Project Reality Forums

You realize that this isn't some random addition but rather trying to address the imbalance between BlueFor scopes and OpFor IS'es? I don't know about you, but in that case I'd rather have approval before I start working on it(I have no idea how BF2 works, so I would start at practically 0) since it their decision anyways.

IDF is a conventional force and their weaponry should be somewhat balanced against other conventional forces.

As said above, Militia (and some other factions) doesn't have scopes and plays AAS, still you can't compare it to conventional force AAS gameplay. Milita (and others) maps are made for guerilla type of gameplay, where OPFOR has terrain advantage and some other useful equipment that supports that kind of gameplay (ambushes, traps etc.).

On the other hand, IDF maps are not made for that purposes obviously, exluding INS. Even on some INS maps I'd prefer to have a scope instead as BLUFOR. Removing all available scopes is not variety for the gameplay and it is not adaptable. Conventional forces should have the ability to win a face-to-face fight against other forces, removing all medium/long range capabilites is just unreasonable. How IDF is suppose to attack an open ground objective? Or hold it? Just give their scopes back, nothing else.

ComradeHX wrote:Scope is not really representing scope, it represents a way to alleviate for lack of detail(compared to real life where you can see, with naked eye, way further than in-game) due to pixels on monitor.

No. Scope is representing a scope, otherwise ironsights would have zoom aswell.
Its sometimes harder to see with ironsights, but in the end of the days, its the same for everyone.
Old PKM had zoom because there was no scope model.

Also they have good CQB armament, and you dont need scopes for that.

Heavy Death wrote:Also they have good CQB armament, and you dont need scopes for that.

Is "They have good CQB" just something people say out of reflex now? CQB is not won on the backs of ironsights alone guys, that's why optics are still used on Muttrah. Urban warfare needs a mix of both short-range and long-range weaponry, or you will fail, unless against a similarly fail squad. If your squad has no optics, you will die. If you have only optics, you'll probably still die. A proper squad has both, and needs both to be effective, including in CQB environments, as not every firefight, even in a city, happens at a distance of 10 meters. Lack of optics is a SERIOUS detriment that isn't balanced out by some advantage, as is the case with all other factions.

Celestial1 wrote:Not all Militia maps get ticket advantages. Fools Road, Dragon Fly, Mestia, and Iron Ridge all have the same tickets as the opposing BluFor team.

Fools Road is night time, thus lowering the effectiveness of long-range combat right there, and I regularly see Militia steamrolled on that map anyway.

Dragon Fly; Emplaced AT and AA guns for Militia. Ambush-heavy environment. Difficult assault positions for Blufor to choose from (having to cross bridges or rivers makes for easy defense for Militia). The map itself is built to offset the disadvantage of a lack of scopes. And still, hideouts.

Mestia; The amount of hills and trees creates a significant difficulty for any long-ranged combat to take place, and the distance of the flags from Blufor's main base also adds another difficulty. Add onto that the difficulty of the logistics system for Blufor due to the lack of roads or even ground to transport supplies and you have a map that heavily favors the Militia.

Iron Ridge; The Militia do get a generous dose of vehicles to help counterbalance the Russians on this map, but even then, they are regularly pushed back to the last flag in city most rounds.

Celestial1 wrote: I think it's pretty obvious that there are exaggerated claims the detrimental effects of this change (I mean, 20-150 team kill/death sounds more like the IDF were playing Lemmings than anything). I'll agree that they might benefit from some balance on Beirut and Bijar, but I don't think re-adding scopes or changing tickets is either necessary or the best way to go.

An unfortunate mishap of altering factions that have existing maps.

Some balance on the AAS maps where IDF plays against other conventional forces is what most people are asking for. I still think Gaza needs a bit of a buff for IDF, but it's nowhere near as big an issue as Beirut or Bijar, and those are the two maps that have created this conversation. If you agree that IDF needs something fixed for those maps, than we are on the same page.

I just don't see why the squad leaders (who have GLTDs) get Optics and other kits don't. Could quite easily just give the ordinary Rifleman kit magnified reflex sites. Only half the squad, if that, would have optics then. Breacher, 2 Medics, and AR would not, giving you a half-and-half setup of Ironsights and Magnified Reflexes (less magnification than Optics), which would be very balanced, while still preserving IDF's main role of CQB combat over range, but without completely wiping the floor with their face.

I'm sure there are other solutions too, but SOME solution is needed to balance out these two maps.

Heavy Death wrote:No. Scope is representing a scope, otherwise ironsights would have zoom aswell.
Its sometimes harder to see with ironsights, but in the end of the days, its the same for everyone.
Old PKM had zoom because there was no scope model.

Also they have good CQB armament, and you dont need scopes for that.

No.

Because ironsights do not have option of zoom for whatever reason and scope is widely available in all conventional forces except IDF.

I find this thread funny because I am using reflex or Iron on 95% of time. G3 with reflex is a beast! And M4 with the EoTech is my favorite one. Burst on, shot non stop at 5 meters away until your enemy is bleeding on the ground. CQB at its best, no matter the environment, the enemy will need to gets closer to you soon or later on this game due to a simple reason: we have objectives to achieve which usually includes attacking and defending.

I don't need to engage people at mid or long range, I leave this for APCs and marksmen. I just flank them until I get close enough to kill it, or wait for them to come to me.

You guys need to stop being tacticool crying kids and just work your tactics.

MuffinMunchies wrote:Fools Road is night time, thus lowering the effectiveness of long-range combat right there, and I regularly see Militia steamrolled on that map anyway.

Only one layer is nighttime.

Dragon Fly; Emplaced AT and AA guns for Militia. Ambush-heavy environment. Difficult assault positions for Blufor to choose from (having to cross bridges or rivers makes for easy defense for Militia). The map itself is built to offset the disadvantage of a lack of scopes. And still, hideouts.

No emplaced AA guns to my knowledge. The howitzers are a valid advantage, but they rarely see usage and are difficult to utilize given how sluggish they are to aim. More often they'll either be destroyed quickly by a team that has any idea that they are there or will get a lucky kill on an APC before the Tank rolls up and makes short work of it.

Iron Ridge; The Militia do get a generous dose of vehicles to help counterbalance the Russians on this map, but even then, they are regularly pushed back to the last flag in city most rounds.

They get 1-2 spandrel or spgs and a techy or two. Russia gets 4+ BTRs, 2 of which are 80/As with the 30mm. They really don't get much of anything.

So dslyecxi put up a new video of him playing as russians against idf. "Fish in a barrel" was what he called it, which i find to be oddly appropriate.

Conman51 wrote:I used to like Beruit as IDF. It was fun.

But not anymore. That map is fucked and one main reason is because the IDF need to try to fight without scopes. They just cant lean on their shitty M113s to fight and the tank will just get raped ny TOWS, HATS, and the Havok. Its dumb.

I saw this post and wanted to contribute a perspective from the Russian side. I absolutely agree with you that it was a completely unfair face-off and the IDF had no chance for victory. It was a total bloodbath/massacre.

Project Reality - Barrel o' Fish - YouTube

FuzzySquirrel wrote:Right, and that's great for Gaza, but they get steam rolled on Bijar and Beruit.

Never saw them being steam rolled on Bijar.

I would like to see the Russians scopes removed maybe just for that map just to see how it plays out. But right now its just stupid and unplayable as IDF.

Keep in mind that Russians already have the worst scopes in the game along with the worst BUIS, so they are at a huge disadvantage in cqc.
I'm mostly fine with not having scopes, but I think a slight zoom on the IDF AR or MG kits are the necessity. I know they should supress, not kill, but it's difficult to supress when you can barely see an enemy who is in a defensive position and the enemy KNOWS you can only supress or injure him, not kill, so he takes his time to aim at you without fear at all.

So dslyecxi put up a new video of him playing as russians against idf. "Fish in a barrel" was what he called it, which i find to be oddly appropriate.

409-0
Scopes didn't really helped Russians, even without them they would win easily since most of the fight took place in the city(where the IDF is at no disadvantage at all IMO), you can see how Dslyecxi struggles with the horrible BIUS of the PKP in the beginning and yet he still wins in the cqc simply becouse the enemy is a bunch of retarded lone wolves. By the time he started using scope on the PKP they have already won.

Exhibit A....

Oh common. Did you see the way IDF played in that video? Its like a bunch of CoD kiddies playing the mod for the first time employing such brilliant tactics such as a lone dude crossing a road diagonally directly towards a building full of hostiles...

CroCop wrote:Oh common. Did you see the way IDF played in that video? Its like a bunch of CoD kiddies playing the mod for the first time employing such brilliant tactics such as a lone dude crossing a road diagonally directly towards a building full of hostiles...

Things which often happen when a team is routed.

The original impetus for removing IDF scopes was due to MA feedback on what their forces are currently issued; at the same time, a lot of IDF scenarios in PR deal with hypothetical conflicts with conventional armies, which does not reflect their current deployments and missions (which are primarily urban environments with a fair amount of armored support and CQB).

It will be discussed.

I am for option where MEC and Russia would have less scopes (probably equivalent to IDF)
on maps where they are fighting IDF. Almost every MEC kit poses damn marksman rifle.

Unhealed wrote: 409-0
Scopes didn't really helped Russians, even without them they would win easily since most of the fight took place in the city(where the IDF is at no disadvantage at all IMO), you can see how Dslyecxi struggles with the horrible BIUS of the PKP in the beginning and yet he still wins in the cqc simply becouse the enemy is a bunch of retarded lone wolves. By the time he started using scope on the PKP they have already won.

You should of seen the KDRs.....actually i did post them at the start of this thread. I remember Dyslexis score of 22-0

I was leading a IDF squad. Trust me, the team was trying. Its hard to stay together though when you cant move. To be able to move to get close to the enemy you need to keep their heads down, which is hard to do if you cant get accurate fire on them.

That round we brought up our open top M113s to try to suppress as we moved but they usually got shot out. And the tank was always down because the HAVOK. I played that map again as Russia and it was a cake walk. Didnt even see the tank live long enough to engage us.

You should of seen the KDRs.....actually i did post them at the start of this thread. I remember Dyslexis score of 22-0

22-0? It's impressive but it happens quite often on the maps where both sides have scopes, MG kit is a very powerful tool in the right hands and with the right squad members.

That round we brought up our open top M113s to try to suppress as we moved but they usually got shot out.

Those things are horrible, they are like techies but huge and slow, useful only as some sort of stationary 50 cal. It's the asset balance that should be adjusted on Beirut, not the scopes, becouse IDF quite often wins on Bijar even thou the MEC infantry use scoped battle rifles(almost marksman rifle but without bipod).

get close to the enemy you need to keep their heads down, which is hard to do if you cant get accurate fire on them.

You can use smoke for example, many kits have it.

Complete inability on the IDF side, clearly seen by lone wolves and general depring in the contruction site.

I swear if i hear the "No scope = No accurate fire" argument once more im gonna flip. HOW IS THAT. HOW IN THE NAME OF YOUR OWN MOTHER IS THAT SO? Deviation is the same. Mouse button1=fire is the same.

Its not about accurate fire also, IDF have much greater volume of fire on all weapons, how is that for suppresion? Ah ofcourse, if your squad and you cant use that tactics, its easier to come whine on the forums how unbalanced it is.

L2P is all i have to say.

Target acquisition, yo. You cant shoot at what you cant see.

Wheres_my_chili wrote:Target acquisition, yo. You cant shoot at what you cant see.

that is why you have spotter and officer kits!

with the binocs you can spot them very easily

lack of scopes is not the problem, the map is not balanced in my opinion

and that dyslexi's video just show how a bunch of noobs on the other team tried to get to the flag running through the open, (not talking about your squad conman as I know you are a good SL)

Kevokpo wrote:adding scopes is not the solution at all, does people complain that the militia in black gold needs scopes? I haven't seen any posts about that or heard people complaining either and it is a 4km map.

well you haven't seen posts because you fight militia only on ins which is their ideal conditions and if you die often as a militia it was most likely because you didn't use that advantage properly or your team didn't. as for IDF AAS 4km with less urban areas is the worst condition they can have as they are an conventional army built on and for CQB as that's the conditions they live in, on aas you can't control the enemy's approach and target so they can't work on their conditions adding no urban areas it's a clear team bash for the IDF unless the other team ain't organized...

My bottom line here is don't compare both as they don't have the same conditions...