Project Reality Forums

1. Why does Karbala not have an Arty IED as a counter to BluFor armor?

2. Why do Techies (.50 cal variety) not have an ammo box?

3. Where do you find the patience to put up with the impatient, rude, and ungrateful people on the forums on a daily basis? (I know I have fallen into at least the first two categories at one time or another. )

DEVS! Y U NO ANSWER ANY OF THE PR2 QUESTIONS?!?!?!?!?!?

Doc.Pock wrote:DEVS! Y U NO ANSWER ANY OF THE PR2 QUESTIONS?!?!?!?!?!?

because your asking the wrong DEVs, they have a secret forum afaik.

OriginalWarrior wrote:Karbala has bomb cars and Gary.
techies dont need ammo, there is another ammo truck for that with 3-4boxes.

Since when did you become a Dev, OG?

[R-CON]Jafar Ironclad wrote: I cannot comment on the CH-53.

Does that mean it is being worked on?

[R-CON]Jafar Ironclad wrote: The USMC AV-8B Harrier II is being worked on. A version of it exists in the current PR build, and you can find it on Rhino's Test Airfield downloadable map; however, its flight physics are far from final as currently implemented.

Is that what happened to your improved Harrier code?

What's the best way to pronounce Beethoven?

Mikemonster wrote:What's the best way to pronounce Beethoven?

Theres more than 1

Mikemonster wrote:What's the best way to pronounce Beethoven?

Bee-though-veen

'Beeth' * 'uven'?

[R-CON]Jafar Ironclad wrote:Chido:

The LCAC has been repeatedly suggested, and attempted; however, complications exist which make full implementation difficult in the BF2 engine

I have been told that it is not so hard to implement the LCAC into the BF2 engine, you could code it like you have with the current amphibious vehicles.

Im not saying its easy, but its not impossible.

Edit; I Just been wondering why it has not been added, I know its not a priority, but i dont think it should be left out either.

PR2? <3

trololololol.

Are you ever going to give the Chinese vehicles some damn love? You reskinned the British vehicles last patch while that Chinese vehicles still have their terrible looking vbf2 textures.

I'm guessing it's not really worth the effort skinning them since actual new models are needed.

[R-CON]Jafar Ironclad wrote:Chido:

The LCAC has been repeatedly suggested, and attempted; however, complications exist which make full implementation difficult in the BF2 engine; additionally, you only really see the LCAC employed in a "safe zone", I.E. after troops have secured the amphibious landing zone.

Not sure where you've got the idea of it being attempted, unless you mean attempted by DICE?

http://www.f7c-network.com/data/media/808/lcac.jpg

DICE did originally make the LCAC for BF2 and as a hovercraft afaik, it worked totally fine but you couldn't drive things on/off it etc. The main reason that I'm aware of why DICE didn't implement it is because it wouldn't offer anything to BF2's gameplay. But we here at PR haven't made any attempt to make a LCAC although its not beyond the BF2 code to have one, we just have better things to make

'[RIP wrote:-Chido312;1732412']Edit; I Just been wondering why it has not been added, I know its not a priority, but i dont think it should be left out either.

If you want to model it that's fine by us, but LCUs are more common and better all round

Navo wrote:Are you ever going to give the Chinese vehicles some damn love? You reskinned the British vehicles last patch while that Chinese vehicles still have their terrible looking vbf2 textures.

The british vehicles just had the black removed from the p.s.d iirc...wasn't a total reskin. (I think it was just the removal of the associated layers and then resave, not like having to do it again from scratch since Stigger had all his .psds iirc)

China got a nice boost last patch with kit geometries, and as the public is already aware their weapons are getting an overhaul with an eye to optimisation, vehicle wise the Chinese are in need....but its not like the PR modelers/etc are not doing anything. They have to-do lists the length of the Bayeux Tapestry.

And iirc....the PR textures for Chinese vehicles are actually different to teh EA ones? I'm 40% certain...the colours are different.

I also have another question. How hard would it be to change the way we select weapons in requested kits?

I ask because the AR gunner wouldnt alsways use the 249 in the US Army or USMC. maybe add the M-240 or M-60 to the USMC AR optional weapons.

Opinions?

Note this video.

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=8xdj0lBklvM

'[RIP wrote:-Chido312;1732480']I also have another question. How hard would it be to change the way we select weapons in requested kits?

I ask because the AR gunner wouldnt alsways use the 249 in the US Army or USMC. maybe add the M-240 or M-60 to the USMC AR optional weapons.

You could make it like you do with the ranges on the contacts on the comm rose. right click select weapon and done.

Opinions?

Note this video.

M240B HELMET CAM AMBUSH FIREFIGHT-AFGHANISTAN 2011 - YouTube

Yes we are fully aware of GPMGs which the M240 comes under and yes this is sort of our future hope we will be able to do this but the main thing missing right now is that we don't have GPMGs for all factions, nor even a decent M240/L7 GPMG model for pretty much all the NATO factions

^ apart from the AWESOMESAUZ model on the land rover