Posted: 2006-05-07 13:55
"windage" sorry, i dont touch sniper rifles, what is this. Do you mean zoom or something far more clever that sounds quite cool?
Project Reality Forums
What do you want to see in a Realism Mod?
Page 51 of 95
Posted: 2006-05-07 14:32
it means the elevation, scopes usually have different settings( like 100meters, 200 meters, 300 meters ) to actually shoot higher than the target for far away targets to be able to hit it while still keeping the crosshairs on the target
Posted: 2006-05-07 16:29
i am alll for this, this make sense, rather than jsut a bit of random guessing AND WAR IS NOT AOBUT RANDOM GUESSING or being good at it. not entirely true, but mainly!
I like the sound of this, i love games where specilized weapons such as snniper rifles requrie yuo to make adjucements or a small change to the weapon ext., this being actually being more complex than picking up as Ak and firing it, in the vague hope that a bullet might land somewhere on his body.
Sounds good, i cant see any major problems, other than BF2 it self (engine), i say the developer should see if they could get it in PR .4. Nice idea hicapa.
I like the sound of this, i love games where specilized weapons such as snniper rifles requrie yuo to make adjucements or a small change to the weapon ext., this being actually being more complex than picking up as Ak and firing it, in the vague hope that a bullet might land somewhere on his body.
Sounds good, i cant see any major problems, other than BF2 it self (engine), i say the developer should see if they could get it in PR .4. Nice idea hicapa.
Posted: 2006-05-07 16:44
sweet, the future is looking better and better for mods
Posted: 2006-05-07 17:54
Top CAt they shoudl give you a medal: Another idea is to make it that flags can only be captured by 3 or more people. THis could be a huge reason for squads to stick together. Becuase at present most players are in squads, the next stage is to get them working betting together, and this WOULD force them to stick together - "leave no man behind", would become the moto of all squads.
This would could also mean a decline in the number of small squads, these being not as helpfull as half as many larger ones.
The reason for the number 3 is because in is:
- half a full sized squad, and is therefore easily feasible for allmost all squads to complete, not exsisive or extreme.
- it increases the chance that the 3 poeple are co-operating, rather than jsut 2 poeple who randomly met up.
On 64 player amps this could possible increased to 4, due to almsot double the number of players compared to smaller games. This could even result in more Squad co-operation mabey.
This would could also mean a decline in the number of small squads, these being not as helpfull as half as many larger ones.
The reason for the number 3 is because in is:
- half a full sized squad, and is therefore easily feasible for allmost all squads to complete, not exsisive or extreme.
- it increases the chance that the 3 poeple are co-operating, rather than jsut 2 poeple who randomly met up.
On 64 player amps this could possible increased to 4, due to almsot double the number of players compared to smaller games. This could even result in more Squad co-operation mabey.
Posted: 2006-05-07 18:27
Wat i want to c is...
THE BRITISH ARMY AND EVERYTHING ITS GOT!!!!!
LOL
THE BRITISH ARMY AND EVERYTHING ITS GOT!!!!!
LOLPosted: 2006-05-07 18:29
on another note:
i want to c stuff like the bradley and warrior apcs and have more capacity for troops
i want to c stuff like the bradley and warrior apcs and have more capacity for troops
Posted: 2006-05-07 18:46
Both the bradely and the Warrior should have a crew of 2 and be able to carry 6 other passenger. THis is entiely realistic, although one of those vehicles might be able to carry one more in real life but this extra 1 would in no way enhance gamaplay any more. THis enables an entire squad to be dropped off at a location and then be given complete support by a fully manned APC.
Posted: 2006-05-07 18:59
omg, top cat has hit the nail on the head!!!!
this is EXACTLY what should be in the mod
this is EXACTLY what should be in the mod
Posted: 2006-05-07 19:14
I've already suggested that before.
Posted: 2006-05-07 19:22
i know, but somethings jsut need to be hamered home even if this means they get repeated 10 times over , actually quite similar to armoured humvees really.
Posted: 2006-05-08 09:30
http://www.army.mod.uk/img/equipment/pw/law94.1.jpgSgt. Jarvis wrote:LOL, this isn't FH sir, this is Project Reality, you know, with Realism it's main basis?
Look at this... OMG ! He carries... An assault rifle (SA 80)!
Go and tell him that's NOT REALISTIC...
Posted: 2006-05-08 09:41
If you notice that the tip is yellow, this is in training. Also that looks like a 66 LAW (because of the creases like how the weapon is strached out wile in use).'[k wrote:MuffinMaster']http://www.army.mod.uk/img/equipment/pw/law94.1.jpg
Look at this... OMG ! He carries... An assault rifle (SA 80)!
Go and tell him that's NOT REALISTIC...
LAW's or Light Anti-Tank/Material/Armour Weapon's are givern to soldiers within a squad to take out light targets, old tanks and alike when the Anti tank soldiers are unable to do so.
Posted: 2006-05-08 09:57
These guys (Royal Regiment of Fusiliers) are operating a Milan Anti-Tank system, they carry assaultrifles:
And this are no training Pictures. These are from Iraq.
Light Anti Armor:
Any more questions about realism?
And this are no training Pictures. These are from Iraq.
Light Anti Armor:
Any more questions about realism?
Posted: 2006-05-08 10:17
The first picture is an emplaced MILAN, i think that walking around in BF2 with one of thies and emplaceing it everyware would be a foolish thing.
The second is (again) a Light Anti-Material Weapon, a squad level weapon used as i have stated before.
I also forgot, in Vietnam, the North Vietnamies; if ambushed, shot a volly of RPG's at there attackers, somethink the LAW can be used for.
The second is (again) a Light Anti-Material Weapon, a squad level weapon used as i have stated before.
I also forgot, in Vietnam, the North Vietnamies; if ambushed, shot a volly of RPG's at there attackers, somethink the LAW can be used for.
Posted: 2006-05-08 10:29
I don't get your point.
I was just defending my opinion against the assertion that LAW and assaultrifle don't go together.
As far as I know... there are only Light-Anti-Material Weapons carried by soldiers in BF2 and also in PRMM. -> Squad based.
So why not give the AT-Trooper an assaultrifle in PRMM ?
Oh and btw (dont' want to be a smart-***) but: I think it's the "rock of GibraltAr..."
I was just defending my opinion against the assertion that LAW and assaultrifle don't go together.
As far as I know... there are only Light-Anti-Material Weapons carried by soldiers in BF2 and also in PRMM. -> Squad based.
So why not give the AT-Trooper an assaultrifle in PRMM ?
Oh and btw (dont' want to be a smart-***) but: I think it's the "rock of GibraltAr..."
Posted: 2006-05-08 10:41
Its a lyric from a song i copied so when i can be botherd....'[k wrote:MuffinMaster']
Oh and btw (dont' want to be a smart-***) but: I think it's the "rock of GibraltAr..."
Anyway the SRAW and Eryx are not light AT weapons, i am not going to try and explain because AT weapons are not my strong point.
With tanks comeing with front and side Flat Pannle, Block or Stillbrew ERA; the Eryx would be more worth useing.
Posted: 2006-05-08 11:09
The ERYX should be taken out... it is totally unrealistic in the game.
To make it Realistic is should be able to smash a concrete bunker wall with no problems: "Eryx is effective against static and moving tanks fitted with all types of armour including ERA (explosive reactive armour) from 50m up to a maximum range of 600m. It is also capable of defeating structures such as concrete bunkers and earthworks" http://www.army-technology.com/projects/eryx/
To make it Realistic is should be able to smash a concrete bunker wall with no problems: "Eryx is effective against static and moving tanks fitted with all types of armour including ERA (explosive reactive armour) from 50m up to a maximum range of 600m. It is also capable of defeating structures such as concrete bunkers and earthworks" http://www.army-technology.com/projects/eryx/
Posted: 2006-05-08 15:07
is that 2nd one not the predator out of bf2?'[k wrote:MuffinMaster']These guys (Royal Regiment of Fusiliers) are operating a Milan Anti-Tank system, they carry assaultrifles:
And this are no training Pictures. These are from Iraq.
Light Anti Armor:
Any more questions about realism?
anyway for realism, i would have to put this as the AT weapon for the british:
http://www.army.mod.uk/equipment/pw/pw_law.htm
The NLAW
Posted: 2006-05-08 15:16
I think it is an NLAW, try army tech for more pics and info.