Project Reality Forums

i say reduce this to between 1 and 2 seconds. 1.7 seconds sounds about right.

and just to recap, the delay was put in before there were deployable HMGs so that you couldnt just jump on a vodnik and instantly take out a squad.

now things are different, vodniks are gone and replaced with spandrels and the only mobile .fiddiez are the hummwv and the technical, which...lets face it, are ment for fiddy abuse

All of these systems could be setup to fire at the press a button. I think if i was setting up an AA emplacement or HMG that was going to be used sometime in the next couple hours i would load and **** the thing, or in the case of the AA, power it up, setup computer, etc.

We already have a long building process, it's not like you could plop down a fully built AA emplacement (like in older versions) and instantly be firing it.

If your close to the weapon system, and can get on it when it needs using, that seems dedicated enough. When you see video of troops on outpost in Afghanistan, they're not always holding the weapon, looking down the sights, but they're close enough that if they needed it, they could be on that weapon firing it quickly.

I just can't any reason for keeping this delay. If it hurts gameplay, why?

Nerfing one asset shouldn't result in nerfing the rest. Maybe we should put a 10 second delay when switching from cannons to hellfires, if thats the logic we're going for.

I personally think the idea behind the delay between hellfires is that in real life they wouldn't be shot off in a quick bust of rockets, that would be a huge waste of money. But since the pilot and gunner dont have to report to any commander who reviews tapes of their missions, an in game mechanic was put in place to encourage proper usage. Not that i agree with it. I can see the logic in it.

I disagree, they are fine IMO.

The firebase HMGs are primarily for defense, not offense, so the reduction of the delay would only make it more of an offensive weapon. It would allow for someone to just jump in one and kill those enemies attacking or that sniper sniping from far away with no problem at all. At least with the current delay, they have to expect the enemies coming.

00SoldierofFortune00 wrote:I disagree, they are fine IMO.

The firebase HMGs are primarily for defense, not offense, so the reduction of the delay would only make it more of an offensive weapon. It would allow for someone to just jump in one and kill those enemies attacking or that sniper sniping from far away with no problem at all. At least with the current delay, they have to expect the enemies coming.

agreed. i have seen people try to get into the machine gun nest while under fire and the current delay gives the attackers a good shot at killing the gunner before he can fire. you still have to be quick to kill the guy before he can fire, though.

the HMGs are too powerful to only have a 3 second warmup. that's not even enough time to zero a shot on him at 150m. the HMG should be difficult to man while under fire.

1. It would be spammy and afaik the Devs do their utmost to reduce the level of spammy gameplay in PR.

2. Have you ever prepped an M2 .50cal for firing? Neither have I but I don't imagine it being an instant or even 3 second process. Obviously this brings up the argument of being able to pop in and out of it and not having to prep it again but unfortunately this is due to engine restrictions. Not to mention that, again, this is spammy. In addition the weapons are way more powerful than normal infantry carried weapons meaning a delay is appropriate for balance, given the extreme accuracy and massive damage dealt by the deployable MG.

3. It promotes teamwork. You should not need to be switching between the mounted weapon and drivers seat, for example, on a WMIK you should have a dedicated driver and gunner. You don't need to use your binoculars to spot enemy from a deployed .50 cos you should have your squad in support and an SL to set markers to direct your fire.

Therefore disagree strongly with suggestion.

Reduce, I agree.

No, i have never prepped a real 50 cal gun emplacement, but i would imagine they do the prep work when they are setting up the system. (ie. Building the HMG) So i could understand that argument if we didn't have to shovel the thing first.

I seriously doubt they would leave an AA emplacement to where it needed 20seconds to setup before firing, when they expect to be attacked at any time. They would set it up to where all you do is sit down, aim and fire.

I have never used one of these AA weapons, but I bet they aren´t as simple as jumping in and pressing a button. There are moire things to think about, I think the seekers are cooled etc, but in any case, it isn´t press "e", move mouse, press "fire" win.

Has anyone actually used these types of systems? And can comment on the realism of a long warm up time.

AFAIK the "warm-up time" is present to prevent people abusing the "repositioning" of their player models in-and-out to make them impossible to hit whilst still spamming fire, or effectively "dual-wielding" the gun and their kit by jumping instantly between the two. A "warm-up time" slightly longer than the "suppression effect" duration would seem reasonable, so that if you're using one weapon to suppress, the target can recover and kill you before you switch to and spam another.

That would strike me as appropriate without being spammy / open to exploitation.

So when a sniper fires at you, you hear the crack of a bullet landing right beside you, jump off the gun, take cover, find the sniper with your binoculars or scope, and now you're screwed out of getting back on the gun and killing him, since the warm-up time will be plenty long enough to hit a stationary target.

It may be 'spammy' whatever that means. But the other side of the problem is game mechanics creating unrealistic 'rules' to go by. Similar to checking your kills to verify if that guy who ducked behind the hill actually died, rather then having to find a body. People know that if someone is running towards the stationary emplacements, there's nothing to worry about, because you've got plenty of time to kill him before the gun warms up.

With vehicles the time needs to be there, because you can spam the F1 F2 buttons and unrealistically move your characters at light speed. But with these emplacements you have to move your character to the thing before you can get on it, so spamming on/off it would be as realistic as a soldier dropping the gun and hiding while taking fire. Then jumping up and returning fire when needed.

[R-COM]badmojo420 wrote:So when a sniper fires at you, you hear the crack of a bullet landing right beside you, jump off the gun, take cover, find the sniper with your binoculars or scope, and now you're screwed out of getting back on the gun and killing him, since the warm-up time will be plenty long enough to hit a stationary target.

I'd say realism would go like this: If the sniper know's what hes doing and sees you spotting him, He'd train his sights on the guy spotting me or the area. As soon as you make a move to that .50 he will take you out. Your a static target just like him than and you need to swing the .50 around on his position, aim, aim good and try to shoot at him with a massive machine gun.

Realisticly (you want to lower cause its realistic) you'd just stay of the .50 when a sniper try's taking you out, get some cover and get your squad to surpress him or even get armor support to be sure no one loses there lives to that sniper.

That's just how I see it. Warm-up times need to be this long to prevent spamming. Just like how its unrealistic that people get revived or respawn. You need these things for gameplay fun'y'time

producer official site
KBM: products: "Igla-S"

Time to transfer the system from the travelling position to combat - max 13 s

KBM: products: Support Launching Unit "Dzhighit"

Time for deployment on firing position - 3 min.
Time for missile reload - 2 min.

20-30s for stationary AA is enough imo according to links above(13 seconds to get ready+time you need to "get into" SLU), while deployment time(3 min.) is represented by shoveling

[R-COM]badmojo420 wrote:Deployed HMG - 8 seconds
Static HMG - 8 seconds
Deployed AA - 20 seconds
AA Emplacement - 10 seconds
TOW Emplacement - 20 seconds

I would like to see all of these cut down to 1-3 seconds.

It's not like any of these move, and it takes team work to build 2, and the other 3 are only seen around main bases. Also the fact that there's no way to use your binoculars while on them.

Static HMG - 2-3 seconds
Deployed AA - 12-15 seconds
AA Emplacement - 8-12 seconds
TOW Emplacement - 10-13 seconds

Thats how I would like to see it.

To all the people who are saying 'it takes more then 3 secs to load, **** etc. a .50 cal'.

Do you not think that in combat zone where you expect the enemy to come, that they would have already done that?

The gun would be ready to fire as soon as the trigger was pulled (or pushed, in the case of the M2).

The delay should be 2-3 secs to represent the time it would take for a soldier to throw down his rifle, sit down behind the gun and look down the sights.

However, despite the fact that the same would be true for deployable AA, the 10 (?) sec delay is needed to prevent the already overpowered AA becoming spammed as soon as a plane/heli came into sight.

Stu.

Don´t you think that, in a combat zone, they would already be on it?

Don't you think in a combat zone that there would be more then 64 soldiers?

The stationary and deployed MG times need turning down a fair bit, but I have to agree that (epically given DankEs referencing) the others are fine.

IMO - they could be lowered, but not needed. IRL an AA trained soldier does his job and doesn't deviate from that, he keeps his *** in/on the AA untill he is relieved of his duty from his CO or killed in action. You wouldn't leave the gun, therefore would not need a "warm up" time. Or better yet lets say IRL you leave the AA to take a piss..... you will deactivate the guidence systems, radar, live ammo and such before you leave it.

In part I do agree that they take too long in-game, but to also going along with realism, leave them the way they are. The game engine can't differenciate between "this is the first time I got in this seat" vs. "this is the lightening fast seat switch I did to spam the MG". IRL out on patrol, the gun would already be cocked, locked and ready to go but as stated the engine does not support the time line theory of it was ready'd when it left the base.... Also - the squad leader IRL would dedicate you to the gun... if you didn't follow his direct order- you would be up for court marshal. In-game, most of the vehicles allow you to "duck" when mounted on the MG.... Maybe fixing it so ALL of them do it would be better. That way when the sniper is popping shots off at you, you just duck and ask the SL/squad locate the target so you can suppress/kill the sniper. That is how it "should" be done anyways.

If any of you are thinking- well I can't stay in the gun, my squad is moving or they need my help to do something (build), then just ask your squad leader. I tend to stay on the AA/HMG even after my SL has left the area. I will even tell them I am staying behind to man the gun. "Kick me if you need to- I chose my job and will stick to it until I am dead."- Something else that just occured to me is that AA IRL is an asset and there are teams of people maintaining and opperating it... The person who actually hits "fire" is only one of MANY important people. Maybe make the AA two man?? Like one to move the turret and one to actually lock and fire?