Project Reality Forums

There are some things you will seldom/never see in a public game...i hope we can show you a more useful assignment during the tournament?

...and i`m sure the Devs are working on a solution for all of the points you have mentioned? Look at what they already have changed compared to Vanilla? Give them some time.

Long Bow wrote:I remeber reading some books on him and just thinking WTF!! this man is no mear mortal. He is some ancient Greek good of ownage (and patience)! He is the original and only 733t sniper

nah, no where near the best sniper in the world.

Mammi now thats an exxaggeration as big as Long Bows, come on...the guy wrote the book on so many sniper skills that have long since been adopted into ritual for modern snipers. No one is ever the best, but hell hathcock and chuck were definitely way up top.

VipersGhost wrote:Mammi now thats an exxaggeration as big as Long Bows, come on...the guy wrote the book on so many sniper skills that have long since been adopted into ritual for modern snipers. No one is ever the best, but hell hathcock and chuck were definitely way up top.

well, I'm not saying that he wasn't good or anything.
But he just isn't the best. One of the best, sure, maybe even the best american. But during ww2 there were some awesome snipers, mostly from the Soviet Union but also from other countries.

And as Engineer just posted, there is one guy who is above all other snipers, Mr. Simo Häyhä. Over 500 CONFIRMED kills with a sniper rifle. That already speaks for itself. Also note that ALL of those kills were made with the iron sight.
Also if over 500 confirmed kills is not enough you can always add those ~200 kills he made with an smg.
And if I remember correctly after he got shot in the face, he picked up his rifle and killed the guy who shot him. Most soldiers would just **** in their pants, but this dude still fought.

So there is really no way you can say that he isn't the best.

WNxKenwayy wrote:Short Answer: No

Longer Answer: Hell no.

i never sig quotes , but thats got to be in it

Strategist wrote:A sniper should never find himself beside other infantry. If he does it means either he or the infantry is doing something wrong, often that the sniper is too close to the enemy and should be using a marksman or even rifleman kit instead.

A sniper is a strategic asset in himself, just like a squad, a tank or a jet is. He is not some kind of rifleman with a better scope. He is an entirely different kind of 'unit' than other infantry. Taken to the extreme, it could be said that a sniper is as different to other infantry as a tank is. If a squad needs a sniper they should be using a marksman - never the sniper. A sniper should always be engaging at extreme ranges, staying out of harms way. Even the scoring systemencourages this.

Because of this is I find it entirely wrong that the sniper is encouraged to be part of a squad, requiring several players in the squad to request his kit. He should in fact be encouraged not to be part of a squad as being in in one hurts both the squad and the team: The squad will not be at full strength, missing one man who is hiding up in the hills and the commander will not be able to give the sniper orders directly or receive intelligence reports from the sniper - something the sniper excels at.

I say we go in an entirely different direction. For starters, it would be a welcome change to require only one person in a squad to request a sniper kit. I would like to see this taken further, however: It should in fact not be possible to request the kit if there are non-sniper classes in the squad.

The system could be extended even further to encompass for example jets and helicopters which are just as bad to have in an infantry squad as snipers - again, it hurts both the squad and the team. Either pilots should be disallowed in squads with infantry or at least it jet pilots should. In general, I think promoting the separation of infantry, armour and aircraft squads is a good idea to ensure maximum team effectiveness and commander control.

I agree and I disagree. Yes, I understand your point about the armor/infantry/air support squads being separated (as the commander can more effectively manage his/her assets) but this can be overcome with communication between the ranks. Also, sometimes squads need long-range, accurate precision fire (if you're in Mestia it really helps to have a sniper clearing out the bunkers for you around the Towers). If there was a way to request a sniper (just like you request supplies/arty/etc...) then I might approve of your idea, but not until then.

Engineer wrote:If we are talking about best snipers here, remember Simo Häyhä

Get Real. Get Carlos.
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/carlos_hathcock

Ther's only one 1337 sniper and that's me. full stop.

TF6049 wrote:Get Real. Get Carlos.
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/carlos_hathcock

Article doesnt even exist. Ill stick with the Finnish guy

Whats wrong with mechanized infantry squads?

You want to keep infantry squads at full strength to gain the maximum benefit from the ability to spawn on the squad leader and rally point. You cannot do that if if you bring for example a tank as it will eat up three of your men. I say 'three' and not 'two' because tanks are such valuable tools you cannot afford not to bring an engineer with them. This is because crewmen are horrible at repairing and should never risk getting shot while doing so and abandoning the tank. Read more about this in my 'Common Basic Mistakes' guide linked to in my signature.

Also, you want tanks and other powerful vehicles working independently of the squad since your goals are different: Infantry are for taking CP's, tanks are for pure fighting and should not cap flags.

Strategist wrote:A sniper should never find himself beside other infantry. If he does it means either he or the infantry is doing something wrong, often that the sniper is too close to the enemy and should be using a marksman or even rifleman kit instead.

A sniper is a strategic asset in himself, just like a squad, a tank or a jet is. He is not some kind of rifleman with a better scope. He is an entirely different kind of 'unit' than other infantry. Taken to the extreme, it could be said that a sniper is as different to other infantry as a tank is.

Which is why snipers are not drawn from the ranks of the infantry and are not found organic to US infantry units of company or battalion strength, depending on service branch and unit type. And also are not supporting the advances of small units with precision rifle fire and observation, or are not attached to infantry patrols for insertion or to support them with precision rifle fire.

Strategist wrote:I say we go in an entirely different direction.

If I may use a quote . . . "What do you mean, 'we,' White Man?"

Who the hell uses tanks in mechanized infantry? You use an APC. You can't load up your squad in a tank. The APC provides transport fairly close to the objective (actual distance depending on view distance and surrounding terrain) then the infantry dismount and cover the rest of the distance on foot while the APC hangs back and provides supporting fire. And generally it'll only eat up 2 squad members at most because its rare to have a double crewed APC.

Eddie, news for you: This is a game.

In regards to the "other specialists" part of the post I don't think it makes sense to let civilians be part of ANY squad. Squads are meant for the military by definition, so once a civilian joins a squad they aren't really civilians anymore.

Then again squads for insurgents aren't an army. They happened to hit up Radio Shack and buy radios is all.

Zybon wrote:In regards to the "other specialists" part of the post I don't think it makes sense to let civilians be part of ANY squad. Squads are meant for the military by definition, so once a civilian joins a squad they aren't really civilians anymore.

This. Is. A. Game.

I want to quote Gunnery Sgt. Jack Coughlin, USMC, the author of the book Shooter (no it has nothing to do with the Marky Mark movie).

"In my opinion, the quick pace of war today has rendered the traditional role of the sniper obsolete. In a raid of this sort, the tactic still worked well, but modern battlefields are changing, and long-distance precision shooting means little if tanks and armored-personnel carriers filled with infantrymen have already moved the fight five miles beyond you.
Somehow, we needed to be able to move, far and fast, and I dreamed of running a Mobile Sniper Strike Team that could roam the battlefront and take the fight to the enemy. Scraps such as the one in Somalia only validated my belief that important parts of basic sniper doctrine were flawed.
For instance, snipers are taught never to expose themselves to the enemy. In Mogadishu, we ignored that; we arrived quickly at the front edge of a likely fight and worked out in the open, shielded only by a masonry wall. With other Marines around, we had plenty of protection, and without having to worry about whether of not the enemy could see us, we dominated the battlefield.
Mobility would be the key to the sniper remaining an effective combat tool.
Using traditional methods, just reaching a good shooting position could be extraordinarily complicated. Sometimes we humped along with a patrol and dropped off at a specific point to find a hide and set up shop. Or we might cling like leeches to the back of a tank and roll off when it passed a certain point. Or a helicopter might drop us several miles from the target location and we would sneak forward on feet, bellies, hands, and knees."

Now, would the USMC use these tactics if they ever fought a modern conventional military force such as the PLA? Maybe, maybe not, but the point is that nothing is set in stone. And you can't just say that a sniper would not ever deploy alongside rifle squads in combat just because the Discovery Channel or whatever told you that snipers operate in 2 man teams away from everybody else.

Get outta my Goddam squad, solo-boy!

HABO3 wrote:I want to quote Gunnery Sgt. Jack Coughlin, USMC, the author of the book Shooter (no it has nothing to do with the Marky Mark movie).

"In my opinion, the quick pace of war today has rendered the traditional role of the sniper obsolete. In a raid of this sort, the tactic still worked well, but modern battlefields are changing, and long-distance precision shooting means little if tanks and armored-personnel carriers filled with infantrymen have already moved the fight five miles beyond you.
Somehow, we needed to be able to move, far and fast, and I dreamed of running a Mobile Sniper Strike Team that could roam the battlefront and take the fight to the enemy. Scraps such as the one in Somalia only validated my belief that important parts of basic sniper doctrine were flawed.
For instance, snipers are taught never to expose themselves to the enemy. In Mogadishu, we ignored that; we arrived quickly at the front edge of a likely fight and worked out in the open, shielded only by a masonry wall. With other Marines around, we had plenty of protection, and without having to worry about whether of not the enemy could see us, we dominated the battlefield.
Mobility would be the key to the sniper remaining an effective combat tool.
Using traditional methods, just reaching a good shooting position could be extraordinarily complicated. Sometimes we humped along with a patrol and dropped off at a specific point to find a hide and set up shop. Or we might cling like leeches to the back of a tank and roll off when it passed a certain point. Or a helicopter might drop us several miles from the target location and we would sneak forward on feet, bellies, hands, and knees."

Now, would the USMC use these tactics if they ever fought a modern conventional military force such as the PLA? Maybe, maybe not, but the point is that nothing is set in stone. And you can't just say that a sniper would not ever deploy alongside rifle squads in combat just because the Discovery Channel or whatever told you that snipers operate in 2 man teams away from everybody else.

But you don't understand, this is a game.

When organizational ideas run contrary to his worship's concept then it's a game, when gameplay runs contrary to his worships concept then we talk about reality.

Please try to keep up with the divine flip flop effect.