Revamping of the Kit Limiting

[Caboosehatesbabies]

This comes down to two sides, though that think every squad should be able to take out any threat at any time, and those who want people to communicate and work together as a TEAM to attack threats. I belong to the Team group.

I always tell people who say stuff like the OP to go play BF2. Just today I was playing MEC on Muttrah and my squad took East City, built a BUnker, and sat there the whole round defending. About halfway through our team was close to capturing docks and one of my rifleman said, "Sooo, we gonna go attack Docks?" I told him no, we were gonna defend Mosque, use the AA, and if he wanted constant action he should go join another squad or go play BF2. Sure enough, not 5 minutes later the US had North City and west city and were attacking our mosuqe.

[Gaven]

lets not bring up the c4 issue i'd prefer we focus on the idea at hand please

The C4 issue directly impacts the anti-tank issue.

[LithiumFox]

blargdefarklargemoo!

(There is no issue at hand anyway. There is no ISSUE. It's fine the way it is, why not worry about fixing insurgency to make them more INSURGENT like?)

[Solid Knight]

actually i did give thought into it, thank you very much.

The point in being is that not every squad needs an AT kit, and honestly people need to realize that they don't always need to engage an enemy, especially when it's a tank. Limiting AT's limits the "i'm invincible" mentality that SOME, and i say some, people get when using an anti-tank kit.

Why assume its a tank? Why can't it be a Vodnik? And what about when they engage you? Having been playing for a while I can say with a great degree of certainty that most LAT kits go to waste.

Like I said, the goal is to improve kit accessibility and not to increase quantity so your counter-point is null. Furthermore, you have not addressed the other two kits I mentioned which leads me to believe that you made up your mind long before you read my suggestion and thus never truly played with the idea.

[panther501]

this is just another idea fox (and yes i agree with you on the insurgency problem) and gaven, this has nothing to do with c4 because the topic here is kit limiting, not anti-tank. The problem with communication (as said by CBhatesbabies) is that how often are you able to communicate with other squads and coordinate together. When I'm usually in-game there is not often a commander and generally squads tend to do their own thing. Now I don't want this idea to cater to the squads that don't communicate and lone wolf, I just want squads to be able to handle certain situations more effectively and realistically. Of course this idea is open to all tweaking and modifications as solid make a point earlier, I just think that the prime concept of this idea would improve game play and the realism factor of the game.

EDIT: No argument needed. Just keep the c4 in another thread please. this is more than about anti-tank equipment.

[Gaven]

this is just another idea fox (and yes i agree with you on the insurgency problem) and gaven, this has nothing to do with c4 because the topic here is kit limiting, not anti-tank. The problem with communication (as said by CBhatesbabies) is that how often are you able to communicate with other squads and coordinate together. When I'm usually in-game there is not often a commander and generally squads tend to do their own thing. Now I don't want this idea to cater to the squads that don't communicate and lone wolf, I just want squads to be able to handle certain situations more effectively and realistically. Of course this idea is open to all tweaking and modifications as solid make a point earlier, I just think that the prime concept of this idea would improve game play and the realism factor of the game.

C4 directly influences anti-tank, which directly influences kit limiting.

It was a lesser point of my idea, not trying to start a conflict by it.

[Bringerof_D]

Each squad could have a fire team and an assault team set up like this:

Fire team:
Officer
Rifleman AT
Support

Assault Team:
Medic
Engineer
Rifleman Optics

This is just an idea so don't bash me for it.

whao whao whao, hang on there, why is the medic on the assault team? i understand the support gunner and the riflemanAT are better suited for support, but i ussualy like to keep my medic back.

my assault team is ussualy rifleman, engineer if we have one or the second rifleman, and rifleman AT

ussualy i get my rifleman AT to blast his shell in first if theres no immediate vehichle threat, a target like a bunker or firebase would of course be the first target, then charge in the with the other 2 guys while everyone is dead or supressed. given any chance he would reload and prepare for incoming vehichles.

[Bringerof_D]

Why assume its a tank? Why can't it be a Vodnik? And what about when they engage you? Having been playing for a while I can say with a great degree of certainty that most LAT kits go to waste.

Like I said, the goal is to improve kit accessibility and not to increase quantity so your counter-point is null. Furthermore, you have not addressed the other two kits I mentioned which leads me to believe that you made up your mind long before you read my suggestion and thus never truly played with the idea.

ok so if a light infantry squad were to be engaged IRL by a tank, while not carrying an AT weapon, yes they'd be screwed, and no that doesnt mean that every squad is going to be carying an anti tank weapon in real life. if a squad IRL had no measure to destroy a tank, they hide. it's called dont engage, if they engage you you're screwed anyway and it was your fault for being spotted by it. if theres anything i learned if you hear a heavy engine, find a bush.........or dive into a room and go prone so they dont see you through the window.

get down, dont move. the eyes notice mroe easily things that move, i've had situations where i was right infront of a tank that turned a corner and i just tood still, behind one of those thicker wooden poles with the powerlines on them, and it drove right past me without noticing me at all. needless to say the pole isnt thick enough to cover my body, my arms head and front half of my body were probably sticking out.

[Solid Knight]

ok so if a light infantry squad were to be engaged IRL by a tank, while not carrying an AT weapon, yes they'd be screwed, and no that doesnt mean that every squad is going to be carying an anti tank weapon in real life. if a squad IRL had no measure to destroy a tank, they hide. it's called dont engage, if they engage you you're screwed anyway and it was your fault for being spotted by it. if theres anything i learned if you hear a heavy engine, find a bush.........or dive into a room and go prone so they dont see you through the window.

get down, dont move. the eyes notice mroe easily things that move, i've had situations where i was right infront of a tank that turned a corner and i just tood still, behind one of those thicker wooden poles with the powerlines on them, and it drove right past me without noticing me at all. needless to say the pole isnt thick enough to cover my body, my arms head and front half of my body were probably sticking out.

Again it has nothing to do with giving out an LAT to every squad. It has nothing to do with trying to defeat armor all the time in which LAT is nearly a waste on tanks. It has everything to do with being able to obtain kits that you need while still having restrictions so there aren't a bazillion of them out there. I really don't get why people are talking about tanks and hiding and what not which isn't even the reason why I want more kit accessiblity. Hell the LAT isn't even the kit I'm focusing on. What about the Automatic Rifleman or Marksmen kits? I believe I mentioned those numerous times but no, everyone wants to piss on this subject because of the LAT. So I ask you, what is so bad about having more access to common kits like the LAT, Automatic Rifleman, and Marksmen kits? And please refrain from mentioning tanks because last time I checked 2/3 of the kits I mentioned won't do anything against a tank.

[panther501]

whao whao whao, hang on there, why is the medic on the assault team? i understand the support gunner and the riflemanAT are better suited for support, but i ussualy like to keep my medic back.

my assault team is ussualy rifleman, engineer if we have one or the second rifleman, and rifleman AT

ussualy i get my rifleman AT to blast his shell in first if theres no immediate vehichle threat, a target like a bunker or firebase would of course be the first target, then charge in the with the other 2 guys while everyone is dead or supressed. given any chance he would reload and prepare for incoming vehichles.

i am not saying everyone needs something like that. I was just giving an example of how it could be setup and the different combos you could have for your fireteam and flanking team.

[the other Steve]

i dont think i undestand the topic right. what are you suggesting? cant you write a clear line of what you want?

ok, i get it that the TS want that every squad get the possibility to get 1 AT kit, so that SQ1 dont have 2 AT while SQ2 + 3 dont get anything.

every squad should have atleast 1 AT kit whit it. this is realistic and more fun for infantry players.

how about the special kits arent limited to the entire team?
on a 64 player map, the kits shouldnt be limited to the amount of players in the TEAM, as the amount of players in a squad.

all kits are unlimited to request. but each squad have a limitation how many kits of that type can be requestet. and how many kits can be requested in a squad.

______________________________

per squad:
max requestable amount of kits whit:
2 men -> 1 kit.
3 men -> 2 kits.
4 men -> 2 kits.
5 men -> 3 kits.
6 men -> 3 kits.
(whit ecception of officier)


types of kits.
precision kits -> sniper, *******
support kits -> granadier, machine gunner, AA, *******
Anti armor kits -> LAT, HAT.

(im a bit unsure where the specsops and the marksmen belong, both are precision striking, but also mainly support. the devs should decide )


limits for kit types
precision kit per squad -> 1
support kits per squad -> 2
anti tank kit per squad -> 1

but it would be stupid if there is a HAT, a sniper, and a AA dude:
2 support -> no precision kits
1 AT + 1 support -> no precision kits
1 prec -> only 1 support kit
1 prec + AT -> no support kits

AT kits should always be requestable, whit ecception of max requests per squad.

important:
this is only for 1 squad. not for the entire team. each of these 9 squads on the server can request kits whit this rules. it would be incredible usefull if the SQL need to approve first before a SQM can request a kit.

notes:
sniper(/precision) kits limits. snipers are very rare IRL and whit this system every squad is enable to get one. i suggest to keep the whole team limit by snipers. maybe also by specs ops. (could we please rename this kit to demoman?)

vehicle operating kits...
.. are in no way affected by this. they are unlimited in every way.

whit this system.
1. its get incredible important to ask the SQL first before requesting.
2. each squad feels more like a induvidual unit, and not a random bunch of soldiers.
3. a good squad have a real chance to win every fight. not whit ease, but its a chance, even when its very small.
4. more realism. there is always atleast 1 AT system issued to a squad. currently its feels like theres only 4 LAT for a entire team, either becouse the enemy picked ours up or another squad have got 2.

thoughts? other suggestions? good or bad idea?