Project Reality Forums

I imagine theres strict rules when it comes to the tanks and stuff. The gunners on all the other tanks are exposed so that means there can't be a crows.

M240 is not the same calibre as the other weapons on the tanks and generally does not do as much damage.

It might be realistic but when it comes down to it every tank must rely on skill of your crew in bf2, not the tank.

Wildstar is done. He just needs a UVer/Texturer.

FuzzySquirrel wrote:Wildstar is done. He just needs a UVer/Texturer.

thanks for the reply!

Ccharge wrote:I imagine theres strict rules when it comes to the tanks and stuff. The gunners on all the other tanks are exposed so that means there can't be a crows.

M240 is not the same calibre as the other weapons on the tanks and generally does not do as much damage.

It might be realistic but when it comes down to it every tank must rely on skill of your crew in bf2, not the tank.

iirc R-DEV Jaymz has stated the DEV team are looking in to giving blufor tanks a faster reload rate than opfor, but giving them less tanks as part of the asymmetry.

Ccharge wrote:I imagine theres strict rules when it comes to the tanks and stuff. The gunners on all the other tanks are exposed so that means there can't be a crows.

M240 is not the same calibre as the other weapons on the tanks and generally does not do as much damage.

It might be realistic but when it comes down to it every tank must rely on skill of your crew in bf2, not the tank.

The M240 on this model is a bit superfluous, to be honest, since realistically, if the loader is manning it, the gunner would not be able to operate the main gun.

In real life the M1A1 and upgraded T-72s have the ability for the commander to fire his machine-gun from under armor and the Challenger 2 has a GPMG RWS available, but those require new models. "Bad guy" factions have received newer models before BLUFOR before, so cry me a river.

Conman51=US= wrote:it looks sweet...ppl who say taht it wouldnt be put on tank maps like kashan are right though...maybe the devs could use both models..on for insurgency..one for tank wars


dude you should make a NEW LAV and AAV7...that would be sweet...

but to me it seems america is becoming...a bit over powered with all this new stuff...we need new models for other countries

Rightfully so.

I'd at least like to know that our massive defense budget at least does something.

That is so awesome!

if it gets added to PR, the crew should be like this:

Commander
Driver
Loader
Gunner

Dr2B Rudd wrote:iirc R-DEV Jaymz has stated the DEV team are looking in to giving blufor tanks a faster reload rate than opfor, but giving them less tanks as part of the asymmetry.

That's interesting for Asymetric warfare which is always good but I was thinking it should be the other way around and maybe blu for tanks have more HP/Armour?

As far as I'm aware T72s have auto-loaders but I don't know how effective a trained tank crew can compete with the auto loader. Then again one verison of the T72 also has a ATGM attached to the side of it.

Oh well.

Still an interesting idea.

I don't want to sound like an *** either but about the model.... It looks 'nice' but I'm not sure if it's actually detailed well. I could be wrong though.

[R-DEV]Eddie Baker wrote:The M240 on this model is a bit superfluous, to be honest, since realistically, if the loader is manning it, the gunner would not be able to operate the main gun.

In real life the M1A1 and upgraded T-72s have the ability for the commander to fire his machine-gun from under armor and the Challenger 2 has a GPMG RWS available, but those require new models. "Bad guy" factions have received newer models before BLUFOR before, so cry me a river.

You mean M1A2

ReaperAce712 wrote:You mean M1A2

No, I don't. The M1A1 has the ability for the commander to fire his cupola AAMG from under armor via a 3x magnification sight or, on the AIM, a thermal sight installed on the gun mount. The CROWS gives the ability to the M1A2; additional electronics packages in the original A2 upgrade prevented the commander from firing the weapon from under armor. CROWS also gives a much better observation capability and can slew very fast. It kind of makes the Commander's Independent Viewer superfluous.

Jane's Armour and Artillery wrote:The commander is provided with six day periscopes which cover 360º, as well as a day sight with a magnification of ×3 for the 12.7 mm M2 machine gun mounted over his position

Mounted at the commander's station is a standard 12.7 mm (0.50) Browning M2 HB machine gun which can be elevated from -10 to +65º and traversed through 360º. This weapon has powered and manual controls for traverse and manual controls for elevation. The 12.7 mm machine gun has electric power traverse and can be aimed and fired from within the turret.

Dr2B Rudd wrote:iirc R-DEV Jaymz has stated the DEV team are looking in to giving blufor tanks a faster reload rate than opfor, but giving them less tanks as part of the asymmetry.

I'd much rather just have a Javelin

Ohh ok i got.. didnt do my homework on this one lol

in real warfare armies operate in many ways differenty, one thing that bugs me about bf2 mods is that they are too symetrical, nothing is different, this could make the gameplay more interesting. similar to how the insurgent cache game mode works, the regular force on force maps aren't as dynamic. there could aslo be some senarios as well, but yeah. cooler tanks, less of them. vs more tanks that arent as cool.

spartan117gw wrote:in real warfare armies operate in many ways differenty, one thing that bugs me about bf2 mods is that they are too symetrical, nothing is different, this could make the gameplay more interesting. similar to how the insurgent cache game mode works, the regular force on force maps aren't as dynamic. there could aslo be some senarios as well, but yeah. cooler tanks, less of them. vs more tanks that arent as cool.

Heh, you should see FH2. least symetrical mod I've seen or played to date

McLuv wrote:Heh, you should see FH2. least symetrical mod I've seen or played to date

lol, well you can't exactly call a King Tiger and a Sherman balanced now can ya? Thus the Allies get 5 Shermans to kill 1 KT