Alternative to Reloading Revolvers

[MisterMeatball]

Hello all it is great to become a part of the War of Rights community!

Reading up on some of their updates I noticed that any player who is using a revolver will only have six shots because the reload would take too long. Personally I think that being unable to reload revolvers is a good idea. Imagine having to wait for your officer to reload all six cylinders because he wants to rambo his way to a quick death while friendly units are in desperate need of assistance.

Well I also think that engagements could be a little more tooth and nail on occasion as well as being quite sustained. I assume that pistols will be heavy and hard to aim, as well as producing a lot of smoke and recoil. As well, the use of the hammer in single action should jerk the aim enough to prevent quick and accurate followup shots to give an opposing player a chance to engage him. I can imagine firing all six cylinders in a close engagement in the span of 30 seconds and still not killing anyone, and then fighting for 15 more minutes with only a sword. Therefor six shots seems like it will be too few for the type of sustained engagements that Campfire Games seems to have in mind.

As an alternative to reloading the revolvers would it be authentic enough for the officer to carry a second revolver on him? I was reading the history of the Walker revolver and I know that cavalry did it, but was it uncommon for infantry officers to do it as well? Especially if they knew they may be going into a hard fought battle that may go on all day long. From a gameplay standpoint I think that just pulling another strap from one's belt would be a little much, so maybe it would not have percussion caps which the officer would have to place on the pistol, lengthening the time it would take before he could fire again. I am not trying to make the officer a combat class, and I understand that if you make it too appealing for combat people will use it as such, being an online game. However I am trying to make him a little more fun to play over long engagements, and firing a few shots at some rebs/yanks could do a lot for the average player, just not having enough ammo for a one man army.

Any feedback is welcome, be it historical authenticity or gameplay wise.

[Maximus Decimus Meridius]

Or the officer could choose between saber/pistol or a rifle. Some officers used a rifle to look more like a private because everyone with a saber was a good target for skirms

[thomas aagaard]

then fighting for 15 more minutes with only a sword. (...)

As an alternative to reloading the revolvers would it be authentic enough for the officer to carry a second revolver on him?

Officers was suppose to command not fight. And they are positioned behind the line.
(until summer of 1864) A soldier in army of the Potomac spend weeks walking pr. day in combat...
Revolvers are expensive and heavy. So no, that would not be something that was common.

Just like it was not common with cavalry. On paper each cavalryman was issued with one, But revolvers was not something that was in storage in the arsenals or imported in huge numbers... so there was a lack in both sides...
It natrally became better during the war... but 2,3 or even 4 revolvers was not something the typical cavalryman had...

Game mechanics should be made so doing command stuff is way more effective than using a revolver.

[MrAmerican]

I would support the idea of atleast one reload for the revolver. Because you can have some downtime after an intense fight and if you use up a couple shots you shouldn't have to be forced to run with your sword for the rest of the event.
According to http://civilwarhandgun.com/load.htm
"Loading all 6 cylinders in under 1 minute is certainly not beyond the realm of possibility for an experienced soldier."
So it could be possible for one reload after a battle when you have a minute to spare.

[TrustyJam]

I would support the idea of atleast one reload for the revolver. Because you can have some downtime after an intense fight and if you use up a couple shots you shouldn't have to be forced to run with your sword for the rest of the event.
According to http://civilwarhandgun.com/load.htm
"Loading all 6 cylinders in under 1 minute is certainly not beyond the realm of possibility for an experienced soldier."
So it could be possible for one reload after a battle when you have a minute to spare.

I'd love to see a video of someone loading all six chambers of a black powder revolver in less than a minute. In all of the material I've seen, it's a long and laborious process if you're to load it safely that is. Maybe the gentleman is talking about a simple cyllinder change in models such as the Remington M 1858?

- Trusty

[MrAmerican]

I'd love to see a video of someone loading all six chambers of a black powder revolver in less than a minute. In all of the material I've seen, it's a long and laborious process if you're to load it safely that is. Maybe the gentleman is talking about a simple cyllinder change in models such as the Remington M 1858?

- Trusty

possibly... But I still stand behind my extra reload idea ;)

[A. P. Hill]

Something to consider with your black powder pistols.

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=ijCW6myUoXA

[A. P. Hill]

Allow me to double post here, as this thought is completely different from the previous.

I think a lot of the misconception about loading pistols may come from excessive Hollywood pictures viewing. It's also a safe bet to assume that many may not realize that the pistols in use at the time of the ACW were not like the ammunition in use in today's weaponry.

So to give some balance to the misconception folks, here's a video showing the steps necessary to reload a black powder 1850s - 1860s Army/Navy Revolver.
Note the equipment necessary to perform this task.

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=OSOo-zY0_lc

No self preserving pistol wielding individual is going to carry all this equipment with him into battle just so he can reload.

And of course loading a black powder weapon always carries the possibility of hot cylinder misfire while loading, the same as is possible with any black powdered propelled weapon.

About the concept of carrying multiple weapons, it is historically reported that some officers did wear multiple pistols into battle. If not a full sized Army/Navy, at least a smaller caliber backup tucked in a belt or inside their jacket or haversack. Shoulder holsters were not in use at that time so they wouldn't be wearing a spare gun in a shoulder holster. Cavalry, being horse mounted were known for having a multiplicity of weapons that could be suspended from saddle horns or other saddle mounted baggage.

[Arkansan]

These pistols only weigh 2-3lb's so the weight should not be a factor in accuracy. Though I feel that the dev's have probably got the accuracy realism down on their own.
Reloading the cylinder would take a minute to do and isn't something I'd like to do while getting shot at. Though cylinder swap is easy enough for a skilled man.
Example 1 (https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=3kqEgijuCu4)
Example 2 (https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=M3rj89cqQQ8)
Example 3 (https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=VeqLL2xuSQs)
Accuracy at 25m/27yards (https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=uZ8EYQ9ng30)

[MrAmerican]

No self preserving pistol wielding individual is going to carry all this equipment with him into battle just so he can reload.

Well I guess I was mistaken... I take it back, no reloads is enough reloads for me ;) :p

[A. P. Hill]

Arkansan, I'm getting errors with your links Sir.

:(

And MrAmerican ... :p

[Arkansan]

fixed it! Thanks!

[William F. Randolph]

I don't need twelve shots... As long as bullets penetrate.

[thomas aagaard]

These pistols only weigh 2-3lb's so the weight should not be a factor in accuracy. Though I feel that the dev's have probably got the accuracy realism down on their own.
Reloading the cylinder would take a minute to do and isn't something I'd like to do while getting shot at. Though cylinder swap is easy enough for a skilled man.
Example 1 (https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=3kqEgijuCu4)
Example 2 (https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=M3rj89cqQQ8)
Example 3 (https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=VeqLL2xuSQs)
Accuracy at 25m/27yards (https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=uZ8EYQ9ng30)
Now you just need to prove that officers carried extra cylinders... ;-)

And remember that this is not possible with the colt.

[Maximus Decimus Meridius]

i dont want to see a officer kill a small enemy line only by using his colt

[Arkansan]

Now you just need to prove that officers carried extra cylinders... ;-)
And remember that this is not possible with the colt.
I think you need to prove to me they didn't ;D You do some research.

i dont want to see a officer kill a small enemy line only by using his colt
I sure the people that died to an officer with his pistol didn't want to see that either.

[Maximus Decimus Meridius]

ba dumm tss ;)


That would be nice so i am happy with the decision of the devs.

[William F. Randolph]

Quote from the devs from a kickstarter update

"The officer will carry a revolver as well as a sword. Back in the day it would take around 3 minutes to reload a revolver, which would not be practical for a game. So to avoid making the revolver too powerful, we’ve decided that the 6 shots the revolver initially comes with is all the officer is going to get. After all, his main job is not to kill the enemies, but to lead his men. This will eventually change whenever easy swap cylinder models such as the Remington pistols are implemented into the game."

So looks like the Remington is for sure going to be reloaded more than once. And that they have already decided to not let revolvers such as the Colt Walker/Army/Navy be able to be reloaded whatsoever.

Besides, unless you are an NCO or officer don't worry about it.

[Tar Heel]

Or the officer could choose between saber/pistol or a rifle. Some officers used a rifle to look more like a private because everyone with a saber was a good target for skirms

Do you have any references of officers carrying rifles? I'd be interested in reading about it.

As the devs stated, the officer's primary job is to lead his unit. Pistols were meant to be a self defense measure. Hopefully the devs will come up with the best way to prevent officers from running around like Josey Wales.

[Mississippi]

Do you have any references of officers carrying rifles? I'd be interested in reading about it.

As the devs stated, the officer's primary job is to lead his unit. Pistols were meant to be a self defense measure. Hopefully the devs will come up with the best way to prevent officers from running around like Josey Wales.

Did someone say JoseyWales...

[thomas aagaard]

Do you have any references of officers carrying rifles? I'd be interested in reading about it.

As the devs stated, the officer's primary job is to lead his unit. Pistols were meant to be a self defense measure. Hopefully the devs will come up with the best way to prevent officers from running around like Josey Wales.

I remember reading about a few... but don't have a source at hand.
But I really think that is was an exception... officers have a job to do. If they are using a musket they are not doing their job.

[Maximus Decimus Meridius]

I will look up if I can find some sources. I read it about the Napoleonic wars but the idea behind can be adopt for the civil war.

why can't a officer with a rifle do his job? he carry the rifle to be not a easy target for sharpshooters. he can command with a rifle. ;)

I read something in the Starbuck and Sharpe novels ( I know this are fictional books :) ) but I have also a serious source but I have to search it again

[Willie Fisterbottom]

Quote from the devs from a kickstarter update

"The officer will carry a revolver as well as a sword. Back in the day it would take around 3 minutes to reload a revolver, which would not be practical for a game. So to avoid making the revolver too powerful, we’ve decided that the 6 shots the revolver initially comes with is all the officer is going to get. After all, his main job is not to kill the enemies, but to lead his men. This will eventually change whenever easy swap cylinder models such as the Remington pistols are implemented into the game."

So looks like the Remington is for sure going to be reloaded more than once. And that they have already decided to not let revolvers such as the Colt Walker/Army/Navy be able to be reloaded whatsoever.

Besides, unless you are an NCO or officer don't worry about it.

Well anyone can be an officer or nco its not restricted to what you are in a company your formed.

Now i watched A.P. Hills link and you probably would'nt be able to load your gun seeing as it would take 4 or 5 minutes. But i don't see what would be stopping the officer from loading in just 1 or 2 shots he doesn't have to load the whole thing does he?

[Mississippi]

Well anyone can be an officer or nco its not restricted to what you are in a company your formed.

Now i watched A.P. Hills link and you probably would'nt be able to load your gun seeing as it would take 4 or 5 minutes. But i don't see what would be stopping the officer from loading in just 1 or 2 shots he doesn't have to load the whole thing does he?

Good idea, load one bullet and one nipple at a time.

[thomas aagaard]

I will look up if I can find some sources. I read it about the Napoleonic wars but the idea behind can be adopt for the civil war.

why can't a officer with a rifle do his job? he carry the rifle to be not a easy target for sharpshooters. he can command with a rifle. ;)

I read something in the Starbuck and Sharpe novels ( I know this are fictional books :) ) but I have also a serious source but I have to search it again

The LTs got one job. Keep an eye on the men and make sure they do their jobs. This he can't do if he is standing in the line firing a musket.
The captain have to give orders to the company when maneuvering. And he need to stay behind the line where he can see and communicate with the battalion commander. This he can't do if he is in the line firing a musket.

The extra firepower you get from the officers firing muskets is simply not worth it compared to the problems that you get if some of the men are not doing their jobs or even worth if the regiment need to maneuver and the captain don't get the order because he is firing a musket.

Also since the officers are positioned behind the line the risk of someone deliberately targeting a LT or captain is rather small.

Now if the regiment is in a defensive position and under heavy pressure and the enemy is close I can see the officers stepping up to the line and firing their revolvers.
Orders are likely not needed, it is good for moral and in a company there might have less than 30man in the line 3 officers with revolvers do actually give some extra firepower at close range.



--
I know a number of cases where officers, both LTs and higer up carried longarms in other wars during the musket era... but in all cases we are talking light infantry/jägers/rifles or similar.
(Captain Evald who commanded "Hessian" riflemen during the war american of independence... it happened in danish light infantry battalions in 1848-1850 and I do believe it was not rare in the 95th rifles... I also believe that is was not rare in the 1st and 2nd USSS but don't have a source for it )

But We are talking units who focus on fighting in skirmish order.
It would likely be better trained soldiers and way more independent soldiers , so less need for keeping a close eye on them and less need for "micromanagement".
The officer are also more likely to live and dress like the men, they don't have a line of infantry in close order to "hide" behind. And when fighting an enemy with similar trained soldiers the risk of getting deliberately targeted is much bigger... so more need for looking more like the men. And the officers are more lily to try lead by example and not simply by their rank... And in any units of specialists... being better at what they good at is always a good way to get the respect of the men.

[Maximus Decimus Meridius]

I agree with you in all aspects.

But i have never said that the officer with the musket stand in the line and fire. Only for the look i said ;)

i agree with you. After i read you last part i remember that my source ( i hope i can find it soon) was about a light company of a infantry battalion.

[thomas aagaard]

Problem is - where would he get it?

Sure he can pick one up on the battlefield but he would need to turn it in after the battle...
Or he could try buy one... but why use the money and carry the extra weight day after day... when you are not going to use it?

He would also need to buy or pick up accoutraments.

Allowing us to pick up guns and ammo from the ground would be the way to do it.
Picking up the weapon should be quick but picking up ammo should take a bit of time, since you would need to take the cartrigebox og the dead guy.

[Josy_Wales]

Problem is - where would he get it?

Sure he can pick one up on the battlefield but he would need to turn it in after the battle...
Or he could try buy one... but why use the money and carry the extra weight day after day... when you are not going to use it?

He would also need to buy or pick up accoutraments.

Allowing us to pick up guns and ammo from the ground would be the way to do it.
Picking up the weapon should be quick but picking up ammo should take a bit of time, since you would need to take the cartrigebox og the dead guy.

Although Id love to use the wepons from the kickstarter campaign while leading my band of sharpshooters, this is how it should be.

[A. P. Hill]

... Now i watched A.P. Hills link and you probably would'nt be able to load your gun seeing as it would take 4 or 5 minutes. But i don't see what would be stopping the officer from loading in just 1 or 2 shots he doesn't have to load the whole thing does he?

A note about that video. Where the presenter is shown pre-measuring his powder for each cylinder the officer in the field would likely have carried a powder flask, from which he would pour directly into the cylinder.

[FanaticDK]

I'd love to see a video of someone loading all six chambers of a black powder revolver in less than a minute. In all of the material I've seen, it's a long and laborious process if you're to load it safely that is. Maybe the gentleman is talking about a simple cyllinder change in models such as the Remington M 1858?

- Trusty

In the civil war they actually used paper cartridges and don't load them like we do recreationally today.

I haven't tried myself, but I guess you could do it in a minute if you trained for it. Alternatively some revolvers allowed for easy cylinder swaps. The colts are not really meant to do it in the field because you have to remove the wedge to get it out, but the 1858 Remington can have it's cylinder swapped out in under 10 seconds.


A note about that video. Where the presenter is shown pre-measuring his powder for each cylinder the officer in the field would likely have carried a powder flask, from which he would pour directly into the cylinder.
Paper cartridges was by far the norm in the field, for both muskets, rifles and revolvers.

Paper cartridges was even the norm during the revolutionary war, they knew it was the fastest way to reload muzzleloaded guns (and even some breachloaders like the sharps) so obviously it was the tech used at the time.

Sure you can obviously find accounts (lots even) of soldiers loading with loose powder as their supply of paper cartridges ran out during battle, but it was not normal.

[A. P. Hill]

Yes, I am fully aware.

[FanaticDK]

Yes, I am fully aware.

Alright, your comment about the officer pouring from his flask just confused me.

I'm not even sure powder flasks was standard equipment for large portions of the war if ever.

[A. P. Hill]

As we were speaking about a technique being used in a posted video, I thought it appropriate to stick to the technique .... ;)

1930

[thomas aagaard]

I agree with you in all aspects.

But i have never said that the officer with the musket stand in the line and fire. Only for the look i said ;)

i agree with you. After i read you last part i remember that my source ( i hope i can find it soon) was about a light company of a infantry battalion.

Just reading a book about the development of the British rifle corps.
(Wellington's Rifles)

After the disastrous Braddock expedition in 1759, (where British was shot down trying to fight European style against the french, Canadians and Indians in the forrests of north america. )
The order was given that the sergeant should carry muskets instead of half-pikes and many offices exchange their spontoons for muskets... and General James Wolfe carried a musket when he when to Quebec.

But this is as I see it just more confirmation that this was something we see with units fighting mainly i open order... The mentioned changes was specifically for the British units fighting in north america during the 7 year war.

Later i It mention that in the 95th and 60th it was common for the company officers to carry rifles. Both for the extra firepower and to make them less obvious target.
Again two regiments fighting in open order...

[R21]

I think I bought the Officer Tier, didn't realise they couldn't reload lol.

Hoping they can carry a Musket along with the Revolver or a Sabre like others have said. Also hoping they'll do something like Ammo Dumps dotted around the Map (like the Officer Walks in Range and gets his Revolver Reloaded) which would be on a cool down timer (once every 2 minutes or something).

While that may not be realistic I feel the Revolver won't be that useful with only one load especially if it's inaccurate and lacking in range and replenishing supplies after taking an objective makes sense from a Game-play point of view.

[Jamez]

While that may not be realistic I feel the Revolver won't be that useful with only one load especially if it's inaccurate and lacking in range and replenishing supplies after taking an objective makes sense from a Game-play point of view.

Many people have already explained here that the officer was very rarely in a situation which required his revolver to be fired as he is usually too occupied commanding his men.

[Johann Günderson]

I remember coming across officers just swapping cylinders instead of reloading the cylinder. Here is a video of it being done, although I don't honestly know if the source of them doing this was very accurate.

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=bv2yqbQa4K0

[R21]

Many people have already explained here that the officer was very rarely in a situation which required his revolver to be fired as he is usually too occupied commanding his men.


But it's a Game, not real life, so it probably will see quite a lot of use. Not everyone playing is going to be a re-enactor or whatever and will actually be using the items in-Game not really giving a fuck whether the way in which they're using them is authentic or not, just whats effective in terms of Game-play.


makes sense from a Game-play point of view.

[Jamez]

But it's a Game, not real life, so it probably will see quite a lot of use. Not everyone playing is going to be a re-enactor or whatever and will actually be using the items in-Game not really giving a fuck whether the way in which they're using them is authentic or not, just whats effective in terms of Game-play.

You fail to see what the developers are trying to acheive with this game. They want to be as accurate as they can get to what combat was like in the civil war. If that means the officer will only have one cylinder for their revolver then I see no reason to why they would not implement that.

[R21]

Game-play > Realism.

I'm a fan of realistic Games which is why I backed but concessions have to be made or the Game just becomes un-fun, and an Officer intermittently being able to have one extra load for his Revolver every 20-25 minutes or something after taking an objective isn't going to destroy the realism the Developers are going for it's just to help with the flow of Battles and possibly drive units to want to take Objectives (get there and take it and the reward for doing so is being re-armed).

I like Realism and authenticity but not to the point where it gets in the way of actual Game-play, and even some of the most ardent developers of realistic Shooters i've played in the past have gone back and adjusted Game-play/features based on user feedback after their Game was released and tested publicly, I can see this being one of them in WOR.

[Jamez]

Game-play > Realism.

I'm a fan of realistic Games which is why I backed but concessions have to be made or the Game just becomes un-fun, and an Officer intermittently being able to have one extra load for his Revolver every 20-25 minutes or something after taking an objective isn't going to destroy the realism the Developers are going for it's just to help with the flow of Battles and possibly drive units to want to take Objectives (get there and take it and the reward for doing so is being re-armed).

I like Realism and authenticity but not to the point where it gets in the way of actual Game-play, and even some of the most ardent developers of realistic Shooters i've played in the past have gone back and adjusted Game-play/features based on user feedback after their Game was released and tested publicly, I can see this being one of them in WOR.

I am just going to ask you to re-read all of the info which has been provided in this thread, particularly A.P.Hill's post on the first page. There is many reasons for reloading a revolver to not be implemented into this game.

[R21]

The two main ones from what I can see are :: Realism and the fear that people will run around 'Ramboing' with Revolvers.

I've already explained what I think on the first and having one extra load every 20-25 Minutes really isn't going to enable people to Rambo any more than having a Revolver with one Load in the first place would .

[Johann Günderson]

I think an officer should get 12-18 shots, given that the pistol is not accurate past 25 meters. Either way officers will be targeted unless the server you're playing on makes a rule against it.

[thomas aagaard]

if they are behind the lines as they should they will be rather hard to hit.

[Jamez]

Allow me to double post here, as this thought is completely different from the previous.

I think a lot of the misconception about loading pistols may come from excessive Hollywood pictures viewing. It's also a safe bet to assume that many may not realize that the pistols in use at the time of the ACW were not like the ammunition in use in today's weaponry.

So to give some balance to the misconception folks, here's a video showing the steps necessary to reload a black powder 1850s - 1860s Army/Navy Revolver.
Note the equipment necessary to perform this task.

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=OSOo-zY0_lc

No self preserving pistol wielding individual is going to carry all this equipment with him into battle just so he can reload.

And of course loading a black powder weapon always carries the possibility of hot cylinder misfire while loading, the same as is possible with any black powdered propelled weapon.

About the concept of carrying multiple weapons, it is historically reported that some officers did wear multiple pistols into battle. If not a full sized Army/Navy, at least a smaller caliber backup tucked in a belt or inside their jacket or haversack. Shoulder holsters were not in use at that time so they wouldn't be wearing a spare gun in a shoulder holster. Cavalry, being horse mounted were known for having a multiplicity of weapons that could be suspended from saddle horns or other saddle mounted baggage.


Quote from the devs from a kickstarter update

"The officer will carry a revolver as well as a sword. Back in the day it would take around 3 minutes to reload a revolver, which would not be practical for a game. So to avoid making the revolver too powerful, we’ve decided that the 6 shots the revolver initially comes with is all the officer is going to get. After all, his main job is not to kill the enemies, but to lead his men. This will eventually change whenever easy swap cylinder models such as the Remington pistols are implemented into the game."

So looks like the Remington is for sure going to be reloaded more than once. And that they have already decided to not let revolvers such as the Colt Walker/Army/Navy be able to be reloaded whatsoever.

Besides, unless you are an NCO or officer don't worry about it.

You two seem to be completely looking over what has been discussed in this thread. Yes gameplay wise for people who are impatient it would be nice to allow the officer to reload. But apart from that there is no reason to give the officers the ability to reload and keeping the accuracy of this game. Unless of course you find some evidence of this being done.

[R21]

I think we'll have to agree to disagree.

I have read and seen whats been written, i'm just adding my thoughts as someone who's bought that Tier on potential Game-play issues that might arise from the way they're implementing it.

[Landree]

Realism makes for good gameplay.

Officers should be few and far between. If I were to take the officer role, I'd actually try to do what an officer would be doing - commanding his men. Having done a lot of such things in M&B as well as other games, you are most effective if you're not firing a single shot.

Keep the revolvers as is. They look great.

[A. P. Hill]

The problem here is too many people have been spoiled by the current plethora of modern games that are not based on reality and go for the immediate adrenalin rush of flashy explosions, inaccurate ammunitions rates and ridiculous kill rates. WoR is not of that style and people who thrive off the previous mentioned crap for entertainment of gaming are not going to be overly thrilled with this game, despite it's ability to provide just as much of an adrenalin rush if not more so.

The developers have arrived at and set a very realistic goal of fidelity to realism and I do not see that wavering or changing too much any time soon. And for people to be demanding change of venue BEFORE they even experience the environment and involvement of this endeavor borders on lunacy of growing up in games that do not sponsor any sort of realism to real life.

Let's all wait for the experience to come into existence first and get a taste of what the developers want to produce, IF it doesn't work out after that then maybe it can change.

Myself realism in every aspect as far as possible is the only way to go with this.

[R21]

And in principle, I agree with you, but reality is often different.

In an ideal Game i'd see it being as realistic as possible but this simply doesn't work as people are spending their free time to play these Games and even the most ardent realism enthusiasts, at the end of the day, are playing for fun. If something is un-fun/boring or needlessly finicky they either won't bother with it or find ways around it hence my point about developers going back and retroactively altering mechanics or in some cases completely changing aspects of Games, even those that strive for high amounts of realism.

And your argument that anyone who even mildly critiques what is being put in the Game, based off playing realistic Shooters in the past, is some kind of impatient COD kid is a knee-jerk one at best which from what I read on these Forums seems to be the standard response to anyone that critiques anything.

Game-play > Realism, i've seen this a thousand times before.

Watch this space.

[TrustyJam]

And in principle, I agree with you, but reality is often different.

In an ideal Game i'd see it being as realistic as possible but this simply doesn't work as people are spending their free time to play these Games and even the most ardent realism enthusiasts, at the end of the day, are playing for fun. If something is un-fun/boring or needlessly finicky they either won't bother with it or find ways around it hence my point about developers going back and retroactively altering mechanics or in some cases completely changing aspects of Games, even those that strive for high amounts of realism.

And your argument that anyone who even mildly critiques what is being put in the Game, based off playing realistic Shooters in the past, is some kind of impatient COD kid is a knee-jerk one at best which from what I read on these Forums seems to be the standard response to anyone that critiques anything.

Game-play > Realism, i've seen this a thousand times before.

Watch this space.


You're welcome to critique anything you think is worth your effort to do so. :)

There will be made adjustments in order to make sure the fun aspect is very much present in the game also, that's a given. For the time being, the one cyllinder revolvers is how we're going to do things. That doesn't mean we'll test any other options out during the early releases.

I will say that we've clearly stated the game will follow an as authentic as possible guideline as possible while still maintaining it's fun value so please don't expect us to go above and beyond that "for the sake of game-play", instead, we'll work around it and incoorporate various authentic mechanics in more exciting game-play wise ways.

- Trusty

[Jeffrey Miller]

I think you need to prove to me they didn't ;D You do some research.

I sure the people that died to an officer with his pistol didn't want to see that either.

Love it Sir! Keep it coming!

[A. P. Hill]

You two seem to be completely looking over what has been discussed in this thread. Yes gameplay wise for people who are impatient it would be nice to allow the officer to reload. But apart from that there is no reason to give the officers the ability to reload and keeping the accuracy of this game. Unless of course you find some evidence of this being done.

I am not really sure who you are directing this comment at. Given that you've quoted me I can only assume that you're counselling me as to what you think we developers need to do, completely tossing the dedication to realism out to the wind. As has been said, Officers only get 1 set of shots per pistol, per engagement. Maybe that'll change in the future but right now, not likely to happen.

[Jamez]

I am not really sure who you are directing this comment at. Given that you've quoted me I can only assume that you're counselling me as to what you think we developers need to do, completely tossing the dedication to realism out to the wind. As has been said, Officers only get 1 set of shots per pistol, per engagement. Maybe that'll change in the future but right now, not likely to happen.

I was referring to the two people commenting above me, not you. I used your quote and the other one as a reference.

[A. P. Hill]

I was referring to the two people commenting above me, not you. I used your quote and the other one as a reference.

I thought that too, but I needed to make sure. :)

It's all good.