, their counterpart in the Star Wars world during a war wouldn't be either.
true_Kieran wrote:
Not sure you know the meaning of deadly, cause if you would, you should know there is no "more" or "less" deadly, just deadly or not. And read what I wrote again, I said nothing about armor piercing yet, neither did I say pistols would be as dangerous at long ranges.
The point was that rifle rounds are deadly over a greater distance. Hence they are more deadly overall since they are deadly over a greater range than pistol rounds.
Actually hunting pistols do exist, they just have another "job" at hunting. The main reason why you use a rifle is because a true hunter doesn't want the animal he shoots atto suffer, therefore, he shoots at long range with a lot of aiming and only uses one shot, or if you want it that way, we behaves like a sniper, and that's not possible with a pistol. What high caliber pistols are often used for at hunting is when he fails and the animal is only wounded, lies there in front of him, suffering and bleeding, then most hunters use the pistol because you can kill it with the pistol too and at that close range, it's much easier to aim fastwith a short pistol than with a long rifle. So the reason why pistols are not used for hunting itself is not because they can't kill the animal, but because you won't get close enough to aim right with the pistol because the animal will hear or smell you and run off. And I don't live in the states btw.
I know hunting pistols do exist. I mentioned that.
You said a hunter uses a rifle because they don't want the animal to suffer. That is correct. But if pistol rounds and rifles rounds were just as "deadly" why would there be a difference? There wouldn't be. It's becaue the rifle round remains deadly over a greater distance.
However, you just gave me a reason to ask for AP2 for Pistols, because like you say yourself, in rl, level 2 armor does not protect against the strongest pistol calibers, now a .44 magnum and a .50AE for example are not that uncommon inrl, and for sure, their counterpart in the Star Wars world during a war wouldn't be either.
Actually the .50AE is rather uncommon. While the .44 Magnum is more common than the .50AE it isn't nearly as popular as it once was. Mostly because most police departments have gone away from revolovers. The most common police round now in the US is the .40 . Most popular in Europe is probably the 9mm. However in a war you would be unlikely to find these largecalibers because of the large sized pistols that are needed to handle these loads. The only pistol I know, off the top of my head,that can handle the .44 Mag and the .50AE is the IMI Desert Eagle. If you've seen one you know how large those pistols are. Ruger also makes the .44 Mag (and .357 Mag) for revolvers. But you don't see revolvers in the military anymore.
As for AP2 for pistols there should be one. Probably the DX2. It's suppose to be a disintegrator pistol. For some reason SWG considers disintegrators to be acid damage. But the DX2 should be AP2.
Waste93 wrote:
The point was that rifle rounds are deadly over a greater distance. Hence they are more deadly overall since they are deadly over a greater range than pistol rounds.
Pistols are still deadly at their max combat range, which indeed is less than that of a rifle, I never said anything else on this btw. What they do suffer at greater distance is precision, pistols in swg already suffer aiming penalties at greater distances, but at close range you can, in rl, kill as easy if not easier, take the hunting example, with a pistol than with a rifle. However in swg you can not.
I know hunting pistols do exist. I mentioned that.
You said a hunter uses a rifle because they don't want the animal to suffer. That is correct. But if pistol rounds and rifles rounds were just as "deadly" why would there be a difference? There wouldn't be. It's becaue the rifle round remains deadly over a greater distance.
They are just as "deadly"! The reason why hunting with pistols if forbidden is because, like I said, you wouldn't get close enough to aim right without the animal to notice it, yet there are enough idiots with hunting licenses out there who would shoot anyway, not hit right and therefore wound the animal instead of killing it.
Actually the .50AE is rather uncommon. While the .44 Magnum is more common than the .50AE it isn't nearly as popular as it once was. Mostly because most police departments have gone away from revolovers. The most common police round now in the US is the .40 . Most popular in Europe is probably the 9mm. However in a war you would be unlikely to find these largecalibers because of the large sized pistols that are needed to handle these loads. The only pistol I know, off the top of my head,that can handle the .44 Mag and the .50AE is the IMI Desert Eagle. If you've seen one you know how large those pistols are. Ruger also makes the .44 Mag (and .357 Mag) for revolvers. But you don't see revolvers in the military anymore.
As for AP2 for pistols there should be one. Probably the DX2. It's suppose to be a disintegrator pistol. For some reason SWG considers disintegrators to be acid damage. But the DX2 should be AP2.
Yes I know the Israel Military Industies Desert Eagle, meanwhile produced in the US as far as I remember, already when it was more common with .357 and .44 Mag than .44 Mag and .50AE. S&W also has a revolver with .44 Mag along with some others and looking at the DE-10 in swg, revolvers haven't died out yet. And not to forget my friend, in this game we don't have only the military who is armed, but several civilians and criminal organisations, just think of all the smugglers. If there is one group for which high caliber guns are more common than military, then it's the gangs.
Crap double post. And I didn't even finish.
This"What contradiction? Between offensive balance and offesnive balance? You obviously misunderstood me. You want to measure things on an overall, offense, defense, status effects, status defense, range scale between the proffessions. "
should be this
What contradiction? Between offensive balance and offesnive balance? You obviously misunderstood me. You want to measure things on an overall, offense, defense, status effects, status defense, range scale between the proffessions. I want to measure things on a scale large enough to differentiate the proffessions, but small enough to make the relative proffessions equal enough to be playable against and with eachother at a similar level. Everything should be balanced, but on their own. Speed/damage/accuracy should be balanced. Defense shoudl be separately balanced. Status and AOE effects should also be balanced on their own. Your view of everything be balanced together gives little freedom in choosing your proffession. "If you want to be assualt, then you can't be a pistoleer, no matter how much you would like to use pistols. Sorry, you don't get to choose your weapon then choose your role, you have to choose your role and are forced into a certain weapon." Giving one proffession OFFENSE and one DEFENSE makes the options of modifying your proffession through others less important and deemphazises a strong point of the game.
But it would be great for groups. Want to go take out those Night Sisters? Well they have lots of mind but low Health. They also use lots of Force Powers and status effect attacks. Makes sense to get some Pistoleers in your group then. Want to take out Snorbls? Invite some Carabineers since they have low Action.
Actually such a system sounds interesting but is a fun killer, we've had something like this i DAoC, let me give you an example. At the highest lvl (lvl 50) pretty much everything still interesting you could do is RvR (realm vs realm). Each group could have 8 members. In on of the 3 Realms, Hibernia, you had 3 "healer" classes, the bard, the druid and the warden. The druid had the high buffs, he could buff only a certain amount of people at a time other than our docs, the bard had the ability to make the group faster and the warden had something often called "bubble", a magical shield which protected of slow attacks so to speak. Then you had 3 magical classes, the mentalist, the eldritch and the enchanter, all three had only one skill line that was wanted in groups, but this one wanted very much, mentalist was for mana regeneration, the other two had about the same job, to do the main damage, oftencalled the bombs. Then you had 2 stalker classes, one more for ranged the other more for melee, and 3 tank classes. Now thanks to special abilities, an elite group always consisted of one of the three healer classes, one mentalist, two who can be either enchanter or eldritch, and two tanks. Stalker classes were important because without them you had no info of the enemy on the field, yet almost no one wanted them in group because they weren't as effective in combat and without group, your chance to get Realm Points (the only reward in RvR, given for killing people of other realms) was between 1% and 0 during the main time, their only chance was to go out there hidden during morning times and hope for finding a single char hunting. Since the 3 healer classes were support classes, not main fighting, there were less than of other classes and some groups started to say "no, we won't go out there without at least two of them" which led to waiting times of 20 minutes to 2 hours and several classes almost never getting groups. Now sure, our groups here can be larger, but then many will still say "some professions are more effective... less people, higher chance to get the loot myself". Naff groups already get kept low, so that you don't have to share too much money.
Lhargylflharfh wrote:
Just look at the T21, I believe in oneof the books I have it says stormtroopers with the weapon are issued aTRIPOD to fire it because itis so heavy. In the game you can run backwards, shoot with one hand, and hit someone in the head. LOL
Message Edited by Lhargylflharfh on 05-11-2004 09:05 PM
Larger and more powerful than the typical blaster rifle, the BlasTech T-21 Light Repeating Blaster is the largest weapon that can be carried and used by one soldier. Primarily used in large-scale military actions, it provides support for Imperial army and stormtrooper squads as well as cover for artillery gunners. Because it is a portable weapon, it became popular among Rebel factions and is still used by some New Republic units.
At 1.5 meters in length, the T-21 is perfect for soldiers who need to set up a weapon quickly and with minimal fuss. Along with a belt-mounted tripod and a backpack generator (weighing 20 kilograms), the T-21 can be set and ready to go within 30 seconds. Although it can be wielded by a single soldier two-handed, use of the tripod improves its accuracy out to its maximum range of 300 meters.
The T-21 is capable of being powered by a power pack, but it only contains enough energy for 25 shots. However, use of the backpack generator provides near unlimited ammunition, but its firing rate is limited to one shot per second due to the generator's low cooling capacity.
The power behind the T-21's blaster bolts is amazing, being known to penetrate infantry armor, personal forcefields and even armor plating of light combat vehicles.
As you can see the tripod is optional. Also since it states it is a belt mounted tripod it's fairly safe to assume it's rather small. Probably more along the lines of a bipod than the tripod we think of.
But it is possible to use the T21 without the tripod.
True it doesn't make much sense that you can run backwards and do HeadShots. But we also have to look that the range has been greatly reduced. Also if we follow the rules exactly, the DX2 would have a max range of 6m.
Waste93 wrote:
Haven't played DAoC. But I don't think you example translates exactly. My suggestion only makes some changes to MOBs. You example seemed to be about PvP. Also the suggestion would only make it easier if you had someone that could hit the weak spot. However it isn't required. You could still kill the MOB. It just might take a little longer.
I took PvP here because it's 95% of high lvl DAoC, however, it doesn't change with high lvl mobs there, for example: About the biggest mob, or one of them, in a realm is the dragon. This beast has some highly valuable drops, including the material for the dragon trophy now. To take down such a dragon you need about about 7-9 groups of 8 people each. Remember, these trophies are most wanted, now what happens? To make their chance for a drop higher, they try do reduce the amount, only taking the classes for the "elite" groups again, after all, they are most effective. Now there it's not always that you can still kill the mob, it happens quiet often that such a dragon raid ends up with alot of dead people and one big dragon walking home. Therefore, people focus more and more on getting only the needed classes in the groups instead of just working for more groups.
In my opinion it should here too not be possible to kill every creature, especially such as krayt dragons, alone. However, the more you specialize professions, the more you will get the same picture here that we had in DAoC.
I'm getting tired of arguing, so my posts will probably be shorter if existant from now on.
I didn't say a Pistoleer should have no chance against the Rifle. Just they won't have a good one. Just like the Rifle won't have a good chance against Carabineer, and Carabineer won't be good against Pistoleer. It's called having a role. It's stacking one professions strengths against anothers weaknesses.
My view doesn't require them to choose weapons based on their desire in combat effectiveness. It requires them to choose based on the role they wish to play.
Okay. That's it. That's the dumbest thing you've said yet. What is the difference between their deisre in combat effectiveness and their role? The "role" is what they are effective or inneffective at in combat; so if someone wants to have a certain type of effectiveness, say offensive, then that's the same as saying that they want an offensive role. I say, people should choose their weapon, be able to use it, and modify their role. You say people should choose their role, then their weapon is decided for them. That's the biggest problem with your point of view, which sucks fun from the game. If the game were different, you would be right. If instead of Pistoleer, Carbineer, and Rifleman, there was Infantry, Shocktrooper, and Anti-Melee or whatever you want to callit, then you'd be absolutely right. But it's not like that. Combat proffessions are organized by weapons so that everyone can choose their weapon.
You are very narrow minded if you think that by balancing the proffessions would make them all equal. I might possibly be somehwat swayed to see it almost like that if you would say that they wouldn't be different enough, but saying that they would be equal demonstrates very poor vision on your part.
Aside from the stuff that should be blatantly obvious, like the pool target, effect or type of special attacks, other stuff still would have a huge role in class difference. Rifles would still be more effective at long range, Carbineers shorter and pistols very short. In my view of offensive balance, the classes would have similar damage over a period of time each at their own peak effectiveness. For example, a Pistoleer at 15m (orwhatver the ideal circumstrances may be)would kill their target with relative ease. A Rifleman would hardly be effective at that range, so they would be much further away and at their optimum conditions would kill the thing as easy. But the Pistoleer's maximum range would be closer than the rifleman's ideal range. That alone makes a large difference in combat. Also, the rifleman would actually have an advantage because of their range and due to the very nature of distance could probably kill the thing while taking less damage. Pistoleers on the other hand would have to run and rely on moving accuracy and better defenses. So the Rifleman and the Pistoleer would probably kill the same thing at about the same speed, and take about the same damage, but the fight would be totally different for each.
And of course factor in all the other nuances of combat in the game, and Carbineers etc, but that's just an example of how two proffessions can be equal, but different. It's all about effectiveness in their own ideal conditions.
My way creates a fair game with options for different play styles, but by getting other skills you can change your role.
One thing I'd like to comment on. Everyone keeps talking about the love triangle of Pistoleer, Carbineer, and Rifleman. My question is: What about commandos? They're the only profession to havea prerequisite requirement of the entire marksman profession, so should they simply be better than all of them? (not saying I'm advocating this, just pointing out that there's a profession out there being ignored with all of these talks of professions countering eachother - what would their role be? And if you're going to be one of those folk that thinks commando should be a support profession, despite investing more skill-points into combat than any other profession in the game, I'm going to smack you!)
Now, the only real way this is going to end up balanced and fun as a result of the way the game is designed is if profession power is based upon skill-point investment. Rifleman, Pistoleer, and Carbineer should all be on even playing fields in terms of combat effectiveness, but for different reasons and through use of different strategies.
Ie. Pistoleer damage output might not be high at closer ranges, but they can avoid enemy fire with great deftness (kinda like now, except vastly improved.) Rifleman could focus on pure offensive power at long range, having little defenses to speak of. Carbineerscould be in the middle-grouds here. Sinceit takes a bit more skill investment, commando could have massive firepower at a variety of ranges, and a ranged toughness skill for taking fire.
This is a vastly over-simplified concept of balance, but it is still a valid point. Just because professions are balanced around what skill investmentgoes into them does not mean that they will "all be the same".