Project Reality Forums

[R-DEV]M42 Zwilling wrote:Picking features over aesthetics could turn into such a slippery slope... obviously there are times where minor compromises make sense, but I'm not so sure this is one of them. I really wonder whether the kit geoms would ever get done tbh if valued so low.

this ^^ listen to this man!!!

[R-DEV]Mats391 wrote:For me it is not only about aesthetics but also gameplay. Having the RPG-7 HAT but showing the Eryx can be very misleading. If i spot a RPG-7 wielding soldier while being far away in a tank, i wont care. If i see an Eryx i am going to get the fuck out.

TBH the only real differences between the RPG-7V2 with Tandem Warheads and the Eryx, is really Range (600m for the Eryx, 500m for the Iranian Tandem HEAT, 200m for the PG-7VR Tandem HEAT), Damage (825 damage for the Eryx (x1 rocket), 550 damage for the Iranian Tandem HEAT (x3 rockets with a total of 1650 damage), 700 damage for the PG-7VR Tandem HEAT (x2 rockets with a total of 1400 damage), The Amount of Rockets the Weapon has (gone into in Damage) and naturally, The Accuracy of the Weapon (Eryx being wire guided with spin, RPG-7V2 being manually ranged with deviation on the side too). As such in some cases I would be more scared of the RPG-7V2 with Tandem Rockets than the Eryx, especially at close range.

I would also argue that you are far more likley to see the Rocket Launcher in the hand of the player than you are on his back and if he doesn't have it in his hand, either way you probably have time to gun him down before he dose.

I would agree there is small gameplay difference from not having the right kit geom but nothing massive.

[R-DEV]M42 Zwilling wrote:I really wonder whether the kit geoms would ever get done tbh if valued so low.

In my experience something is more likley to get done if there is a Place Holder already in play for it, as then there is a direct need for it to be done.

Range, accuracy, damage and amount. So basically completely different?

Also the fact that the Eryx can be guided.

sweedensniiperr wrote:Range, accuracy, damage and amount. So basically completely different?

Well they do the same job, just in different ways and in all, the RPG-7V2 with its multiple rockets is more deadly in overall damage.

PatrickLA_CA wrote:Also the fact that the Eryx can be guided.

That comes under accuracy

From my experience you are pretty safe from RPGs at 300m, even more at 400-500m. Eryx is pretty much secure hit on a big target such as a tank up to 600m and more important even on moving targets.

I would let the LAT kit have the RPG for now, but the HAT kit should wait until its completely done

Aren't we already doing that, with T-72Ms that can take on M1A2's?

(please give MEC T-90 and BTR-80)

I voted for gameplay. Not too long ago we didn't even have custom kit geometries, and we didn't let that get into our way of changing kit layouts.

No placeholders, please. Take your time, finish something and then release it. It's better than releasing placeholders. Why is the community so impatient? Jesus people.. Lol

Navo wrote:Aren't we already doing that, with T-72Ms that can take on M1A2's?

(please give MEC T-90 and BTR-80)

I voted for gameplay. Not too long ago we didn't even have custom kit geometries, and we didn't let that get into our way of changing kit layouts.

There is no country in the middle east using T90's, so really would make very little sense. The T72M is really not a placeholder. The BTR80 other hand would make for a nice MEC vehicle indeed. But that has nothing to do with being a placeholder or not.

There are still a few placeholders in PR, like no real PLA GPMG (just thinking on the top of my head). But really not many.

For as long as I play PR we've had custom kit geometries?

[R-DEV]Mineral wrote: For as long as I play PR we've had custom kit geometries?

I'm getting old.

About the T-90:

The T-90 has been exported to India and Cyprus. Seeing MEC mostly operates Russian vehicles I don't think them buying the T-90 is unlikely instead of using 1970's monkey model T-72s.
I mean, this is a coalition of Middle Eastern states, now that is pretty fucking unlikely already. Either give them western vehicles (to fit with their western small arms, also realistic considering there are Arab users of the Leopard 2, Leclerc and Abrams) or give them a T-90. I cry everytime I see a T-72M without reactive armour survive a APFSDS round.

Edit: Forgot Iran isn't Arab

We base MEC on what current middle eastern nations use. Not on what they could use. And what our maps need. With the current working of armour in PR there is no need for a T72 replacement really. If we would move towards more realistic armour penetration etc then yeah, T72 would really be outmatched but that's a worry for later

[R-DEV]Mineral wrote:We base MEC on what current middle eastern nations use. Not on what they could use. And what our maps need. With the current working of armour in PR there is no need for a T72 replacement really. If we would move towards more realistic armour penetration etc then yeah, T72 would really be outmatched but that's a worry for later

I understand that, but why no Leopard 2? Shit would be rad and more realistic.

I dream of a MEC with more mixed Western/Russian vehicles. Mi-17s, Chinooks and Hueys. Mirages and Mig-29s. Humvees and Urals.

But that's a discussion for another time

lol also for balance issues some countries use western weapons such as Egypt which are using the abrams cobra and apache i believe
jordan are using the challenger 1

Algeria got T90s from Russia I believe. But the T72 (it's versions) is a classic, and I like seeing it in the mod

Now that the T-72 has gimped optics, it's in the best interests of the MEC to get an upgrade, regardless of immediate realism.

The T-72 should be split into Monkey (T-72M1, 2 hit turret, 2-3 hit hull, no Thermals). *Insert fake T-72 upgrade here* for things on Khami and Kashan. If you could find a Kontakt 1 bloc, make a T-72S1 and you're done.

I like the idea of the features. I love the feel of playing and watching the game world develop around me over time.

Could someone close the poll please? The thread keeps popping up under new/today's posts...