Project Reality Forums

When i read the TOW 'cost', in the title, I thought that you meant request a TOW Humvee. Wouldn't it be great if the commander had a set number of points which he could use to request different vehicles from firebases? Instead of random vehicle spawns, perhaps a SL could request one and it would show up on the map, like a build request, and the commander could accept or ignore. The point system would work just like 'World in Conflict', with a map appropriate cap on certain vehicles (tanks and apcs). This would stop non-squad players using vehicles, and would allow the officers on a team tailor the vehicles to their needs. Also it would be more realistic in that most people would request jeeps (a bit of armour, speed and a gun) over trucks, and so trucks wouldn't be used inappropriately (i.e. taking them into hostile areas).

If this is a Tactical-Gamer thing, I believe HAT sniping was made legal, because no one could control it, and the admins are usually in the game to enjoy the game. BattleRecorder scouring would take a while, and I imagine, was simply not worth the effort.

Ticket loss on using a rocket seems a bit much, and would not remedy the "problem" of HAT sniping. Is it a problem if the Anti-Tank rocket is used against infantry? Not in my opinion as I roll forward in my APC to take out the soldier who just wasted his only rocket.

And if there's a decent sniper team on your squad, and someone requests in Team chat sniper support on the enemy HAT, they could move in quickly to help their team, as snipers should do.

So... we should probably remove tanks sniping and apc sniping and chopper sniping to be on the safe side. Look theres not real balance issue with having a guy carrying a rocket, he's better than the average troop when he picks up that rocket, so deal with it. Get your own rocket and have a party. We had a HAT duel on Jabal the other day across the gorge behind the canyon. Had an enemy firebase, boom. Had 2 squads running into the base who didn't bother to keep their spacing... BOOM. They are now 1 squad. They pulled out their HAT and started to shoot back but I M24ed them RAMBO-L337 style.

Maxfragg wrote:don't think that this would be sencefull, use of at weapons agianst inf is a fact, also i am not sure if it is actually legal ( since international laws forbit shooting on inf with rounds bigger than 12,7mm )

The Geneva Convention is a law of war as well, and it's only arbitrarily followed - imposing similar laws of war on a video game is silly.

HAT sniping is, I admit, really F-ing annoying. However, grenades are just as annoying, and they MUST be kept in the game, as they are a major part of modern combat. Likewise, HAT has already been nerfed to oblivion; in fact, we need more HAT kits available at any given time, not less, and a ticket penalty isn't even reasonable (is it even possible?).

@ R-Dev CAS_117 a canyon is a gorge

dont think of it as HAT think of it as Predator general purpose.

Nick The Bubble wrote:When i read the TOW 'cost', in the title, I thought that you meant request a TOW Humvee. Wouldn't it be great if the commander had a set number of points which he could use to request different vehicles from firebases? Instead of random vehicle spawns, perhaps a SL could request one and it would show up on the map, like a build request, and the commander could accept or ignore. The point system would work just like 'World in Conflict', with a map appropriate cap on certain vehicles (tanks and apcs). This would stop non-squad players using vehicles, and would allow the officers on a team tailor the vehicles to their needs. Also it would be more realistic in that most people would request jeeps (a bit of armour, speed and a gun) over trucks, and so trucks wouldn't be used inappropriately (i.e. taking them into hostile areas).

Thats a great idea and would also mean the commander had more influence on squads actions and use of assets!


Just increasing the reload time of a HAT would increase the worth players place upon each shot.

What about adding another 'resource' to be tabulated alongside tickets? My idea is that with every enemy ticket depleted, every friendly soldier defibrillated, and every teamwork point accumulated by the team (with some time limit between defibs counted to prevent abuse), the Commander is able to, as Nick suggested, spawn certain vehicles at a certain radius from the main flag or a FB/bunker. Perhaps this resource could also be used to 'buy' the firebases and bunkers, preventing a good-for-nothing team or Commander from setting up firebases when the front lines aren't even being managed properly.

Something like this would give PR yet another RTS element that just hasn't been seen before in most FPS games, especially a non-commercial mod.

I have come to live with LAT vs infantry as pretty much common place.
HAT, i can live with sometimes. Not sniping solo INF, while lone wolfing, but against enemies inside a fortification, perhaps...

Im not a fan of the ticket idea, because it'd ruin those long, hard faught out moments when the game hangs in the balance by 3-5 tickets; then some knob-jocky goes and ripps off a TOW and your forefit.

...mongol...

IMO, I think that HAT sniping is not a problem.

It's been nerfed enough, and it has a 15 second loading time, even longer if you've been running ect ect. In all fairness if you and your squad have not been maintaining stiuational awareness and not spotted the guy who's been staying still for 15 seconds while pointing a rocket at you, then you deserve to die. Because in a away it takes alot of skill to set up and fire without dieing. Also it promotes teamwork within a squad:
e.g. Squad is in a house or on the side of a road, the ambushing squad starts firing on them, they run behind some rocks and they become surpressed. The HAT guy can hen begin setup and blow up the area of cover. Which is kinda the way it's done in RL right now if you watch the vids of troops firing HATs at targets behind cover from 2 miles away.

Even if I hated HAt sniping or thought it was "unrealistic" then i would still think that the 1 ticket tax thing would be silly.

Especially as if you hit them they lose a ticket as well, balancing things out, and you get rid of the guy shooting at you...