Project Reality Forums

Maybe you should also try to implement the AKM, you have to contact the Syrian Faction folks though for it.

That looks very interesting

Pronck wrote:Maybe you should also try to implement the AKM, you have to contact the Syrian Faction folks though for it.

ANA doesn't use them

[R-CON]Insanitypays wrote:ANA doesn't use them

Some of them do, but the rest ended up sitting in reserve anyway.

ANA doesn't USE them.
I never said they didn't HAVE akms.
Same goes for the AK74s

They aren't used anywhere near as often or with the same consistency as other weapons systems- especially not to the point where they should be portrayed in a potential ANA faction.

Looks great. I love iron sight factions. BTW, would it possible to give the techicals windows that aren't broken?

comming along nicely i see, keep it up!

[R-CON]Insanitypays wrote:ANA doesn't USE them.
I never said they didn't HAVE akms.
Same goes for the AK74s

They aren't used anywhere near as often or with the same consistency as other weapons systems- especially not to the point where they should be portrayed in a potential ANA faction.

They do USE them, and it's gonna be much easier to just give them an AKM than making 5 more AK variants.

FluffyThumper wrote:They do USE them, and it's gonna be much easier to just give them an AKM than making 5 more AK variants.

I'm not sure where you're coming from there. I never said anything about 'making' any AK variants. If the ANA were to use AKs, it would be more realistic for them to use the AK47 rather than the AKM because the 47 was far more prevalent in their armed forces.
As far as I know, the goal of PR's factions isn't to represent every detail of that force, but rather to represent its most common/consistent aspects.

My point is that in terms of authenticity, it would be best to have the ANA using M16s. It would be unrealistic if (in game) the players were using a mix of AKs and M16s. Its also dependent on which unit is being represented, so this is a choice that the comfac will likely have to make.

Another factor here is the time period. Earlier in the war, the ANA were mostly using AKs, but now the dominant weapon is the M16 as they've phased out most of their AKs.
So if the comfac were choosing to represent the early war ANA, they would have the soldiers wearing M81 and predominantly using AKs. For late war, they would be equipped with M16s and the new digital pattern.

As PR is in a constant state of "a little bit in the future" I say go for the digital camo, use the old one as a tool for diversifying the soldiers, and give them a mix of their equipment and weapons that provides best gameplay. That has seemed to be the rule, especially for factions where it is hard to tell what is standarized and what is uncommon but needed for the faction.

Lately I have seen a lot of people being fans of inrosight gameplay, and this faction can provide that quite nicely if they use both the AK and the M16, although a squad might not deploy like that, a larger force(which PR portrays) might realistically include both types.

This would give people that like either weapons a chance to use the ones the like.

'[R-COM wrote:H.sta;2062700']As PR is in a constant state of "a little bit in the future" I say go for the digital camo, use the old one as a tool for diversifying the soldiers, and give them a mix of their equipment and weapons that provides best gameplay. That has seemed to be the rule, especially for factions where it is hard to tell what is standarized and what is uncommon but needed for the faction.

Which factions are you referring to?
(There's also plenty of documentation as to the common gear used by ANA infantry)

Apart from the unconventionals, the only other faction that comes to mind is Germany with a single G3 on their spawn selection (alt officer). Otherwise I'm drawing a blank.

I don't think there's any substantial "gameplay" advantage as much as it just gives the players a bit of personalization. As cool as that is, I don't think its worth sacrificing authenticity for. Even in the 'larger' operations you're alluding to, chances are that most of the time, the little AO represented by a BF2 scale map would have a single infantry unit operating within it (alongside air+armor).
In jointly using Aks/M16s/phasers, we infer irritating logistical faults (which I believe is why this is a feature often left to insurgent factions).

In my opinion (which I may have already expressed), the ideal way to go about including both weapons would be to have crewman, spotters, combat engineers, and other less common kits using AK47s, which could simulate the front line infantry using the most up to date gear (M16A2s), while armored and other less prioritized units make do with older rifles because their small arms should hold a lower significance in their particular role.

I put a lot more energy into making this argument than I had originally intended

Yes, that would be a very good way of mixing the kits together, realistic, yet keeps things varied.

'[R-COM wrote:H.sta;2062700']As PR is in a constant state of "a little bit in the future" I say go for the digital camo, use the old one as a tool for diversifying the soldiers, and give them a mix of their equipment and weapons that provides best gameplay. That has seemed to be the rule, especially for factions where it is hard to tell what is standarized and what is uncommon but needed for the faction.

Lately I have seen a lot of people being fans of inrosight gameplay, and this faction can provide that quite nicely if they use both the AK and the M16, although a squad might not deploy like that, a larger force(which PR portrays) might realistically include both types.

This would give people that like either weapons a chance to use the ones the like.

Yeah For example, Russian forces with tactical "vests" straight from the 80s , well but they seem very out-dated. I think they got real tactical vests by now, not just some harness-pouch-combo thing.
[/offtopic]

Jacksonez__ wrote:Russian forces with tactical "vests" straight from the 80s , well but they seem very out-dated. I think they got real tactical vests by now, not just some harness-pouch-combo thing.

I'm assuming that when the Russian comfac made that stuff, it was what the Russians were using at the time, so that may be more due to the mod aging rather than being inaccurate.

What I will probably do is a Ziptie kit variant with AKs with a few M16s using their old US M81 Woodland camouflage representing their equipment that they "used" to have, and the Normal kit variant will use M16s with a few Aks with their newer Spec4ce Afghan Forest Digital Camouflage.

But, I'm not sure if we can apply Woodland Textures Sufix when loading a init_alt.con on a map while getting the Ziptie kit variant and on the normal init.con to not apply any Textures Sufix with the Normal kit variant.


Also the last heavy task that we need is Kit Geoms, Player Model and more maps.

I might also do a few changes for vehicles, maybe do a version of the BMP-1/2 without Zoom for balance reasons.

max nice wrote:What I will probably do is a Ziptie kit variant with AKs with a few M16s using their old US M81 Woodland camouflage representing their equipment that they "used" to have, and the Normal kit variant will use M16s with a few Aks with their newer Spec4ce Afghan Forest Digital Camouflage.

But, I'm not sure if we can apply Woodland Textures Sufix when loading a init_alt.con on a map while getting the Ziptie kit variant and on the normal init.con to not apply any Textures Sufix with the Normal kit variant.


Also the last heavy task that we need is Kit Geoms, Player Model and more maps.

I might also do a few changes for vehicles, maybe do a version of the BMP-1/2 without Zoom for balance reasons.

That sounds great, it's exactly what I wanted to suggest Also since there won't be that many scopes I think it would be cool to have the primary version be M16 and alt version be some type of AK(perhaps only for ziptie version). I've seen some videos where they have American weapons mixed with PKM and RPG etc so I don't think it would be totally unrealistic. I'm glad you won't make it strictly M16, that would feel too "clean".

Actually I'm pretty sure you can load a different texture suffix based on the map layer. I may have done so on Sbeneh earlier when I was testing some stuff. You wouldn't want to use the woodland suffix because some statics will have Chinese graffiti and propaganda posters instead of Arabic. Due to the Afghan maps not using any suffix (like other desert maps), you could just make it "M81" or "Digital". Its why MEC uses the word "sbeneh" instead of "woodland" for their 'saa' textures.
EDIT: Depending on what the mapper wants, they could use the old camo with m16s or the new camo with AKs. Lots of fidelity there ^^

Considering the suffixes do work, I think you've figured out the perfect solution
Maybe use the AKs/M81 for AAS and M16s/digital for Insurgency. It would compliment both gameplay and realism.

in regard to the remaining workload:
Soldiers/kits are my bread and butter, and I'd absolutely love to make some badass ANA infantry, but your #1 priority should be getting maps finished, tested, and game ready. I know it isn't ideal, but understand that if I do make the soldiers+kits early and a mapper randomly flakes out (which isn't uncommon), my hours of work will also go down with that ship (when I could have spent them on something else more urgent).
As I said before, once you've got at least one map prepared, I'll be willing to work my butt off on the ANA.

Once a map is complete, it would take maybe a month and then the ANA soldiers/kits would be done as well (probably much sooner if I buy enough subs/rootbeer). Trust me when I say I would like to see this in game as much as you do.

It is possible to have different texture suffixes between layers, many of the night layers on maps use it iirc to change map textures etc, and ye you wouldn't want to use the woodland suffix on a desert map as that would change a whole load of stuff.

I didn't think about objects textures, I will expand this idea of having Ziptie kits with Texture Sufix. for having variation with GPOs.

For the maps, Bamyan is practically done, some fix here and there, but I want the words of Ason about it.
Musa Qala is way far from done.

Yeah Bamyan is very close to being finished, I'm actually lightmapping it right now, 652/7868 objects