Some assorted questions to the Devs

[Jigsaw]

I have a question

1. Will there be Hinds on maps against Chechen rebels?

Thank you.

Ruskies should deffo get Hinds, no question.

Might have to wait tho

[Eddie Baker]

1. US Army uses the Chinook and they plan to do so for a few more decades with the H-47F/G upgrades. The USAF had selected them for their CSAR helicopter replacement, but that was overturned. All the model would need is a reskin.

2. The thermal imaging systems in the Apache and other vehicles only have two selectable modes; "white-hot" and "black-hot." These are what you see most often in videos on YouTube. Their imaging systems also usually have an image intensifier channel (the "green night vision" everyone is familiar with) and a day optic channel (color) with optical and electronic magnification.

3. Couldn't tell you firsthand; never fired one.

4. We've been aware of it for a while; use search, please.

4B. Which Marines? If you mean US Marines, then the AAVP7A1 (current) or EFVP1 (future), then see below. If you mean the upcoming Royal Marine' Viking (current) or Warthog (incoming), then no, we cannot have articulated vehicles in this engine.

5. Eventually, sure, but those are more difficult to find good references of, such as high resolution photos and tech diagrams.

6-9. Long questions which could each fill a thread in and of themselves.

10. If we can get the damn thing to work? Sure.

As for the AAV-7 I think one of the main things keeping it out of the game is that it's main armament is the Mk19 belt fed grenade launcher which might lead to 'grenade spam' but this is just my thought. If I could model one I would...

As I've said before, the main thing is that it's huge. The AAVP7A1 is a clown car. It carries 20-24 of them. Angry, angry clowns, with green and brown face paint. And their noses are red because they are dipped in blood, sunburned and/or mean-assed-drunk. Which is why it seems ridiculous to have it in game just to hold 6 men plus 2 crew (driver and weapon station). Even with the ERA up-armoring it's still just an APC and a magnet for anti-tank weapons; it's as tall and long as a main battle tank, and nowhere near as well-armored.

The AAVP7A1 intended replacements are two vehicles, the MPC and the EFV. The EFV can carry a reinforced rifle squad (17 men); again, limited seats. The MPC will carry a number of troops closer to what we are able to represent, but the platform has not yet been selected, so there's nothing for us to model.

As much as I like the Chinook and other heavier utility helicopter models, I feel even those are out of place. If this engine were more like BF42 or even Vietnam, where we could have players free-standing in ramped vehicles (one step forward, two steps back; thanks again, EA/DICE), the AAVP7A1 or EFVP1 might have even been ahead of the Huey on our to-do list.

[Blakeman]

Eddie Baker;883101']As I've said before, the main thing is that it's huge. The AAVP7A1 is a clown car. It carries 20-24 of them. Angry, angry clowns, with green and brown face paint. And their noses are red because they are dipped in blood, sunburned and/or mean-assed-drunk. Which is why it seems ridiculous to have it in game just to hold 6 men plus 2 crew (driver and weapon station). Even with the ERA up-armoring it's still just an APC and a magnet for anti-tank weapons; it's as tall and long as a main battle tank, and nowhere near as well-armored.

The AAVP7A1 intended replacements are two vehicles, the MPC and the EFV. The EFV can carry a reinforced rifle squad (17 men); again, limited seats. The MPC will carry a number of troops closer to what we are able to represent, but the platform has not yet been selected, so there's nothing for us to model.

As much as I like the Chinook and other heavier utility helicopter models, I feel even those are out of place. If this engine were more like BF42 or even Vietnam, where we could have players free-standing in ramped vehicles (one step forward, two steps back; thanks again, EA/DICE), the AAVP7A1 or EFVP1 might have even been ahead of the Huey on our to-do list.

Love the analogy, since once upon a time I was one of those angry clowns.

I think most folks by now are aware about the seat limitation with BF2 so it wouldn't be as big a deal tbh. Those supply trucks can be even more 'clown car' than an AAVP7A1. My main thought for the AAVP71 was that it could be the 'level' of APC equivelent to the Stryker and BRDM-2 that seem to be the 'light' APCs instead of the LAV-25/BMP/BMD/Warrior IFVs. Perhaps to make up for the 'seat space' which cannot be worked around, it could instead carry two of the APC/Jeep style ammo boxes? I realise it is huge as well, but there are many size disparities in the game already, so I don't see that as a big deal either if it is a bit smaller than reality. The supply truck is already fairly tall as well, it just lacks more armor and the ability to swim.

As far as the helos, I realize that the CH-53 is the largest Western helicopter, but it could be explained much like the chinook with the ability to carry two crates instead of one. If the huey were then made to carry no crates and take the place of the LB, this would make for a more realistic USMC experience in the rotary wing department (unless the V-22 can be worked out ).

I just hope that the USMC can reach a level of realism that it was never able to attain in vBF2 or PR(yet?) because the USMC team has so many good uses in a variety of combat experiences.

Disclaimer: I realize this is a lot of work and although I would love to be able to help, I have tried even simple mapping and it has confused the hell out of me. These are hopes/requests/dreams and are not meant to be stated in a demanding manner.

[fuzzhead]

3. The one “experimental” game mode, which I, for the love of me, cannot remember the name, has not really been played much up to this point. Can we expect to see a revamped game mode in the future releases, or at least more incentive to play it?

yes cnc (command and control) will be getting revised and will be much more user friendly in next version. Our intention is to put more focus on other game modes in the future, we dont care to deal with tradtional "flag" game modes if you cant tell by now

4. I understand that it takes a long time to model, animate, code, and test weapons, vehicles, and the rest. However, I do have a question about some weapons. First, the L22 (a basically compact SA80 issued to British crewmen.)

Are there any plans to put in a L22 in the future? Meanwhile, are there any plans for new Marine vehicles, such as that one large amphibious APC (which I, again, do not know the name of)?

yes there are some plans to include L22, low priority.

5. The new .50 cals for the Western factions are beautiful. Are there any plans to revamp the heavy machine guns for the MEC or the PLA?

yes, opfor equipment will be getting high priority in v0.9

6. With PR becoming progressively more realistic and less forgiving, I would like to know how the Devs feel about progressing from here. While someone must realize that they are about to enter a relatively realistic game play setting when they play PR, it is still a game. To what extent to the Devs feel that realism is necessary? Do the Devs want to preserve some of the “gamey” aspect of the BF2 engine? Can we expect progressively more realism, or will it eventually level off in a balance of realism and “fun”. (I know that fun is up to interpretation, so try to answer the best you can)

I think the game will continue to evolve and get more complex, while keeping it easy to get into initially, but giving long-time players more stuff to do (like squad leaders etc). Adding more depth and complexity doesnt mean that it cannot be enjoyed on a simpler level as well, and that kind of development will continue.

7. We are only one major release away from expecting v1.0. Do the Devs know where they want to go for that ultimate goal? Are there any major plans or expectations, or have you already put in what you really want in, and are now simply adding new maps, fixing bugs, and addressing concerns?

Its a continuous process, I think PR 1.0 is not a final goal but rather just another destination. Obviously it will be a milestone, but the stuff that is truly innovative is not being reserved for a 1.0, but rather being developed RIGHT NOW. I think a 1.0 will probably be the most "polished" PR release ever, but not truly ground breaking.

8. There has been talk about a new sort of asymmetry to maps. How much do the Devs plan to implement the realism of “unfairness” to the game? It can be argued which tank is better, and what weapon shoots straighter, yet some things can be generally accepted. A T-72 will lose to an Abrams, a BRDM will loose to a Warrior. What can we expect to see? How so?

Adding some realism wherever feasible.

9. Do the Devs intend on making larger maps, smaller maps, or a combo of both? Is there more renewed focus on infantry, combined arms, or asset warfare?

Generally experienced mappers are encouraged to make 4km maps if they are up for it (thankfully alot are in developement right now). New mappers are suggested to start with smaller maps which are easier to complete. So yes there will continue to be a variety of maps in the future. But right now there is compartively far too little 4km maps (only 2 presently) which will hopefully change by v0.9.

10. While it was hyped for a bit, it kind of disappeared. I’m talking about the Harrier. Any plans for it? Will we maybe see it in the future, or has it long since died? (Mind you, both the Brits and the US marines use the Harrier)

Jets will be added to 4km maps only, as they are a large asset and just would not work on smaller maps. If there is no suitable 4km map, no harrier.

11. 3D Iron Sights. They are incredible, and seemingly added with ease. Why did it take 2 years for us to make such an innovative addition to the entire game? How easy was it to do? Where did you learn to do it?

Chuc. Hes the reason we have all the amazing animations that we do. It is hella hard to find a motivated animator and chuc took it upon himself to learn animation and is now uber l33t, bow down to his leetness.