While running with my rifle, i feel like with some kind of improvements on gore stuff. No, i not going trew a simple suggestion about dismemberment. No. If dismemberment would be implemented, it would be crappy.

What i have is:

1)Death animations that lasts 10-20 seconds by a random chance (Time/chance of occurance can be easily modified at faction.xml at soldier config sections). You know - human body can withstand so much damage under certain conditions. And insta-death is kinda sucks. How it works? Well... If bullet will cause death, there could be 20-50% that killed character will play some animation, like crawling somewhere, lying in pain while bleeding, etc. Killer will get his ex and rp point at the start of the animation as usual. Second kill (If character play death animation, you can kill him second time) wont reward you with xp/rp.

2)Please, can you make wounded ai soldiers crawl to their teammates? (It can be easily configured at faction.xml file at soldier config sections. So guys who dont want it can disable it.)

3)Make sure that people can copy char.states under different name. So, we can have one state (Like wounded) under milion names. Why i suggest this? Let's find out. Game already has 3 states - Stun, Wound, Death. It's enough. Yes. But sometimes not. You still can't make some sort of vest that can absorb everything but laser/grenade/bullet from your special weapon. With this, we can add another death/wound/stun state under another name like "Deathfromnukeblast" or "WoundM14". So vest can absorb death/wound/stun states but cannot absorbe "WoundM14" state or transform it onto another state.

4)Sometimes battles feels boring. Can we have multiple char.states with chances of occurance at projectile file?

With best regards,

Viet King.

1. Would be nice.

2. I don't think you can do that?

3. I've asked the devs about this before - those states are hard coded, so it's impossible for them to let us modify or add to them.

4. Same as above.

Yes, it would be really nice to see, because sometimes battles feels empty. No one crawling back, no one lying in pain spraying blood all over. No one shakin all over. It is a nice touch that can bring some life to the battles.

Why so? They not going to be dragged by teammate, they just crawl to them, maybe to safety. Again, it is just a nice touch.

Dammit. All this things with char.states are very nice idea. HP points health system should be dead long ago by now.And more of amazing things, those kills/woundings (by weapon) works by a chance.
I always wanted a game where everything works by a chance. This just a nice system for sandbox/open world games. Because here, you have no idea, what will happen next.

I like the suggestions, but technically they are rather far away from the existing game implementation. We should've got these 3 years ago while we still had all the plans open!

Vanilla RWR never needed this level of control of things so such support wasn't implemented and development efforts were placed elsewhere. At this point, continuing development to the suggested direction could mean a lot of work in re-testing everything so that we won't break anything we've already completed.

In this sense, the suggestions sound like good food for thought for the next project or a potential RWR sequel.

In the other words - none of those suggestions will come true. Too bad for nearly all of us, runners.

The vests and wounding mechanic was designed as a very player-centric thing so that we could skip some of the AI work, again to prioritize elsewhere. The fact that bots get wounded at all, that's already the "nice touch". Of course, everything could always be better, more varied, etc etc, that's both the beauty and the doom of game development (kinda reminds me how RWR was supposed to be a 1-man 1-year project but ended up as 2-man 5-year project).

Yup, sadly so. RWR is off Early Access so we have a responsibility to keep RWR functioning as designed. I continuously feel bad about making any changes we are making, bug fixes etc, as any change can potentially break anything, and that is not a healthy way of doing further in-depth game development. We need to "get back to early access" to change fundamental things in the game, and that can only happen through a new project.

That's make sense. Anyway, thanks for the reply.