Also you gotta remember that the damage values of the Railgun is far off from what it should really do. Realistically, it'd do about 1000 to 1500 in damage (whereas the tanks should have like 2000 instead of 800. Hell, it only takes about 400 bullets from the AR in stock UT to kill a tank, when it should be like 400k bullets (unless it was a lot in the same exact place)).

Also, remember one thing, just because something is larger and heavier doesn't mean it might have the better penetration of another bullet. While they are heavy factors, it also has to deal with the bullet's aerodynamics. if you shot a cylinder at a wall, it'd not go in as far as a cone that might be smaller or lighter.

This is why I believe the next sniper bullet we make should be large, heavy, extremely aero, and with a miniature explosive pack in the tip to cause more damage once it has penetrated.

I know Mr Adams. The overal damage propotions are rarly very accurate in games. Yes the railgun would do quite more damage than it does. Anyway my point is that nothing lighter than our railgun should do as much damage as it does. I just get so annoyed when people find a powerful sniper rifle and wish to have it in the game and that it should be the most hard hitting, when we have the railgun which is stronger in everyway than any sniper rifle. Well not to mention what would happen if hit by a thick <50 000 deg c cloud of plasma.

I know the shape etc matters. But some times whe purpose is to make a big not necesserly deep wound. But on hard targets it's either penetrate or do no serious damage. Humans are soft though. You don't want the bullet to just leave a cylindrical hole.

Exremly aero, hm a cone I guess? Why isn't it used really?

The Barrett could be also much more dangerous vs humans. Maybe not vs tanks or something.
Because is doesnt matter if the projetile is so much more faster as the 50 BMG.
When the 50 BMG hits the body and then explods in the inside I think it is making mor damage as the railgun

How did you come to those numbers? There is no way a man-portable railgun is going to take out a tank in two shots without completely tearing the gunner's arm off. It could be feasible if the tank had specific weak points where the armor is weaker, but the Goliath does not.

Why are you bringing up stock UT weapon stats?


The M75 is capable of throwing a 20mm through roughly five 5-meter stone walls (in-game figures) on a full charge. Peerless penetration power.

Also, the M75's slugs are not simple cylinders. They're actually quite pointy, and their weight is an advantage as far as penetration is concerned. The main disadvantage with big heavy bullets is that they're generally slower and have a less flat trajectory, but considering the nature of the weapon, this disadvantage really doesn't apply.


I somewhat doubt an explosive .50 BMG would really do more damage, and even if it does, so what? A .50 BMG would ruin a guy's day pretty well. Making it explode would just be overkill.

Also consider that an explosive bullet would be much more expensive, less durable, would probably have weird ballistics, and would likely have far less penetrating power.

You can easily at least disable the tank if you shot the bullet through the engine, but we are ignoring that fact for now. Reason I bring up the stock AR is since it was 'balanced' to what the base stuff has, meaning we should have based a modified version of the tanks to have health in comparison to the AR damage to the tanks.

In other words, (AR was 5.56mm anyways) the M50 should take the same number of bullets to destroy the tank as that AR, which was around like 400 shots or so (I don't have the damages in my face right now to get exacts), but obviously it doesn't. Until we can get modified tank health balanced for BW, we really can't bring up much on the damage able to take on tanks by any gun.

Next, that's because that is what was set by DC and SB in the UC code. Really a railgun should go in about 7 feet of reinforced steel and stuff. A stone wall should get at least 7 meters, if not more. Also... I had cylinders and cones just as examples, not what I said the M75 used compared to M99's bullets. I was just doing an exaggerated (but true) statement there.

Probably should do modified versions of the tank myself to get more accurate damage levels towards them...

Maybe in the early days of tanks, but modern battle tanks are basically fully protected against small arms fire (.50 cal would count). You might be able to punch through an APC, but nothing like a main battle tank.



There's no need to modify tank health to balance the infantry weapon damage. You can easily reduce or eliminate the damage and knockback a weapon does to a vehicle in the weapon's DamageType class.

What I'd really like to see is a tiered system for vehicle armor. Heavy vehicles (Tank, Paladin, Levi) would be invulnerable to small arms, while lighter vehicles (Scorpion, Manta, aircraft) would take a little bit of damage. Weak points on vehicles would be great too, and maybe the ability to headshot Hellbender occupants.

I think the tiered armor would actually be possible to do by modifying the individual weapons. I might have to look into that.



Where are you getting these numbers? Do you have an M75 in your garage or something?



Penetration is scaled according to what surface the weapon penetrates. Metal would be half as penetrable as stone, wood twice as penetrable, an so forth. The M75 goes through a maximum of 5 walls with a default maximum wall size of 256 UUs, or about 4.9 meters of rock/default/glass, 2.45 meters of steel (about 8 feet).

this could be made compatible with vehicles mods? or only to default Ut2004 vehicles?

It should work with modded vehicles. You could easily just check the basic attributes of the vehicle (Tracks? Flying? Hover?) and max health of the vehicle and adjust damage accordingly.


Back on topic, I feel there really isn't a whole lot you can do to make a .50 cal sniper too different from the R78. I suppose you could give it a smaller magazine, more damage, more penetration, and the like, but nothing particularly interesting.

well, magazinr is almost non-existant, it can only hold 1 bullet at a time... does that still count as a magazine? never mind, forget i said that, because this topic ay go hay wire again with debate and what not...

Ack, I was thinking of the M95.

A single-shot sniper rifle would just be useless compared to the others. If the railgun was single-shot and this gun had the magazine, I'd be far more enthusiastic.

Maybe i will and one but first of all i want to know how to animate it.

You could try asking Xav' he is good at animating!

I think it will be not that hard to texture it because i hae found and good image that i can lay exactly on the rifle. But I think i will need you help.

Now I have finished the UV map, here are some pics
Zer0 if you want to you can texture it

I would be only too happy to!

Show UV-map yes.

Why are you so interested in the UV Map
zer0 already does the texturing

Curiousity.

Curiosity Killed the cat...

I dont know if its coincidence or something, but it fits in good with your avatar, Kien.

All I can say to that is:

Hahahahaahahahahahahahha.... nice.

OK, this is my first try at texturing it, i havent done it all though...

That looks cool maybe you can make an bigger picture

NICE MODEL!!..

I think you should down its poly count to about half if you could.. The less the better..

Have you thought of making vehicles check out Bombardment under GameType ideas.. i could really use your skills..

Well, there seems to be a problem with the ASE you sent me, whenever i try to import it UED it comes up with the following.

Also, for those who haven't seen it, here is what I did before it got some extras added to it:

since then the scope has been fixed and a bipod has appeared!

Sorry about that
But I will fix it tomorrow I think then I will habe some time

Ok now with a new texture:

and BIBot but the texture is still alpha:

Did we forgot about the primary fire and stuff? Or we will talk about that later?

If you have got some ideas just tell me them

Ok.

Primary Fire: Fire bullet (Duh)
Secondary fire: 2 options = Deploy/Plant the sniper rifle OR use a plasma round (Which has 500 damage (Nearly destroying a Raptor) and need to wait 2/3 minutes in order to use the weapon again because of his heat)
Special: Use night vision on scope (Weren't thinking of a night vision on the rifle? )

Also i would like to see the muzzle smoke look-a-like the sniper rifle on Halo 1.

I propose to add a bipod on model and assign controls like this:
Primary: Fire weapon
Secondary: Scope (because scope is most used thing in any sniper rifles)
Special: Deploy weapon
Fire Mode: Change ammo type <Standart, Antiarmor, Explosive>. When pressing Fire Mode key the weapon plays reloading animation and changes ammo type if you have ammo of selected type. Ammo pickup of rifle randomly spawns various ammo types but Standart ammo with more probability.

Ammotypes:
Standart - more effective against infantry and more accurate.
Antiarmor - more effective against vehicles and turrets. Can shot trough walls. Has strong recoil.
Explosive - more effective against infantry and mines. Explodes after contact with target or wall (like AH104 from Sgt.Kelly pack).


Undeployed M99 rifle:


Deployed M99 rifle: