Beef up the weapons

[InvadrZIM]

anyone notice just how weak the weapons are now?

why is the raptor absorbing the shock rifle? the shock isn't suppose to be some pea shooter its suppose to be powerful. 2k4 got this right, if you shoot a raptor in 2k4 it gets tossed around, in UT3 it doesn't even move

why can the scorp take 3 rockets and not even budge? or a shock core and not ever seem to notice?

this new system of absorbing the shots isn't half as much fun as 2k4 where it actually felt like there was power behind the rockets and the plasma

EDIT: just to clear things up, i got a little clarity on this. im talking about how the vehicles react to weapons, the damage they do is fine

[Wail of Suicide]

The weapons don't need to be "beefed up" anymore than they are now.
What needs to be changed is how vehicles react to physical forces in the game. Right now, they basically don't.

[InvadrZIM]

The weapons don't need to be "beefed up" anymore than they are now.
What needs to be changed is how vehicles react to physical forces in the game. Right now, they basically don't.

well thats kinda what i meant. i didn't mean more damge i meant they need to actually pack a punch

[Sunshine]

umm, in 2k4 the weapons were WAY weaker. As Wail said, there is barely any vihicular physical reaction to the weapons tho, which needs to be changed. However, the weapons are, in reality, MUCH stronger, and if they were "beefed up" they would all be overpowered

[Wail of Suicide]

well thats kinda what i meant. i didn't mean more damge i meant they need to actually pack a punch

Ok. I can agree with that sentiment.
I still think it's more accurate to point to the vehicle physics rather than the weapons. Shooting hovering and flying vehicles should knock them around, and planting rockets underneath tires should cause some pop up. Players that get hit (and survive) do get popped up and knocked around, the issue is the vehicles.

[bclagge]

The only time I've been impressed with vehicle knockback is when I'm hit by triple rockets in the Hellbender. Quite a kick. But otherwise I completely agree. It's like the vehicles are glued to the ground. I still try and disrupt a hellbender by sending shock cores his way. Doesn't work of course.

[InvadrZIM]

I still try and disrupt a hellbender by sending shock cores his way. Doesn't work of course.

i miss that so much, scorpians too.

[Telzen]

Yes because large armored vehicles aren't heavy at all.

[Moloko]

I think this perception of weaker shock has a lot to do with the damage model for vehicles; blackened blistered look -to burnt out shell doesn't really do these great looking vehicles justice. Other than the crosshair showing red, it seems harder to tell if you are inflicting damage from distance than in UT2004 clue wise , hence maybe this is why players think the shock primary is doing little damage. I don't know if it looks any different if you have onboard Physx ,maybe someone who has a card could tell me.

[bclagge]

The OP corrected it, it's about knockback of vehicles not the actualy damage.

Yes because large armored vehicles aren't heavy at all.

No need to be facetious. I don't think anyone is saying that the vehicles should behave as if they're light. We're just 1. used the the 2004 style and 2. suggesting that the power of the weapons might justify some noticable knockback. Most I think the shock should. It's an imaginary weapon the seems to utilize an otherwordly power (have you seen the bodies get tossed about?). Mostly I think the Hellbender deserves to receive more knockback because 1. it really doesn't look as heavy as the one in 2004, it's really kinda frail and 2. because it was really fun to send a trail of shock cores at a hellbender and surprise the driver when he falls off the back of the hill.