Down with scopes.

[Outlawz7]

I think, that with 5 marksman kits available the sniper kits should go. Who needs a sniper, when you have tanks with 120mm shells that can fire across the map without any account for the drop etc. and each squad can get one marksman alongside the unlimited scoped rifleman kit.

Which brings me to the second idea, where the scoped rifleman kit is a.) is totally removed and scopes are only kept on Officer/Grenadier alongside the Marksman or b.) it's made requestable but unlimited in amount, like the Crewman/Pilot. But I think the first idea works better and it reduces the amount of scopes on the battlefield.

I mean, have 5 squads and a commander, that's 5+1 Officer, 5 Grenadiers and 5 Marksmen which adds up to 16 players out of 32 on a team.
And most people think, that scoped rifleman is the "free" version a scoped rifle, when you can't get a Sniper/Marksman. The squadless lone wolfs are at disadvantage as they cannot see enemies on the minimap, but that doesn't mean they can't be effective at being arseholes, that ruin everything, because they run around with a scope and stumble over an enemy squad and go wtfinstaheadshot on them.

Commence discussion (and flame wars)

[charliegrs]

identify one soldier in this pic that doesnt have a scope.



the point is, theres not ENOUGH optics in PR. these days, armies like the USMC, US army, and british army and others equip nearly all soldiers with optics.

down with optics means down with realism.

[bosco_]

I'd say more scopes, if in question.

[$kelet0r]

PR is not set in WW2 Outlawz - if anything there are too few scoped weapons, the reason that there is no drop for the 120mm is to compensate for the lack of a fire control system as well as the fact that a APFSDS has a flat trajectory anyway over the range that PR represents, there are 2 sniper rifles max. There is no discussion here - the op is more of a rant then anything constructive.

[Outlawz7]

Show me an Insurgent with scope on his AK. Or a Middle Eastern soldier for that matter.

Gameplay balance thing here, not real life.

[bosco_]

Show me an Insurgent with scope on his AK.

Why? We are talking about regular armies here.

[LeadMagnet]

PR is not set in WW2 Outlawz - if anything there are too few scoped weapons, the reason that there is no drop for the 120mm is to compensate for the lack of a fire control system as well as the fact that a APFSDS has a flat trajectory anyway over the range that PR represents, there are 2 sniper rifles max. There is no discussion here - the op is more of a rant then anything constructive.

X2

There is nothing wrong with the current loadouts. If anything more kits should come with optics. As for insurgents not having optics; if they stay in the city instead of trying unrealistic frontal assaults in open territory this wouldn't be an issue.

[Farks]

I agree on that the sniper should go. It doesn't have any real advantage over DM.

[LeadMagnet]

I agree on that the sniper should go. It doesn't have any real advantage over DM.

Try using it correctly then.

[Ragni<RangersPL>]

Gameplay balance thing here, not real life.

Symmmetrical gameplay balance has landed in the trashcan after British Forces was implemented in PR. Asymmetrical balance is what PR needs, IMO.

[arjan]

about snipers being not usefull.. we have a guy in our clan, that once shot someone on a distance like north village to us main base.. i take that as usefull

[Tef]

Show me an Insurgent with scope on his AK. Or a Middle Eastern soldier for that matter.

Gameplay balance thing here, not real life.

Realism and balanced...thats like dividing by zero, you won't see a insurgent with a scope in real life but you will see conventional armies with them but people say thats going to hurt balanced but now you want balance so no more scopes for con. armies and then that would ruin realism. My point is you need a balance so you can't completely take scopes out but you can't give every class a scope or else it will get onesided.

[Tef]

Why?

it is one sided isnt it?

have you ever heard of a regular army being engaged in open warfare by an insurgent force?

the insurgents only advantage is surprise, and it should be like that in game. They dont attack, they defend.

I know that but the thing is most people are going to whine about the onesidedness and some people will stop playing.

[Tef]

and what kind of person is that most likely to be?

Noobs or people that are just tired of the server bumping them to insurgents and then getting constantly owned and having to wait a minute to get owned again.

[charliegrs]

Show me an Insurgent with scope on his AK. Or a Middle Eastern soldier for that matter.

Gameplay balance thing here, not real life.

insurgents in real life dont have scopes. {or atleast the vast majority of them dont} as far as gameplay balance, well if you ever go into the city hunting for caches {which is what you should be doing} then you have probly noticed that all of the sudden that scope is a major drawback in the close in fighting that takes place in the city, and that the insurgents AKs with iron sights now have the advantage. if your just hanging out in the VCP picking off insurgents out in the distance, then yes i guess you could say the gameplay isnt balanced, but your also being completely useless to your team. not to mention picking off insurgents is pointless considering they have something like 5000 tickets.

[Top_Cat_AxJnAt]

An Argument for Scopes

On 90% of maps, 90% of engagements occur at less than 150m for the simple reason the maps terrain hight, vegetation and building placement prevents even viewing the enemy at greater ranges.

The frequency of such range engagements compared with both the large number of real world environments where engagements occur at much greater rangers but importantly the massive amount of fun that can be had longer engagements, creates the urgent need for an increase in the range of the average engagement.

Fools road is a clear example of where it is possible to view the enemy at ranges in excess of 200m often and as a result, the average range of engagements can be and sometimes is much greater than average.

Therefore a greater number of maps, designed to provide players with greater distance views on average, this being highly realistic (there are many environments in the world where this is the case but i am not suggesting all are like, but they bloody well exist) but crucialy it would increase the range of the average engagement, with possibility of some out to 400-500m and many many at 200 - 300m range.

However it is not just the map design that must allow for this but also the weapons systems. The main systems being the assault rifle and light machine gun and therefore it is imperative that these weapons can be accurately fired out to 500m and for this to be achieved, these guns must be equipped with scopes.

SUMMARY:

Increase range of firefights is a good thing - to make it so we must - design maps that allow for greater view distances - ensure basic infantry weapons are capable of being used effectively at these longer distances - scopes on a large number of these weapons is the ONLY way to achieve this.


THIS MEANS IN SYMMETRICAL WARFARE: Both sides will have access to a large number scoped guns therefore they can both employ identical tactics, namely engaging the enemy at ranges in excess of 300m when appropriate.

THIS MEANS FOR ASYMMETRICAL WARFARE: Only one side has access to a large number of scoped guns, while the other (insurgents and militia) generally will not therefore they must adjust their tactics accordingly. Namely getting much closer to the enemy before firing than would be done by the both teams in symmetrical warfare, therefore making the their enemies large numbers of scope weapons significantly less of an advantage. Personally i consider this is thoroughly exciting, the idea of absolutely having of having to use markedly different tactics for different teams (failing to do so resulting is consistent and very regular death!)

So in conclusion, Up with scopes and Up with Asymmetrical warfare!

[Cyrax-Sektor]

Hear, hear! It's such a treat going Ambusher in Al Basrah, and sneaking up on people, at least getting close enough to nail him with my SKS (iron sights own on that baby). Prone is the best position for hiding, and it increases accuracy.