Project Reality Forums

Vista wrote:I do, the dutch weapons are quite litteraly god-like vs the AK74 for example, on dovre. I've had many situations where I shoot a full second eariler than the enemy while using the AK74 and they just turn around and rape me in 2 frames. It's quite ridiculous

Just (try) to give them more side-to-side and vertical recoil.

Know your facts Vista:

450/60 = 7.5 shots per second (or maybe even 600/60 = 10 shots...)

So what you are saying is that you fired 7.5 shots and then you died because he turned around. So either you suck at aiming, or PR's hit registration / a bad internet connection strikes again. And hit registration is just a whole different topic. Though even then it would still be kinda bad since you need only 3 to kill a guy and after 2 shots he should be bleeding so bad he can hardly see you anymore...

Come on man...




D.J.

[R-CON]Mr.VdHeide wrote:Know your facts Vista:

450/60 = 7.5 shots per second (or maybe even 600/60 = 10 shots...)

So what you are saying is that you fired 7.5 shots and then you died because he turned around. So either you suck at aiming, or PR's hit registration / a bad internet connection strikes again. And hit registration is just a whole different topic. Though even then it would still be kinda bad since you need only 3 to kill a guy and after 2 shots he should be bleeding so bad he can hardly see you anymore...

Come on man...




D.J.

But we need more balancing you shitlord. Otherwise why would this game even be worth playing?!

Look at DICE and EA, you can learn from them. They actually listen to feedback and balance the guns in such a way that everyone has equal chances.

I don't even remember anymore why i stopped playing COD/BF and started playing PR.
Those games were balanced so well, for example the 50.cal machine gun wasn't so op, if you got hit by it you actually had a chance to get to cover because you needed multiple rounds for a kill. Or the TOW missile was way slower so you could actually dodge it much easier.

So if you can't manage to make the recoil work properly in full auto then reduce dmg.

Fuck realism. Fuck authenticity.
Because nothing is more important than to have perfectly equal chances in the rare occasion you and an enemy start shooting at each other at the same time at close range.

Next up please have a look at the MG3, it is way too op compared to other machine guns, way higher fire rate and dmg. And also the leclerc has much faster reload than opfor tanks, sometimes you hit it first and it still kills your tank because of it, plz nerf!

Are you actually being serious?

No he isn't xD

[R-CON]Mr.VdHeide wrote:Know your facts Vista:

450/60 = 7.5 shots per second (or maybe even 600/60 = 10 shots...)

So what you are saying is that you fired 7.5 shots and then you died because he turned around. So either you suck at aiming, or PR's hit registration / a bad internet connection strikes again. And hit registration is just a whole different topic. Though even then it would still be kinda bad since you need only 3 to kill a guy and after 2 shots he should be bleeding so bad he can hardly see you anymore...

I don't think he's mistaken, sounds to me as if that's the interpolation kicking in. The same thing that causes you to get hit even though your body has long been behind hard cover.

Really no need to discredit somebody seeing bloody smoke puffs popping up only to 360'd a heartbeat later.

@Dog

Shut up

+1 for Dogactual

Though we always need to keep looking for ways to improve realism.

@Frontliner, yes that can happen to anyone every once in a while. But really, I feel like he is exaggerating. I personally love the AK-74M and I can get good kd's with it, no matter who I am up against. A rifle like the G36, Famas or C7 helps, but other things are far more important, things like: Strategy, Tactics, Communication, etc. Individual skill and teamwork is far more important then the rifle's you use and that is how you win a round.

Another question is, do we want to make fire rates unrealistic so that all the guns are the same: The answer is: NO, because this is PR. Yes, we all know that this makes certain rifle's better then others. But hey, wasn't that one of the reasons to make this mod in the first place? The G36 is better then the AK in terms of ROF, but the BMP-3 auto cannon fires faster then the Puma's. Which is fun because it challenges players.




D.J.

[R-CON]Mr.VdHeide wrote:+1 for Dogactual

Though we always need to keep looking for ways to improve realism.

@Frontliner, yes that can happen to anyone every once in a while. But really, I feel like he is exaggerating. I personally love the AK-74M and I can get good kd's with it, no matter who I am up against.

I hear the same argument from people saying they prefer the AK variants without scopes but when it came down to it in the PRT C11 it was literally a slaughterfest on Kozelsk. What you "feel" is not necessarily true.

A rifle like the G36, Famas or C7 helps, but other things are far more important, things like: Strategy, Tactics, Communication, etc. Individual skill and teamwork is far more important then the rifle's you use and that is how you win a round.

"Git gud" is a shitty argument against something that is demonstrably better in almost every regard. Considering that it a) really shouldn't be like that(meaning any "realism argument" is out the window) b) wasn't intended by the devs(begs for a fix) and c) happens because of engine limitations gives weight to why we're asking for a sensible adjustment until something better is found.

Vista was popping up behind somebody's back. HE should've won the firefight, period. But he didn't because EZ mode happened(and maybe some hit detection issues coupled with interpolation, I'm not denying that). And your response to that is "teamwork"? Yeah, no.

Another question is, do we want to make fire rates unrealistic so that all the guns are the same: The answer is: NO, because this is PR.

To me this isn't a question of realism. Realism in PR is and has always been a secondary objective to serve the purpose of making the factions distinct where necessary. Usually I'm the one making arguments for a more realistic approach to things(where feasible), but PR has indeed made a lot of compromises to certain factions to better the balance, hence why the Russians and Chinese can all be equipped with scopes, Panzerfaust 3 and AT-4 do roughly the same damage and stock T-72s are on eye-level with modern MBTs enjoying upgrades of the third millenium. If you actually believe the little adjustment we're asking for makes the game unrealistic(despite that not being truly the case) then you've been fooled - you've played an unrealistic game all along!

I mean, for the true realism experience you can play Silent Eagle as Russian, no scopes on your AK74M. I truly hope you can find solace in "it should be like that", "this is completely fine", "Strategy, Tactics, Communication are more important", "This is PR" when the Germans shit on you from 200 meters away without any possibility to retaliate, while BMPs and T-90s getting obliterated by the Leopards and SUs blasted out of the sky.

You have a good point with the T72's being much too good in game since they suck IRL. PR isn't anywhere close to a milsim.

But why change the C7 ROF? It will sound and feel wrong. Deviation and grouping could be changed I supose. But only if that would make sense in terms of realism as well.




D.J.

Frontliner wrote:"Git gud" is a shitty argument against something that is demonstrably better in almost every regard.

You mean only in one regard? Really close quarters combat?

Frontliner wrote:when the Germans shit on you from 200 meters away

Nothing to do with ROF right?

So how are we gonna balance all the factions that don't have back up sight? Remove them for all factions or invent new scopes?

You dont have to make all weapons identical BUT there shouldnt be something unrealistic and gamebreaking at the same time, thats why the ROF should be reduced a bit. Simple fix.

@heide: pls dont come with gitgut arguments. Ive seen you playing...

Dogactual again best feedback 2017. Not as good as your suggestion to supress a tank with an AR but still quality posting. You and Mineral could make this mod great again!

Is ROF really gamebreaking though?

HK416 hacks have been around since day 1 of 1.2. Everybody else running around with the silenced C7 while I had a full auto 30rd Marksman.


AK-74M has been buffed like 9 times, it's a very competent weapon. It's also easier to hipfire inside, and you don't get caught reloading while spamming the fire button.

sweedensniiperr wrote:You mean only in one regard? Really close quarters combat?

Don't be stupid, on maps like Dovre and the majority of other maps aswell CQB is the entirety of all the engagements.

You're just not going to engage people at 200m+ everytime you see them... Everyone knows that it's preferable to get up close.

fecht_niko wrote:@heide: pls dont come with gitgut arguments. Ive seen you playing...

Yes you have, we were in a squad together a while ago, we had fun.

But really Niko, no need to act like this, just leave the drama and stick to the facts. Then we can have a good discussion about these kind of things. All I wanted to point out with my initial post is that people shouldn't exaggerate when it comes to C7/FAMAS/G36 vs. AK-74M. Yes, the bluefor rifles are better and some might even be too good but it is not like the AK-74M is unplayable. That is what I wanted to point out.

Also. If you or Vista feel offended by that post, I am sorry. I have no intentions to bash people online and cause drama. I rather stay friendly with everyone in this game, unless they are absolute ********, but you guys aren't so ye...



D.J.

Heide, there's no drama here, it's just that in PR, the rifle that shoots faster is going to be simply better in CQB. In medium to long range it doesn't really matter - since you're just going to tap it out (except with the G3 since that rifle is really good when it comes to tapping ofc).

And if you disagree with the latter, then no offence but you have no idea what you're talking about.

All we're trying to say is that certain rifles have an inherent advantage and we'd like to see that changed. But hey, keep denying it, like all of you were saying that the automatic shotguns weren't OP untill a certain someone made a fragmovie to prove it lol...

I absolutely completely agree witb the first part . Those are just facts.

Indeed, the discussion should be about if this should be changed. I say no to changing ROF. But I am open towards the possibillity to increase the spread of the bullets on auto. Though I personally feel like it works the way it does right now.



D.J.

fecht_niko wrote:thats why the ROF should be reduced a bit. Simple fix.

Not a simple fix, bf2 is limited to certain fire rates.

Vista wrote:Heide, there's no drama here, it's just that in PR, the rifle that shoots faster is going to be simply better in CQB. In medium to long range it doesn't really matter - since you're just going to tap it out (except with the G3 since that rifle is really good when it comes to tapping ofc).

Looks like the G3 has to be nerfed next... otherwise this game will never be perfectly fair!

So because of engine limitations either the ROF or the recoil of the C7 is unrealistic. From my point of view that means that there is no right and wrong in this case. Both solutions are a compromise so... it doesn't matter if "we" change it or not.

Perhaps giving the russians one more grenade on Dovre could make the infantry combat more balanced without compromising realism.

DogACTUAL wrote:Looks like the G3 has to be nerfed next... otherwise this game will never be perfectly fair!

Nah leave the G3 alone, it's perfectly represented in game IMO