Project Reality Forums

SuperHornet wrote:You still didnt provide a valid reason why they should have optics.

Also, I CQB with a RPG. You ever shoot someone coming up the stairs with an RPG? Even though it doesn't explode it still kills them. Beats rushing at them with a knife.

Valid reason: because they can(realistically) and it was not imbalanced when they had magnifying optics on rifleman/SL kits before. PSO and POSP scopes are expensive(relatively, they are still some of the most cost-effective optics), Romanian-made TIP2 scopes are cheap(half as much as POSP, even less than that against PSO), and they do fit on AK since they are tritium powered(nothing protruding on the bottom to run into AK top cover).

You waste RPG on people in CQB? Also, Militia LAT kit has a rifle...
This is about Militia, not Insurgents.

Murphy wrote:I'm surprised that after years and years of RPG practice people don't prefer the ironsights version. The scoped RPG gives you the false impression that you will actually be able to hit that target just because you can see it better. At 200+ meters scoped or not it's a hell of a shot with either weapon system and with the scoped version you don't really get to see the drop as that well for your follow up shot.

A smart RPG user will play like a smart IS user, close that distance as much as possible to get an easier shot and give the opponent a lot less chance of escape. Scopes encourage attempting long shots which are wastes of ammo (fun if you have ammo to waste ofc), and offer the enemy plenty of chance to escape/evade/regroup/attack.

I finally realized this is more or less an issue of comfort. Are you comfortable running around dangerously close to the enemy or are you more confident watching them at range. Either way enemy players will do their best to keep you out of your comfort zone, which is why I enjoy meeting them face to face for tea and grenades as many people firmly hold onto the idea that they are superior because they can see what they are shooting easier at distances.

Again, scopes can be used to see better(and identify the target) WITHOUT pulling binoculars; it helps when you expect armoured vehicle to appear very soon and might lose the opportunity if you pull out binos and then have to re-arm the RPG which takes several seconds and then sight in the RPG which takes even more time...

Also, the more distance you close(after seeing the enemy), the longer you have to wait for deviation to settle. It does not take any more than 3 seconds for APC with thermals to spot someone.

You can run up to close range comfortably with scoped rifles because deviation is the same... And that provides its own problem because your deviation is at MAXIMUM while the ones sitting there is at MINIMUM(or very close to it), and that is if you do not get picked off by scoped AR elsewhere before you get there(oftenly there is not a single cluster of enemy but multiple squads working together to approach a flag from different directions). And obviously there is going to be enemy with ironsight(medic and/or specialist, for example) looking around for possible flanking(which is you and you are now spraying rounds against someone who has deviation at minimum...). All this ambush and flanking is very situational; you simply cannot force a faction to play successfully like this every single time.

Also, just because Militia can have magnifying optics on regular rifles that does not mean they will have shootout over long range every time; if Ambush puts Militia in advantageous position, they will do it.

You're still missing the point. Militia are meant to have different equipment than BLUFOR, and their equipment is supposed to be inferior to theirs, otherwise, they would just be another Russian faction.

Also, answer this: if the Militia are so disadvantaged because of their lack of scopes, how come the Militia maps in PR are some of the most balanced maps in game?

ExNusquam wrote:You're still missing the point. Militia are meant to have different equipment than BLUFOR, and their equipment is supposed to be inferior to theirs, otherwise, they would just be another Russian faction.

Also, answer this: if the Militia are so disadvantaged because of their lack of scopes, how come the Militia maps in PR are some of the most balanced maps in game?

Uhh... yeah, did you see those FOB-related deployables? Unscoped AR? Lightly-Armoured vehicles? Tank that reloads much slower than the enemy's? UAV with lower fly time?

You missed the point; it is not about how disadvantaged Militia is. It just makes sense for them to have cheap optics.
Militia maps are not balanced around how infantry does; there are static defenses that somewhat evens the odds; it seems balanced because the win/lose ratios looks about equal, but it all depends on whether BluFor armor squads are taken out by static defense cannons(which everyone knows where it is, or can atleast guess) or not. At least, that is how less organized matches(for example pubs, especially on Reality China server last night...) goes. And for maps with multiple ways to get to the objective; ambush is never 100% guaranteed to work(still quite a bit more possible than real life)...

None of that even has anything to do with whether infantry has optics or not; so why are you so against Militia having optics(again, I said cheap optics, not 1pn29 like Russians)???

ComradeHX wrote:Also, the more distance you close(after seeing the enemy), the longer you have to wait for deviation to settle.

Entirely the opposite, the closer you are the less effect deviation has which is why smart RPG teams will get as close to the enemy armor as possible. The trees and/or terrain on every Militia map offer excellent concealment and armor can be heard from very very far away.

You don't have to expose yourself on your approach, and if you have keen situational awareness Militia normally has free reign for picking their fights. These are the skills needed to be successful on Militia, not overwhelming the enemy with firepower from range. This is why I strongly believe Militia should never have scoped rifles for normal kits (Obviously Sniper/Marksman is an entirely different case).

Murphy wrote:Entirely the opposite, the closer you are the less effect deviation has which is why smart RPG teams will get as close to the enemy armor as possible. The trees and/or terrain on every Militia map offer excellent concealment and armor can be heard from very very far away.

You don't have to expose yourself on your approach, and if you have keen situational awareness Militia normally has free reign for picking their fights. These are the skills needed to be successful on Militia, not overwhelming the enemy with firepower from range. This is why I strongly believe Militia should never have scoped rifles for normal kits (Obviously Sniper/Marksman is an entirely different case).

You have no idea what your deviation cone will be and if you do not hit with that RPG at close range, you are going to get shot by APC. Gamble with deviation is not going to work every time. Also, armor cannot be heard from very far away when the driver gets into another seat; if the driver is any decent, the vehicle will be placed in somewhere smart so sneaking up to it is not that easy without being spotted(in this case, since militia does not mave any long-range HAT, BluFor can comfortably sit APC on top of a hill with a line of infantry...good luck getting around that). And if you get up THAT close so deviation does not matter...you are within your own RPG's safety range...might as well stick an arty IED up there.

Militia is never going to overwhelm enemy with long range fire even with magnifying optics on regular rifleman kits; they miss the most basic scoped AR anyway(notice I am only talking about giving scopes to regular rifleman kits, not AR) and they have a lot less armor...shootout at range will only end up in Militia's lose.

Keep situational awareness can be had by both sides; and all that concealment you want to depend on can and will work against you.

Again, Militia can STILL do ambushes with whatever they are doing right now even with scoped rifleman kits; it is not going to make game imbalanced for anyone. Infantry wise, Fools Road was fine when they had scope before; it is not as if having scopes on rifle will make Militia rush forward to attack BluFor.

The gamble for deviation is trying to hit it from further then you have to. If you land your shot and fire from a place of your choice you would ideally have cover (jack in the box anyone?) and a fallback plan should things go sour. There is no excuse for missing an RPG shot at close range, the deviation takes around 8 seconds to FULLY settle. If you are right up their *** you may need to wait half of that, also being hit inside armor is always disorienting for a moment and that's when you reposition. If you are trying to LAT a tank you will die no doubt, but if your HAT lands at point blank it's good night Challenger/T90.

You are arguing for a style of play that is not meant for Militia, I believe that is the overall sum of my posts and others who see things as I do. If you really hate lack of optics so much you can always avoid being Militia. I personally love the faction and would really be saddened if their overall theme were to be shifted back to the earlier version where they were essential just a bland Russian ripoff with different geometries.

You keep on bringing up the words 'cheap optics.' Bud, this a video game that doesn't have an economy. So the money part of your argument is irrelevant.

When remembering the humble beginnings of the Militia, a Chechen Rebel force, one actually realizes that the claim of 'cheap optics' is unrealistic. Crack open google just a bit and you'll see how truly lacking in funds any real rebel force is. Just because you and I can access these things in theory and singularily doesn't mean a militia force with little to no funding can do it on a scale you are suggesting.

There is no justification for the militia getting scopes. They are an attempt at asymmetrical warfare in AAS. Yes they are regulated to certain tactics and strategies but hopefully the map plays to that, and all maps I've seen with them on do.

ytman wrote:When remembering the humble beginnings of the Militia, a Chechen Rebel force, one actually realizes that the claim of 'cheap optics' is unrealistic. Crack open google just a bit and you'll see how truly lacking in funds any real rebel force is. Just because you and I can access these things in theory and singularily doesn't mean a militia force with little to no funding can do it on a scale you are suggesting.

There is no justification for the militia getting scopes. They are an attempt at asymmetrical warfare in AAS. Yes they are regulated to certain tactics and strategies but hopefully the map plays to that, and all maps I've seen with them on do.

And then it was specifically stated that Militia =/= Chechen.

Even if they are Chechen:
If they have "little to no funding", how did they get UAV and BRDM2? How do you know that every unit is equipped at the same level? PR only has 32 people per side unless on special occasions.

Reality is that Chechen actually can get scopes but no way to mount them securely; the poorest ones you see have HOMEMADE rifles that do not even have optics rail and AK74 with optics rail is not that common in the first place. If there are units with AK74(with optics rail), they can and probably will use optics when appropriate. And that is not impossible even in Russia; where do you think all the Soviet military surplus in other side of the globe came from? Official government sanctioned sales?lol no Hint: there are warehouses that you can pay to get in.

This is PR world and Militia is a fictional military faction; if they have AK74 with optics rail while having enough money for UAV and all the cool toys, then scopes are no problem.

Asymmetrical warfare is not affected by scopes in PR(because if maps puts in THAT much concealment then people WILL pick ironsighted AK47, not optics equipped AK74; or they can simply CQB with scoped rifle...not like people HAVE to snipe from 200m away with regular rifles...because you KNOW standing in the open shooting long range is a great idea to attract APC w/ thermals due to tracer). Your argument is irrelevant.

ComradeHX wrote:And then it was specifically stated that Militia =/= Chechen.

Yet they still model that faction very well. Militia is not Chechen Militia, yes, but they serve as proxy for such a force.

If they have "little to no funding", how did they get UAV and BRDM2? How do you know that every unit is equipped at the same level? PR only has 32 people per side unless on special occasions.

How do the Taliban have tanks without optics? Come on, its not hard to realize that most, if not all, Militia assets are handme downs from the Soviet era. Its reasonable to realize that a few of those assets would be around.

This is PR world and Militia is a fictional military faction; if they have AK74 with optics rail while having enough money for UAV and all the cool toys, then scopes is no problem.

A Militia infers that it is pseudo military. The UAV I can't justify but everything else works when assuming a very loose and unregimented rebel force.

Asymmetrical warfare is not affected by scopes in PR(because if maps puts in THAT much concealment then people WILL pick ironsighted AK47, not optics equipped AK74). Your argument is irrelevant.

It can and is affected by scopes, though it isn't entirely dependent on scopes. The willingness and capabilities to engage at ranges is proportional to the amount of optics given on a team.

Furthermore my argument is that the Militia are a test at an unconventional force that is less well equipped than the conventional forces. Therefore they should stay that way else-wise be a re-skinned Russian force. That point is not moot. Put it this way... should Muttrah allow for the MEC to stage an Amphibious assault?

ytman wrote: Put it this way... should Muttrah allow for the MEC to stage an Amphibious assault?

They always could when they had BRDM2; if they can get them in water without dying...

ytman wrote: How do the Taliban have tanks without optics? Come on, its not hard to realize that most, if not all, Militia assets are handme downs from the Soviet era. Its reasonable to realize that a few of those assets would be around.

Taliban =/= Chechen.
Taliban =/= Militia.

ytman wrote: It can and is affected by scopes, though it isn't entirely dependent on scopes. The willingness and capabilities to engage at ranges is proportional to the amount of optics given on a team.

Militia will find that they lose every round if all they do is snipe away with scoped rifleman kits(because their AR do not have scopes, among many other reasons). Willingness is going to go down very fast.

There is also a difference in quality of the optics; Blufor optics has a lot of blur areas so any movement in those areas can be seen easily. Militia can get a slightly modified PSO fro SVD for stand in of Romanian cheap TIP2 scope; which does not really offer the advantage of 3d scopes and has confusing reticle for anyone not used to them.

Lol. I'm not even going to bother reading your post's for now on since you're not making any sense.

You're in a "defensive" mode and will say anything ( even if its wrong ) to try and push your points. Unfortunately, your trying to fight a battle you can't win. Your arguments just aren't valid and irrelevant.

- Slow *** phone internet double post -

SuperHornet wrote:Your arguments just aren't valid and irrelevant.

Speak for yourself and learn to read.

ComradeHX wrote:They always could when they had BRDM2; if they can get them in water without dying...

Not my point. An amphibious APC does not make an assault (BTR-60 can still sit in the water now). My point was that asymmetry can be a good thing while still forcing two team different into different strategies and tactics.

The Mec on Muttrah need to focus on ground supply lines and Air Defense and hold out long enough until the USMC's assault falters and can be properly counter attacked. The USMC needs to focus on rapid mobilization and consolidation of both its mechanized and air assets hand in hand, extra effort should be place on constricting the Mec's supply line.

The two teams on Muttrah play against each other.

Taliban =/= Chechen.
Taliban =/= Militia.

My point was that the Taliban had, before the war with the US, left over equipment from the Soviet era war. This is a perfect justification as to why the catch all 'militia faction' can have BRDMs and T55s.

You make these silly inequalities without giving the greater idea more thought than you are ready to give. The Taliban/Hamas are both specific real world examples of unconventional forces in PR where the Militia is a fictional 'blank slate' of what ever the devs want to make of them.

However, just because they are a 'blank slate' does not mean they need to have the playstyle you are fighting for. The history of the 'Militia faction' plays well in underlining their purpose and role.

Militia will find that they lose every round if all they do is snipe away with scoped rifleman kits(because their AR do not have scopes, among many other reasons). Willingness is going to go down very fast.

There is also a difference in quality of the optics; Blufor optics has a lot of blur areas so any movement in those areas can be seen easily. Militia can get a slightly modified PSO fro SVD for stand in of Romanian cheap TIP2 scope; which does not really offer the advantage of 3d scopes and has confusing reticle for anyone not used to them.

It doesn't matter how or what the Militia will or wont do with optics. It doesn't go along with their faction's ethos and I think it gives that team an amount of character they wouldn't normally have. I really enjoy the Militia team as it stands.

ytman wrote:Not my point. An amphibious APC does not make an assault (BTR-60 can still sit in the water now). My point was that asymmetry can be a good thing while still forcing two team different into different strategies and tactics.

The Mec on Muttrah need to focus on ground supply lines and Air Defense and hold out long enough until the USMC's assault falters and can be properly counter attacked. The USMC needs to focus on rapid mobilization and consolidation of both its mechanized and air assets hand in hand, extra effort should be place on constricting the Mec's supply line.

BTR60 does not spawn immediately; while I recall at least transport BRDM2 spawn immediately when match starts. It is better than rushing to the warehouses.

Muttrah also happens to be the perfect example of asymmetrical balance with BOTH SIDES having magnifying optics as a CHOICE.

ytman wrote: My point was that the Taliban had, before the war with the US, left over equipment from the Soviet era war. This is a perfect justification as to why the catch all 'militia faction' can have BRDMs and T55s.

ALL of the former WARPAC countries have leftover stocks of weapons/equipment from the Soviet era. Militia can have those(because of simply availability, not cost); and they have money for UAV so they probably have the money to afford cheap scopes.

ytman wrote: However, just because they are a 'blank slate' does not mean they need to have the playstyle you are fighting for. The history of the 'Militia faction' plays well in underlining their purpose and role.



It doesn't matter how or what the Militia will or wont do with optics. It doesn't go along with their faction's ethos and I think it gives that team an amount of character they wouldn't normally have. I really enjoy the Militia team as it stands.

Blank slate faction... ethos?
The character of a team is determined by the players.
If the players want to suicide bomb a cache with a humvee loaded with C4; they can screw up INS mode even more.

Also, I am not fighting for any playstyle; just scopes. If maps are so balanced and encourages close range ambush; then PLAYSTYLE WILL NOT CHANGE AT ALL.

According to your statement; BluFor has more 'character' than militia because they have more scopes.

Indeed, it DOES NOT matter whether they have optics or not. They are not going to change drastically just from adding some scopes for rifleman only. The rifleman kits with magnifying optics is a CHOICE, not a REQUIREMENT.

If you want to make the map more asymmetrical; just FORCE ALL BluFor kits to have magnifying optics; then we can talk asymmetrical. Because right now BluFor can do everything Militia do, but more; and that makes Militia the faction with all the trolls/people wanting to switch but cannot. Also server population tends to drop when Militia maps come up.

Has it not been mentioned that Fools Road is basically a 50/50 chance to win map. Meaning despite their lack of optics the Militia force still comes out on top half the time, and assuming both teams play smart the match can go either way at any point. This goes to prove that Militia are very capable of handling Blufor optics with other tactics you obviously refuse to acknowledge as on par with the conventional approach of the blufor side.

The faction you are looking for is already ingame as I, and others have already pointed out. What is your justification for turning Militia into Russia, other then your personal disdain of iron-sights (it's really obvious).

ComradeHX wrote:BTR60 does not spawn immediately; while I recall at least transport BRDM2 spawn immediately when match starts. It is better than rushing to the warehouses.

Yeah BTR is on short delay. Either way the 'amphibious option' of the MEC team, BRDM/BTR, is a gimmick and will only be successful for the sheer 'surprise' of the Op. I've seen the standard rush into Docks work better anyways... amphib is too slow.

Muttrah also happens to be the perfect example of asymmetrical balance with BOTH SIDES having magnifying optics as a CHOICE.

But they don't have choices in the assets given to them or for the play style each team must use to win.

Also, I am not fighting for any playstyle; just scopes. If maps are so balanced and encourages close range ambush; then PLAYSTYLE WILL NOT CHANGE AT ALL.

Then nothing would be gained from the change, and the Militia faction would lose an aspect of its 'non-standard' military character... effectively becoming a RussianFed clone.

According to your statement; BluFor has more 'character' than militia because they have more scopes.

No. Thats your interpretation of my statement.

Indeed, it DOES NOT matter whether they have optics or not. They are not going to change drastically just from adding some scopes for rifleman only. The rifleman kits with magnifying optics is a CHOICE, not a REQUIREMENT.

If you want to make the map more asymmetrical; just FORCE ALL BluFor kits to have magnifying optics; then we can talk asymmetrical. Because right now BluFor can do everything Militia do, but more; and that makes Militia the faction with all the trolls/people wanting to switch but cannot. Also server population tends to drop when Militia maps come up.

Wouldn't make sense realistically.

I personally prefer Militia over Britain and love taking it to the team who thinks their cool toys will make them win.

Murphy wrote:Has it not been mentioned that Fools Road is basically a 50/50 chance to win map. Meaning despite their lack of optics the Militia force still comes out on top half the time, and assuming both teams play smart the match can go either way at any point. This goes to prove that Militia are very capable of handling Blufor optics with other tactics you obviously refuse to acknowledge as on par with the conventional approach of the blufor side.

The faction you are looking for is already ingame as I, and others have already pointed out. What is your justification for turning Militia into Russia, other then your personal disdain of iron-sights (it's really obvious).

That is what I said; it has nothing to do with lack of optics.

Which is why you have no gameplay issue in giving Militia scopes; you just want to feel special.

Militia is special enough; you do not have to put them in the special-ed to make them special.

Again; difference between Militia and Russia was obvious even when Militia had scoped rifleman kits. If you cannot see that then you need to actually play on Russian side for once.

Also, you keep saying that I have disdain of iron-sights. That is just because I want Militia to have scope?
No. I hate those rubber eyepieces on PSO clones because in-game they make 3d scope feature completely worthless.
I just wanted to give Militia more options and I believe it is perfectly fine even for the image of Militia if they have cheap TIP2 scopes(do you even know what that look like without using google? It is not the 1pn29 that the Russians use).

Because currently we have AK74 with optics rail; might as well use it.

ytman wrote:

ComradeHX;1763470 wrote:BTR60 does not spawn immediately; while I recall at least transport BRDM2 spawn immediately when match starts. It is better than rushing to the warehouses.

Yeah BTR is on short delay. Either way the 'amphibious option' of the MEC team, BRDM/BTR, is a gimmick and will only be successful for the sheer 'surprise' of the Op. I've seen the standard rush into Docks work better anyways... amphib is too slow.

That is the point; driving on water is slower so they cannot rush dock. But they can appear from a different direction and possibly catch enemy off guard from the sea instead of in the warehouses(probably expected; so there will be LAT waiting).

ytman wrote: But they don't have choices in the assets given to them or for the play style each team must use to win.

There is a server running Muttrah 24/7 and is mostly populated. Muttrah is what Fools Road could be if balance is done on asset level(the level that is most important) instead of infantry(which does not balance much at all).

ytman wrote: Then nothing would be gained from the change, and the Militia faction would lose an aspect of its 'non-standard' military character... effectively becoming a RussianFed clone.

It has plenty of non-standard features already; such as SPG deployables and choice between RPG7 and RPG26 for LAT(two inaccurate shots vs. one). Most important feature is the appearance; Militia uniform is quite obviously non-standard.

ytman wrote: No. Thats your interpretation of my statement.

That is exactly what your statement means. "[scope] gives that team an amount of character they wouldn't normally have" That is essentially saying scope gives more character.

ytman wrote: Wouldn't make sense realistically.

Which part is not realistic? What is realistic to you? If it is to be made realistic; Russia vs. Militia maps should have Russians winning one-sided every time(and give them Anti-personnel rounds for RPG for extra fun) with LOADS of more tanks and planes. And forget regular armies; bring out the interior troops. The MVD guys; with Smersh and AK105s.

ytman wrote: I personally prefer Militia over Britain and love taking it to the team who thinks their cool toys will make them win.

Good luck with that; because the winning British team would not be the team that thinks like that.

On an infantry level it was exactly like Russia and you have to be delusional to not realize that. The model of optics doesn't matter, you're struggling to stay relevant here.