Page 6 of 7
Posted: 2008-04-27 12:18
by El_Vikingo
Scopes aren't the problem, t'is the lack of realistic balistics!
Posted: 2008-04-27 13:22
by Rudd
El_Vikingo wrote:Scopes aren't the problem, t'is the lack of realistic balistics!
there are community members on that at least, 0.8 might be more interesting than we ever guessed
new balistics in existing maps will be cool to get used to.
Posted: 2008-04-27 13:27
by Scot
to be honest, if im a medic, and i nomrally have like 3-4 scopes in the squad, the iron sights are for me a suppressing weapon at long range. Just put rounds on the hill, leave the scopes to shoot em
Posted: 2008-04-27 13:28
by DirtyHarry88
Outlawz wrote:I think, that with 5 marksman kits available the sniper kits should go. Who needs a sniper, when you have tanks with 120mm shells that can fire across the map without any account for the drop etc. and each squad can get one marksman alongside the unlimited scoped rifleman kit.
Which brings me to the second idea, where the scoped rifleman kit is a.) is totally removed and scopes are only kept on Officer/Grenadier alongside the Marksman or b.) it's made requestable but unlimited in amount, like the Crewman/Pilot. But I think the first idea works better and it reduces the amount of scopes on the battlefield.
I mean, have 5 squads and a commander, that's 5+1 Officer, 5 Grenadiers and 5 Marksmen which adds up to 16 players out of 32 on a team.
And most people think, that scoped rifleman is the "free" version a scoped rifle, when you can't get a Sniper/Marksman. The squadless lone wolfs are at disadvantage as they cannot see enemies on the minimap, but that doesn't mean they can't be effective at being arseholes, that ruin everything, because they run around with a scope and stumble over an enemy squad and go wtfinstaheadshot on them.
Commence discussion (and flame wars)
Or not.
Posted: 2008-04-27 16:36
by Sabre_tooth_tigger
Snipers are more accurate at longer ranges even now and the extra scope factor helps with the really long shots. Your right that they arent needed for anything closer then that so its the players who should change how they use the kit.
Problem is the range of the sniper is 600m+ but the view distance on some maps is less then that making it redundant in those cases - thats not a case for removing rifleman scope imo
Posted: 2008-04-28 08:01
by PFunk
cplgangster wrote:the thing is though with the automatic rifleman being supressed by a scoped rifleman he jsut need to hide for what 2 seconds find where fire is coming from scoot over about 4 feet then just let rip and the rifleman will either be dead or heavily supressed.
Plus when I'm suppressed and my SL gives me a direction to shoot at like a marker or something I don't need to have perfect vision to hit it. I can fire roughly cause thats what a support gunner does. Plus the support gun shouldn't be the point guy so he should be one of the last guys to get suppressed or at least not be the first with enough time to try and suppress the other sunnuvabitch.
Posted: 2008-04-28 10:24
by General_J0k3r
my 50 cents:
more scopes, especially for medics. and i would LOVE scopes on .50 cals
Posted: 2008-04-28 16:00
by Nick The Bubble
I think all infantry should have scopes on their rifles, except heavy AT and crewmen, who should have SMGs. Also the automatic rifleman should have a scope for all the main factions, as they do in real life.
Posted: 2008-04-28 21:10
by DeltaFart
You look up images of war in iraq now, pretty much noone runs around there ithout a scope, so i dont see the reason the engineer and medic dont get the scopes also. THey are used almost like CQB soldiers now. The way it should be is everyone gets a scope, except for the pilot, crewman, and the Spec Op (he gets a red dot or an EOTech type sight)
Posted: 2008-04-28 21:41
by agentscar
the point is, theres not ENOUGH optics in PR. these days, armies like the USMC, US army, and british army and others equip nearly all soldiers with optics.
down with optics means down with realism.
I agree,so much.
Posted: 2008-04-29 17:11
by (HUN)Rud3bwoy
Posted: 2008-04-29 17:45
by Alex6714
The top one is an airsoft gun, and that is not a scope it holds the battery. The bottome one does not have a scope, that is an aimpoint red dot sight.
Posted: 2008-04-29 18:01
by Natala
In relation to the "Should Insurgents have scopes" debate, I have just one thing to say.
If I as an Insurgent had the option between scope or Ironsight, I would choose Ironsight.
why?
Because most of the Insurgent maps are close combat and defend, and in on those maps Ironsight is vastly superior to Scope, assuming you have the skills and patience to use it correctly.
You can have the longest range scope in the world, but once you are on the street, and running around corners, the fellow with Ironsight will defeat you every time.
Do Not Underestimate the Power of Ironsight in Close Combat Fighting!
Posted: 2008-04-29 18:12
by Alex6714
Emnyron wrote:Oh but I do, You see, You can shoot at the Apatche with all your mighty AK`s, and its gonna stop, laugh at you, and deliver 30mm Dr.Feelgoods to evryone who wants some
I will have some.
While I agree, in CQB ironsights are much better, having the ability to have a scope is a great advantage, especially seeing that most scopes have back up ironsights on them.
Posted: 2008-04-29 18:55
by Sabre_tooth_tigger
Alex6714 wrote:
The top one is an airsoft gun, and that is not a scope it holds the battery. The bottome one does not have a scope, that is an aimpoint red dot sight.
It was described as an infrared nightvision I think
Full pic with Night Vision scope.jpg
Posted: 2008-04-29 19:13
by Alex6714
Sabre_tooth_tigger wrote:It was described as an infrared nightvision I think
What was?
Posted: 2008-04-29 19:26
by 00SoldierofFortune00
Pariel wrote:The reason the other classes don't have scopes is because they have other extremely useful tools; engineer has C4 and mines, medic has the ability to keep soldiers alive and keep your team from losing tickets.
There wouldn't be a need for a rifleman class if all the classes got optics, people would just use the medic and engineer classes all the time. I realize that's somewhat of an exaggeration, but that's why the system is set up the way it is.
No, because medics don't have nades, ammo bags, or extra magazines of ammo. They have extra bandages, but those don't matter once you already go down. Engineer should probably be limited anyway and maybe have 2 Light AT's per squad in its place. Engineer shouldn't have scopes IMO because they are a support role.
Medics are a support role too, but they are on the frontlines with the infantry and not back in the rear building stuff like an engineer.
Posted: 2008-04-29 20:18
by Kalo Shin
All of this is complete non-sense (The arguement about removing them).
And whoever thinks Snipers are useless needs to scrub their nethers with Steel Wool..
Important Targets for Snipers : Tanks (Spot them out, tell the Commander to tell the others)
RPG's (It's horrible to have your entire squad taken out by one...)
Automatic Riflemen (These guys can pin down an ENTIRE squad if they know what they're doing).
Ambushers (Need i say more? They have IED's, and one may be layed where a squad is headed).
Other Snipers...
I think i've said enough, and these guys are right, if anything, Scopes should be added to more Kits...Though i'll admit, Scoped Soldiers are at a disadvantage in Maps like Al Basrah
