Project Reality Forums

Mats391 wrote:yep, everyone that is in favor of this change hates insurgents. there are no other possibilities to like the change except hating insurgents.
this is a gameplay change, so pretty much any "but but its realistic" arguments arent suited here. you should try to explain what positive gameplay effects result from picking up and using enemy kits. i only see negative ones.

I've already addressed this, read the thread. No, sorry, other sides should never be wearing the colours of the enemy this is fucking basic warfare 101. You wear the enemy's uniform you get shot by your own guys, and the enemy at once.

Look, I'm going to blame myself for this shit. I should communicate better, but i've said this before. Taking these kits away, makes the life of the insurgents harder. HOWEVER, it is unrealistic. THerefore, we should strive, to change the game, such that it is realistic, but still balanced. We should remove things such as insurgents wearing german, or canadian, or american, or french, or whatever flags, and using rather complicated weapons that they would not be able to in real life, AND THEN AT THE SAME TIME change the game so that this hindrance, is completely canceled out by something that makes the life of insurgents easier.

Which is why im proposing a redesign, or retiring of many insurgency maps, soon.

The only BLUFOR weapon that is unquestionably superior to its OPFOR counterpart is the scoped SAW so I don't see where all the "BLUFOR weapons are better than OPFOR weapons" whining is coming from. The AK-47 is the best assault rifle in the game, the SVD is decent, and the RPG-7 is extremely good when used properly, so yeah.

40mmrain wrote:Which is why im proposing a redesign, or retiring of many insurgency maps, soon.

You keep bringing up the maps, what exactly is wrong with insurgency maps that can't be addressed with game mechanic changes?

Are you suggesting maps be made so there is never a place that is impossible to attack, so the 1 cache system isn't as broken as it is currently?

ShockUnitBlack wrote:The only BLUFOR weapon that is unquestionably superior to its OPFOR counterpart is the scoped SAW so I don't see where all the "BLUFOR weapons are better than OPFOR weapons" whining is coming from. The AK-47 is the best assault rifle in the game, the SVD is decent, and the RPG-7 is extremely good when used properly, so yeah.

My guess, the lack of a scope on the AK's is what people dislike. On a large open map like Lashkar I use a scoped German kit if I run across one.

I can see maps that should really be redone or heavily overhaule. Such as Fallujah & Basrah? Big chunks of those maps do not get used & last I checked, wasn't there a big wall around Fallujah which posed a problm for ~4X days before the marines managed to breach it?

Not to forget that Fallujah was turned into a maxe of tunnels and defenses but in game it feels like an regular Iraqi suburb.

Yes fallujah, basrah, and karbala the cities are too small, and thin with not enough enterable buildings, really.

I am not going into a discussion with you...You should know that there is a difference between a city turned into a fortress and a city that is covered with only open buildings.

Problem with Rally Points:

Squadleaders, PLEASE DO NOT set a rally point right next to a FOB, it is hard to tell which of the spawns is the FOB then and one might actually spawn in main because one cannot tell which of the two spawns is which.

40mmrain wrote:I wouldnt. Personally I know less than 5 iraqis who can read english. I think it's worth mentioning any soldier firing said weapon requires quite a few hours training with the weapon before firing it too, and more until he's accurate.

Perhaps allow taliban and insurgents to use these weapons but with ludicrous deviation. As for the AR platforms, G36s, and such these weapons are certainly more simple, but still not without their intricacies, like a forward assist, fire selection, sight zeroing, mag release location, and such.

If you can show me some reports of talib, insurgents, and militia capturing american AT, and rifles, and using them, i'd be inclined to change my mind



second one

Also don't forget the fact that, there are lots of official manuals about how to use aforementioned weapons on the web.

bessert wrote:Also don't forget the fact that, there are lots of official manuals about how to use aforementioned weapons on the web.

Look, insurgents, using LAT weapons is certainly conceivable, they've used RPG-29s, and the weapons arent that complicated. But I'm going to relist the reasons for removing the ability to take kits.

1) Wearing the enemy's uniform
2) Being as accurate as a very experienced anti tank soldier, despite having never fired this foreign AT
3) able to resupply these weapons indefinitely off caches, and at main as if this makes any sense
4) causes unintended effects on kit, such as encouraging not taking rope, or LAT kits on INS
5) undermines the nature of asymmetrical warfare that is INS, which is why the other kits are unusable, it's not like an m249 is such a difficult weapon, this just finishes the job really.

all of these combined are the reason theyre bad, really. It is unrealistic for a soldier to not bring a useful weapon into battle in fear of it being captured

But do you find that a reason to denie the insurgents of using regular rifleman kits even when the kit geometry issue is fixed (Helmet and uniform problem). The reload issue is maybe fixeable. But we shouldn't go straight to forbidding every kit for the enemy team.

I like the changes of not being able to use enemy kits for realism AND gameplay reasons. And I prefer to play as Insurgents.

The problem is pretty simple:
People are not smart enough to realize that they should play differently as "the underdog"; Ins don't need scopes if played right. But oc you "need" a scope when you want to get into long range firefights with a BlueFor tank. The amount of people that go to the last row of buildings/cover and then engage BlueFor soldiers as soon as they see them is too damn high! Let them come closer, keep your freakin head down until the civi in your squad tells you to come up and blast them. Oh, noone is playing that class and you don't want to? Then you deserve to die!

I am an insurgent fan and I ambush at least one squad each round in an alleyway so I know how to play the frikkin game. But if I have the chance in real life to get an more accurate rifle I would take it, if I have the chance in game I would do it. The fact that players don't adapt to their ak's isn't a reason in my opinion to prevent them from looting M16s off the ground. I understand the problem with the uniforms and heavy equipment meant for specialized soldiers. But now we even want to keep the insurgent from taking the easiest rifles from the ground. I want to meet you guys in the middle as a guy whom stands for the people that have the same ideas as I have but every post is either saying that the insurgents can't handle them in irl or they scream that they can't stand it if their own plan to kill hadjis backfires because they get shot with their own rifles they lost earlier on.

Needs poll.

If the kit geometry is fixed, and youre simply picking up the rifles, then so be it, but as of now the full removal is the best solution until further work is done. All of my points are moot, if theyre only taking the simple rifleman's kit. It is certainly possible that the insurgents could have many 5.56 rounds at caches to resupply.

Kilo makes a good point as well, really, and it relates to map changing. Downtown fallujah, clearing a room, do you want an acog weapon on burst, or a full auto iron sighted rifle?

It is unrealistic for a soldier to not bring a useful weapon into battle in fear of it being captured

I thought it was routine for troops to destroy any vital equipment because enemy capture is an acknowledged risk in combat.
Its more a case of the game is not real life, it may just be that it doesnt play well that way.

B.Pronk(NL) wrote:Not to forget that Fallujah was turned into a maxe of tunnels and defenses but in game it feels like an regular Iraqi suburb.

I feel more than anything, that is really the problem with the game. With such, the engineer may become more useful. Clearing actual defenses around the map to aid the main force in pressing through. Currently it's just drive through, shoot, destroy cache, fall back.

There's not much to stop the BLUFOR from actually driving through, even mines aren't a huge determent (Both due to the amount you need & people placing them).

Might need a new thread about this. However thing's should look & feel somewhat more like gaza does. When you enter the city it's much more defendable due to the walls & some obstacles throughout the map. I remember Fallujah being hard just to get close to/in. With such the map could use a redo not for mains, which I felt were fine before. But for the map itself, maybe all maps across the board really where a force would dig in. They are too clean, they don't feel like a force has dug in & been holding onto it for a long time or plans to hold them for the foreseeable future.

Of anything, even with the texture problem which I don't see as being a huge problem. The insurgents should be able to use the rifleman kits from the enemy, crewman maybe, specialist, AR & medic. AR being debatable.

Nebsif wrote:blabla.. I still remember some pre 0.95 or even earlier qwai round which played spawn-die-spawn-die-spawn-die-spawn-die w/o ever a feeling of winning any firefight or clearing a flag as every1 just kept coming on and on, and running around like a headless chicken in hope of finding the magic bags didnt help any1.
Why do I still rememb it? COZ IT WAS HORRIBULLL, BORING, REPETETIVE, and SPAMMYYY!! T.T

There's a huge difference between pooping a few bags by clickin a button and getting a sneaky supply drop and showeling that not so small FoB. >.<

Thats true, It was totaly boring shit. First when the RP was changed to that system now, i played PR realy active and created my clan with now 32 Players, if the RP will get changed to that COD headless thing again, we are out.

Nothing to add here.

Sabre_tooth_tigger wrote:I thought it was routine for troops to destroy any vital equipment because enemy capture is an acknowledged risk in combat.
Its more a case of the game is not real life, it may just be that it doesnt play well that way.

You drag in a multimillion dollar drone to make your point LMAO