Project Reality Forums

Jacksonez__ wrote:If(/when) the T-72M1 gets nerfed to shit-tier, Militia should get it on some maps Why not Grozny? I recall seeing one picture from battle of Grozny where militants were driving a captured T-72 and BTR-60(/80).

Militants driving captured BMP-2 in Grozny


Militants operating captured T-72 (I suppose it's T-72?)



Grozny LRG:
T-72
BMP-2
BMP-1

for militia

The white top ones, ye. Just get rid of the BMP-1 for Militia, give Russia a BMP-1 and a T-72.

Hey Guys for the HAT I have a good solution: remove the HAT from crates and give then as kits on the ground (like in Sebeneh)... also balancing the maps were one team just get a shitty APC

EDIT- I just saw that I forgot something: if this is implemented there will be no limitation to how much HATS a map will get, so if one side gets a lot of Armor, and the other can get up to 3 or more HATs...

Gerfand wrote:Hey Guys for the HAT I have a good solution: remove the HAT from crates and give then as kits on the ground (like in Sebeneh)... also balancing the maps were one team just get a shitty APC

Yes... modern armies can randomly find their launcher somewhere in enemy territory that they haven't been in yet and don't have any of their own. Makes sense.

Steeps wrote:Yes... modern armies can randomly find their launcher somewhere in enemy territory that they haven't been in yet and don't have any of their own. Makes sense.

They can also Find tanks! and Jets!

think then like if was a Tank... an asset that you need to take care of...
the diference is that is for INF squads

EDIT- No kidding but if I was the financial guy for the Army I would not give then an SRAW or Javelin to fight some african Warlords

[R-DEV]Mats391 wrote: Jet ATGM will one hit kill tank from any side and we are even discussing to have near misses kill.
Chopper ATGM are also unchanged for now.

As an mostly infantry player I'm glad that you have sticked to your line to make us more and more useless. Meatwall so to speak.

First you made anti-air so useless that taking any experienced pilot down is right next to impossible. Now you make same kind of update for tanks and vechicles. I'm fine with that.

What I'm not fine with is that same rules don't apply to every asset. Its outrageous that choppers and jets can keeps their at-abilities while infantry keeps getting worse. Do you want winner to be decided by which side has better pilot? Because with all your updates that is where this is going.

TaBull wrote:As an mostly infantry player I'm glad that you have sticked to your line to make us more and more useless. Meatwall so to speak.

First you made anti-air so useless that taking any experienced pilot down is right next to impossible. Now you make same kind of update for tanks and vechicles. I'm fine with that.

What I'm not fine with is that same rules don't apply to every asset. Its outrageous that choppers and jets can keeps their at-abilities while infantry keeps getting worse. Do you want winner to be decided by which side has better pilot? Because with all your updates that is where this is going.

combined arms is the name of the game not infy win the game or tank/jet/CAS win by them selves...

unfortunately that's the mentality we have in some people around PR now days that only play for them selves.

Exactly, too many people expect the infantry to be able to be able to take out anything. Infantry needs to be able to clear out urban areas and hold out sectors on non urban maps while assets are the ones that need to bring the firepower.

I for one welcome our new armor overlords!

I for one welcome them once I see two HAT kits back per team

75% of damage to a tank means it's on fire correct?

No, it actually has to be at least 90%.

Will the 125 guns do more damage?

I was searching on Wikipedia and Russians gets more Muzzle Velocity...

This would also helps on balancing the Higher reload time if implemented

TaBull wrote:As an mostly infantry player I'm glad that you have sticked to your line to make us more and more useless. Meatwall so to speak.

First you made anti-air so useless that taking any experienced pilot down is right next to impossible. Now you make same kind of update for tanks and vechicles. I'm fine with that.

What I'm not fine with is that same rules don't apply to every asset. Its outrageous that choppers and jets can keeps their at-abilities while infantry keeps getting worse. Do you want winner to be decided by which side has better pilot? Because with all your updates that is where this is going.

Boy you would've loved 1.2.

PR is actually becoming less friendly to assets; go look at all the threads where asset whores are crying about missile turn rates, autocannon deviation, etc.
As an asset whore myself I miss 1.2 where you could just spam 16 hellfires and not worry about the AA that would never hit you, but if you think AA is useless you're probably just not good with it. Most things in the game, jets included, are useless if you're not good.

But how you got there from jets one hitting tanks with ATGMs I don't know. Jets should 1 hit kill tanks with ATGMs and near misses should too. The laser system isn't perfect and manually hitting a tank with ATGMs that aren't even zeroed to the sights in most jets isn't the easiest thing in the world. /rant

[R-CON]LiamBai wrote:Boy you would've loved 1.2.

PR is actually becoming less friendly to assets; go look at all the threads where asset whores are crying about missile turn rates, autocannon deviation, etc.
As an asset whore myself I miss 1.2 where you could just spam 16 hellfires and not worry about the AA that would never hit you, but if you think AA is useless you're probably just not good with it. Most things in the game, jets included, are useless if you're not good.

But how you got there from jets one hitting tanks with ATGMs I don't know. Jets should 1 hit kill tanks with ATGMs and near misses should too. The laser system isn't perfect and manually hitting a tank with ATGMs that aren't even zeroed to the sights in most jets isn't the easiest thing in the world. /rant

First you say it takes skill to use assets correctly. Then you say at the same post that you are not skillful enough to use jets so that you could kill tanks without helping hand from mechanics. Maybe you should learn to play before coming to shout your opinions.

[R-CON]LiamBai wrote:Boy you would've loved 1.2.

PR is actually becoming less friendly to assets; go look at all the threads where asset whores are crying about missile turn rates, autocannon deviation, etc.

I love your condescending tone. Just because someone's forum join date is earlier than yours doesn't mean their opinions should be discarded.

Jets should be able to one-hit kill tanks yes, but so should many other things. The shitty LAWs used by Finnish military can penetrate 350mm, which is enough to penetrate the side armor of most modern tanks, unless it hits reactive armor. A tandem warhead not outright killing a tank with a side hit is just retarded.

In the latest patch, most APCs including BTRs with basically tinfoil armor can survive at least one LAT hit with no problems, even to the side armor. I remember being able to kill light APCs with no problems in the past, so something must have changed to make them harder to kill.

I don't understand why you keep insisting on armor buffs based on realism, when in reality armor is pretty vulnerable to anti-tank weapons. If you want to buff tanks due to gameplay balance reasons, fine, but just say it then.

Damnit Liam.. how many times have I told you not to piss off the Fins?!

TaBull wrote:First you say it takes skill to use assets correctly. Then you say at the same post that you are not skillful enough to use jets so that you could kill tanks without helping hand from mechanics. Maybe you should learn to play before coming to shout your opinions.

He said manually(;without it being lazed) hitting a tank with an aircraft mounted anti tank guided missile isn't easy because on most jets they're not even zeroed in on your sights/HUD.

Piipu wrote:In the latest patch, most APCs including BTRs with basically tinfoil armor can survive at least one LAT hit with no problems, even to the side armor. I remember being able to kill light APCs with no problems in the past, so something must have changed to make them harder to kill.

The only LAT that needs two hits to destroy a BTR-60 is the PG-7V warhead for the RPG-7, which I agree is odd since it can easily penetrate the BTR's armor. Something that should be tweaked a bit.

Still not sure where this idea that penetration = kill is coming from

I can't find exact specifications about the PG-7V's explosive charge weight but it would probably do considerable damage inside a vehicle like that, not to mention the effects it would have on the crew.

Wiki tells us the PG-7VL, which weighs 2.6 kg, has an explosive charge weight of 730 gram.
The PG-7V weighs 2.25 kg which should translate into quite an effective explosive charge, even for an 'antique' warhead like that.

[R-DEV]M42 Zwilling wrote:Still not sure where this idea that penetration = kill is coming from

In what world do you live where vehicle occupants live through plasma jets, burning hydraulic fluid and brake fluid, spalling, shockwaves and burning fuel?

You must be the dev that decided that 105mm HEAT doensn't kill BMP-1's.

The real one? Couple of quick examples:

MoD kept failure of best tank quiet - Telegraph - Rather famous incident in which RPG-29 penetrated CR2 through underside of hull, 3 crew wounded. Elsewhere stated that the tank RTB'd under its own power.

http://csis.org/files/publication/120720_Cordesman_LessonsIsraeliHezbollah.pdf - Statistics from 2006 Israel-Hezbollah war on p. 111:

Tanks penetrated: 20
Tanks destroyed: +5 estimated
Crewmen killed: 30

Research more, and you'll see that this kind of thing is not at all uncommon. With smaller pure HEAT warheads (i.e. not so much MPATs, AGM-65s, etc.), the lethality really seems to depend on the layout of the target vehicle and what happens to be in the direct path of the HEAT jet and whatever (limited) spalling there is.