Project Reality Forums

tankninja1 wrote:Isn't the point of ARs to be a little bit OP?

I mean they should be a feared weapon that you wouldn't just blindly rush at.

What if it's the AR which is now able to blindly rush at you ?

Old deviation forced the players to accomplish what they were supposed to do in their squad according to their role, as playing on your own was simply impossible.
Now, whatever's his role, everyone's able to run alone through the map and get his killz fix, then they die, then respawn, then rush, kill, die, respawn, etc. Making the rate of ticket loss extremely high, and also making the teamplay experience in PR almost nonexistent (remember I mostly talk about infantry experience here).

LakeMole wrote:The argument is that ARs are supposed to lay down suppressing fire to allow the rest of your squad to flank the enemy, call in CAS, or call in armor to take out the enemy like modern armies do. The problem with this is that infantry squads don't need to call support because they're unrealistically effective[...]

But they're not unrealistically effective. The most common misconception about light machine guns is that they're only used to pin down enemies in supressive fire. Of course they excel at this role because of the amount of fire that can be laid upon enemies quickly.
But the true nature of a light machine gun is that of a ruthless killing machine that is way more likely to kill the enemy than a rifleman. When I was in Bundeswehr basic training we were taught that the heavy weapons actually make up the majority of firepower a platoon carries, despite there being relatively few of them.

Machine guns are good at supressing simply because they're great at killing. They're a threat on a whole new level when compared to assault rifles.

EDIT: Bonus video. It's always satisfying when stuff like this happens but imo this doesn't make the kit OP, these guys simply got killed because they maneuvered into a bad position.

Hurricane wrote:But they're not unrealistically effective.

Sorry, I meant the squad as a whole is unrealistically effective, not just the AR.

Hurricane wrote:The most common misconception about light machine guns is that they're only used to pin down enemies in supressive fire. Of course they excel at this role because of the amount of fire that can be laid upon enemies quickly.

I can accept that. I feel that the large majority of engagements in PR end too quickly because the weapons are too accurate which I believe to cause less teamwork between squads and those in the squads

Hurricane wrote:When I was in Bundeswehr basic training we were taught that the heavy weapons actually make up the majority of firepower a platoon carries, despite there being relatively few of them. Machine guns are good at supressing simply because they're great at killing. They're a threat on a whole new level when compared to assault rifles.

I'm curious, what's classified as a heavy weapon? Are assault rifles considered heavy weapons? Also, were you deployed?

Thanks for taking the time to address my previous post.

Hurricane wrote: But the true nature of a light machine gun is that of a ruthless killing machine that is way more likely to kill the enemy than a rifleman. When I was in Bundeswehr basic training we were taught that the heavy weapons actually make up the majority of firepower a platoon carries, despite there being relatively few of them.

Machine guns are good at supressing simply because they're great at killing. They're a threat on a whole new level when compared to assault rifles. .

I was taught the same in training. Soldiers with assault rifles only support the really effective weapons like MGs and mortars, grenade launchers etc.

LakeMole wrote: I'm curious, what's classified as a heavy weapon? Are assault rifles considered heavy weapons? Also, were you deployed?

Never deployed. Heavy weapons of the infantry are primarily machine guns (in my days only the MG3), but of course also grenade launchers and the Panzerfaust 3.

I guess grenade launchers and mortars are considered as effective because they sweep everything away right ? You blow everything, then the infantry goes "in" (if the buildings are still up with an inside) and check ?

Thing is in PR, either the mortars arent necessarly available, or hard to get as a support (a dedicated mortar squad isnt always funny for everyone - I love it personally , so should remain an option in the game, not a necessity). Plus we dont have destructible environments in PR, so the GL are probably way less "effective" (read "have a high power of destruction") in game than IRL. And I would probably say the same about the AR, at a different scale of destruction ofc.

Therefore PR is barely compatible with this kind of tactic, and is surely caught between two stools atm.

The reason automatic rifles exist is because of their accuracy and volume of fire. It's based on their ability to kill, not suppress. Suppress is a side effect of worrying about being killed. While suppression doesn't perfectly translate into video games, focusing more on the blurry screen than the kill ability takes away the purpose of an automatic rifle.

It would become an automatic blur screen weapon instead, and infantry would just move about freely even while getting shot at by the automatic blur screen weapon.

LakeMole wrote:I still believe deviation is too little on all weapons, US army uses 250k bullets per insurgent killed.
US forced to import bullets from Israel as troops use 250,000 for every rebel killed - BelfastTelegraph.co.uk

Obviously, we should not increase deviation to those numbers, but it would be nice to know what the current bullet per insurgent is in PR and make some changes based on that. .98 had good deviation in my opinion.

Look at the wording inside the news report.

Bullets Fired In Iraq and Afghanistan

Okay. So how were they fired? Because when ammo is used, it's usually for this:

• Marksmanship training
• Recon by fire
• Suppression
• Firing at a visible target

There's only one situation in which you're actually aiming at an enemy and firing. The rest involve not aiming at that enemy, but rather around it (suppression), blindly hoping it's there (recon by fire), or not even in combat (marksmanship training). You cannot base in-game deviation upon this.

It's probably more accurate to say that this is the number of cartridges sent to Iraq and Afghanistan. Now you have to take into account ammo that was lost and never even fired!

Well it says they were "forced" to import bullets, so it means they actually fired so much bullets they had to ask Isreal to send them new ones. So I bet they used everything they had.

Regarding the AR, it's always been accurate whatever PR's deviation was. 0.98 deviation just used to take a higher amount of time to reach the maximum accuracy, and it was depending on what you were doing before aiming (sprinting, going prone, moving the sight all around you very fast), but the best accuracy you were finally reaching never changed.

Sorry for the Necro, but I think this must be discussed,
The AR in the right now is too much accurate, and we should get a nerf for that...
because this encourage 2 things that the AR should not do
-Long Time Lone Wolfs (those guys that most of time don't even have a mic, and, no offense for who like those games, should be playing BF or COD) to get this kit and got rewarded by doing the set-up, kill, die, repeat
-Not using the amazing suppress ability, instead using the AR like a glorify Marksman Rifle

The second is what annoys me the most, as most of the time you can just kick the guy that is lone wolfing, but the second guy, is playing by the squad, he is just not know the amazing weapon that he has.

I think that the best way to solve this is by adding recoil for the deployed version of the MG(L or GP)
as it can be a laser rifle, w/ the only thing throwing you of target being the deviation...
This would also make an good AR to do Burst instead of Full auto, as now it only applies for the MG3, 900+ RPM

Gerfand wrote:Sorry for the Necro, but I think this must be discussed,
The AR in the right now is too much accurate, and we should get a nerf for that...
because this encourage 2 things that the AR should not do
-Long Time Lone Wolfs (those guys that most of time don't even have a mic, and, no offense for who like those games, should be playing BF or COD) to get this kit and got rewarded by doing the set-up, kill, die, repeat
-Not using the amazing suppress ability, instead using the AR like a glorify Marksman Rifle

The second is what annoys me the most, as most of the time you can just kick the guy that is lone wolfing, but the second guy, is playing by the squad, he is just not know the amazing weapon that he has.

I think that the best way to solve this is by adding recoil for the deployed version of the MG(L or GP)
as it can be a laser rifle, w/ the only thing throwing you of target being the deviation...
This would also make an good AR to do Burst instead of Full auto, as now it only applies for the MG3, 900+ RPM

They already added recoil and deviation in past versions. Add more and you will not hit anything on longer ranges leaving you with a fully automatic do nothing.

They are supposed to be accurate, they are heavy weapons with bipods and scopes.

If you take the killing power out of AR, less and less people would be inclined to request it (also I as a SL may consider more riflemen for more ammo for my LAT/other shit then one guy who can suppress, but really can't kill). IMO this is a really dualistic issue as in this engine you really can't make a spray weapon that is effective in that distance and still suppresses realistically (I'm not an expert, but after you play in one engine for years and years you start to notice it's limitations) - with bullets, not only with the visual effect that affects the person receiving the incoming bullets.

Gerfand wrote: -Not using the amazing suppress ability, instead using the AR like a glorify Marksman Rifle

Because the ability to suppress isn't amazing. The ability to shoot guys is.
Also it has already been stated that ARs perform really well on longer distances.

- You hear AR shooting at you
- You know it is accurate as fuck and can kill you
- You keep your head down

Congratulations, you are suppressed

Weapons aren't too accurate in PR, it's just that people forget that you rarely every engage someone at long distances in PR, and even when the distance seems long because of the fog of war, it actually isn't, except for a few maps such as Kashan, Khamisiyah and Bijar where the view distance is about 1000m.

Some MG/AR are too accurate compared to others atm (MG3 vs PKP for example).

parch wrote:Because the ability to suppress isn't amazing. The ability to shoot guys is.
Also it has already been stated that ARs perform really well on longer distances.

Only if just Suppress... Suppression get the enemy out of the fight for some time, like, 15s to 1 min, but after that he is up again... what makes Suppression Effective is the flank/Breach/Assault, that you do after firing at the enemy



Well I would not give a awful accuracy, just something that encourages people to suppress instead of using as a DMR, something like an COD/BF High recoil weapon, which the recoil is nothing more than just annoying, so you need to control your fire to be effective, not only because of the deviation, but because of the recoil.

[R-DEV]KaB wrote:Some MG/AR are too accurate compared to others atm (MG3 vs PKP for example).

Which is more accurate in your opinion?

Never had trouble killing people with either. Just requires a slightly different way of shooting I guess.

MG3 is a laser gun something needs to be done about that one it's too accurate.

Brozef wrote:MG3 is a laser gun something needs to be done about that one it's too accurate.

Yeah, up to 300m. After that it's as useless as any of them.

viirusiiseli wrote:Yeah, up to 300m. After that it's as useless as any of them.

And the majority of the engagements are between 0 to 300m