Moveable mounted Machinegun/Tow

Shitman · Post by **Shitman** » 2006-05-08 15:28

Hi All.

How about mounted machineguns/mounted TOWs wich can be drop or taken from support-jeeps or support-trucks? A player could take it as a kit and place it anywhere to enforce defendpositions.
Is it possible to code?

Malik · Post by **Malik** » 2006-05-08 16:43

Yeah, the whole team could steal all the tows and machine guns, plant them outside their last spawn and mow down the enemy, thus winning the game...

NiGHTWoLF · Post by **NiGHTWoLF** » 2006-05-08 18:44

I think he means limiting the number of them, a team hardly isnt going to get mowed down by 2 machine guns or TOWs now are they? I think its a good idea myself.

Malik · Post by **Malik** » 2006-05-08 18:48

No, he's suggesting all fixed machine guns such as the ones in vehicles and the static TOW missiles should be able to be picked up as a kit and then deployed elsewhere. This would indeed mean players could remove all the powerful static weapons and place them in one location creating a barricade.

Shitman · Post by **Shitman** » 2006-05-08 20:02

Malik wrote:No, he's suggesting all fixed machine guns such as the ones in vehicles and the static TOW missiles should be able to be picked up as a kit and then deployed elsewhere. This would indeed mean players could remove all the powerful static weapons and place them in one location creating a barricade.

Not exactly. I didnt want to suggest to remove the fixed ones. I submitted that for example a Humvee carries one additional MG-Kit and can unload this, so it can be picked up and placed somewhere to create barricades or traps.

trogdor1289 · Post by **trogdor1289** » 2006-05-08 21:02

Would still create a barricade situtaion espically on infantry only maps.

Solitas · Post by **Solitas** » 2006-05-08 21:19

I think the idea suggested a while back of having engineers setting up sandbags would be enough. If you need a turret let support deploy their gun on low level walls (support should have to deploy when going prone IMO anyway)

Malik · Post by **Malik** » 2006-05-08 21:35

The current emplacements are enough in most maps at the moment anyway. Personally I find these MGs no fun, it destroys the point in tactics, just sit back, zoom in and take fire. You can't really miss with te 0.50s, and at least having them strapped to the top of hummers means the hummer is limited from going to some locations. Letting them go anywhere would be chaos, we'd have MG gunners sitting on roofs with their 100% accurate super MGs. Do you really think PR needs that?

Zepheris Casull · Post by **Zepheris Casull** » 2006-05-09 01:57

just like in the past war which have taught us,
sniper & marksman >> machinegunner >> infantry

all given the right condition and location.

and when the condition and location is NOT right for them
infantry >> machinegunner >> sniper & marksman

infantry in general can't possibly punch through a bristling machine gun nest by themself, but like any static gun emplacement, snipers and marksman will eat them for breakfast.

and besides, in real war they DO put these machine guns in any bottleneck that are suitable for it.

PS: i know it's a massive generalization i just did above, but just to get my point across.

Post by **RikiRude** » 2006-05-09 04:52

what the hell Zepheris, you are like the Confucius or Sun Tzu of the PR forums, you always have the most insight in your posts, i always love reading what you have to say.

i'd like to see movable statics, or if possible the eng making sandbags and support setting his gun up to it.

six7 · Post by **six7** » 2006-05-09 05:00

'[R-CON wrote:Riki_Rude_BTYC']what the hell Zepheris, you are like the Confucius or Sun Tzu of the PR forums, you always have the most insight in your posts, i always love reading what you have to say.

i'd like to see movable statics, or if possible the eng making sandbags and support setting his gun up to it.

I hate his posts. The make me feel dumb >_<

Zepheris Casull · Post by **Zepheris Casull** » 2006-05-09 05:33

i am just a bit fed up after going through several cases of ppl complaining about "hey let's remove this grinding machine coz i kept running straight to it and get myself killed" in many occasions, i don't understand why ppl see something so obviously meant to butcher them if they come straight to it and yet... they run to it anyway... why??

Post by **RikiRude** » 2006-05-09 05:46

six7 wrote:I hate his posts. The make me feel dumb >_<

lol agreed!

and a double agree with zephs last post. they are like moths to a flame!

Malik · Post by **Malik** » 2006-05-09 06:39

No way am I complaining about the machine guns, currently they work very nicely. They annihilate infantry well at the moment, but it's useful that they're either in memorisable locations or strapped to the top of a jeep. If we let people take them where they like, we have ourselves a bit of a mess, players will exploit this ability and place machine guns in easily accessible locations. Thank to the draw distance and the MG zoom, it's very easy for a machine gunner to kill a sniper before the sniper gets his shot in (I don't know how greater the sniper upgrade is, but if it takes as many shots in 0.3, that machine gunner will still dominate them).

Zepheris Casull · Post by **Zepheris Casull** » 2006-05-09 15:19

if the sniper is seen by the machine gunner then he should very well be dead. A sniper shouldn't be seen, if he were seen then the enemy would've poured covering fire in his direction and he shouldn't be able to let a shot of from this location. And a gunner for the gun emplacement barely move from their position while manning the gun so if you miss their head while they stand still then that's the sniper's fault for missing his shot.

So how to balance it? we can balance the fact that they can be moved by slowing the movement down while moving it ensuring that the whole movement process would be risky to the gunner. Then add a significant setup time to the gun to make sure they cannot be used in a "shoot and scoot" run.

Still not enough?, take out the ability to jump while carrying the gun and increase the fall damage while carrying the thing as well. Now tell me just how much mobility the gunner lugging this thing around will still have and how many places can he deploy it now. Next, put a limitation (not sure if it's possible) on the surface angle, so that the gun can only be deployed on places that are relatively flat and parallel to horizon.

Possible scenario then: machine gun setup in hill, snipers will eat these for breakfast. Likewise with rooftop, and other high location because unlike a sniper, machine gun tracers will guarantee that ppl will see him once he starts firing and he will be bullet cushion in no time. He can setup on a corner and ambush ppl who pass through it, assuming there's enough distance that ppl cannot run straight to him and melee him. In this case he will be grenade bait if he stick in that location, and if he tries to move which means he has to undeploy the gun, then the waiting enemy will pulverize him when he comes out of his location. And finally we have machine gun's favourite, open space with limited dimension that can be covered easily. In that case, bring the armour support, use smoke to cover the infantry advancing, etc.

solipsism · Post by **solipsism** » 2006-05-09 15:43

Good idea man. I like the limited view angle, no/restricted jump amd slowerspeed. Deploy like DOD seems pretty cool, but probably not possible.

Zepheris Casull · Post by **Zepheris Casull** » 2006-05-09 16:22

actually i don't think i mentioned limited view angle, how do we justify that?

Solitas · Post by **Solitas** » 2006-05-09 16:30

Some nice ideas Zepheris, in all honestly I don't mind the LMG's that much.
But I do mind insta-proning, and support being able to use their LMG's rambo style :/
It takes away from the strategy, yes you can flank LMG's who are overlooking a position, but it's rather hard to flank someone who's just running around like their not carrying a large gun.

Zepheris Casull · Post by **Zepheris Casull** » 2006-05-09 16:41

PR is working on it to make sure the LMG do not induce new rambo fever, that i am certain.

and my idea is directed mainly to static gun emplacement, and not the support class gun.

Solitas · Post by **Solitas** » 2006-05-09 16:45

I know, but the static's are basically the LMG's support carry.
So why not allow support to deploy their guns on walls.

If another kit picked up a static though they couldn't use it (put i down to lack of experience), and could only re-place it somewhere else or in the original position.