Project Reality Forums

The key to making changes like this is getting someone interested in learning the materials system that BF2/PR use. Its a very complicated system, changing one value effects many many things. For example, changing the damage that 50cal bullets does to wood also effects tanks, because vbf2 tanks sometimes have pieces of wood material on them (dont ask...)

I read the list about the changes you put there warren, and though I have a couple changes I think it mostly looks good. But if you thought it was exhaustive to make a list like that, wait until you start investigating the way material damage/penetration is handled in BF2, it will make your head spin so fast youll probably pass out For every value you change, you have to consider hundreds of other things you have inadvertently just changed... its real fun stuff!

So I agree its a great idea to make these changes but its not an easy task and we need someone to step up to do these changes *wink wink*

Well thanks for that Warren. pleased you liked the Eryx stuff, guess we wait and see what happens. Yeah I got the SRAW working, including the lock and the top down warhead, but although it has a range of 600m, it can only track moving targets in rl at up to 200m, which makes it significantly worse than the ERYX in the PR world. Of course it has the advantage of being fire and forget, so no guiding against an angry tank, but vs the present superspeed ERYX, it is inferior in every way. So anyway been busy with other stuff, so I havent got any further since then....

Put the javelin in... It is used a lot by US and is being implemented in UK and takes out tansk 1 hit no worries i believe... BUt very good post, would like to see some of those ideas implemented.

Wonderful.
I'd thought of such a thing, but had never thought of convaying it in such detail.

I always thought it might be possible to just increase all vehichles HP to 200% of its current value. When a vehicle reaches 50% of this new value, the vehicle becomes disabled and begins to deteriate, along with the crew.


...mongol...

it'd be unlucky to get hit in any APC but still fair

M.Warren wrote: The HMMWV TOW is the only ground vehicle with a missle that is capable of destroying a tank or getting it to burn with a single shot to the rear to the best of my knowledge. That thing simply is massive.

Through my large experience running these TOW HMMWVs on Qwai, I can confirm that a single TOW round to any REAR section of the tank WILL destroy it instantly or cause it to burn for 1 second at most. (On most of our encounters, the tank was destroyyed instantly with no hope for the crewmen to escape).

MarineSeaknight wrote:Through my large experience running these TOW HMMWVs on Qwai, I can confirm that a single TOW round to any REAR section of the tank WILL destroy it instantly or cause it to burn for 1 second at most. (On most of our encounters, the tank was destroyyed instantly with no hope for the crewmen to escape).

Agreed

wow this guy is like the holy grail of good suggestions...and lots of numbers which gives me headaches

'[R-DEV wrote:fuzzhead;694089']The key to making changes like this is getting someone interested in learning the materials system that BF2/PR use. Its a very complicated system, changing one value effects many many things. For example, changing the damage that 50cal bullets does to wood also effects tanks, because vbf2 tanks sometimes have pieces of wood material on them (dont ask...)

I read the list about the changes you put there warren, and though I have a couple changes I think it mostly looks good. But if you thought it was exhaustive to make a list like that, wait until you start investigating the way material damage/penetration is handled in BF2, it will make your head spin so fast youll probably pass out For every value you change, you have to consider hundreds of other things you have inadvertently just changed... its real fun stuff!

So I agree its a great idea to make these changes but its not an easy task and we need someone to step up to do these changes *wink wink*

Oh I have no problem in working on the mod in some way if I could, I would say that I have that kind of time to spend. Not that I mind spending 10 hours working on something, I'd do that in a heartbeat if I simply could become familiar enough to manipulate the BF2 editor properly. While also being aware of it's limitations so I don't go crazy putting effort in an otherwise unchangeable situation.

To put it simply... The Trial and error system sucks. Not that it's the PR guys fault or anything, I just hate doing things in an unprofessional manner. Although I have a friend that had gone into the field of Computer Generated animation that may be able to help, but Project Reality is not his intrest.

Along with that... I think I have to mess with my BF2 editor. For some reason I'm not seeing any of the Project Reality models of things. You know, APC's (IFV's) that have the missle pods removed and the like. Then again, it may just very well be that way. I'm going to go toil around the Community Modding forum then. If not, I hope someone bans me from the forums for like 2 days so I can ACTUALLY GO BACK TO PLAYING THE GAME FOR ONCE. Argh!

TheScot666 wrote:Put the javelin in... It is used a lot by US and is being implemented in UK and takes out tansk 1 hit no worries i believe... BUt very good post, would like to see some of those ideas implemented.

now i know theres alotta arguements about HAT KOs or not now lets examine modern anti tank weapons...simple enough they arnt made to destroy the tank, simply to penetrate the armour and kill the personell inside. most anti tank shells today leave most of the vehichle intact, the only reason they seem chared and burned is from the reactive armour

the explosive elements within the shells are probably not much more than 1 or 2 grenades

shiite man thats amazing work, Id agree with it

Excellent Work Warren, You have indeed done your homework . I agree on all parts. This is a improvement that will cause the HAT/LAT gunners to try and engage armor in the rear, rather than just hit it dead in the noes. I absolutely love this. Great work.

i agree w/ it....all of it

Me not knowing an incling of this infamous BF2 Editor, I ask you all:

Can you create your own 'materials' in this... BF2 Editor?

...mongol...

maverick551 wrote:Excellent Work Warren, You have indeed done your homework . I agree on all parts. This is a improvement that will cause the HAT/LAT gunners to try and engage armor in the rear, rather than just hit it dead in the noes. I absolutely love this. Great work.

Slowing the missile down will also make HAT gunners attack the rear more, as if you have to stay up to guide a slower missile and the tank has seen you, you stand a good chance of being co-axed before the missile gets near the tank.

Nice one. I'm all for a more realistic damage system.

Would be great if hits on armor had a greater chance of breaking something before it starts burning. Infantry AT weapons are much too weak at the moment.

For testament to this, think back to when a tank rolled up and none of you had a HAT handy - everything goes balls up since the tank is basically untouchable.

it will take every hit you throw at it without any real consequence until about 30% health.


> a much needed modification would be so even a single AT4 or RPG could damage optics, tracks or engine.

'[R-MOD wrote:Mongolian_dude;694344']Me not knowing an incling of this infamous BF2 Editor, I ask you all:

Can you create your own 'materials' in this... BF2 Editor?

...mongol...

I've only started getting familiar with the BF2 Editor as of late and the term "infamous" is quite accurate at this point. Wasn't until a month ago that I had learned that basically any community member was encouraged to aid Project Reality's developement.

But yes, there is an interface that allows the creation of "materials" which is referred as the Material Editor. Ranging from common soil types, flora, wood, metal, cardboard, concrete, carpet to even creating your very own material.

All that needs to be done is to give it a name and numerical values on how it reacts with other materials in game (Such as projectiles.). Of course, I am still unfamiliar on how to use the material editor properly. But yes, you can create your own matter.

Mescaldrav wrote:Slowing the missile down will also make HAT gunners attack the rear more, as if you have to stay up to guide a slower missile and the tank has seen you, you stand a good chance of being co-axed before the missile gets near the tank.

Indeed, and that's exactly the point that we're going for here. To encourage the players to use tactics and teamwork to assault enemy armor from a particular point otherwise known as "shot location" is the focus of all infantry combat. Infantry is significantly more capable of getting behind enemy armor in areas that offer a high amount of cover, such as cities and wooded areas, that is thier true advantage. Of course this is not always possible of occuring such as while playing Kasahan Desert. But there's nothing you can do about that as that is simply the nature of the beast.

Besides Heavy Anti-Tank is very deadly piece of equipment, but even that needs to come at a price. As it is currently, Heavy Anti-Tank travels at such a high velocity it can reach it's maximum range of 600 meters in less than 1.5 seconds. The only realistic missle that should fire off like that is Light Anti-Tank.

Light Anti-Tank:
AT-4 and the RPG-7
<Note: Take note that there is very little to no smoke for the backblast effect. Also note that there is no smoke trailing either of the 2 projectiles as they head for thier targets. Very different than what's currently depicted in our PR gaming experience.>

Heavy Anti-Tank:
SRAW and the Eryx Anti-Tank Missle
<Note: Take note that the Eryx flies significantly slower than what is shown in PR, but it's clear that the SRAW also operates on completely different principles aswell. These 2 missle systems are significantly different from eachother, but keep in mind that we have to work with what we have. Meaning that it is a must that a standardized median between speed, firepower and guidance must be established. Because in reality not all things are created equal, but for gameplay dynamics this must be fair for both teams as much as permissable.>

The refined Eryx by Mascaldrav: (Original thread is found here.)
Improved PR Eryx (Video One), Improved PR Eryx from the Optic Sight (Video Two), Improved PR Eryx with Thrust Vectoring Appearance (Video Three).

<Note: Special thanks to Mescaldrav for fine tuning the Eyrx. I would highly recommend reducing the smoke trail to just the faintest haze as seen in the live video above. Also to appease the developers I'd recommend keeping the optical sights the standard 1x zoom. Maybe one day well be able to see this in an upcoming patch sometime, wouldn't that be nice humm?>

Also, Heavy Anti-Tank should be threatened by the same things it's capable of attacking. Keep in mind that Heavy Anti-Tank isn't a suit of god armor, it's just a normal soldier carrying some serious equipment into battle. Thusly making him vulnerable to the very same things any other infantrymen has to deal with... Enemy armor and snipers though are a Heavy Anti-Tank gunners biggest concern, and it should be.

Now do this for infantry!!

hmm so the SRAW is fire-and-forget.

Maybe a way this can be implemented in-game is reduce the turn-speed of the SRAW missile so that a perpendicularly moving target which a good Eryx operator can hit at about 400-500m is impossible for a SRAW missile to hit (since its max effective distance on moving targets is 200m)

If that's not enough, maybe the 2 HAT kits available to a 24+ US/GB team include only one "Predator" variant with that does just as much damage to MBTs as the Eryx. The other HAT kit would be the "all-purpose" version that has more splash but takes 1-2 more missiles than the predator to defeat MBTs. Both SRAWs should be fire-and-forget requiring the operator to place the crosshairs/sight almost directly on the target for 2 seconds without moving the sights off the target to get the clear tone or some other lock-confirmation to fire.


Anyways,
nice work Warren.