We have sniper rifles. We have pistols. We have pistols that can be upgraded to machine pistols. We have sub machine guns...we have assault rifles and light machine guns...we have shotguns and grenade launchers. Why no Rocket Launchers or RPGs? Since Grenade Launchers fire in an arc, would be great to have a line of site explosive weapon.

Would love to hear everyone's thoughts on this.

There`s no need for a rocket launcher or rpg. No vehicles, no destructable buildings or else soooo, no rpg.

So you base the need for an RPG on whether or not the game has vehicles or destructible environments. Interesting point, one I hadn't thought of. Based on that perspective, it makes me wonder why they exist in Call of Duty multiplayer when they have neither destructible environments or vehicles either. Although in Brink, I might argue that an RPG would be handy when trying to take out those maintenance robots.

There are vehicles. The maintanence bots.

My idea for rocket launchers.

-Low splash damage
-Low damage towards infantry unless direct hit. Direct hit = 1 barnet round to the body. Direct hit causes knockdown.
-Can not get headshots and all shots deal body shot damage.
-2 Rounds. 3 rounds with soldier ammo buff.
-Heavy body type can use it only.
-Takes 3 rounds to take out the maintenance bot.
-Takes 1 rocket to incapacitate a turret. Takes 2 to destroy a turret.
-Rocket fly inaccurately unless fired while ADS.
-Slow reload after each fire
-Is able to destroy machine gun placements with 2 rockets. Must have engineer to repair placements before they can be used again.

I know they implemented it in CoD. Mostly a weapon for for bad snipers xD. I mean the CG (Carl Gustav) is an anti inf/light vehicle and it can be very funny or annoying for example in BFBC2. But i also think that they wouldn`t fit into the maps and the gamestyle of Brink.

In BC2 I always use RPGs to snipe snipers

So awesome when you hit a bush and take out 3 of them

I personally like the idea of having a line-of-site, point A to point B explosive round. Nothing too crazy, but something that is different from a grenade launcher that fires with an arc.

I say no because it seems to me the only way to implement it would be either to break the game or make a redundant weapon. It seems that an RPG, by deifnition would be a high damage splash damage projectile. Now realistically it should have damage on par or higher than the Barnet or the Gatlung gun. Now people are already complaining about the Barnet as a OHK weapon. Magnify that by a splash damage radius and you have a game breaking weapon. The solution to this would be to scale the damage to be equal to the E Z nade or Lobster rounds in which case why bother with it in the first place since it will be functionally identical to those weapons. I do admit though that I have a bias against such weapons as they are usually the last refuge of the unskilled explosives spammer and I have no respect at all for that type of game play. It ruins matches when you have one guy just sitting in a spot launching rockets and utilizing the splash damage and higher damage to subsidize his lack of skill and inability to hit accurately with a bullet. It's not that you can't beat that type of player, it is just that it takes more time and effort than it should take to take out someone with that level of ability and the sole reason is because the weapon magnifies their limited skill. That should never be the case.

Its an infantry based shooter... And even for the anti sniper arguments. do you REALLY run into other snipers in this game? I RARELY see them (meaning like 3 games total out of my 2 level 20's)

i say no... even the vehicle argument shouldn't be valid. Why WOULD people use them? the vehicles are only on for portions of the maps, and select maps at that.

they are going to use them to spam anti infantry for an easy kill and you know it. Theres no excusing it.

Well.. I cannot really add anything to that. Seems a solid and rational addition to the game. Now, we wait... as the developers praying eyes secretly stock these forums for useful information, rather then blatant ignorance running wild.

I would like one, more explosives would be fun and honestly if it's only for heavies you would rarely see one. It wouldn't be a problem if it was done right.

Good points you bring up.

If you reduce RPG damage like the EZ Nade or Lobster, they still aren't the same weapon. Grenade launchers still fire with an arc, making them great for launching over walls, obstacles, and cover. Some kind of RPG would mean more accuracy, line of site firing, which is good and bad since you have the accuracy at the expense of not being able to arc your shot over obstacles.

In regards to rocket spamming...isn't this also an issue with a grenade launcher? Just as easily, people can sit back at objectives and spam up to 6 grenades at a given location. If it is an RPG that is over powered, you simply solve this by giving the shooter one round that can't be replenished without a complete respawn. The other trade off is that you are giving up a secondary weapon for a 1 shot weapon. As we know, ammo in brink runs out fast. People will have to weigh the consequence of taking a high powered weapon, knowing that they'll be down to 1 gun until a respawn.

There are ways to make it work IMO without spoiling the fun for everyone.

I feel like you should never be able to hipfire a rocket, its crazy. One of the few things I think COD does right.

Just give it the same damage as a GL but make it fly straight and using it would be only so productive. Reload time long for the price of a straight rocket. Gotta make it a burden to use but not impossible.

Yes. Make it like the Panzerfaust in Wolfenstein and make it have a recharge time of 30 seconds.

Why? o_O

I like that suggestion. A long recharge time would discourage this weapon from being overused.

COD doesn't stop to think about how much sense their game makes, or what they don't need because of what they don't have. One of my biggest gripes in videogames is the use of anti tank weapons vs personnel. You already have satchel charges, emp nades, reg nades, eznade, lobster, molotovs, sticky nades and landmines to take down maintenance bots along with normal weapon fire...

The game is pretty balanced atm, RPG's are VERY EASILY abused in every single game they are in. I really hate people trying to put things in brink just because cod or battlefield has it.

Not Team Fortress 2, or its decendants, Team Fortress Classic, Quake Team Fortress, or Quake.

Due to the sci-fi / post apocalyptic style of the game, why does the RPG need to be fashioned in the way that you imagine it in COD or other military shooters. The idea of a straight shooting launcher could mean a lot of things. There are a lot of ideas to make it different in BRINK than in other FPS games. For example, it doesn't need to be the typical one hit one kill mini nuke. There are many ideas for projectiles that could be used in a launcher. Think outside the box...a launcher in Brink doesn't mean that it would need to function or do the same thing as a launcher in other FPS games that you're used to. Besides...the abuse factor can easily be eliminated by giving it one shot per respawn, or giving it a long cool down period. Brink is a creative game, so their launcher could be different as well.

Yes, let's make this game JUST like CoD, and maybe a bit more BF so we could have all the glorious stuff that's in those games... What would be the point of the rocket launcher? Let everyone in the team spam it when they get in so they can have an easier time defending/attacking objectives? That would just become overused, even with a slow recharge (earlier post)

I agree if the RPG is made and operates the same way as it does in COD/BF. You could argue that ever single thing in Brink is a rip off some other FPS game. Class System - Team Fortress/Battlefield. Mines - name an FPS game that doesn't have these. Guns...pretty much every gun in Brink is a creative rename of an existing gun..many of which can be found in any COD MW/Black Ops game. Grenade Launchers and Noob tubes...pretty much every military FPS game in existence. If anything, Noob tubes and grenade spamming gets abused far more than any rocket straight firing projectile. Again...if you take the non-creative approach and have a standard RPG style projectile, then yeah...you're just copying. If Brink could make creative use of such a weapon, like a concussion blast. I disagree that a slow recharge would still cause it to be overused. For one, grenade spamming is not nearly as bad in Brink compared to other games because of the slow recharge. Same would happen with an RPG. Secondly, this would take up your secondary weapon. Ammo goes fast in Brink...if you use all your primary ammo and and then have only one shot with an RPG...you're kinda screwed until you die, get an ammo refill or hit the nearest command post. This will discourage most people from using an RPG in the first place. One of the reasons you don't see nade launchers so much in this game is that the ammo is so limited...then you're down to just one gun and a couple of clips. Risk/Reward factor. I dunno...just not seeing the issues of it being the "same as COD and BF" because I see it being designed differently in BRINK.

so many automatic fire "machinegun" type weapons in the game already. There should be some adversity. Hell, I wouldnt mind if all the weapons from Quake made their way into Brink :mohawk:

I said yes and the only reason why i didnt pick all classes was operative needs something good

As much as the idea sounds fun I do not think that it is needed. Even if you limited the weapon to a single round players would start camping Command Posts with it. As for disabling bots/turrets, the EMP grenade already does that so it is rather redundant.