Project Reality Forums

xambone wrote:I like the AAVP in the current configuration of pr. But in the city the AAVP is like trying to drive a train. We used to have LAV's in the map before the last patch. I was wondering how the community felt about having the fun to drive LAV's removed from the map and the AAVP's with their infinity of grenades.

So on muttrah, do we need LAV's Back or Keep the AAVP? or do a 1 of each deal.

[R-DEV]Rhino wrote:Should we make the M1A1/2 amphibious too for the sake we don't have any landing craft

Hunt3r wrote:I don't really like the AAVP mostly because it's poor ground clearance makes it VERY easy to lose a lot of precious health for when the 30mm MTLB comes up and tries to destroy you.

Kingy wrote:I take it you did well in maths at school Smiddey?

Smiddey723 wrote:Thanks, i guess thats what i get for posting at 1AM

Ninjam3rc wrote:You get my point I think. You don't have landing craft but you have an asset which is amphibious, in reality that asset would not float ashore and yet in reality it would also be among the first assets landed in an assault. LAVs and abrams would move inland while the aavs would most likely return for another wave of infantry rather than head into the fray.

Even though it would be LAV -> Landing craft -> shore irl we can still get the end effect on the asset with no modification. Your quote is a strawman argument and has nothing to do with the discussion at hand. If you want to do that then why not make the EFV under the argument that in PRs WW3 scenario the bugs were worked out and it was never canceled due the pressing need for the asset.

Sgt.BountyOrig wrote:LAV-25, you cant get shot out by small arms.

Hunt3r wrote:I'd honestly like to see a heavy duty full on assault version of Muttrah, with extremely heavy dug-in defenses by the MEC at the beach, BMPs, ZPUs, T-72s, the works, and the USMC would have 3-4 Cobras and the squad leaders/CO would be able to call in as many as 3 strikes of ship artillery on 10 minute intervals. The MEC would have to have the large majority of it's troops manning ZPUs, HMGs, tanks, IFVs, and SAM sites. However, if the MEC fails, their only assets will be one T-72, 2 BTRs, 2 MT-LBs (1 would be 30mm, another would be Shturm ATGM carrier), and a single BMP. If the USMC manages to capture the docks, they would receive around 3 LAVs, and 3 M1A1SAs. Also, AAVs would stop spawning. Only one Cobra would respawn, along with 3-4 Hueys.

The USMC is screwed if they can't break through MEC defenses, the MEC is in for a tough fight if the USMC breaks through and captures the beach and docks.

I'd like to call it... Muttrah City... Assetwhore edition.

killonsight95 wrote:the reason the AAVP's don't get used is because they're under the ship and take forever to get on land, I think that they should spawn on the land once docks has capped and if docks are capped only then they should start spawning on the carrier.