Project Reality Forums

mortars
mortars
mortars
mortars
mortars
mortars
Whether or not you realise it but we are all tacticaly imept with out them!

How can we possibly attempt to storm an enemy, well dug in behind sand bag walls, bunkers, barb wires and in house with just MGs and grenades with out horrendous loss of life to our own side.

Horrendous loss of life = regular/usual fact of dying 3 or more times over a period of 10 minutes to secure a flag. Dont kid you self - you die alot!


Only way to kill or atleast suppress these well dug in folk is by dropping explosives from above, indirect fire support - most effective and realistic way.


A JDAM does for fill this requirement. , but most maps dont have them and they only come every 1/2 or 1 hour - so 90% of attacks on well dug in enemy 1 is not available.

However in RL, every company (around 100 soldiers) will have access to or be able to call in some serious mortar fire and it will never not be the case!




p.s. as iv said before - how they work (deployed and fired) does not matter becuase nothing changes the fact they provides player controlled indirect fire support ALWAYS!

- US Army
- Bradly
- Blackwater faction and VIP mode
- Taliban faction
- Maps: Fallujah, Muttrah v2 and Sangin
- More insurgent maps
- Hand Cuffs
- Chinook
- Molotiv coctail skin

- Chinook

she is in the work

[R-CON]ice_killer how many patch's till it might be in?

POV that is at eye level and not in the stomach...

Fire base deployable mortars, therefore stationary.


SEE PREVIOUS POSTS ABOVE on this page and page 14 ^^^

I want the VIP chevrolet back (a)

1) Quinling running on Linux

1.more options for medic(maybe that fieldhospital)

2.in sunny maps,snipers scope will shine,because the sunlight(hope you understand)

3.deathmatch mode(maybe just in small maps)

4.in deathmatch mode the blackdeath screen is boring,so is there any possibilities to watch meanwhile you are dead,others gaming or battlerecorder?

5.able to throw granade inside the tank.

6.wintermap.(and blood included,so the ground will be red in battlefield)

7.some communications center(if the enemy destroy this center,voip is disabled)

8.more drunken players???

9.day and night in same map...

None of the above things are ever going to happen..

And what makes you think deathmatch is realistic.. :S

Mortars which take two people to operate in a sort of deployable that can be moved.

For example it takes two people to use/pick it up. Two people to move it to another location and one person to change the trajectory and another to put the shell(s) in the mortar. Not sure if thats how it is done nowadays but something along that line.

Totally agree on the mortars, I think they should be moveable.


Here's what I want,
I want a REAL WORKING aircraft carrier. Not the stupid vbf2 one.(this aircraft carrier is NOT used now) Possible catapults could be put in and somehow you guys guys could rig up a system that would make a certain area of the deck slow down the plane (friction?) but there would be wires there even though there not the real thing slowing down the plane, if the wire physics are not possible. I would love to be landing jets on a REAL carrer in pr. DEvs, it really wouldnt be hard to accomplish and it would be awesome. Better yet, if you can make it a movable VEHICLE (I doubt its possible, as if any vehicle touches another they blow up) by the commander, that would be awesome. Maybe base it off a real one (USS Abraham Lincoln ect...)

Also get the 128 player servers going. This will make the game awesome. This will call the the ratio of vehicles to be doubled, (4 jets on carrier instead of 2 for 128 people ect...)

-F-18 -carrier based jet
-A TWO SEETER JET
I thought I saw a f-15 on a demo map, and if you guys bring it in, it should be a two seeter. In reality, alot of the f-15s are two seeters, I believe most of them are. The person in the back would manage weapongs (bombs, laser guidance, possible T.V. guidance if you guys bring it in.)

-fix the gay units.

I dont know what they are, but they are NOT kilometers, miles, or anything I have seen before, but whatever they are they are not right, and its pretty stupid.

Thats what I want

what's wrong with the g3?


Ontopic: I'm a bit disappointed tbh by the amount of individual requests for so much superficial junk like soldier skinjobs or the identikit weapon/vehicle type with a different model for everyone's favourite country
Maps and gameplay features should be the only reasonable requests here - things that actually make the game better
Mortars, Ballistics, Scenario Mode, 128 players (if it can be done) would all change the game for the better

fartknocker12345 wrote:Totally agree on the mortars, I think they should be moveable.

I did but then i thought more carefully about the effect of mortars being mobile and the direction of such being player controlled.

> In what ever form, the weapon will be capable of firing a minimum of 5 rounds in the space of a minute. Each round have a significantly greater blast radius than a grenades, say that radius to the power of 3 or 4, with all infantry in that radius being killed instantly.
> With direct hits to any jeep destroying it also instantly, and 3 or so, to any armored vehicle or bunker causing serious damage, possibly even disabling them.

> This weapon is also one of a few that can be fired on an enemy with out having a direct line of site on them. One then must consider its accuracy and range.
> In RL, the mortars that we are considering (around 60mm - 100mm) have ranges well in excess of 4km.
> Accuracy however is quite dependent on the quality of the direction, communication and aiming systems employed along side the weapon. With modern use of GPS and radio, it is possible to deliver rounds with considerable accuracy.

Now you look at the environment the weapon is operating in and what is will be most used for.
> Nature of the mortar makes it most effective against stationary targets. Therefore the most common target will be static flag defenses.

So when you consider all of the above, if the mortar is mobile,
you have both an extremely potent weapon, that can also be frighteningly hard to find and destroy.

It what ever form, it will be capable of devastating any station object power of it is portrayed realistically, which it must or not be implemented at all.

With this single fact in mind, i strongly believe making the mortar mobile would make it this disproportionately powerful compared to environment it is being used in.


Quick example: You set up a bunker at a flag, but the enemy deploy a mortar in the area around your flag (say with in 750m). If they can fire accurately on your flag and bunker, they will able to easily totally suppress all of you and quite possibly kill many of you, aswell at destroying your bunker.
Even if you send out patrols - say 6 men - which is probably the maximum you can send due to man power restrictions (can have 1/3 team searching for 1 mortar) - chance of your patrol finding the mortar in a area well in excess of 1km square, that can any point pack up and move, is impossibly low.

However, if this mortar was tied to a firebase, it would be much easier to locate the mortar, visually becuase of the actual size of the firebase structure next to it but also becuase of the large number of enemies spawning off the FB and being spotted in area close around the it. Therefore the weapon would retain its realistic potency, but would become possible to find and destroy, rather than quite simply impossible!

A weapon that is about the impossible, should not really be in PR, should it?









NO


.

mortars could be really useful

ice cream vans