Jump to content
Xenunjeon88

Poll: Should guns jam? (with some degree of historical accuracy?)

  

143 members have voted

  1. 1. Would you consider gun jams (if done right) to add something to the game? (tension, immersion,)

    • Yes
      96
    • No
      47


Recommended Posts

Easy games don't have place for weapons wear/jam, a good example is Far Cry 2, the weapons wear of this version lead to much complain that this was removed for ulterior versions.

 

As the weapon wear chase away COD players from S.T.A.L.K.E.R., but the "hardcore" people that enjoy this game love this feature.  :)

 

In Combat Flight Games the planes, and their weapons last just one flight - on average maybe 15 minutes - so no time for weapons wear,

and all careless weapons technicians have already been shot.   :biggrin:

Edited by Sokol1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I simply do not trust the parameters on witch those random failures would be set. Personally I have quite enough of frustration. 1 wheel out in the snow and the plane is stuck =restart . neighbor plane groundloop and you loose a wing= restart. You change bomb load and take off then notice you have no bomb= restart Then you get vulch= restart and then, crap you have to go to bed. If you put more failures in , you will find yourself well not doing what you came for

Edited by EG14_LuseKofte

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Cannot vote for any of the choices due to the fact that to do it 'right' for all weapons would require such a huge amount of research (and in game testing) that it could not be cost effectively introduced for the gains in realism it would give...

 

To 'half' do it would either lead to even more pointless 'bias' arguments on whichever side, or bring frustration due to half 'baked' simulation...and where would people even find the graphs for compulsory weapon damageFM talks?  :biggrin:

 

80% of people would want to turn it off anyway for real life reasons as in above posts

 

In a theoretical "Star Citizen funding" world I would say, Go for it! (as an option)

 

Cheers Dakpilot

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I would like to see them implimented, but have them be something that would be optional, either as a server option, or in single player a difficulty option. 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Thinking about it although I personally would love that it sounds like too much trouble on a widespread scale and ultimately as discussed before the German and Soviet weapons were very reliable so the impact it would have in this game is minimal and not worth the effort.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

i think gun jamming engine failure and random explosion should be set according karma points given by things as vulching kill stealing etc

 

 

 

That would be kind of interesting.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

i think gun jamming engine failure and random explosion should be set according karma points given by things as vulching kill stealing etc

 

[flash=]

Edited by 6./ZG1_milopugdog

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

That would be kind of interesting.

 

It certainly would.

 

Having given up BoS MP after being team-killed three times in a week by Yaks while trundling along in my bomb laden Lagg, it would be satisfying to know that the guilty individuals were suffering constant gun jams, burst tyres, overheating: perhaps even simulated dysentery...... 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Regardless of reliability, at least German fighters had a feature that automatically Re-charged jammed guns (pneumatically or electrically). Certiainly a useful feature.

 

Was there a similar Re-charging (unjamming) system in Soviet fighters, too?

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

As far as I know Soviet (and some American aircraft that operated there) had manual systems for that, in the form of the handles you can find in the cockpit linked to the nose guns. Some of these were mechanically-operated, while others (La-5 for example) had mechanical and pneumatic reloading systems. The P-39 had a reloader handle for the MGs and separate charge ejector and reloading for the M4 cannon.

  • Upvote 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

As far as I know Soviet (and some American aircraft that operated there) had manual systems for that, in the form of the handles you can find in the cockpit linked to the nose guns. Some of these were mechanically-operated, while others (La-5 for example) had mechanical and pneumatic reloading systems. The P-39 had a reloader handle for the MGs and separate charge ejector and reloading for the M4 cannon.

 

And in the Il-2, it has a set of four "piano keys" on the righthand side - one for each cannon and machine gun.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Funny - I thought they did in BoS when you tried to fire under excessive G.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I thought that is what it means to check the "misfires" option on the realism?

 

I don't know for certain, but I was under the impression this meant engine misfires.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Create an account or sign in to comment

You need to be a member in order to leave a comment

Create an account

Sign up for a new account in our community. It's easy!

Register a new account

Sign in

Already have an account? Sign in here.

Sign In Now

×
×
  • Create New...