All round classes

[Malik]

Alright Top Cat, you've seriously got to stop overusing the terms 'realistic' and 'we'. When you say 'we've agreed that this is unrealistic' you're referring to you suggesting it in another post. I don't like the way you pointed out that the recon class 'sounds like the spec opps' when I pointed out that they are the same thing. So to clarify I hereby call on anybody who's served time in the military to answer these questions:

1) Are some soldiers in the USMC assigned tasks that could be defined as 'Special Operations'?
2) Is it unrealistic to presume that ammunition can be stored in a bag or another similar medium?
3) Is it unrealistic to presume that ammunition can be distributed by than one method i.e. from people possessing ammunition in a vehicle and people carrying the aforementioned storage medium?
4) Quantity aside, are the kits I mentioned ever used in the military? (I understand I may have gone over the top with kit amounts, especially the four AT4 rockets)

My post was designed to combine both the 'realistic' suggestions with an implementable designed. At present, nobody knows how to make team specific unlocks (in other words, alternative kits for one class on one map). My designed tries to balance in between having the two kits everyone mentioned. I agree, I may have added too much ammunition for some classes, but by no means is it 'unrealistic'. You're preaching both for realism and balance, two things it's very hard to combine in one package. Real soldiers don't think about making it fair on the enemy (aside from the NATO rules on ammunition) they just have one aim: eliminate the enemy. At the same time it's arguable this is a game so it should be made fair, but you've quite hyprocritically stated on several other threads that due to the fact the two battling sides are different they should be treated differently.

The kits offered in my plan may not be fair against the current MEC loadouts, but I could quite easily knock together an MEC counter version and we've got ourselves an interesting balance. An MEC opposite would probably have some high powered eastern weapons, such as the Kalashnikov creations and perhaps adding some more explosives (the lethal RPG for example). Chinese creations would feature more Russian imports also, probably similar to the MEC kits all in all. The British versions again would be very similar, aside from the replacement of many of the American Rifles with their British counterparts.

Take away the accessories if you will, but the point remains that the said system will work better than the current one. I'm talking about the use of the dumbfire rockets and the presence of more combat friendly weapons for all classes, meaning battles will be even more furious than they are now, but thanks to PR's realistic approach to damage and such battles we be at the nice steady pace we've all grown accustomed to.

[Top_Cat_AxJnAt]

Ok, i am liking this debate, i start with one opion, it gets changed by other peoples good suggestions and reasoning and by the end i am pretty sure what woudl be best for PR. A the moment i am far from sure.
THis might get on somes peoples nerve, but how will any idea improve gamplay making it BOTH for fun and realistic. fun mean balanced as well.

How do ammo bags support gameplay:
- they encourage team work, with soldier support each other, by giving them something that is very important.

But if soldiers had more ammo, double present ammount for certain classes e.g probaly medic and assult it would mean that number of times soldier would need "re-fill" for a sinlge life would drop hugely and i many case would hit zero due to present gampaly (fairly fast). And if most vehicles can provide ammo, ammo bags become a huge ammout less usefull, making only a tiny contribution to gameplay.
This is just a one argument against them, something to consider. But at present I THINK they should stay and any class changes shoudl be kept minor until certain problems are resolved such a multiple choises for one classs. And as PR becomes more realistic the gampaly will evolve and any major change now might become a waste of time after a couple more realeases.

As someone pointed out earlier, on some mission special marines or special forces are also sent in with the normal marines. The present spec opps reperenting them. However i would think (no certain) that on most mission they do not come alone (this being a average), and therefore PR would be making a large exception by including them in every map.

So if Enginners have some form of C4 and mines they are capable of destroying enemy installation, something that the present spec opps can also do.
If snipers ahve a powerful scope (which they always will) and a pair of benocs they are capable of spotting enemy positions and scpouting ahead.

This means that the job the spec opps or recon marine could do, could be done aswell and in some cases better than excisting units.
In a game this could mean an extra medic of assult, who could provide extra fighting normal head on battles and possible change the result of them (improving chance of winnin).

So with the reasons i have offered above what would the point in them be?
HEre are some reason for them:
- they combine a variety of abilities, offering an affect class that can perform a variety of roles that with out them would take up more, and mabey less overall affective classes
- they are realistic, special forces sometimes come alone with marines, and marines recon is very very real, and i presume play a vital role in reconisance, something that should be in PR, cos PR shoudl strive to be as real as poss

OK, i have tryed to offer a balance argument for both, sides but i feel i failed slightly. After carefully considerign both points of view i feel that not having a recon or spec opps class would be unrealistic and that they could play a very important role in PR battles.
However i also feel that we must ensure they have at least 1 ability that no other class has but at the same time a balanced compare to assult class power, WHICH HAS BEEN CORRECTly mentioned before.

[SiN|ScarFace]

I dont think there is any need for the spec ops or a recon class. What can they do that the other classes cannot. Its a redundant class pretty much, and would be better replaced by a pilot class or para trooper to keep a class with a chute.

And limiting ammo just so people have to go find more is stupid. All combat classes should carry enough ammo that they dont have to find more every 10 min of fighting. I also think when you get ammo from a bag it should only be bullets and not nades and rockets ect ect. You should only be able to get things like that from a supply crate or maybe a vehicle.

[Malik]

The Spec Ops class has one major advantage over every other class: they have a paracute. It's that simple, that gives them a major advantage on the battlefield as it is. As for your argument on ammo bags, well it's really unsupported. You're saying 'because the ammo bags aren't making a huge improvement on gameplay they are thus unrealistic and should be removed. tanks and APCs may restock ammo, but last time I checked there aren't tanks and APCs all over the map. You can't bring a tank or APC along with you behind enemy lines, they can't sneak with you in undergrowth on Steel Thunder or climb onto roofs with you on Karkand. I don't care how minor you believe it to be, but supply bags do help. I don't care that you think giving spec ops binocs is pointless just because snipers have them, the fact is spec ops don't, and it's something they need. It should be possible to do recce missions without having a guillie suit and long range rifle with you. In later builds if we ever get a laser dot system implemented I imagine the Spec Ops will carry that role, but for now the Spec Ops is meant to be a light alternative trooper to the main rifleman having the advantage in CQB.

And Top Cat, how long did you serve in the marines? Judging by you certainty on many points I'd say you must have spent some time with them, or you're just making it up.

[JellyBelly]

Well, seeing as everyone else is doing it, ill post my ideal kits list.

Recon: Light Armour
Knife
P226
M14 SOPMOD (s) w/ Red Dot x4
SLAM Explosives Charge x4 (Like a timed C4, but slightly weaker)
Binoculars

Marksman: Light Armour
Knife
Berreta 92f x2
SPR/M14/Some other DMR rifle x4
2x Frag

Trooper: Heavy Armour
Knife
M16a4 x4
3x AT4/SMAW-D, dependant on whats best suited.
Frag x2

Automatic Rifleman: Heavy Armour
Knife
SAW x2
Ammo Pack x4
Smoke x2

Combat Engineer: Light Armour
Knife
M4a1 x4
Wrench
C4 x3
Claymore x2
AT mine x2

Grenadier: Heavy Armour
Knife
M4a1 x4 w/M203 x4
Smoke x2
Binoculars


Corpsman: Light Armour
Knife
M16a2 x4
Med kit
De-fib x6
Frag x2

[Top_Cat_AxJnAt]

sorry, any points i get are from what others have siad, i do make mistakes and i never try to deny them. I would be extremely gratefull if you expose any.
I have never served in any marine core and i am sorry if i give any one that impression, i will try to ensure that any statements i make, that i am not completely sure of I WILL MAKE THAT CLEAR.



What i said, was trying to give a fair arguement, show where my final opinions come from and what information are used to get them their. THis means if my info is wrong you can easily poitn it out and i can adjust my opionon correctly. OK.

I like you point about them being a lght class, and they shoudl be kepted for the present time. After the vehicle point, i alos think that it would be better to keep them. However i feel that on 16 player maps there should be no tanks, and only jeeps and on 32 and 64 there should be a large number of transport vehicles, not 2 HUmvees But 4. AND most importantly allmsot all vehicles should be grouped in twos!!!!! - does any one agrreee??

JELLY BABy - i like it, quite undeataild but it gives us an idea. Certain things like ammo/ grenade ammounts might need adjsuting.

BEING the nob that i am i will say this: including choises for indervidula classes is a good good idea when listing a ever class, COS , it suggests a huge re-vamp and this will problay onyl happen in a long time and by then the chance of multiple gun choice probelm being solved is alot alot higher - simple

It is also good to include smoke, ammo bags ext. in any lists cos they can affect balance alot.

ALOS Rhino stated that in the marines there are light and heavy AT soldiers, both carry rifles but the light one carries a disposable launcher while the heavy carries a relodable one. AND I HAVE NOTICED THAT evey class layout avoids having a heavy one, BUT as the title of the thread is about jsut having one, then mabey i am saying this is the wrong place - ????

[JellyBelly]

JELLY BABy - i like it, quite undeataild but it gives us an idea. Certain things like ammo/ grenade ammounts might need adjsuting.

What more detial could you want?

[Top_Cat_AxJnAt]

OPinions:
- would like to see more ammo per class, a grenadier with M203 i think shoudl have atleast 8 mags +, and mabey 1 - 3 more grenades than 4.
Cnat really say much more cos these whole class ideas are all veyr similar.

BUT MY MAIN point being, i feel that htis area can not be properly addressed at thins moment, after .3 we will be better suited but not much, I think near the release of PR1 and jsut AFTEr would be an appropriate time to really address the issue with mroe idea of how it will affect gamaply, REASON:
at present PR is still close to BF in terms of gameplay and untill it is a fair bit more realistic in other areas can we understand the true position and need of each class the the abilities they possess - sorry, not put well but we shoudl be prepared to wait a longer before making big class changes BUT HTIS DOES NTO MEAN THIS CONVERSTION IS POINTLESS THOUGH! - just my badly spelt opinion.

[JellyBelly]

But no mention of smokes or ammo bag

Automatic Rifleman: Heavy Armour
Knife
SAW x2
Ammo Pack x4
Smoke x2

[Top_Cat_AxJnAt]

-

[Malik]

Well, your idea is like mine, only you took out the sniper and added a grenadier...

[Cerberus]

I say we just put in classes that are as close to their real life counterparts as possible.

[six7]

I liek Cerberus's classes the best (although I think my changes were better )

The basic rifleman also the choice between an m-4 4x ACOG or and m-16 4x ACOG, 2x m67s, 1x smoke, and kabar. They would also get ammo bags the only resupplied bullets. A third Rifleman loadout would be similar only with no ammo bag, a stock m-16A2, and 1-2 AT-4s. I still want a dedicated AT kit for when playing a armour heavy map. All classes except for maybe spec-ops and sniper would get the same amount of armour (even a squad marksman would get armour IRL).

[Deuce6]

My last line was ****. I was just trying to make the point that infantry learn that first, like thats default, then you get more tools/training to do other things.

haha, ok, I get your point.

[Deuce6]

Cerberus']Deuce posted a pic of what he took with him on missions and he had about 12 HE's, judging by the looks of it.

Correct, but like I said in my latest PM. I actually had 14, 12 on the belt, and 2 HEDP's in another pouch on my vest. Along with 4 illum rounds, and 2 smoke rounds elsewhere. *I bought additional molly pouches*

Along with 330 rounds of ammunition, two hand grenades, and 1 flashbang. I was loaded down. And that was before I had to add my camelbak and breach kit. Man did it suck to have to run.

[Deuce6]

and cerberus has a good class system. Sounds about right to me, mostly. We never had an engineer with us. That was a seperate entity within our brigade. And our Anti-tank tools were carried in our vehicle. So no one really carried around a Javelin, mainly because Iraqi's had no armor at the time. We did carry around AT-4's though, and the SMAW-D, which is a one time fire weapon. It's meant to be disposable.

[Top_Cat_AxJnAt]

- Support should be able to choose between a SAW OR a M240. I blelieve this is realistic and would be very fun. To ensure a balance adding a scope to one might be neccessary.

- A rifle man who can either choose a M16 and M203, 6 grenades, 2 smokes OR a M16 and scope, 2 dumbfire antitank rockets, (not sure how many grenades though, atlest 1 smoke and mabey 4 frags). THey both carry limited ammo bags as well.

- A AT man who carries a M16 and a relodable launcher with 4 rockets (again num of grenades not but mabey 1 smoke)

The question is my mind is whether to have a seperate rifle man and grenedier. However i feel this could be a waste of a class and by combining the grenadier, rifleman and rifleman with rocket together into 1 class would be a benfit to teamwork, the chance of their being the class you need is higher as a SL.

Class list would be:
- grenadier/ rifle man with AT - either M16+M203 OR a M16+scope and AT
- Corpsman
- Support - either SAW OR M240
- Markesman - either a silence scoper M16 OR a .....
- specialised AT
- Enginner - either M4/16 OR shotgun (this is not fullydecided, but idea is to give engi a choise of some kind)
- ? - some form of spec or recon marine with laser deg/ lightly equipted - either a M4 +scope OR M14 +scope.

[SiN|ScarFace]

Whats with you putting sopes on everything? No I do not like your class sugestions top cat.

[Top_Cat_AxJnAt]

lol, there are nto that many, i just mentioned the common ones, only added one new scope and the others are either snipes or the M4 whcih already has one. Not very good reason but hay.
This class thing is far mroe comlicated and confusign than anything else cos it is the bread and butter of Pr.

Reason are good but again hay. O well. Just give me armoured humvee and i will begon.

[Deuce6]

There are no "scopes" on a Machingun, it's an area weapon. Get an MGO.