Remove scopes from grenadier, LAT, SL

[badmojo420]

It funny tho, we both suggested the same thing, but you want it, so it will punish people for using good kits, where i believe an iron sight on my LAT kit would actually help me.

[[uBp]Irish]

this is so not the right way to play, relying on rally points instead of having a squad fully outfitted from the get go for all situations. this doesnt even sound easy to do, what if the rallys not that close? an apc comes up at you, what happens someone has to run back to the rally to grab an AT kit while the rest of your squad gets vaporized? plus, i dont think this style of play will be possible in .85, and now i can see why. also, your whole squad risks getting killed whenever you venture out, not just the AT guys, which is why you should keep the AT guys in the back of the squad and keep the riflemen up front.

I agree. I dont think i've ever been been targeted because I had an AT weapon on my back (unless you're talking about a HAT) unless it was by an APC that stopped, and let me have some of it's HEAT rounds.

I agree with Charlie, that your squad should be ready, which means having an AT, Grenadier, and SAW on hand. Running back to the rally point is pointless. Smarter to just have the kits on hand, than waste time running back.

[badmojo420]

A good SL will tell you to remain rifleman, until you need a AT or grenadier, which you can quickly acquire from a nearby rally.

LMAO, maybe in a clan match where you know other squads won't have requested all 3 LAT kits, and are sitting back building firebases. Not to mention the fact that when you're being attacked by vehicles, is totally the wrong time to run back to your firebase, that will only direct their spotters to where you are all spawning. I will often run around with my squad holding my LAT. It takes long enough to pull up the sights when that vodnik comes racing around the corner gun blazing.

[CanuckCommander]

Irish;891855']I agree. I dont think i've ever been been targeted because I had an AT weapon on my back (unless you're talking about a HAT) unless it was by an APC that stopped, and let me have some of it's HEAT rounds.

I agree with Charlie, that your squad should be ready, which means having an AT, Grenadier, and SAW on hand. Running back to the rally point is pointless. Smarter to just have the kits on hand, than waste time running back.

I would suggest you both try it sometime before making such strong speculation fact. When the APC comes around, for example on Muttrah, you usually die the first time or the squad gets wiped out. Now tell me how you're going to get another AT kit if you died with it the first time, not having enough time to get 1 shot off since the animations are so slow.

This may not be the most realistic way, but it is still a good in-game strategy. Plus, it agrees with the OP's idea of keeping more riflemans in the squad rather than DM, AR, AT and/or grenadier. Just to clarify, it is very easy to get weapons off a rally. Who said that you have to run back to your rally to get it?

Most of the time as inf you would spend humping ground to the next objective. Most likely, your SL will place a new rally near the next objective before you move into enemy territory. GRAB the kit then if you expect armor or expect the use for DM, AR, or grenadier during the assault. This eliminates the risk of losing it when you're moving from point A to point B before you REALLY need the kit.

Hope that clears it up a bit .

[[uBp]Irish]

I would suggest you both try it sometime before making such strong speculation fact. When the APC comes around, for example on Muttrah, you usually die the first time or the squad gets wiped out. Now tell me how you're going to get another AT kit if you died with it the first time, not having enough time to get 1 shot off since the animations are so slow.

This may not be the most realistic way, but it is still a good in-game strategy. Plus, it agrees with the OP's idea of keeping more riflemans in the squad rather than DM, AR, AT and/or grenadier. Just to clarify, it is very easy to get weapons off a rally. Who said that you have to run back to your rally to get it?

Most of the time as inf you would spend humping ground to the next objective. Most likely, your SL will place a new rally near the next objective before you move into enemy territory. GRAB the kit then if you expect armor or expect the use for DM, AR, or grenadier during the assault. This eliminates the risk of losing it when you're moving from point A to point B before you REALLY need the kit.

Hope that clears it up a bit .

Are you the first one around the corner? I know when I play L-AT I stay probably second to last in the file letting the medic be in the back. As soon as we hear/learn of an APC, that rocket is coming out, and I'm waiting for the APC to make his move into my fire....

[Teek]

I think that most of the time when a LAT carrier is specifically targeted is when he has the rocket out, because at ranges greater than 250m it is impossible to see kit items on the back. A sniper or APC cannot see a LAT unless it is being welded. The LAT should stick with the officer and medic in the rear fireteam, and should be requested only when there is a significant probability of APC encounter however.

oh, regarding scopes. Riflemen should be the backbone of any team, thats why it is the only unlimited kit with a scope, the other scopes are limited and are in good proportions to the riflemen because of it. IRL every combat M4 and M16a4 are issued with scopes, so adding more non-scoped kits to the spawn menu that are appealing to players would be a step backwards.

[CanuckCommander]

Irish;891870']Are you the first one around the corner? I know when I play L-AT I stay probably second to last in the file letting the medic be in the back. As soon as we hear/learn of an APC, that rocket is coming out, and I'm waiting for the APC to make his move into my fire....

Naw, I squadlead. Remember, when a APC sees INF, he doesn't just stop to shoot the first guy. He'll keep going to kill the whole squad if he expects that there is more than one.

Anyways, different people have a strategy that works for them. Let's see if some other people would voice their thoughts on this.

[badmojo420]

I see what you're saying Canuck, but FYI if you wait until the APC is approaching. Then grab an AT kit off the rally and try to destroy the APC and get killed in the process. You won't be able to request another kit when you respawn, as you have to wait (i dont know exactly how long) a length of time before you can request a limited kit again. On the other hand, if you're carrying the kit from the time you spawn, and stay alive a while before you die. Then, if the other 2 kits are not being used, you can request one when you spawn.

Of course if a bad player uses this strategy of gaining kits, they could waste 2 of the 3 rifleman AT kits pretty quickly. Maybe even giving them to the enemy in the process.

[viper759]

I suggested they let us pick Aimpoint/Ironsight or Optic with the right or left mouse click for the requested kits. But i don't think it got much attention.

https://www.realitymod.com/forum/f18-pr ... -kits.html

But, I'm very much against putting LAT as a spawn kit. I love LAT, but damnit not everyone needs one. Its unrealistic.

AT4s are a common sight, ask anyone whos been in iraq recently. the at4 costs market less than 1500, thats nothing. not everyone needs one, but id say on a map with apcs 1/3 of the players should be able to carry one.

of course if anti-armor was as common as in the real world then apcs would need to move with infantry and not run around like mini-tanks....

[azn_chopsticks_boi]

I see what you're saying Canuck, but FYI if you wait until the APC is approaching. Then grab an AT kit off the rally and try to destroy the APC and get killed in the process. You won't be able to request another kit when you respawn, as you have to wait (i dont know exactly how long) a length of time before you can request a limited kit again. On the other hand, if you're carrying the kit from the time you spawn, and stay alive a while before you die. Then, if the other 2 kits are not being used, you can request one when you spawn.

Of course if a bad player uses this strategy of gaining kits, they could waste 2 of the 3 rifleman AT kits pretty quickly. Maybe even giving them to the enemy in the process.

You can't request kits from rally in v.85. so you wont have that problem.

[CanuckCommander]

AT4s are a common sight, ask anyone whos been in iraq recently. the at4 costs market less than 1500, thats nothing. not everyone needs one, but id say on a map with apcs 1/3 of the players should be able to carry one.

of course if anti-armor was as common as in the real world then apcs would need to move with infantry and not run around like mini-tanks....

Yes and no.

Yes the AT4 is extremely common in the military, but soldiers don't hump many of these around. They are usually carried in HMMVS or LAVs, or any other vehicles.

Now, in .85, they (Devs) are trying to simulate this by allowing INF to get kits off the backs of APCs, which is quite more realistic than rally points.

No, it is fine now in PR with this number because if used resourcefully like how I suggested by requesting it at the right time, INF can kill light armor without a problem. Although I admit it is a hard habit to break especially if you've played .7 or earlier because people normally would get a requested kit as soon as they spawn.

If you think about it, PR's team size represents about half of a platoon (60 men). If there are 3 AT4s in half a platoon of 30 men, that I think is quite a significant number.

[[uBp]Irish]

except i guarantee you that those 3 LAT's arent going to be close to each other maybe even 1/4 the time.

Look at it this way. Everyone in PR is a rifleman with a scope (except for engineers/medics). When you select a LAT kit, you are just requesting a At4/RPG Equivalent. You're still keeping your weapon and gear, but you're pulling out a rocket, from like you said, a humvee/APC (which i agree with).

However, if you are still retaining your gear/weapon. You're not losing your rifle which has a scope on it. The same can be said for the grenadier. If the rifles have a scope on it, than the rifle has a scope on it. Just because it might be a little game changing does not warrant the removal of the scope from the weapon.

[viper759]

Yes the AT4 is extremely common in the military, but soldiers don't hump many of these around. They are usually carried in HMMVS or LAVs, or any other vehicles.

and if your in an area where you KNOW the enemy has armor your going to leave a 7kg weapon in your vehicle?

If you think about it, PR's team size represents about half of a platoon (60 men). If there are 3 AT4s in half a platoon of 30 men, that I think is quite a significant number.

army / marine field manuals basically say 'if the enemy has armor make sure you hand out lots of AT-4s' . yes a marine squad normally carries 1 at4 per 12 people, however if they know the enemy has armor they bring what they need. also if your going to bring up numbers of units, how many half platoons have 3 tanks and a bradley in them? there are maps with more armor than lats... more multi-million dollar machines than 1500 dollar launchers.

[badmojo420]

AT4s are a common sight, ask anyone whos been in iraq recently. the at4 costs market less than 1500, thats nothing. not everyone needs one, but id say on a map with apcs 1/3 of the players should be able to carry one.

of course if anti-armor was as common as in the real world then apcs would need to move with infantry and not run around like mini-tanks....

I would love to see a few more LAT kits per team. But not a spawnable kit with the LAT. Not even the insurgents get that.

You can't request kits from rally in v.85. so you wont have that problem.

The same method will work with a supply crate, an apc, the repair depot.

[azn_chopsticks_boi]

I would love to see a few more LAT kits per team. But not a spawnable kit with the LAT. Not even the insurgents get that.



The same method will work with a supply crate, an apc, the repair depot.

From what I understand, he said run back to the rally and request a kit. Those are not rally's.

[CanuckCommander]

From what I understand, he said run back to the rally and request a kit. Those are not rally's.

I was referring to .8, which is right now. But for .85, you'd have an APC next to you anyways to help you kill armor.

Back on the OP's topic. There should be more scopes, not less. Or at least find a way to make it like arma, where there is 4x magnification at anytime to simulate your vision being able to adjust to that range even with ironsights.

[[uBp]Irish]

The same method will work with a supply crate, an apc, the repair depot.

And knowing that you're going to

a) want to make sure you have it before hand
b) an APC is close
c) a truck is close
d) a helicopter has already dropped a crate close.

-------On Topic, we need to think back to scopes...not the amount of LAT's on the team-----

[badmojo420]

From what I understand, he said run back to the rally and request a kit. Those are not rally's.

Okay i see what you're saying, sorry.

There will be no more 'Getting a kit from the SLs kit' deal going on, where if he plops down his backpack there's magically AT4s inside. Now if you don't bring the kit with you, you will be running back to whatever resource is closest.

I was confused because you quoted my method that can be used to die with 2 special kits in a short amount of time. I thought that was the problem you were referring to. Which isn't a problem really, more of a reward for people staying alive longer.

[Anderson29]

well here is my .02 (worked on this for a while so it mite interupt or be overlooked by some of you guys squabbling, but anyways here are my thoughts on the subject)


it is realistic for most troops to have optics, unless your insurgent,etc...
and most coalition soldiers having a magnifying optic...also true.
the only thing is that this game would have the "feel" of true combat(IMO) if just a few less scopes were on the battlefield. when most everyone has scopes and they take fire....the exact origin of that fire is almost immediately identified and engagements are quickly finished. as when in real combat it is significantly harder to determine exactly where the fire is coming from, thus suppressing and maneuvering is more of a must do, and likely to win the fight, than just sitting off at a distance picking everyone off.

the only reason I'm against most soldiers in the game having scopes is mainly the view distance in the game and the lack of a marksman and sniper being as devastating in game as they are IRL (elaboration deleted). I've been in firefights where we were taking fire from over 900m away(story deleted). only in some maps you can do that in this game. in my opinion officers, snipers & marksmen should be the only scopes& binos [of course sf& rifleman(eyes for the support gunner) have binos] on the battlefield. (that's what...1/4th the players with scopes and 1/2 with binos?) it would force more teamwork and voip, which i know alot of y'all don't like (im uber1337SFsniperzBAMFigetzalldekillz guy...you know who you are), and i also think the acogs/counterpart should be 3x in game instead of 4x(if they are indeed 4xacogs in the game) like IRL. and the reason is view distance. i know you all want to have exactly what the soldiers IRL have, but this is a game and can't be made to be truly realistic but could be made to feel more realistic. but it's very close as it is now (props to the devs).

and if this game is really trying to be realistic they would of gave the support gunner a scope of some type a long time ago, because i know if i was in a fight i would want the most casualty producing weapon on the battlefield to have a scope...i would give him mine and just have my m4 iron sites rather him go without.

i apologize for the long post. i cut a lot out. it was hard to get my point across in such few words

60men per platoon is alot...we had 4squads of 9 + FO,RTO,PL,RTO,PSG,Medic thats 42 for us paratroopers. though im sure it varies from army to army.

[CanuckCommander]

well here is my .02 (worked on this for a while so it mite interupt or be overlooked by some of you guys squabbling, but anyways here are my thoughts on the subject)


it is realistic for most troops to have optics, unless your insurgent,etc...
and most coalition soldiers having a magnifying optic...also true.
the only thing is that this game would have the "feel" of true combat(IMO) if just a few less scopes were on the battlefield. when most everyone has scopes and they take fire....the exact origin of that fire is almost immediately identified and engagements are quickly finished. as when in real combat it is significantly harder to determine exactly where the fire is coming from, thus suppressing and maneuvering is more of a must do, and likely to win the fight, than just sitting off at a distance picking everyone off.

the only reason I'm against most soldiers in the game having scopes is mainly the view distance in the game and the lack of a marksman and sniper being as devastating in game as they are IRL (elaboration deleted). I've been in firefights where we were taking fire from over 900m away(story deleted). only in some maps you can do that in this game. in my opinion officers, snipers & marksmen should be the only scopes& binos [of course sf& rifleman(eyes for the support gunner) have binos] on the battlefield. (that's what...1/4th the players with scopes and 1/2 with binos?) it would force more teamwork and voip, which i know alot of y'all don't like (im uber1337SFsniperzBAMFigetzalldekillz guy...you know who you are), and i also think the acogs/counterpart should be 3x in game instead of 4x(if they are indeed 4xacogs in the game) like IRL. and the reason is view distance. i know you all want to have exactly what the soldiers IRL have, but this is a game and can't be made to be truly realistic but could be made to feel more realistic. but it's very close as it is now (props to the devs).

and if this game is really trying to be realistic they would of gave the support gunner a scope of some type a long time ago, because i know if i was in a fight i would want the most casualty producing weapon on the battlefield to have a scope...i would give him mine and just have my m4 iron sites rather him go without.

i apologize for the long post. i cut a lot out. it was hard to get my point across in such few words

60men per platoon is alot...we had 4squads of 9 + FO,RTO,PL,RTO,PSG,Medic thats 42 for us paratroopers. though im sure it varies from army to army.

In the words of the great one who said this (Idk who), "you can't mod the players."

I don't see why scopes would hinder fire and maneuver. Except in a video game, everyone thinks he/she is a better shot than the other person. A usual engagement involves both people dropping to prone and shooting at each other until one lands a lucky shot.

Here is video gamers logic, why put up a higher volume of fire that is inaccurate, when you can easily drop a few accurate shots on the enemy?

Good thing you cut your post short, sometimes more isn't better, but I do understand your point.