Project Reality has too much similair stuff!

Post by **77SiCaRiO77** » 2007-10-22 02:05

but thats becasue right now the US dont have any enemys with a airforce that migh be a threat , if the US is gonna fght agains the fictional MEC and PLA im sure that they will put some "old" antiair vehicles online again .

Eddie Baker · Post by **Eddie Baker** » 2007-10-22 02:08

Not if the "old" anti-aircraft vehicles were a disappointment the first time around. And here I thought you were the one complaining that the factions were too symmetrical.

Post by **77SiCaRiO77** » 2007-10-22 02:13

now that i thing better on it , yeah your are right , make the US air force better amred than others airforces ingame , but with no AA suport , that make them diferent from others factions .

sounds good

Farks · Post by **Farks** » 2007-10-22 09:53

About the T-90: Since the MEC is a fictional faction; couldn't they have made upgrades on it, so it would be comparable with the M1 or CR2? After all, the MEC- countries would have alot of oil money to spend on the military.

fludblud · Post by **fludblud** » 2007-10-22 12:58

Farks wrote:About the T-90: Since the MEC is a fictional faction; couldn't they have made upgrades on it, so it would be comparable with the M1 or CR2? After all, the MEC- countries would have alot of oil money to spend on the military.

the T90 CAN go toe to toe with the M1 and CR2, the problem is the method it achieves this is beyond what the engine is capable of doing.

Farks · Post by **Farks** » 2007-10-22 16:17

fludblud wrote:the T90 CAN go toe to toe with the M1 and CR2, the problem is the method it achieves this is beyond what the engine is capable of doing.

Well, let's just say it is other upgrades then.

By the way, how can people be so sure about that the M1 and CR2 kicks T90's *** with ease? They've never seen combat with each other as far as I know, and just like everyone should know - there's a difference between theory and practice.

Post by **Rhino** » 2007-10-22 16:24

Farks wrote:By the way, how can people be so sure about that the M1 and CR2 kicks T90's *** with ease? They've never seen combat with each other as far as I know, and just like everyone should know - there's a difference between theory and practice.

well its not really the tank, its more to do with the crew of the tank for who would win. And as the CR2 and M1 crews have most likely seen alot more combat, they would most likely win just due to that.

Farks · Post by **Farks** » 2007-10-22 17:29

[R-DEV]Rhino wrote:well its not really the tank, its more to do with the crew of the tank for who would win. And as the CR2 and M1 crews have most likely seen alot more combat, they would most likely win just due to that.

But some of the MEC- countries have been in war to (Iran - Iraq for example), so their military should have combat experience.

Post by **Rhino** » 2007-10-22 17:35

Farks wrote:But some of the MEC- countries have been in war to (Iran - Iraq for example), so their military should have combat experience.

so like ingame, its more down to the players that man the tanks that will win, than the tanks it self which it should be

Post by **Jaymz** » 2007-10-22 20:33

Farks wrote:But some of the MEC- countries have been in war to (Iran - Iraq for example), so their military should have combat experience.

Doesn't matter if they've been battling in tanks since birth, US/UK would obliterate them because of structure, training, communication, optic technology and other reasons.

Post by **Rhino** » 2007-10-22 20:49

[R-DEV]Jaymz wrote:Doesn't matter if they've been battling in tanks since birth, US/UK would obliterate them because of structure, training, communication, optic technology and other reasons.

in r/l yes, but ingame the MEC are a well trained (fictional) army

Farks · Post by **Farks** » 2007-10-22 21:03

[R-DEV]Jaymz wrote:Doesn't matter if they've been battling in tanks since birth, US/UK would obliterate them because of structure, training, communication, optic technology and other reasons.

But since the MEC is a fictional faction with modern MiGs, T-90s, etc, we can assume that they've been using oil money to train their soldiers and equip their military well. I doesn't make sense to give them modern equipment and then say they are a bunch of poorly trained guys. It wouldn't appeal to the balance either. After all, the MEC must have existed for 10 - 20 years in order to establish such a organized and well equipped military. In other words, BF2/PR must take place in an alternative history in order to be "realistic".

Post by **Jaymz** » 2007-10-22 22:30

Chillax lads! I thought Farks meant in real life. In game we can't define anything I mentioned in the previous post (except optics

) because it's all up to the team (essentialy what PR is about. Realism too for that matter). Obviously in game the MEC are portrayed as a worthy opponent so who knows who would win. All we can do is portray them as realisticaly as possible relative to balance whilst keeping a unique touch to each factions MBT's

Obviously that's not the case in 0.6 but it's being worked on I assure you.