Project Reality Forums

im at work

Sucks lol
Anyway back on topic, kashan needs a few tweaking to give it more an afghan feel i think.
(removing bunkers and change to villages, compounds in the mountains and tunnel networks and more)

and it could be tested out if the game mode works as good as it sounds on paper yes or no !


EDIT: note that kashan could still be MEC vs US too, just an remake could be the afghan one.
And needs to be permission.

obviously with the authors permission!

Ofc.
actualy, im not sure were allowed to do it, since its more than just a map audit, its also gameplay?
Maybe a dev can come in this thread, and tell us what he thinks?

arjan wrote:What i like about this idea this focuses on lightweight infantry, commanders and area attacks instead of people waiting on the airfield to get theirselfes and a10 or f16, also theirs no need for bigger maps for this gamemode when a area attack can do the same thing, this game mode is not about air, its and infantry gamemode.

Well i noticed its not a air mod and i am not saying it is. I don't think its infantry only either. For the people waiting at the airfield: It depends on the team and server rules etc. You can have as well people waiting for sniper kits or tanks.

As i don't want to steal the thread i will say: Yea fine reduced timer for JDAM would be good, it would make something at least more realistic.
Dropping 2 JDAMs at a time should also be made possible. In books i read about war in Afghanistan and Iraq, videos i watch its quite common to see more then one 2000lbs JDAM hitting the the area.Although on bigger maps like kashan, future: Feyzabad, Sangin so it wouldn't be considered too much.
They should also have a much increased kill area for infantry and jeeps. I was once standing about 150 meters from one on qwai river and i only got suppression effect.

P.S.Txatu miller wrote: In books i read about war in Afghanistan and Iraq, videos i watch its quite common to see more then one 2000lbs JDAM hitting the the area.Although on bigger maps like kashan, future: Feyzabad, Sangin so it wouldn't be considered too much.
They should also have a much increased kill area for infantry and jeeps. I was once standing about 150 meters from one on qwai river and i only got suppression effect.

About the kill radius, a JDAM is a precision bomb, its ment to keep civilian casualties to a minimum,
in the operation that where called shock and awe in 2003 or something like that
they targeted government buildings and stuff with those JDAMs, the building standing 80 meters away from it only had some damage of the parts flying away from one of those government buildings. AFAIK

I don´t get why it has to be simulated. Player controlled aircraft = more communication, and actual jet that goes over, combination of combined arms etc.

I find it funny how 1 jet on a map is mentioned and suddenly it is an air mod.

JDAM would only be used to clear their defences,
A human pilot would rape them totaly, while a jdam would be on a timer.

it might be nice to have a pilot and such, but the idea is about light infantry and area attacks.

arjan wrote:About the kill radius, a JDAM is a precision bomb, its ment to keep civilian casualties to a minimum,
in the operation that where called shock and awe in 2003 or something like that
they targeted government buildings and stuff with those JDAMs, the building standing 80 meters away from it only had some damage of the parts flying away from one of those government buildings. AFAIK

They are not the bombs its self. JDAM is a guidance kit placed on dump bomb. In operation shock&awe what they done is used smaller weight bombs such as 500lbs or 1000lbs or even concrete that where guided. The angle of impact was set that shrapnel would not hit hospitals, apartment buildings.They could have cause much much more collateral damage if it was needed.

im not saying it would be better or worse with air assets. IMO its an easier map to make without having to worry about the airbase/runway for one player to sit in the A-10.

JDAM option give the commander a proper role, and i'd prefer it to be a inf map. BUT; This is why i asked the question.

If the majority + dev's etc would prefer to have air assets i dont have a major issue either way tbh....

my only concern is that you'd wit 10 mins fo rthe plane to spawn and failcrash into the ground on take off, thereby making the whole US teams job ALOT harder.

Now thats a legit point!^

A word of caution though, if you can drop a JDAM every 15min, then most of the destructables on the map will be destroyed, big time.

But other than that, I think its a great concept! Just make sure that most of the heavy weaponry is limited to visual range, ie, no optics. Will allso be great to see some "lookalike" javelin action.

Archer tries to do this, but with the limited space for vehicles (roads), its more compact than it appears.

In shot:
This would be EPIC!

Well its like everything really, there is always someone who will fail, but its when it works as a team with a person actually flying that its 100% more awesome.

But the thing is it would be done differently, for example like used in Afghanistan, a Harrier with:

No cannon/no rounds (I think some variants don´t have a cannon?) Not sure about this, not needed for this type of mission anyway, or else someone would just strafe the target.

2x 540lb bombs

2x CRV7 rocket pods


The opfor air defense would not be strong, ie, no SA7s or at least very long respawn one. Jet would have something like a 10 -15 min respawn, but here is the key, a 5 min reload time at least to simulate distance, refueling etc and to no overpower it. Also means when you drop that ordinance you better be sure your getting the right target/makes it more realistic than an artificial delay.

Could work quite well.

Still dont like the idea for the player manned vehicles like ninja said.
both fulfill the same purpose but one can fail other not.

arjan wrote:Still dont like the idea for the player manned vehicles like ninja said.
both fulfill the same purpose but one can fail other not.

In that case you might as well do it on PRSP....

arjan wrote:both fulfill the same purpose but one can fail other not.

Why shouldn't it fail? Something can go wrong IRL. Even the best pilots in PR can make a mistake and thats same IRL.

around 96% of a time a JDAM works as it intended, by that i mean it lock on to the target. The other 4% will drop anywhere. Now if the JDAM works as intented there is a 87% chance that it will hit the target. In PR noobs simulate those statistics.

Now about PR : If the server is probably admined the noobs that just want to be l33t, ub3r and 1337 pwn3zor in the jet can be stopped from blowing the jets and 5 people waiting at airfield can be also stopped. I have seen only once that some guy wasted a CAS aircraft in a time span of 2 months.

P.S.Txatu miller wrote:Why shouldn't it fail? Something can go wrong IRL. Even the best pilots in PR can make a mistake and thats same IRL.

around 96% of a time a JDAM works as it intended, by that i mean it lock on to the target. The other 4% will drop anywhere. Now if the JDAM works as intented there is a 87% chance that it will hit the target. In PR noobs simulate those statistics.

Now about PR : If the server is probably admined the noobs that just want to be l33t, ub3r and 1337 pwn3zor in the jet can be stopped from blowing the jets and 5 people waiting at airfield can be also stopped. I have seen only once that some guy wasted a CAS aircraft in a time span of 2 months.

but wye making an whole airfield and such, while you can have an area attack?
also i lold at this part :
''In PR noobs simulate those statistics. ''
nice one

Personally I'm all for having more player controlled CAS in PR.

But the point of this suggestion is increased use of the commander JDAMs.

I know you would love to do the bombing yourself and we don't doubt your ability to do so, but it would just cause unneccesary complications.

There are maps coming out that will emphasise player controlled CAS (Sangin, Feyzabad etc.), what this map/mode is about is commander JDAMs and infantry.

I'm not one of the 'infantry only' guys either, I love flying in PR and I see the value of combined assets.

Exactly!
Thats my point, but i dont think it came out like that

Sounds like a good idea if the map was made in the right way. Otherwise things wouldn't be too fun. I think it would be a nice to get some more use out of the commander assets too, there are plenty of other maps with jets on them for raping the enemy troops. If I understand the concept, the idea of having JDAMs is to destroy the defences and defencive capabilities of the enemy rather than the enemy itself to make it more infantry-centric, which isn't something you can restrict players to.

Out of interest, if there won't be many/any combined arms, will the maps be very large? I might be mistaken, but I can't imagine large numbers of troops in a modern force attacking a single place without any ground support from heavy vehicles.

Sights wrote: Out of interest, if there won't be many/any combined arms, will the maps be very large? I might be mistaken, but I can't imagine large numbers of troops in a modern force attacking a single place without any ground support from heavy vehicles.

See it more as a recon infantry instead of a big force, with the Coalition allready haveing abit of disadvantage with their vehicles and such they can be on big map to give them more maneauvrebility.
(spelled that wrong i think )