Project Reality Forums

77SiCaRiO77 wrote:in DCon the passangers of a APC have a bell that can press if they want to bail

would be cool to hae something like that

That was that annoying beeping sound? That thing drove me mad.

So what special abilities has the tank commander got? He kinda sounds like a glorified driver with a pair of fancy binoculars and a mirror a the moment...

JL wrote:the current tank driver setup is perfect -- I personally think combining tank commander and driver is terrible.

It is not perfect. A tank crew is not just a group of individuals who cooperate with each other like an infantry squad. A tank crew acts as one. Driver does not act separate from the gunner and the commander, but he drives where the commander tells him to and according to the fire commands issued to the gunner by the commander. Merging the driver and commander is a huge leap of realism in the way tanks are modeled. And not only because it simulates the driver-commander cooperation, but it also enables the commander to work much better with the gunner - he sees all that the gunner sees and he can move the tank accordingly to direct and aid the gunner's engagement. Overall this change will see PR tanks work much more in synch like their real-world counterparts.

'[R-DEV wrote:eggman']Tank Driver position is gone, replaced by a Commander who uses WASD to send commands to the (non existant) driver. Commander has 360 degree CITV type display. Just sorting out the kinks in this system now, not released to test yet.

Wow! You know that's actually something I've been thinking about suggesting!
But I think driver should be optional.

77SiCaRiO77 wrote:in DCon the passangers of a APC have a bell that can press if they want to bail

would be cool to hae something like that

Yeah, that actually would be pretty helpful when you hop in to a blue apc

AnRK wrote:So what special abilities has the tank commander got? He kinda sounds like a glorified driver with a pair of fancy binoculars and a mirror a the moment...

what else does he need? That is pretty perfect IMO...its not like he needs a gun or anything.

'[R-DEV wrote:eggman']Tank Driver position is gone, replaced by a Commander who uses WASD to send commands to the (non existant) driver. Commander has 360 degree CITV type display. Just sorting out the kinks in this system now, not released to test yet.

I love you

This is how I envisioned it from the beginning. I hope you can make the 50 cal remote operated as well eventually.

$kelet0r wrote:I hope you can make the 50 cal remote operated as well eventually.

But it's not. It could be remote operated on the M1A1, but not on the M1A2. Out of the PR tanks only T-90 has a remotely operated MG.

I think it would be nice if he had a sort of compass ribbon on his HUD, telling what "o'clock" position he was looking at.

"Hostile personell on left side of hut at 11 o'clock..."

Going a little OT here, but is a laser range finder and a manual range entry ballistic computer possible?
Also main gun stabilizer for Y and X axis possible? Think that has been discussed before though.

Give the commander in the tanks and APCs thermal vision!

While the prospects sound nice, I don't think it would work well, to have the tank commander just tell the tank where to go.

I'd like to give it a driver, commander, gunner and machine gunner. Four man crew. I don't like the idea of an automated driver. Seems like its going to have some serious path finding issues.

'[R-DEV wrote:Exel']But it's not. It could be remote operated on the M1A1, but not on the M1A2. Out of the PR tanks only T-90 has a remotely operated MG.

Really? I was under the impression that the M1A2 could be kitted out with a CROWS platform?

Guerra wrote:I'd like to give it a driver, commander, gunner and machine gunner. Four man crew. I don't like the idea of an automated driver. Seems like its going to have some serious path finding issues.

No, the commander drives the tank just like the driver does now. As for four man crew... what I said before, tank crews aren't like infantry squads, they act as one body. There's no way that would work in a game like BF2/PR though, plus it would be far too manpower consuming considering the number of players the BF2 engine allows (tank v infantry ratio is already far from realistic).

$kelet0r wrote:Really? I was under the impression that the M1A2 could be kitted out with a CROWS platform?

As part of TUSK, yes. But we don't have TUSK in PR. At least not yet.

Guerra wrote:I'd like to give it a driver, commander, gunner and machine gunner. Four man crew. I don't like the idea of an automated driver. Seems like its going to have some serious path finding issues.

LOL. The commander basically is the driver dude. What is esseantially happening is the driver is getting a 360 degree swivel view. That's all.

JP*wasteland.soldier wrote:I think it would be nice if he had a sort of compass ribbon on his HUD, telling what "o'clock" position he was looking at.

"Hostile personell on left side of hut at 11 o'clock..."

would it be possible to alter the "spotted" command that everybody in the tank gets, to say the position to the hut it is, like the secondary gunner "spots" a target on the left side of the hut, the message the driver hears is that he get a "target at 9 o'clock"

and would it be possible remove the sniper spotted message when you spot a sniper and then replace it with a anti-tank spotted message when you spot an anti-tank (when you are inside a tank) just keep it normal on the normal ground battle.

sorry for my bad language at the moment (pretty tired) and i hope you understood what i meant, because it was horribly written.

Eggman when can i discuss having your children... Rhino turned me down already with another topic... but i'm sure your more willing..

Seriously, you have no idea how much this makes me. I'm currently the gunner in my Clan's armor unit, and knowing that the driver will have a better field of vision keeps gives me alot of ease.

Will the 3rd Seat Gunner still just be a MG or will he have some other toys to? maybe an actuall cupola to cover his back and sides?

77SiCaRiO77 wrote:in DCon the passangers of a APC have a bell that can press if they want to bail

would be cool to hae something like that

You could put it in as a secondary fire on the gunport MGs that doesn't actually fire anything, just makes a sound when you do it.

ubiquitous wrote:You could put it in as a secondary fire on the gunport MGs that doesn't actually fire anything, just makes a sound when you do it.

Yeah that's a good idea.

'[uBp wrote:Irish']Will the 3rd Seat Gunner still just be a MG or will he have some other toys to? maybe an actuall cupola to cover his back and sides?

I'm sure that'd be possible... if we wanted to go to imaginary vehicles. Wouldn't it be cool to have Mammoth tanks as well?

Seriously though, if we want to stick with real vehicles, that'd be a no. Well for vehicles that don't have anything to cover the gunner, that is.