Project Reality Forums

saXoni wrote:For who?

for the pilots of course. But shooting it down with a strela or built AA emplacement would be some seriously awesome allah hu akbar stuff, exactly like successful bombcar vs. armour moments.

Cobra -> 1km tiny map -> facepalm

An Apache on Kokan might actually work. There are a lot of caches in the center villages that are really tough to get and the Kiowas usually don't cut it.

Really though? So the Taliban/insurgents who are taking cover inside buildings because of the APCs, SAWs, Tanks, TOWs, HMGs (and now Cobras/Apaches), won't be able to look out of the window because their heads will be ripped off, so after being forced to take cover inside the building and cover the stairs, they soon find that they've wasted their time anyway, because all it takes is a squad with common sense to place C4 on the nearest wall to the cache marker, and its ''GG, next cache''

https://www.realitymod.com/forum/f18-pr ... ation.html

in my honest opinion, unless something like this^ is done, then insurgency will soon become simple target practice for blufor.

BulletPr0of wrote:Really though? So the Taliban/insurgents who are taking cover inside buildings because of the APCs, SAWs, Tanks, TOWs, HMGs (and now Cobras/Apaches), won't be able to look out of the window because their heads will be ripped off, so after being forced to take cover inside the building and cover the stairs, they soon find that they've wasted their time anyway, because all it takes is a squad with common sense to place C4 on the nearest wall to the cache marker, and its ''GG, next cache''

oh wow.

If you really think that APCs, machine guns, and tows are too hard to destroy, counter, or kill let alone having a direct equivalent available easily to the opfor you must truly be BAD at project reality. For the last time, the reason blufor have superior fire power is because theyre attacking something. Defending something is inherently easier to do, so more firepower is needed for the game to be balanced. NOw maybe it's a bit arrogant to tell you that youre bad for not being able to kill an abrams with your AK, but in my personal experience only the most experienced and skilled crewman are able to operate effectively against opfor teams that arent terrible in insurgency

Armour dies easily to LATs, HATs, bombcars, mines, ieds, stationary AT, and spg techis. Field guns, opfor APCs, and quad cannons are bonuses. Things like emplacements should be ripe mortar targets. I specifically addressed how heavy air assets COULD be balanced, and how not all maps could include such assets. If you noticed, blufor armour dies the moment it gets too close to urban areas, and caches. The only time blufor armour is seen as overpowered is against bad caches. Ill admit caches in the middle of fields and open desert ARE shooting galleries, and ill also say that c4 through walls is a problem too.

Simply put, urban/bunker/fortified caches with lots of building cover, with present and suggested tools for the insurgents are all defensible from armour, and CAS.

I'd slightly agree at the fact you're being arrogant, and I'd also like to add at no point did I say it was hard to kill them. So I'd appreciate it if you didn't try and judge, then insult me from something you have miss interpreted. But since you have raised that point, you're right they are easy to kill on their own, but not when they're fighting side by side, armour takes a back seat and keeps rooftops clear while CAS makes repeated runs. Whilst the FOB acts as a safe zone for the armor, while the inf is hunting down mortars which will be gone within seconds of being located due to access to CAS.

Simply put, urban/bunker/fortified caches with lots of building cover, with present and suggested tools for the insurgents are all defensible from armour, and CAS.

Not entirely true after the introduction destructible buildings, as well as instances where Kiowas have destroyed caches through walls. Also this all depends on random spawns.

Also you say oh they're easy to destroy but I really doubt that quad cannons and handheld kits are a suitable counterpart to jets. Considering there is no air threats to the pilot, he can afford to dump as many flares as he wants when making his attack run. A quickly developed tactic would be to have an AA team set up at the end of the runway in order to take out the jets, but this goes against what the Devs have previously stated, regarding why there DoD is there, to replicate the main base being far from the combat zone. As for Choppers, the lack of conventional H-AT's means they can be riskier with how long they can hover at high altitude once the quads have been dealt with, allowing for prolonged engagements, spotting hideouts, high value targets such as L-AT teams/Mine Layers.

I can't see deploying cannons working either, as far as I'm aware you can't make FOB assets differ between maps, and they would just be OP on maps with only lighter air assets. To have increased statics would just result in them being taken out before the CAS has spawned or simply becoming it's first target. And they would only divide the defending force between caches, AA installations and mortars, on top of which any ambush squads, sniper teams, easy to go on.

Look, theres a few things you said in your post that I specifically addressed in my other posts, or the OP such as "they would always just dump flares on the way in!" which is why i said refill times would be very long to encourage loitering, and not incredibly liberal use of limited (while in the air) resources such as flares, meaning if you dumped 30 coming in for a bomb drop, and on your egress, it would mean waiting 5-10 minutes on the runway for a resupply, instead of using a small amount and staying in the air for immediate support, with still a few mavericks and LGBs left.

You also said things like "quad cannons are not suitable counterparts for jets" which is simply wrong if youve ever used one of the things it instantly fireballs any vehicle within range, and I also only suggested for there to be a jet on one map, which is only for the reasons canadians dont posses any gunships like the brits or americans.

Im not going to go into too much detail, but essentially this is 99% theory speculation bullshit were working with. Personally, I think that competent insurgent teams could coordinate air tight anti air around caches with proper supplies (read: the OP), just like how armour can be dealt with. You, however think that CAS vehicles are indestructable rape machines of instant cache death, which they could be.

Neither of us are right until it can be tested once or twice.

40mmrain wrote: [...]
I think that competent insurgent teams [...]

Good joke

I think you should see the problem here.

niho wrote:Good joke

I think you should see the problem here.

speaking of that, i was kept to 20 kills, and lost 2 kiowas on kokan today due to semi competent enemy anti air. I had all the enemy .50 techis dead, and the quad cannon in the first few minutes. all they had to attack me were two AA kits, and they used them very effectively keeping myself and the other kiowa away from the knowns for a while.

With only AA kits they can do that, imagine how careful an apache must be when the enemy has quad cannon, more handheld AA, .50 techis, and more.

And soon they are armed like a regular force.....

I would agree with an Apache on Korengal, since IMHO the Taliban is to overpowered on this map.
They would still have enough opportunity to hide, but should get some ZPU2s.
One problem could be the size of the map and another what nvram just said.

niho wrote:I would agree with an Apache on Korengal, since IMHO the Taliban is to overpowered on this map.
They would still have enough opportunity to hide, but should get some ZPU2s.
One problem could be the size of the map and another what nvram just said.

An Apache on Korengal would never even manage to leave the helipad.

saXoni wrote:For who?

Whom*

<33333333333333333333333333333333333333333333333333333333333333333333

Stealthgato wrote:An Apache on Korengal would never even manage to leave the helipad.

This why i say in the OP a small fire base thats justa helipad and hescos in a secluded corner of the map, unable to be attacked by opfor would be ideal, not the present base.

Perhaps a lot of work, and a tad unrealistic, but so is americans with no air support in korengal

How about in keeping with the mosin nagant etc, Some 2cm Flak cannons lol

It's because people cry OP when they get owned and not know how to use AA.

sharpie wrote:Whom*

I'm still struggling to learn the difference between "who" and "whom". Give me a couple of months, and I've got it.

40mmrain wrote:This why i say in the OP a small fire base thats justa helipad and hescos in a secluded corner of the map, unable to be attacked by opfor would be ideal, not the present base.

Perhaps a lot of work, and a tad unrealistic, but so is americans with no air support in korengal

Apache would still get raped. Even if it managed to take off, in such a small map it doesn't stand a chance.

saXoni wrote:I'm still struggling to learn the difference between "who" and "whom". Give me a couple of months, and I've got it.

You better