Scavenging Weapons off Dead Enemies Sometimes I wonder why a soldier can't use an enemies gun. I understand that the ammo can't be used both ways, but you should be able pick up and use enemy weapons. The effects of this are generally positive but take some importance away from teamwork. The weapons you can take should be limited to your class. Riflemen take riflemen weapons, etc. NF Riflemen with a BEAR? Yes. Pros: Using your favorite enemy weaponry Players are more ammo efficient More variety of weapons Cons: Minor balance issues Unpredictabiliy of enemy weapons Soldiers can be too versatile Alternatives Restrict the weapons that can be picked up to the type of gun the character has. If the player is using SMG1, they can only pick up an SMG1. Let people scavenge weapons off the dead bodies of their teammates only.
the reason is that soldiers are not typically trained in handling the enemies weapons. sure some special forces can, so then it should be a scout thing and not a general thing, and a gun is a gun is a gun so you could figure it out, but using a weapon you are familiar with is bound to have a few advantages. "screw realism:" your argument for this was a realism one so that is how i countered it. the main reason not to do this would be to avoid a death match mentality, which empires needs to be careful to avoid.
The actual reason, as I understand it, is that both the NF and BE have developed disablers, to prevent enemy use. Because BE are technologically modified, and NF are genetically enhanced, this was not too hard to do, apparently. About the idea, well I can't say we haven't had it before...you've put good limiters on, but i'm still not really sure if it really adds anything. But then, it doesn't really detract from anything either, so I guess it's just a coding question.
The real reason why soldiers don't usually grab enemy weapons is a question of ammunition. Your own side isn't usually supplying the same type of ammunition for your rifle as the enemy is for theirs. Using enemy weapons is mostly a matter of either personal preference or sheer necessity.
Let's give this situation: You are a rifleman, who is in a squad with other rifleman. Some of your squadmates get killed near you, all of whom are using the same rifle as you. In order to kill the attackers, you have to shoot back but quickly run out of ammo. What do you do?
HAVE YOU NO RESPECT FOR THE DEAD? thats body looting btw, a capital offense for large parts of europe and america in the 1800
Body looting is better than getting killed because you have no ammo. Also, its not uncommon. Numerous WW2 soldiers took 'souvenirs' from soldiers they killed.
You didn't have to worry about ammo in the 1800s. You were given 3 bullets and a bayonet for when you fired them all. You'd get killed by the guy with the bayonet if you wasted time trying to loot a body (most of which didn't even die from the wounds they received) and reload a 4th bullet.
Although it is encouraged in the Russian army, which a lot of players think nf is supposed to represent.
Well he could ditch his RPG/Mowtar for the HMG. But I digress. I object to this idea on other grounds, namely, why? This is not like CS where there are about 12 types of guns and they all have very different characteristics. The BE Assault Rifle is not much more different than the NF Assault Rifle, nor are the machine guns. The only points of contention are the secondary weapons. And on cross-weapon changing for classes, that could result in some severely unbalanced mixes.
I think it's best if we're not able to get weapons and ammo from corpses. That way, the players will be forced to rely on their (alive) teammates for ammo, encouraging TEAMPLAY.
