Dual wield pistols yes or no?

[Lonehunter]

Originally Posted by Hoodlum

I'm not sure a cloaker could be aggressive enough without armor like a LA maybe i'm wrong though

Anyone who's played PS1 will tell you Pistols are for cloakers.
But I'd say half the infantry in the screen shots we've seen are holding them now. They've either buffed them tremendously, or they're just placeholders, which they've been doing a lot of lately.

But my point is the Pistol has been our key tool in ranged combat. I know they're giving us Sniper Rifles, SMGs, and maybe Shotguns. But if the quality of pistols has risen to the point infantry will actually use them now, Cloakers better be able to get en edge over them in some way.

Originally Posted by Biohazard

What if this was a side grade

That I could probably live with

[Hypevosa]

I'd have no problem with it. While the idea would be ridiculous to a professional military outfit like the Terran Republic (meaning players there shouldn't have access to it), a faction that emphasizes freedom over all else (New Conglomerate) and a faction that has weapons that are almost recoil-less and are higher power at close range (Vanu Sovereignty) I see allowing such a practice.

The idea of dual wielding pistols is ridiculous in real life. However, in a situation where the more shots you place means a faster take down regardless of where you place them, like here, it's a viable solution. In real life one shot to the chest or the head or anywhere really will at least put someone on the ground, if not kill them - this is naturally not the case here, so saying that dual wielding pistols is stupid in this universe of armor and shielding is stupid, is a case of applying real world scenarios to a world with entirely different circumstances.

Here's how I see it working:

Pressing the weapon swap button changes between single and dual wield (drawing and holstering the left hand pistol). Wielding one pistol is exactly the same as normal, but wielding both at once comes with the following disadvantages:
- Reticle bloom such that firing as fast as possible while standing still is only 80% accurate (aiming for center of mass) at 10 feet - even for the Vanu pistol (say it's from the torque placed on the guns by pulling the trigger but not having the second hand to support)
- 2.5x Reload time if reloading both weapons, 1.25 for just reloading the left.

Abandoning more effective weapons should still have some reasonable advantages:
- 2.5x Pistol ammunition
- Slight mobility bonus (no turning hindrance, slight speed bonus)
- Fast draw/holster time for second pistol

[Warborn]

The problem with this is with how it would work as far as gameplay goes. The "realism" of it isn't important, it's finding this to have a place amongst other weapons that is an issue. Two pistols would be rather strange as accurate long, or even medium-range weapons, and yet for close ranges it would be competing with both the SMG and the shotgun. The issue then, is, under what circumstances would a player want to use dual pistols over an SMG? How do you keep both of those weapons as viable when they seemingly have the same niche?

There are a lot of pretty significant issues with having dual pistols as something that is meant to compete with actual two-handed firearms. The biggest hurdle to this isn't whether people can or can't aim when using two pistols, as that isn't important really, it's whether there could be a place in the game for dual pistols and SMGs without one or the other becoming useless.

Personally, I think trying to shoe-horn in dual pistols doesn't serve a purpose at this point. Maybe if there weren't SMGs it would have an easy niche to fill, but it would be a bit of a hassle to find a way to make both those weapons viable. And in the end, is gameplay really improved? How many viable ways to engage people with bullets at short range do players really need? I am struggling to see dual pistols as anything but superfluous.

[Neurotoxin]

Personally I dislike dual wielding firearms, unless it is only viable for putting out inaccurate suppressing fire. Use of 2 pistols should always be significantly less accurate than the use of 1 pistol.

[Zulthus]

I agree single pistols would have to be more accurate; the way I'd visualize dual wielding pistols is similar to Killing Floor.




You have no reticle. You'll have to guess relatively where to shoot, and it works really well.

[Hypevosa]

Well, in terms of its "place" the dual wielded pistols would likely be a better option for close range due to the usually higher damage we'd expect them to do relative to the SMGs. So hitting with every shot would mean killing someone faster than they could with an SMG at that range. The shotgun would fall under hit or miss since it's likely close, if not a 1 hit KO at the range the pistols are highly effective.

The reason I gave other benefits was to further solidify a place though. It may not have the sheer stopping power of a shotgun, or the knowledge that dragging the reticle across someone does at least SOME damage like with an SMG, but it's somewhere in between those two, and it also offers the best mobility and longest skirmishing ability comparatively (due to the 2.5x ammo).

[Hoodlum]

Originally Posted by Warborn

The problem with this is with how it would work as far as gameplay goes. The "realism" of it isn't important, it's finding this to have a place amongst other weapons that is an issue. Two pistols would be rather strange as accurate long, or even medium-range weapons, and yet for close ranges it would be competing with both the SMG and the shotgun. The issue then, is, under what circumstances would a player want to use dual pistols over an SMG? How do you keep both of those weapons as viable when they seemingly have the same niche?

There are a lot of pretty significant issues with having dual pistols as something that is meant to compete with actual two-handed firearms. The biggest hurdle to this isn't whether people can or can't aim when using two pistols, as that isn't important really, it's whether there could be a place in the game for dual pistols and SMGs without one or the other becoming useless.

Personally, I think trying to shoe-horn in dual pistols doesn't serve a purpose at this point. Maybe if there weren't SMGs it would have an easy niche to fill, but it would be a bit of a hassle to find a way to make both those weapons viable. And in the end, is gameplay really improved? How many viable ways to engage people with bullets at short range do players really need? I am struggling to see dual pistols as anything but superfluous.

I feel they would be better for fast bursts at close range because you could unload 2 guns but then you would have to reload which would take longer and leave you open, vs an SMG that would carry more ammo, be more acturate over time and take less time to reload then 2 pistols, thus making both good in there own way and fit your play style, something we haven't touched on much is the fact that there putting in all of these side grades so you can play how you want and have your own play style, so why not have more options to do that ?

[Eighm]

Let's leave the dual-wielding to The Specialists, shall we?

Dual-wielding lends itself to a much more arcadey style of gameplay, a la CoD or The Specialists. I know the game hasn't been tested yet, but it seems like from the videos that they are going for a more "realistic" (using that term loosely) style of gameplay that dual pistols doesn't fit into.

[Hypevosa]

Again, realism shouldn't be the counter argument here. In this battlefield situation we have armor/shielding, where you rarely have it in the real world. In the real world one shot to a limb will usually incap someone for a few seconds, and one to the chest or the head will kill them instantly. In this game it doesn't matter how good your aim is, unless you are going for a headshot someone will not die because you have good aim - they die due to a volume of good hits instead. Here, dual wielding pistols would be a realistic strategy to cope with these facts, and less just some bizarre arcade-y thing.

[Geist]

I would appreciate it if you would leave dual-wielding to the TR MAX. It's fun, it makes sense, and it looks fucking awesome(more barrels = more win ).

In KF and L4D, it's fine because it's supposed to be cinematic and fun. Dual wielding in a military MMOFPS like PS2 will never make sense. It's hard enough suspending disbelief with the brightly colored uniforms and lack of (solid) backstory, don't bring dual wielding into this...

[Biohazard]

Originally Posted by Geist

I would appreciate it if you would leave dual-wielding to the TR MAX. It's fun, it makes sense, and it looks fucking awesome(more barrels = more win ).

I'm pretty sure that all maxes will have dual weapons now.

[Hypevosa]

If I were on the battlefield, and I was faced with an enemy who was essentially immune to damage until I removed enough armor or shielding to expose them to harm, I see no reason why using 2 pistols on them in close range, and then switching to one for when I can finally get that kill shot, is not a reasonable and believable strategy. Running everywhere akimbo is one thing, but being able to switch between single and dual wielding is an entirely different story for the kind of enemies being fought here.

[Trolltaxi]

Dual pistols are like dual cocks... no sense at all. Learn to use one and master it, but wielding dual is just silly.

It doesn't fit the setting of the game (these are 3 more or less militaristic factions, not some gangxsta gangs shooting at each other with 2 horizontally held .45 . It is a sci-fi shooter with all the 'magick' stuff, but pls, use your brains. If dual wield would make sense in real life, why isn't it applied by law enforcement or military forces? I will tell you.

- it is faster to handle one SMG than 2 pistols
- better accuracy
- faster ROF
- free hand to perform simple tasks (opening a door, bending a twig in a forest, or just clean the sweat out of your eyes)
- SMG+secondary pistol (in holster) is better than 2 pistols
- no need to learn delicate tasks with your left hand -ambidextrousity is just too rare to happen and those people often has problems with reading or writing and they often mix their left and right sides - that could use problems... Cover RIGHT! I SAID RIGHT YOU F*CKING beeeeeeep...

That is why dual wield has no place in a game that resembles the slightest touch of realism. (And PS2 does, otherwise we would fight upside down and physics wouldn't influence anything ingame).

And dual wield would require a lot of animations too. I'd rather have enter/exit animations pls.

[Hoodlum]

Originally Posted by Trolltaxi

Dual pistols are like dual cocks... no sense at all. Learn to use one and master it, but wielding dual is just silly.

It doesn't fit the setting of the game (these are 3 more or less militaristic factions, not some gangxsta gangs shooting at each other with 2 horizontally held .45 . It is a sci-fi shooter with all the 'magick' stuff, but pls, use your brains. If dual wield would make sense in real life, why isn't it applied by law enforcement or military forces? I will tell you.

- it is faster to handle one SMG than 2 pistols
- better accuracy
- faster ROF
- free hand to perform simple tasks (opening a door, bending a twig in a forest, or just clean the sweat out of your eyes)
- SMG+secondary pistol (in holster) is better than 2 pistols
- no need to learn delicate tasks with your left hand -ambidextrousity is just too rare to happen and those people often has problems with reading or writing and they often mix their left and right sides - that could use problems... Cover RIGHT! I SAID RIGHT YOU F*CKING beeeeeeep...

That is why dual wield has no place in a game that resembles the slightest touch of realism. (And PS2 does, otherwise we would fight upside down and physics wouldn't influence anything ingame).

And dual wield would require a lot of animations too. I'd rather have enter/exit animations pls.

LOL were still playing a game here and just because you don't or possibly can't do it in real life doesn't mean you shouldn't have the OPTION to do it I don't see maxes which by the way can dual wield walking around in real life does that mean we should take them out of PS2 ? .... if it was a side grade would it really bother you that much ? Also adding animations for dual wielding would be a lot less work then vech animations because they didn't build them into the models

[Hoodlum]

Originally Posted by Hypevosa

If I were on the battlefield, and I was faced with an enemy who was essentially immune to damage until I removed enough armor or shielding to expose them to harm, I see no reason why using 2 pistols on them in close range, and then switching to one for when I can finally get that kill shot, is not a reasonable and believable strategy. Running everywhere akimbo is one thing, but being able to switch between single and dual wielding is an entirely different story for the kind of enemies being fought here.

agreed