Project Reality Forums

"Future Weapons" killed your cred.

M.

asianator365 wrote:YouTube - Future Weapons : Stryker Mobile Gun System

dat .50 cal is teh sexeh i think i love ya,lal

Every time I see the PLA crewman, god kills a kitten.. If you know what I mean.
Love this addition, can't wait to see that guy more!

-REad

[R-DEV]Rhino wrote:It did say a few times in the first post that this would not replace the WZ551

glad you understand where we are coming from now

The point being is that the WZ551A itself has blatently noticeable weaknesses unlike it's lateral comparison of the U.S. Stryker. The Stryker at least has a significant magnification ability for it's .50 caliber weapon and a gunner that's is not exposed to incoming fire.

So theoretically it's easy to notice to some degree that the WZ551A may inevitably be an under performer. I wouldn't be surprised if it at least equals the capability of a BRDM. At least the WZ551A may make up for it with potentially heavier armor, but it's exposed gunner, lesser firepower and presumably shorter magnification levels makes for it's greatest loss.

Anyways, I'm sure it'll still be implemented on the basis of being a tool to diversify team assets.

It's performance in the field still needs to be proved. After all, even if the WZ551A is considered to be "transport based" the same can be said for the Stryker which is still a far more capable alternative, even when used in an ideal defensive role.

In other words:
Practical and effective vehicles > "Oooh new shiny" factor

But of course we shall see in time if it was entirely worthwhile as anticipated.

ye but we never said this was a mirror balance jobby. Like Jaymz said, this is planned to be used along side the normal WZ551 so if this WZ551A was on a map vs the Stryker it might be something like say 3 strykers vs 2x WZ551As and 1x WZ551 or there are many other alternatives if you mix other assets in too

Will it have a different spawn timer, or maybe extra ammo crates?

M.

spawn time, in general probably not but that really depends on the map. extra ammo crate, doubt it.

Why not put a scope on the QJC-88, like seen on this picture:



Would make it more useful for longer range fire-support that Strykers and BTR-60s are capable of.

because that is not a QJC-88, looks more like a Type 85.

EDIT: I really dont understand why sooo many people cry out for Asymmetrical balance but then when we do something asymmetrical every one wines that it not symmetrically balanced...

[R-DEV]Rhino wrote:because that is not a QJC-88, looks more like a Type 85.

EDIT: I really dont understand why sooo many people cry out for Asymmetrical balance but then when we do something asymmetrical every one wines that it not symmetrically balanced...

There will always be dissenters, especially when introducing new ideas. You should know better than anyone. This "feedback" is excessive, since I doubt anyone here has used it yet.

Dougalachi wrote: There will always be dissenters, especially when introducing new ideas. You should know better than anyone, after leading the mod for such a long time . This "feedback" is excessive, since I doubt anyone here has used it yet.

Let's try and wait till we have a chance to use it before turning this idea into swiss cheese

[R-DEV]Rhino wrote:because that is not a QJC-88, looks more like a Type 85.

EDIT: I really dont understand why sooo many people cry out for Asymmetrical balance but then when we do something asymmetrical every one wines that it not symmetrically balanced...

I lol'd!

What I love about that thing tho, is that people will hear it coming and will run away thinking it's the heavier gunned version ..
I can foresee the funny moments coming with that!

[R-DEV]Rhino wrote:because that is not a QJC-88, looks more like a Type 85.

EDIT: I really dont understand why sooo many people cry out for Asymmetrical balance but then when we do something asymmetrical every one wines that it not symmetrically balanced...

There will always be someone complaining, always!

[R-DEV]Rhino wrote:EDIT: I really dont understand why sooo many people cry out for Asymmetrical balance but then when we do something asymmetrical every one wines that it not symmetrically balanced...

See, the problem here is that the game is based upon reality, and as we all know not all things are created equally. Just so happens that not all things in reality are suitable for combat either. Take the Lynx helicopter for example. Is it a nice addition to PR? Of course it is. But is it amazingly useful and effective? I wouldn't say so.

Why would someone use a Lynx over a Merlin? It's not like the Lynx has a smaller AA detection signature because of it's size, so it doesn't really matter. Nor does the Lynx's smaller size enable it to land in other places most larger helicopters can't. All helicopters don't have collision boxes for the main rotors, so all helicopters can land almost anywhere. However... The Merlin does have a Supply Crate which is a big help. So what's more practical? The Merlin of course. The Lynx is just a "whateverlolspecops" kind of thing.

In other words, the design characteristics of the WZ551A is far from adequate. Not that it's anyone's fault for trying to bring it into PR or recreate realism, it's simply not a prime candidate that's worth the time and effort. Vehicles that offer a certain type of support but are not consistent with other military equipment usually produces an amount of confusion and a painful learning curve. Even in the end after it's purpose is defined and people use it properly, the vehicle is still limited by it's own functionality. There is only so much usefulness you can squeeze out of something.

Besides as far as I'm concerned, people who use Tanks still get blown away to this day that have far more firepower than the WZ551A has. Thus, in my eyes the WZ551A is more of a liability than a productive tool and simply becomes HAT/TOW bait on Qwai River. But worth it because it transports squads from A to B which any other competent and front-line-capable APC could do.

Also another factor here is the general populace of players that favor a certain type of combat. About 75% of PR involves Infantry based combat and I'm sure a majority of them enjoy it that way. While the other 12.5% use Jets and Helicopters and the other 12.5% use Tanks and APC's. Simply put, I wouldn't say that everyone sees the practical use of the WZ551A at a higher level.

It's not surprising to me that half the Infantry fanatics in this thread are saying:
"ZOMG the WZ551A is awesome!!!"

While all the armorers are thinking along the lines:
"Wait, huh? Do we really need this piece of junk on our team sucking up manpower and wasting tickets with an overabundance of unproductive assets?"

Fact of the matter is, as an armorer (Or what once was until the recent build.) is that it does make a difference. Armor is a very important asset to combat, but because of how scarce in-field repairs and the near useless abilities of Combat Engineers it is probably more costly than useful at times. Especially when we do a little bit of math:

"Humm... I want to use this Tank with my gunner. But is it worth it? What if my Tank gets destroyed with us in it? That costs 12 tickets... Which means I have to kill at least 1 enemy tank, or 2 enemy APC's, and/or 12 enemy infantryman just to break even before I get inevitably destroyed myself."

Which (as we all know) armor very rarely does last an entire round or do the Tank crewman themselves accumulate enough kills and damage to the enemy team to at least pay off their own debt for losing a vehicle.

See, the point I'm trying to explain is that a reckless armor squad can cause more damage to their own team more than anything else at times. We all know that armor isn't even remotely as scary as it used to be a few builds ago. Engineers are now useless to armor, and for most players they seem to be unable to drive a support truck well enough*.

<Note *: Just the other day, I was playing Muttrah City with another individual while using a BTR-60. My driver was killed and got shot out of the APC twice from incoming LAV-25 fire, I had to enter his seat and drive off with it back to main base.

Also there was a single time where we were disabled and stranded in a safe location with friendly infantry surrounding us (Thankfully). We had a dedicated support team that was driving around a Logistics truck. He was right next to us and despite us typing out our request he spent the 1 minute to drive back to main base (He had no clue that the deployable repair station didn't need to be reloaded). Then he spent another minute to drive back to us, then after doing so he deployed the repair station too far away from the logistics truck. Simply put... The guy sucked pretty bad.

Good thing one of the TG guys was a quick thinker and he improvised by getting a nearby forklift and pushed the repair station closer to us to fix the BTR-60. If it wasn't for him, we'd probably would have been blown away.>

Simply put, more times than not armor really isn't that scary anymore. It's far more complicated at times than it is practical. I can't see anyone intrested on using a WZ551A after a few months after it's introduction. Why would a squad leader want to coordinate a pickup/dropoff with an APC that:

1. Is controlled by an external squad with a lack of communication.
2. Has a lack of firepower to even defend itself.
3. The squad leader or any squad member can easily obtain a transport truck at main base and transport his squad without the hassle of coordinating tactics.

I'm sorry, but I really can't get along with some things that come into PR even if it's new. What's the point of teamwork, coordination with Mechanized Infantry if the APC offering it's support to the squad can't even remain in the field with them? What's it going to do? Drive them to where they need to go, then fall back 200 meters to a safer location and twiddle it's thumbs because all it's got is a .50? Why bother, right?

I can already see arguements on live servers:
PLA SL: "Can we get a ride to Government Office?"
WZ551A Crewman: "Uh... No. We're providing AA cover in the area. We can't transport you anyways as there's TOW's around there. You're on your own."
PLA SL: "So... Can you atleast drive us over to Production Facility through the water?"
WZ551A Crewman: "Nope... Like I said, we're on AA duty. What does this look like? An APC with a 25mm automatic cannon that can actually defend itself? We're missile bait if we leave here."
PLA SL: "Come on man, you're supposed to. The Dev's said it on the PR forums!"
WZ551A Crewman: "... Fine. (Loads up and goes through the water to Prod. Facility)"

TOW Gunner: "Look, there's a enemy APC in the water and it saw us!"
TOW Driver: "****! What type?!"
TOW Gunner: "It's the .50 version."
TOW Driver: "LOL! Blow that piece of junk out of the water."

PLA SL: (Crackle, sizzle, pop, crackle, pop.)
WZ551A Crewman: (Sizzle, sizzle, crispy, sizzle, crackle.)

I gotta admit... I did find a lot of amusement devising that scenario.

Why do I write so much? Damn it!!! LOL!

M.Warren wrote:Why would someone use a Lynx over a Merlin?

because its much faster, smaller and has different flight characteristics. I personally prefer to fly the Lynx over the Merlin even thou it has 1 less seat and no ammo just because of how it flys.

Same for the WZ551A, and who even says its going to be up against TOW hummers, just because Its been show cased on Qwai dose not mean its the only map its going to be plonked into and if it is it dont mean that the map is going to keep the same vehicle load out with just the WZ551A filling the gap.

Yes the WZ551A is obviously not as effective but that is the entire point of it. If PR was about giving every player the most effective weapons there are on the market no matter how many there are in r/l etc it wouldn't be realistic.

M.Warren wrote:Why do I write so much? Damn it!!! LOL!

I dunno you shouldn't bother since its not worth reading 2 pages to get to your point, you can put your point across in a paragraph in most cases.

Okay, so I'll sum everything up to less than a paragraph for the ease of reading. --- So you're basically telling me that the WZ551A is a non-essential vehicular element being placed into PR to provide the diversification of assets and to also take part in the minor combat role of AA Defense. This vehicle features little to no true purpose until a map is specifically designed and completed with the emphasis of Mechanized Infantry in mind for the future PR builds to highlight the WZ551A's supposed and unseen potential. Correct?

M.Warren wrote:Okay, so I'll sum everything up to less than a paragraph for the ease of reading. --- So you're basically telling me that the WZ551A is a non-essential vehicular element being placed into PR to provide the diversification of assets and to also take part in the minor combat role of AA Defense.

I wouldn't say non-essential as transporting infantry around the battlefield is essential which is its main role. But the rest above is correct yes.

M.Warren wrote:This vehicle features little to no true purpose until a map is specifically designed and completed with the emphasis of Mechanized Infantry in mind for the future PR builds to highlight the WZ551A's supposed and unseen potential. Correct?

I wouldn't say that but that depends on how you view it.


At the end of the day, China do use these quite a bit and they are made because they are cheaper and faster than the normal 25mm cannon version, main bit here is that they are cheaper but they still fill there main role of transporting infantry which is the main role we want them to do in PR.

We have already seen in PR, that APCs are used more for transport and less as a light tank when they have a lighter weapon and even thou yes, normal APCs with a larger cannon can be very effective at both transporting and supporting infantry, and there is no reason why players can't do this ingame, just many get distracted by the power of the cannon and for some reason, infantry squads are less inclined for the most part to use a APC with a cannon as transport than one with a 50cal. Try driving upto a random infantry squad that is not using mumble etc and even if they are very far from an objective they will 4/5 times not hop in.

But anyways, that is not the main point this is being brought in, that's just one of them. One of the main things is that having more different weapons, even if slightly different, will add anouther dimension to the game play of the mod.

STORM-Mama wrote:Why not put a scope on the QJC-88, like seen on this picture:



Would make it more useful for longer range fire-support that Strykers and BTR-60s are capable of.

Actually that is a QJC88 fitted with a off-center sight attachment. However, it is rare to have optic sporting QJC88s on armored vehicles.