Make techies unable to be single manned.

[dtacs]

How about we just make it so that only players who are not in a squad cannot one-man those vehicles?

And what difference will that make? Join/make squad, single man technical.

To be frank, the technical should be removed from the game until a more feasible replacement is found. The current one is the most bugged asset in PR's history that has been given developer approval, and is one of the serious issues with infantry-vehicular combat.

It's ruined my immersion and experience on more occasions than I can remember, and there are others who can echo my sentiments.

[ComradeHX]

And what difference will that make? Join/make squad, single man technical.

Auto ban anyone who drives technical in locked one man squad; and warning + 30 second later ban for anyone who drives technical in unlocked one man squad.

Easy server side stuff.

[Asystole]

To be frank, the technical should be removed from the game until a more feasible replacement is found. The current one is the most bugged asset in PR's history that has been given developer approval, and is one of the serious issues with infantry-vehicular combat.

To be frank, during my time in PR, almost 3 years, I have never encountered problems with technicals. It's easy to kill, people inside are easy to kill but it might be slightly too easy to kill with it.

1. It isn't realistic at all to require two people to operate something as simple as a pickup truck
2. All positions in a technical are vulnerable to fire: meaning that if a gunner or driver is killed, the surviving "crewman" will be forced out of the vehicle.
3. Sometimes it's necessary for a single driver to move technicals around the map (away from harm, to the rest of the squad, etc.) especially when you think about logistics (we don't require logistic trucks to have 2 operators do we?)

Pretty valid arguments to me.

[TheComedian]

To be frank, the technical should be removed from the game until a more feasible replacement is found. The current one is the most bugged asset in PR's history that has been given developer approval, and is one of the serious issues with infantry-vehicular combat.

It's ruined my immersion and experience on more occasions than I can remember, and there are others who can echo my sentiments.

The technical doesn't have to be removed only because you had some bad experience.

Most of us don't mind it because it can be easily neutralised.

[dtacs]

The technical doesn't have to be removed only because you had some bad experience.

Most of us don't mind it because it can be easily neutralised.

Oh don't get me wrong, my argument is not based on experience alone.



That is sparkling ridiculous and doesn't need an explanation.

Please, mind the language and try to phrase things more politely. No official infraction given, seeing how this post is a response to a relevant question. Further discussion of the hitbox issue will be considered off-topic however, starting from the time I post this. -Spec

[Asystole]

Jesus what the hell is that polygon shit on/in the turret?

[A.Finest]

I dont like this surgestion.

Mostly cause I my self as an SL do how and then get my guys to single man it. Covering our rear while we move up on foot.

Also lets say your squad mate is "dead - dead" and he spawns at main saying "Oh, our techi spawned again"

Surly I'd like him to drive it to us.

Its the same. Imagine the gunner/driver gets shot while driving.. Then what? Would you stop the vehicle to leave it behind... Waste of assets really..

[Mikemonster]

I did only mention Insurgent/Taliban techies but to clarify think the idea should be extended to all of the gunned jeeps in game, Humvees, CROW, etc.

Reasons why this suggestion is a terrible idea

1. It isn't realistic at all to require two people to operate something as simple as a pickup truck
2. All positions in a technical are vulnerable to fire: meaning that if a gunner or driver is killed, the surviving "crewman" will be forced out of the vehicle
3. Sometimes it's necessary for a single driver to move technicals around the map (away from harm, to the rest of the squad, etc.) especially when you think about logistics (we don't require logistic trucks to have 2 operators do we?)

I understand that there are herpderpers on servers sometimes... but it gets to a point where you just have to draw a line. You can't force people to be team players.

To be frank, during my time in PR, almost 3 years, I have never encountered problems with technicals. It's easy to kill, people inside are easy to kill but it might be slightly too easy to kill with it.



Pretty valid arguments to me.

1) Provide some source for this. When I see Libyan rebels in their trucks there is always a driver and a gunner. Same applies for Somalia/Africa. And again for the IRA, who also use a team to support such a powerful asset.

These trucks have a lot of engineering behind them and this means a cell is suporting their utilisation and upkeep. They aren't necessarily expendable derp trucks like we see in PR.

Let's be honest, read my last post and you'll see that it's unrealistic for them to be used by one man. If you want to talk 'realism' that is .. And I think Ins/Taliban mode is really unrealistic (for the sake of gameplay).

2) Then why are there three guns? I forsee a 'Techie Squad' having a driver, a dismounted spotter (civvy), and a gunner. Just like I would imagine technicals utilise in 'real life'.

3) So is it sometimes necessary to move an APC across the map 'away from harm, to the rest of the squad, etc'? No, because it either engages or disengages with a driver and gunner, and is either destroyed or rtb's by itself. Rather than 'oh, go fetch that APC that someone has left in the middle of a field'.


And no, you cannot force teamplay. But you can make things less fun for people wanting to lonewolf, and all single manners of .50 jeeps/humvees are lonewolfs. These jeeps are, tactically, the equivelant of Blufor AA and APC's (APC's in PR are light tanks, not Inf carriers). And for Blufor they are worth more tickets than it is worth to let some idiot waste.

[dtacs]

Jesus what the hell is that polygon shit on/in the turret?

That is the hitbox. Red means it does the most damage, getting lighter in color. Notice how it doesn't actually correlate with the player model itself?

You be the judge.

[Mikemonster]

I will say that it wouldn't be ideal not to be able to recover the techie if the gunner was shot off. But at least you'd HAVE a techie in the first place, rather than XXxL33tboixXX taking it to the compound nearest the enemy and then placing some mines/camping an enemy FOB.

Was hoping to discuss ways to limit lonewolfing in Techies rather than to have to argue that lonewolfing them is even bad tbh.

Auto ban anyone who drives technical in locked one man squad; and warning + 30 second later ban for anyone who drives technical in unlocked one man squad.

Easy server side stuff.

This isa the sort of constructive comment I was hoping for.

[Psyko]

Agree with OP.

The technical should be the swiss army knife of the insurgent forces. The steps suggested would defenitly assist the team structure.

[Sinbe]

Why not make it the way the APCs and tanks are? You can drive the thing alone, but cannot use the .50cal without a driver. The driver could still jump out to cut the engine and spot for the gunner. This would of course allow it to be used as personal transport, but I don't think that would be a big problem.

Oh and that gunner hitbox is quite annoying and whoever said it's easy to kill him apparently can't aim.

[Mikemonster]

Why not make it the way the APCs and tanks are? You can drive the thing alone, but cannot use the .50cal without a driver. The driver could still jump out to cut the engine and spot for the gunner. This would of course allow it to be used as personal transport, but I don't think that would be a big problem.

..

If this is possible it would be perfect IMO, much better than my original suggestion. I didn't know that was possible. Good comment.

[TheComedian]

If this is possible it would be perfect IMO, much better than my original suggestion. I didn't know that was possible. Good comment.

If you do this then people will whine about how unrealistic it is. A taliban could stop his vehicle and man the DshK in the back at anytime.

Best solution in my opinion is a 5 second delay to simulate the person jumping inside and driving away. In real life you can leave the engine running.

[Mikemonster]

Yeah, gameplay > realism again though isn't it. APC's have the same thing.. Nobody whines about that.

Technically in 'real life' you could single man any asset in the game, including the Apaches (IRL there is only the Tornado that doesn't have reduntant [duplicated] weapons controls, but that's only got one seat in the game anyway).

If you do this then people will whine about how unrealistic it is. A taliban could stop his vehicle and man the DshK in the back at anytime.

Yes, but in real life it wouldn't be 'his' vehicle, it would belong to his warlord or the cell/crew that he belongs to (and they would be providing security/spotting for him), and they translate to being the squad in PR.


At the end of the day, implimenting Sinbe's suggestion would only affect people lonewolfing (and people covering their squad with the .50 techies.. But how often do you honestly see that.. And it would still be beneficial to them to keep a guy as driver anyway so it can move up to support again, or not be abandoned once the gunner is shot - so that 'downside' is easily nullified/made into an argument for).

[Spec]

A quick reminder for some people on the last page, this thread is not about hitbox issues. The discussion of that already died down it seems, so please don't respond to this post here, I'm just informing you that further discussion of the removal of the technical or details about its hitbox will be treated as off-topic comments.

[goguapsy]

Well, I'm fine how it is right now, but if anything, I'd only block the .50cal on the techies - make the small MG still one-manable.

[Arnoldio]

APC system (without crewman kits) fot the techie, GO!

[badmojo420]

Was hoping to discuss ways to limit lonewolfing in Techies rather than to have to argue that lonewolfing them is even bad tbh.

When you base your suggestion on "this is bad mmmk?" you'd better be ready to back up why we should consider this action "bad".

At the end of the day, implimenting Sinbe's suggestion would only affect people lonewolfing (and people covering their squad with the .50 techies.. But how often do you honestly see that.. And it would still be beneficial to them to keep a guy as driver anyway so it can move up to support again, or not be abandoned once the gunner is shot - so that 'downside' is easily nullified/made into an argument for).

I see that very often. I constantly see squads on Kokan called "Techies" who grab 6 technicals and spread out around the cache, sharing intel, moving to support each other, etc. That is the essence of what the technical should be used for. Why would 6 other people standing next to static trucks be a good use of man power?

[Mikemonster]

Ok Mojo, in case you missed every one of my posts feel free to go back and see them. I comprehensively explain why lonewolfing an asset like the techie is bad. Go and get your mum to help you deconstruct the sentences (I use a lot of commas and brackets to make sure nobody could get the wrong idea about what I think).

Why would you put 6 people 'next to trucks'? Seems to me that in your rose garden of a server there would just be two techie squads.. Not one. And each techie would have three spotters. In your ideal teamwork server anyway.

Which wouldn't be so hard, would it? And the bonus would be that if they lost a techie to enemy fire they would have one in main unmolested by lonewolfs who aren't going to ever 'share intel' as you so beautifully put it.