Remove Or Update The Rifleman Anti-Personnel Kit

[ComradeHX]

It slows the opposing force's advance and makes them cautious in situations when they wouldn't need to be normally. That caution makes the opposition a tiny bit less effective. In PR this isn't simulated well due to the potential of respawns, rallies, and generally it being a game where ones life isn't risked.

NYET. IN THIS CASE THE PURPOSE IS TO KILL THAT IDIOT POINTMAN RUNNING INTO THE DOOR WITH SHOTGUN HOPING TO SHOOT COMRADES IN BACK WHEN COMRADES ARE SHOOTING AT HIS BUTTBUDDIES ON SECOND FLOOR). PURPOSE IS TO MAKE BUILDING SECURE BECAUSE UNFRIENDLY GUY GO INSIDE MEANS BOOM.

blahblahblah carry can

Suggesting russians carry cans for grenade trap.

NYET.

THEY CARRY GRENADE(YES THEY HAVE GRENADES, TWO TYPES TOO) AND STRING, THAT IS GRENADE TRAP; YOU CAN SECURE GRENADE WITH SOME ROCKS/TAPE(ALSO COMMON IN A SOLDIER'S ARSENAL, CHECK THEIR TAPED MAGAZINES FOR EXAMPLE) IF YOU WANT.

CANS LIKE SANDBAG DEPLOYABLE IN PR; SIMULATE OTHER THINGS(CAN:SOMETHING TO SECURE GRENADE AGAINST/IN; SANDBAG: FOXHOLE).

THERE IS NO CAN; LIKE THERE IS NO SPOON.

And now, in real life, you've completely trapped yourself in a building. Proceed to fire from said building; wait... wait... oh a tank has come up and wrecked the building.

NYET, YOU PICK UP GRENADE TRAPS IN SECONDS OR CRAWL(IRL WALK OVER) GRENADE TRAP AND GTFO.

NOT TO MENTION BAD CONSCRIPTS LIKE YOU WOULD BE F**KED EITHER WAY IF TANK SEE YOU.

TOO UNTRAINED TO PICK UP GRENADE TRAP FAST ENOUGH? MEDIC COMRADE CARRY SCISSOR AROUND?
THERE ARE MULTIPLE WAYS TO DISARM/REUSE GRENADE TRAP; MOST CAN BE DONE IN UNDER 10 SECONDS.


PR is not going to be grenade spamming because grenade range is reduced and Rifleman AP does NOT have to be throwing F1(designed to be thrown from cover, with bit kill radius that would kill EVERYONE in the room if it was detonated); give EVERYONE RGD-5(that is the model with IRL performance similar to performance within PR) to throw.

Obviously unconventional forces can have those. Some of them CANNOT EVEN THROW GRENADES.

CURRENT RUSSIAN F1 GRENADE MODEL IN PR IS WRONG BECAUSE THE KILL RADIUS IS TOO SMALL; REPLACE WITH RGD5; TO BALANCE, KEEP F1 GRENADES FOR GRENADE TRAPS(AS THEY ARE MORE POPULAR).

BETTER YET REPLACE RIFLEMANS THROWN GRENADE WITH RGO; DETONATION ON IMPACT WITH ACTUALLY DECENT KILL RADIUS IS FUN.

I LOVE ALL CAPS BECAUSE IVAN CHESNOKOV USE IT.






IN CONVENTIONAL WARFARE YOU WILL SOMETIMES NEED TO SECURE DOOR TO BUILDING.
IN CONVENTIONAL WARFARE IT IS COMMON TO USE SOME KIND OF FORCE MULTIPLIER.
IN CONVENTIONAL WARFARE IT IS VERY PLAUSIBLE THAT ABOVE TWO ARE DONE TOGETHER(USE GRENADE TRAP, AS FORCE MULTIPLIER, TO SECURE A DOOR; WHY DO PR'S NATO SNIPERS HAVE TRIP FLARES??? GRENADE TRAPS ARE THE LOUDER AND ACTUALLY DAMAGING VERSION OF THOSE).

SOMETIMES WHEN SETTING AMBUSH(VERY CONVENTIONAL) YOU NEED ALL FIREPOWER(SOVIET/RUSSIAN DOCTRINE: FULL AUTO FAST MAG DUMP IN FIRST MOMENT WHEN AMBUSH IS HIT; THEN PROCEED TO RELOAD A READIED MAGAZINE AND PICK OFF STRAGGLERS WITH MORE ACCURATE FIRE, FINALLY ONE FT/SECTION GO IN AND SEARCH BODIES/CAPTURE SURVIVORS/FINISH OFF SURVIVORS; ONE FULL AUTO AK74M IS VERY DEADLY AND LOUD) NOT ONE BORED CONSCRIPT GUARDING A BACKDOOR OR SMALL FOREST PATH THAT MOST LIKELY NO ONE ELSE WALK IN.

[IINoddyII]

Please don't use caps.

1) it's hard to read
2) it's rude

If you feel you need to shout to make you're argument then I'm afraid you've lost.

Internet forums are for discussions not arguments.

My advice would be to step away from the computer for a bit.

Ta for listening.

[ComradeHX]

Please don't use caps.

1) it's hard to read
2) it's rude

If you feel you need to shout to make you're argument then I'm afraid you've lost.

Internet forums are for discussions not arguments.

My advice would be to step away from the computer for a bit.

Ta for listening.

All caps was not for shouting.

Firearms Philosophy of Ivan Chesnokov

I tried to copy that(at least I tried to remove the use of "the"). It is all for fun.

[ytman]

All caps was not for shouting.

Firearms Philosophy of Ivan Chesnokov

I tried to copy that(at least I tried to remove the use of "the"). It is all for fun.

Emulating someone who, it seems, made his internet debut on 4chan is not the way to continue a discussion. Though, provided the link, I find the humor in your post. I'll wait till you compose something better.

Though I don't know why we continue with bashing together immovable opinions.

[ComradeHX]

Emulating someone who, it seems, made his internet debut on 4chan is not the way to continue a discussion. Though, provided the link, I find the humor in your post. I'll wait till you compose something better.

Though I don't know why we continue with bashing together immovable opinions.

I cannot continue a discussion if you just ignore everything I post.

I repeatedly posted that grenade traps are NOT difficult/time consuming to set up and at least once I have posted that the tin can is there to simulate securing grenade to something solid(like sandbag in place of 'foxhole').
And they are not equivalent to spikes that pop out of the ground or anything elaborate/funny like that; grenades are conventional and traps are also very conventional(because all you need is a roll of strings that are strong enough and of correct color)/common as said by two Veterans of Soviet/Russian Army. Grenade traps are not for show as in propaganda photo/videos.

But in your previous post I replied to; it seems you still did not get it.

What I posted in all caps was basically re-stating what I already stated.

And as far as I am aware, there is no Russian MA comment(or do we even have one? If not, try Red-Alliance.net, easy to get in touch with some people who really knows their stuff).

[Ninja2dan]

And as far as I am aware, there is no Russian MA comment(or do we even have one? If not, try Red-Alliance.net, easy to get in touch with some people who really knows their stuff).

We do have MA's with knowledge/experience in such equipment. There have been no requests in our private forums to officially respond within this topic, so I honestly don't think you'll see many PR staff commenting here.

You can personally ask [R-DEV]Nosferatu to comment on this topic, but it'll be up to him if it merits such a reply.

[Nosferatu]

Grenade traps are common tool of urban warfare when both sides are in stalemate and acting in terms of positional warfare. If one side is leaving building/construction complex/block and expecting other side to take their positions, then it's pretty much expected to leave some surprises for newcomers. Like it was in Chechnya or South Ossetia.

Nothing new really, grenade traps were used widely even during WW2. In modern times, grenade traps are settled using RGD-5 and F-1 grenades. Sometimes, before setting F-1 grenade trap, sappers are removing grenade fuse to make detonation immediate and unavoidable for anyone who would be caught in the trap.

[ComradeHX]

Grenade traps are common tool of urban warfare when both sides are in stalemate and acting in terms of positional warfare. If one side is leaving building/construction complex/block and expecting other side to take their positions, then it's pretty much expected to leave some surprises for newcomers. Like it was in Chechnya or South Ossetia.

Nothing new really, grenade traps were used widely even during WW2. In modern times, grenade traps are settled using RGD-5 and F-1 grenades. Sometimes, before setting F-1 grenade trap, sappers are removing grenade fuse to make detonation immediate and unavoidable for anyone who would be caught in the trap.

Thank you.



--------------------------------------
Now we can have good idea on how to balance/implement this? (I submitted a lengthy thread I submitted to suggestion section yesterday but it never showed up)

[ytman]

Thank you.

He hasn't said anything I haven't been saying. ??:


The first thing I said against Conventional Forces getting Grenade Traps:

Originally Posted by ytman
On the subject of 'grenade traps' no conventional faction should get them. Booby traps aren't able to be properly scaled in PR... the time scale and constant flow of battle doesn't work for it. On the other hand the Unconventional forces, by the nature of defending, are able to place booby traps reasonably since any position lost is not assumed to be fought for again in the near future.

Now let me point out exactly my point:

Originally Posted by [R-DEV]Nosferatu
Grenade traps are common tool of urban warfare when both sides are in stalemate and acting in terms of positional warfare. If one side is leaving building/construction complex/block and expecting other side to take their positions, then it's pretty much expected to leave some surprises for newcomers. Like it was in Chechnya or South Ossetia.

I've never been arguing about its employment in real life, I believed you when you said it was deployed. I've been arguing about its place in PR. In fact I've been mainly arguing against your primary suggested use:

Originally Posted by ComradeHX
They can be used for simply securing the area(not deny it from everyone...) ; as in cover that door to the building/courtyard so people do not waltz in. Or "cover possible approach vector of enemy while you sleep/eat" type of thing. Most buildings can have all entry points covered by one AP rifleman very easily.

Nosferatu said, and I'll quote again;

Grenade traps are common tool of urban warfare when both sides are in stalemate .... (i)f one side is leaving building/construction complex/block and expecting other side to take their positions

Still, it remains, that you must:

---beyond anecdotal accounts, show that any specific army (at this point Russian) will actively set grenade traps in 'occupied territory' when in full scale high intensity conflict with a comparative force.

I've never argued against booby traps being employed by any army in warfare... just its use in occupied territory that is not going to be 'released' to the enemy like you've been going on about when claiming grenade traps:

"serve as force multipliers and allow you to have more people shooting the enemy since no one needs to cover doors for security."-not a direct quote.

In PR conventional warfare is based around taking land and not being defensive. I stand by the fact that if you are voluntarily surrendering a flag (and the 30-40 ticket loss) to give a bit of grenade trap nusance to the enemy... well thats a strategic missappropriation of effort.

Basically, the use of nusance mines/booby traps is a practice that works on a large scale strategic campaign where many battles persist over many days with thousands of combatants. Not a hundred combatants fighting over three hours with no long term strategic meaning.

------

At this point I'm beyond this banter, I'm glad Nosferatu is here and clarified the use of Grenade traps. I would though appritate one last thing and that is what I had been focusing on; "Is it standard practice for a Russian infantry unit to plop down grenade traps in a building they have just secured, occupied, and are now engaging hostiles from as ComradeHX is suggesting?"

[ComradeHX]

In PR conventional warfare is based around taking land and not being defensive. I stand by the fact that if you are voluntarily surrendering a flag (and the 30-40 ticket loss) to give a bit of grenade trap nusance to the enemy... well thats a strategic missappropriation of effort.

Basically, the use of nusance mines/booby traps is a practice that works on a large scale strategic campaign where many battles persist over many days with thousands of combatants. Not a hundred combatants fighting over three hours with no long term strategic meaning.

Here is the most obvious problem:
First of all; you do not need to be defending the flag from within the capture area, there are many good positions out of capture area for you to hit the advancing enemies when they do not expect anyone. If they know you are in some building in front/side of the flag zone, they know they need to clear that building or when they cap, they will get hit from both sides. Grenade trap = very viable.

Putting down grenade traps does NOT mean you are leaving the entire flag area.
It is not like you are one of those evil movie villains who gets their own little get-away methods to get away really fast so the base self destructs and have big mushroom cloud.
All you need to do after setting grenade traps is to...gtfo of the blast radius(which in PR means stay out of that room).
PR firefight is not static; there are people flanking and strategically retreating all the time(when enemy tank rolled up to try to pump HE round into the 2nd floor room you are in, you gtfo instead of staying there and die). Giving up a building or two is very common.

I hope you have been playing PR long enough to know that a building/construction complex/whatever is, most of the time(unless you only play on infantry layer), not as big as a flag zone, and you only need to be on the flag zone with more numbers to prevent capture.

PR is not all offensive; that is why sometimes there are area attacks/mortars available to break the stalemate between a highly organized defensive team and a equally organized offensive team that is losing. And more obvious clues include how if you move around too much your deviation goes up a LOT.

At this point I'm beyond this banter, I'm glad Nosferatu is here and clarified the use of Grenade traps. I would though appritate one last thing and that is what I had been focusing on; "Is it standard practice for a Russian infantry unit to plop down grenade traps in a building they have just secured, occupied, and are now engaging hostiles from as ComradeHX is suggesting?"

At this point you should realize that it does not matter what it is used for; Grenade traps need to exist in PR conventional force(or at least RusFed faction) because they exist IRL.

How they are used is up to the players.
Obviously it is stupid to stand very close to a F1 trap; in this game it is doable because F1 kill radius is a lot lower than IRL(need change, btw).

Ask yourself whether it was conventional to shoot lone infantry over open ground with TOW, whether it was conventional to shoot civies on sight with M4, and whether it was conventional to blow up enemy IED with his own cell phone?

It does not matter whether they are used conventionally or not; players in PR will do it if they want to.

[Hunt3r]

Just give the Rifleman AP kit a bandolier of grenades or something. 4-5 grenades and 1-2 claymores would make it a great kit, just don't give it a zoomed optic, reflex sights and irons only.

[Bob of Mage]

Just give the Rifleman AP kit a bandolier of grenades or something. 4-5 grenades and 1-2 claymores would make it a great kit, just don't give it a zoomed optic, reflex sights and irons only.

That would make the kit even ore unrealistic than it is now. Well funded armies make sure they give the option of using zoomed optic to all their men.


The biggest issue with the AP kit is tha it fall victim to the Ottawa Treaty which bans AP mines as mentioned. However Russia, China, maybe the MEC (depends on who is a part of it, and if it's a real state or some thing like the EU. If it is a new state then International Law says that any members who signed before are no longer valid.), Israel, and the USA have not signed. In the case of the USA they want to sign but can't get an execption for the AP mines used in the Korea DMZ. The Russians as pointed who above do still use things like grenade traps in real life. It makes sense that at least the Russian AP Alt kit should get nade traps. This should also be done for any other faction that acts the same in real life. It seem that all the AP kits are made in the NATO style to make things equal acroos the borad.

I aso agreed strongly that there needs to be a way to remove AP mines by the person who lays them.

[Hunt3r]

That would make the kit even ore unrealistic than it is now. Well funded armies make sure they give the option of using zoomed optic to all their men

And well funded armies would also have a reflex sight available to their men. Yet we don't see medics getting ACOGs in PR.

[BulletPr0of]

The German Medics get magnified optics though right?

I genuinely feel the kit layout as it stands at the minute is fine; all it needs is the ability to pick up and redeploy the AP mines, the same for grenade traps, trip flares and any similar device.

[KiloJules]

all it needs is the ability to pick up and redeploy the AP mines, the same for grenade traps, trip flares and any similar device.

^This. The class is much fun (but not that useful in lots of situations) and would be even cooler with that addition.

[SGT.Ice]

And well funded armies would also have a reflex sight available to their men. Yet we don't see medics getting ACOGs in PR.

That's actually only due to the fact people whine about a medic using a scoped sight. Because such a thing makes the player Soooooooooooooo much better.

How is the AP kit useless? One time I got stuck in a building found an AP kit hidden behind the stairs after my gun ran out of ammo during a last stand. Put a claymore & trap down and took out an entire squad. Without any bullets. Explain how a kit that requires a little more strategy is useless, please.

[Hunt3r]

That's actually only due to the fact people whine about a medic using a scoped sight. Because such a thing makes the player Soooooooooooooo much better.

How is the AP kit useless? One time I got stuck in a building found an AP kit hidden behind the stairs after my gun ran out of ammo during a last stand. Put a claymore & trap down and took out an entire squad. Without any bullets. Explain how a kit that requires a little more strategy is useless, please.

Not useless, just not as generally useful as something like an AR.

[waldov]

I agree that the AP kit does have its moments but generally it is of little tactical value to the squad in the more fluid battles that Project Reality simulates. I have to say it would be far more use to the team if the AP kit was equipped with a more effective anti-infantry/anti-structural rocket launcher as suggested earlier.

AP kit pretty useless.Would be nice to remove claymores and put anti-infantry grenade launcher like RShG-2(RPG-26 with Fuel-Air Explosive(thermobaric) warhead) or RPG-7 with Frag or Fuel-Air explosive(thermobaric),for NATO forces - AT4 with HEDP round.Germany Pzf-3 with needed warhead.
RShG-2

TBG-7V - FAE round for RPG-7

OG-7V - FRAG round for RPG-7

AT4 LMAW - HEDP warhead.

Bunkerfaust 3(17mm RHA or 360mm brick wall + follow-through FRAG charge(c))

For china - PF98 with multi-purpose round,and removed no optics on their gun(It's same tube with HAT,left - MPR,Right - HEAT round.)

Agree with 3th choose.

And little video demonstration,how thats rounds work

It would definitely help overcome those annoying moments when your forced to fire AT rockets at entrenched or even exposed infantry with such a limited effect as well as most if not all conventional and even irregular forces these days posses and use thermobaric/fragmentation rocket propelled weapons more and more frequently, especially in urban combat.

[Joker86]

I would even go so far and implement BOTH, anti-personnel RPGs as well as reusable traps. Otherwise you will always have the grenadier being the better option, as the 40mm grenades have the same purpose like those RPGs, which during WW2 and a bit later was covered by flamethrowers.

That way the AP Rifleman would be the perfect choice for squads which want to seize and hold a building, and eventually advance slowly. (By seizing the next building, of course )

[billysmall44]

It's difficult to use the claymores I admit. You want to put down your claymore and move on to other things, not sit and watch until one guy comes along so you can blow it.

One thing I constantly ask myself while I am playing PR is: I wish I had more grenades. Grenades are just beautiful. I love them. If the Anti-Personal kit had a handful of grenades instead of the standard 2, you could bet I would take it more often. I also support Samagon's idea of giving the anti-personal kit a rocket of some sort. It's frustrating to waste a LAT on infantry.