Project Reality Forums

Zimmer wrote: EDIT: I Use H-ATS afainst defensive places as firebasses and bunkers aswell they are deadly weapons.

IRL troops dont waste heavy AT weapons on enemy emplacements and dugouts, they use M72s and other light at weapons for that

Bringerof_D wrote:IRL troops dont waste heavy AT weapons on enemy emplacements and dugouts, they use M72s and other light at weapons for that

there is footage of javelins being used for this purpose on youtube such as Ross Kemp in Afghanistan.

I assume this is because of the superior range and target aquisition

Bringerof_D wrote:IRL troops dont waste heavy AT weapons on enemy emplacements and dugouts, they use M72s and other light at weapons for that

Lul wat?

YouTube - Us Marines use Javelin Missile on Insurgent Sniper

YouTube - Javelin rocket used against Iraqi insurgent

YouTube - Iraq Combat Footage FGM-148 Javelin vs Building

YouTube - Broadcast Yourself.

YouTube - Marines fire Javelin Missile on Snipers

Also, this is a terrible idea.

The winning team on Al Kufra Oilfields will not be decided by the actual battle, but rather by which of the tanks die first. After your teams tanks are defeated, the opponents are literally unstoppable as they roll into your CPs.

i cant use that argument? You are pretty much giving the noobs all the tools they need in order to screw up a game for everyone else. You can't remove heavy at and or aa because that is just making the infantry defenseless, only a mad man would do that...

I really like this suggestion. Although here is my opinion: If aa and hat kits are removed armour and air assets should have a shorter respawn time. If your air or armour is all down you don't want a slaughter for the next 20mins... Sometimes there is good teamwork between assets but it is rare on public servers. Anyway, huge maps should be like that.

No offense to all you guys, but it is mainly the Air and tank people for it, and the infantry people against it. I personally like infantry and can say, that it would be suicide if HAT was taken out... even if you did, at least make the L-AT stronger...

Lets keep to what's REALISTIC please.

Dr2B Rudd wrote:Lets keep to what's REALISTIC please.

What is realistic - Retired Developer Gaz and his HAT. And you will find Gaz and his HAT in the support company (100 or so men) of a Battalion (about 3 companies). Tons of proof here:


2royalirish.com - Javelin Microsite Home

So that'd be 100 out of 400 tickets would be support. So 2 H-AT and AA is no problem.

And that's all assuming that all armies operate the same as the Royal Irish, which I doubt.

Well people, there will be noobs there to screw things every now and then. But what If they get all the armor, air units and H-AT's/AA's? Z0MG!!!!!111

The players will not fu up everytime they play, especially not if communication is made easier. I'm not suggesting that these kits should go without any other changes being made as a little compromise.

As for realism: PR can not and never will be realistic in level with, let's say, ArmA. Is it realistic to have fighter jets limited to 8x8 km2 to fly around on, or reloading rockets from small ammo bags, or reparing big vehicles with a wrench? Of course not! But it's necessary to make PR playable with the BF2- engine limits. The now being kit loadout wouldn't be a problem if we could actully get 128 or so players onto a server, but it's not possible. So now, a whole lot of roles have to be played by only 32 people per team. So on maps like Kashan, etc, almost everything that shoots at you is a heavier type of weapon. And if everything and everybody can stand on their own, their will be no teamwork at all. And the big maps clearly lacks it today. At least over squad level.