You can cheat that a bit with vehicle weapons, there's a bunch of damage types not being used that will let you make custom damage types like that. But's that's only for vehicle weapons, all the infantry gun weapons are simply infantrybullet.
"Make people shoot them more" is not a bad thing on its own. Elaborate their relationship? A squad, especially a coordinated squad can already melt your turrets like a hot knife through butter. There are so many ways for a coordinated squad to take down turrets. In fact, if you are on the other side, "that coordinated squad is OP against turrets" should be the least of your concern, really. Basically, no, this will not make turrets weaker than they are now. Vehicle weapons will of course, be able to damage turrets. Then again, except for APCs, you should just kill them with your CNs/MLs.
Oh and, in case anyone's worried. Agreed or disagreed, we definitely won't see this feature in 2.7.1. If there will be some major tests(at least 10v10 and 2~3 proper games), I'll probably implement this for the tests and see how it goes.
it is a bad thing, because it takes away from the other classes. you already said in your first post that a full clip of hmg will kill a turret. what about engineer seismics or grenadier rockets? i guess everyone can go rifleman now and if your line of reasoning that "if cameras can be damaged, why cant turrets" is held, then why not buildings or vehicles? can they not be torn apart by alot of weapons fire?
Infantry weapons =/= HMG Actually I was wrong, if we apply 96% resist, 1 HMG mag won't be enough to kill a turret. Anyway, all infantry weapons will be able to damage a turret, that includes SMG1/SMG2, I don't see how this is going to make everyone go rifleman. Within lvl1/lvl2 MG range, engineer seismic/RPG would be much more efficient. Out of the range, RPG would still be efficient but falloff & accuracy would kick in for bullets. EVEN IF, rifleman will be the best turret-killing class, better than RPG/seismic grenades. You still need mines, walls, revive, heal, turrets, some assholes to keep your rax up and much more than rifleman. This feature will not change our ecosystem drastically and will not make turrets significantly weaker.
Also why would a rifleman waste 3 or 4 mags on a turret? I don't think there will be more roflmen because of that. Unless the sniper is given to the roflman, then everyone will love to quickscoping turrets.
thats the same like, why do people shoot turrets with bullets... which this is trying to bandaid by making bullets hurt turrets
newbies shoot at tanks too that doesn't mean weapons (besides grens) should have the ability to damage tanks.
Sorry if this sounds offensive, but "They shoot at tanks too" is an invalid reason to oppose this. First, tanks simply don't look as weak as turrets. Turrets have that misleadingly weak model. If we ask 100 newbs "Do you think this is vulnerable to infantry weapons?", I am sure most of them would vote yes for turrets. Clearly, model & GUI will solve this once and for all. But we shouldn't expect that kind of stuff. Second, please elaborate why this is bad for the gameplay. "They shoot at tanks too" doesn't make this feature bad. I am adding a third option "I am not sure". If your only reason is either "Turrets will be really bad" or "Newbs fire at tanks too", I suggest you switch to that.
I swear I posted a reply this morning...anyway... I think infantry are already effective enough versus turrets so I voted no. Every class has a way to defeat turrets without adding bullet damage into the mix too. (Not all classes are equal, but thats a good thing.) Adding bullet damage makes things less intuitive in my opinion; I personally don't think we need to dumb down the game by changing such a key element of gameplay. I would however like to see concussion grenades make a comeback (scout or rifleman), with or without the flashbang effect.
"Your attack isn't doing any damage to enemy turret" or something like that dumbs down the game even more. This is also not a key element of gameplay. Something like vehicle heat is a key element of gameplay, oh and, I strongly oppose the removal of heat. This may dumb down the game just a little bit, but this is definitely not making things less intuitive. I mean, how is this making things less intuitive?
If you want to solve the issue of people shooting at things that don't take damage from boolets (and really, how is this a huge problem) then the solution isn't to change what takes damage, it is to add some indication when you damage something. Can we at least acknowledge the way every other game makes this distinction and not pretend we are innovating here? CS:S Damage / Hit Indicator:
The problem with turret is that it looks so unprotected(unarmored) and the fact that you can't damage it with your rifle isn't written anywhere. Making things more intuitive is the primary objective of this.
You do realise that if anyone was to develop some kind of automated machine gun turret one of the first thing they would do is make it bullet proof, right? so not my intuition has never been to shoot at turrets with my gun. Maybe some people should try thinking before brainlessly shooting everything with their guns.
but it isn't even a problem is it? it has no effect on the game if people shoot at tanks or turrets. maybe it should be more clear - but there are ways to accomplish that
Why should it be more clear? it's not hard to learn really, I really don't see any point to any of this. If you're not sure you ask someone, it takes a whole 5 seconds. Learn to communicate.
That's why I suggested making turrets vulnerable to heavy calibers only, which is not possible now and it doesn't matter imo.