Project Reality Forums

the person who posseses the kit would have very important job to help others, not running around like HE wants to

That's in fact a problem. Having only one kit of its kind is not good at all! Sometimes the person who ownes this kit doesn't care about the team but only about his/her score. And then ppl start to argue about that coz help isn't provided...

F.e. limit the HAT like the tanks. 10 tanks means 10 HAT. What u think about that?

DivS-konti wrote:F.e. limit the HAT like the tanks. 10 tanks means 10 HAT. What u think about that?

What? 10 tanks = 10 HAT kits? A big NO to that . There need to be few of 'em, two perhaps, but defo not more.

(i'm still following the thread, you know my point of view, but you guys might come up with an idea that I can agree with )

DivS-konti wrote:That's in fact a problem. Having only one kit of its kind is not good at all! Sometimes the person who ownes this kit doesn't care about the team but only about his/her score. And then ppl start to argue about that coz help isn't provided...

F.e. limit the HAT like the tanks. 10 tanks means 10 HAT. What u think about that?

When thinking with common sence, limiting heavy anti tank kits mainpoint is making armored vehicles more powerfull, 1 HAT per tank = same as no limits at all

Well the idea would make it possible to bring heavy AT kit fast anywhere in the map where ppls can spawn, but has the risk that newbie takes it and doesnt understand how good kit it is(however even dumpass understands that anti tank kit with only pistol = go hunt tanks and a bit advanced players knows that is also effective to blow up bunkers where enemy is annihilating squad by squad). But wouldnt it be too powerfull to have 2 HAT kits which could be brought anywhere in map where ppls can spawn ? just making em pickup kits would be the compromise thingie, i think rest of kits arent too superior to be fastly brought to any spawnpoint. But then what to do with crewman kits, ppls could steal APCs while the original driver is in gunnery seat or repairing, or tanks.

DivS-konti wrote:That's in fact a problem. Having only one kit of its kind is not good at all! Sometimes the person who ownes this kit doesn't care about the team but only about his/her score. And then ppl start to argue about that coz help isn't provided...

F.e. limit the HAT like the tanks. 10 tanks means 10 HAT. What u think about that?

Well for starters there is usually more then 1 H-AT kit. Second there are more ways to kill a tank then with H-AT, like another tank, attack jet, attack chopper, C4 and land mines. So there is no lack of ways to kill armour and hence no need to have a huge and unrealistic increase in the kits.

The Devs can't control how people ultimately play PR they can make rules in game to help structure how they play. That is the whole reason the kit limiting is included now, to structure or eliminate, the very people you are complaining about.

hehe, ok agree to that. Same ammount of HAT and tanks wouldn't be the best way.

Yes the "drive-away" problem. That's indeed a sticky one. My suggestion for that: combine driver and shooter again! So nobody gets driven away. Plus it's even realistic. (Tankcommander's seat blablabla... we've discussed about that some months ago and I haven't agreed on your point of views and still won't)

DivS-konti wrote:hehe, ok agree to that. Same ammount of HAT and tanks wouldn't be the best way.

Yes the "drive-away" problem. That's indeed a sticky one. My suggestion for that: combine driver and shooter again! So nobody gets driven away. Plus it's even realistic. (Tankcommander's seat blablabla... we've discussed about that some months ago and I haven't agreed on your point of views and still won't)

I'm a little confused. Are suggesting that tanks combine the gunner and driver into one? Could you please clarify how this would be realistic vs. the current (beta) setup?

Could you please clarify how this would be realistic

Of coz! Is no problem.

See, a tank in reality has got 4 or 5 ppl sitting in it. A gunner, one for the driving , one for the ammo, ... AND 1 tankcommander who's in charge of the crew and the vehicle. He sits in the turret, telling where to drive and shoot and so on.

In an arcade game like BF the player is just the tankcommi telling where to go and shoot with the tank. ..realistic, isn't it?

DivS-konti wrote:Of coz! Is no problem.

See, a tank in reality has got 4 or 5 ppl sitting in it. A gunner, one for the driving , one for the ammo, ... AND 1 tankcommander who's in charge of the crew and the vehicle. He sits in the turret, telling where to drive and shoot and so on.

In an arcade game like BF the player is just the tankcommi telling where to go and shoot with the tank. ..realistic, isn't it?

Ok now I'm more confused. In your first post about this you said to combine the positions because it was realistic and would solve the "drive-away" problem. Now your saying that combining the positions is arcade like and un-realistic. I knew that IRL tanks required a crew to operate and the reason the Devs went with a 3 man crew in PR (driver/commander, gunner, hatch gunner) was the best balance they could do without making the tanks to complicated. So the current system in PR is more realistic (within limits) then a one man tank. Do you agree with that statement??

No I don't agree with that! As I said: BF is an arcade game - that's a fact.

Having 1 gunner and 1 driver and 1 at the mg is like everybody acts like he wants to. The tankcommander isn't in charge any more. In rl the tankcommi gives ORDERS everybody HAS TO FOLLOW! That's why tanks are effective as they are in rl ONE in charge of all.

Wouldn't it even more "realistic" to have an ammo-guy too? Yes it would! But how boring would that be?!

Ehh, you now should know how I think about the tanks.... I don't like to discuss about that anymore. I stated my opinion a few times. That's it.

REMOVE THE DRIVER!

I despise the idea of "PR Action" i.e. i assume you mean arcady short respawn time **** servers that wreck the principle of PR.

konti, ever heard of VOIP? TEAMWORK? ARMOR Squads?

lol... no?

You imagine those tanks driven by one person in the past? You remember how frightening that was? You remember those ppl modding "no vehicle" coz of that incident?

WE NEED FEARSOME TANKS!

DivS-konti wrote:lol... no?

You imagine those tanks driven by one person in the past? You remember how frightening that was? You remember those ppl modding "no vehicle" coz of that incident?

WE NEED FEARSOME TANKS!

I think we need fearsome tank crews, way more deadly, since the driver can spot multiple targets, while the gunner takes 'em out. I'm way more frightened by a good tank crew than a single tank-man, really. They're quite easy to sneak up on and can be taken out with the C4.

Tank crews for the win!

...and vice versa.

EDIT: errm you ever came along those "no vehicle" servers since the two-positions-tanks? But no, you're right. The tanks are much more fearsome now...

I've to agree with Konti that a one-man-tank is more fearsome.
And AfterDune has right too... one player in a tank has a big blind angle.
But Infantry and one tanker may work together
The 50cal may stay as a second seat... so the tanker has a gunner watching his back.
I think the tank is an other topic in comparison to a helo which has to be handled by two players.
i cant fly and aim with a helo gun
BUT i can drive and shoot with a tank! Keyboard and mouse work perfectly for that.
The tank commander in RL has so much power, that the crew is acting like one person. The main gunner in RL has a aiming system and cannon that wont be effected by the movement of the driver.
Right now in 0.6 the crew never will be able to act like a RLcrew and wont act like a one person crew. so this 3-player-tank-fix weakend the tank cause the devs splitted a RL one person crew with a better main gun system into 3 players who may work with VoIP but often wont. Right now mostly one player is driving the tank....he drives it into a camper position and starts shooting from the gunner postion. Thats not realistic too.
Always have a well visited public server in your mind, while im explaining this

But right now we are discussing a main topic called "RL vs gameplay" and i know many of you like a total strategic tactics mod BUT a game never will be realistic and i think some vehicles and rules are created to hardcore.
Everyone who wants to play on public servers with this big differnces between veterans and rookies will be frustrated soon.
And im frustrated that there are some "RLfixes" that dont really fit into this kind of mod.
I know that the engine is not really easy to handle but i hope that some features that got a more realistic feeling into this mod are still like a fix and not like a solution.
So I hope that old features like the one-man-tank may be discussed.
The topic about the rally point vs airdrop is worth discussing too.

I disagree. Right now, having a good tank squad (which happens more often than expected in the .6 OB) can be one of the most enjoyable things in the game. In a rare stroke of Dev genius, the three man tank crew has aided realism, gameplay, and teamwork.

Also, to the person that was talking about the loader, the .50 cal gunner is the "loader" except he just stays on the .50 the whole time (at least that's how I understand it).

You just posted your subjective sight. You only disagreed... no argument
Thats not a poll...thats a discussion - thx

I don't think we will ever see two versions but I do believe we should cut out some things from the mod anyway.

For example the extra second of spawn time you get every time you die does not serve to make people more careful. It just serves to piss you off and hurts the guys taking the fight to the enemy and moving to a closer range. 30 seconds is already enough to make most people think twice about charging that tank with their knife anyway.

Another thing that could use some adjustment are the rules for requesting kits. Do we really need two minutes of wait after getting a kit, two minutes to wait after joining a new squad, and two minutes to wait after requesting kits (or being in the wrong area to request one) too many times? If you guys feel you need all three of these could they be tweaked a bit at least?

Finally I believe this server registration thing is getting out of hand. While I can understand why the developers would want most servers running the standard mod these new rules which would prevent a mature group from running a server with minor modifications without a password sort of suck. No offense but all of the time they are spending on a super virus to melt clan servers could go towards other things in the mod.

Lampshade111 wrote: Finally I believe this server registration thing is getting out of hand. While I can understand why the developers would want most servers running the standard mod these new rules which would prevent a mature group from running a server with minor modifications without a password sort of suck.

not true, The licensing so the devs can pick who and what mods are ran. no where dose it say that minor mods will not be ran, or any mod for that matter. If TG applied, they would be accepted, if CDU did, then the Devs have the power now to refuse.

Come on after 2 weeks they have the serverfiles "illegal" on some internetsides.