Project Reality Forums

I personally never had a problem with the AT class. I played it plenty of times. Although I wasn't top player, I've probably saved my squad numerous times from some guy flanking us in a Vodnik/Humvee on his .50 caliber.

One thing you might want to take into consideration before making suggestions as well.

- As far as I know, Full rate production of the SRAW systems was canned by the USMC (I'll try to find a source if a I can). Although thats what I've been told.

- Two, the MEC are completly fictional, and by no means do the U.S, U.K and Chinese way of doing things have to apply to them.

So, to continue. From what the devs tell me, they plan on giving the U.S assault class a single-shot disposable light AT system such as the AT-4 or some man portable configuration of the SMAW. IMO the AT weapons such as Javelins, Eryx etc. should spawn in "armories" of sorts. More specifically in certain strucutres probably to be found in a few crates and things of that nature.

Although, as long as the dedicated AT weapon reamins on the menu, how about equiping them with a .45 pistol or other depending on which side. After all I've seen numerous news posts and suggestions about how the Marines are looking to go back to those .45 pistols. And since at least the Chinese conflict takes place in the near future, perhaps the MEU's would no doubt have their entire forces equiped with the .45 sidearms.

This helps a bit, adding more power to the class without making radical changes. The MP7 is not likely to be adopted by the USMC (perhaps special forces maps maybe?).

Although once again, with the MEC we could be creative to a certain extent. They are a fictional fighting force why do they need carbon copy weapons, kits and classes to the U.S and/or U.K sides?

Overall though, I would like to see Javelin systems and such spawn on the ground. Replace the AT class with some other class, add a single-shot disposable light anti-tank weapon to the assault class.

'[R-PUB wrote:maverick']Fire and forget is not about guidance it is about the fact the munition will detonate at the optimum distance from the target by using heat sensing technology.

Uh, fire-and-forget is about guidance. It refers to the fact that the missile does not need guidance input (from a wire, laser or radio emissions from the launch platform) after it launches. Detonation at optimum distance is fusing or triggering, not "fire-and-forget."

I'm refering to FAF in terms of the SMAW - fire and forget refers to distance from target.

http://www.talleyds.com/products/smaw.htm

I checked at Talley before posting.

You are correct generally, but I was trying to be topic specific, not with reference to a GPS, RADAR or LASER designation system. However, FAF can also mean a weapon which requires you not having to maintain a lock or visual contact with a contact.

Wow you guys really get heated over these things don't you. It's quite a good thing to get real answers though. As to AT class getting more powerful pistols such as a .45
http://www.military.com/soldiertech/0,1 ... 1,,00.html this should be the added pistol. I still think the AT should get a PDW.
Although with the amount of effort going into 1.0 i doubt this will be done before 1.1

trogdor1289 wrote:As to AT class getting more powerful pistols such as a .45
http://www.military.com/soldiertech/0,1 ... 1,,00.html this should be the added pistol.

The Kimber ICQB and MEU(SOC) pistol have been discussed before, quite often and we do wish to include a custom M1911 in game at some point, but it will not be a standard sidearm, because it isn't in real-life.

Only the Maritime Special Purpose Force direct-action component (attached Force Recon Direct-Action platoon) of a Marine Expeditionary Unit (Special Operations Capable) carries the MEU(SOC) Pistol.

MCSOCOM Det 1, who the ICQB pistol was originally issued to, has been officially disbanded and MARSOC has formed in its place. No word yet on if they will continue the issue and purchase of the Kimber ICQB, dip into SOCOM stocks for the Mk-23 lemons or just wait for the Joint Service Combat Pistol.

'[R-DEV wrote:Eddie Baker']The Kimber ICQB and MEU(SOC) pistol have been discussed before, quite often and we do wish to include a custom M1911 in game at some point, but it will not be a standard sidearm, because it isn't in real-life.

Only the Maritime Special Purpose Force direct-action component (attached Force Recon Direct-Action platoon) of a Marine Expeditionary Unit (Special Operations Capable) carries the MEU(SOC) Pistol.

MCSOCOM Det 1, who the ICQB pistol was originally issued to, has been officially disbanded and MARSOC has formed in its place. No word yet on if they will continue the issue and purchase of the Kimber ICQB, dip into SOCOM stocks for the Mk-23 lemons or just wait for the Joint Service Combat Pistol.

But that doesn't apply to teh MEC or China either. So we could just give them a type of .45 and give the US the Sig or a new pistol. At least it will attract people to the class if it has something new. Because right now, unless you are in a squad and told to or get killed by a tank, you aren't going to pick AT. And by the time you do get it, they enemy will either have the base or you will die trying to fight off the armor which has become plentiful it seems.

Could you please post pics of these pistols somewhere or give links to them.
I still feel that the AT class should get a PDW although it would be cool to give them a .45 pistol.

00SoldierofFortune00 wrote:But that doesn't apply to teh MEC or China either. So we could just give them a type of .45 and give the US the Sig or a new pistol. At least it will attract people to the class if it has something new. Because right now, unless you are in a squad and told to or get killed by a tank, you aren't going to pick AT. And by the time you do get it, they enemy will either have the base or you will die trying to fight off the armor which has become plentiful it seems.

Then you will have lost because you didn't think ahead and work as a team. The PLA does not have a second, larger caliber sidearm. Aside from the QSZ-92 and Type 80 (both 9mm Parabellum, but QSZ-92 is available in 5.8mm), the other weapons are a smaller caliber (either 7.62mm Tokarev or .32 ACP). Since we are treating the MEC as a conventional army at the moment, we'd have to find a larger caliber pistol indigenously manufactured by or in-service with one of those states, and we have not found one. In short, to keep it within the bounds of authenticity/realism, the best you can hope for at the moment is the standard sidearm with more magazines. The non-standard handguns are used by SOF.

trogdor1289 wrote:Could you please post pics of these pistols somewhere or give links to them. I still feel that the AT class should get a PDW although it would be cool to give them a .45 pistol.

If it's just for the sake of curiosity, then okay. I can already tell you they will not be the AT sidearm in PR. The Joint Service Combat Pistol has not been selected yet, so I cannot give you an accurate URL or photo. The Mk-23, Model 0 is also known as the USSOCOM pistol and is widely publicized; been in several videogames. What isn't widely publicized is that they were a disappointment. They're HUGE and the suppressor attachment threads were grooved in the wrong direction; suppressors were shot off of the barrels, unscrewed by the projectiles spinning through them.

http://www.military.com/soldiertech/0,1 ... 3,,00.html

The MEU(SOC) pistol has been in service for 20 years; they are near match-grade M1911A1s modified and assembled by specially trained USMC Precision Weapons Armorers.

http://www.sightm1911.com/lib/history/meusoc.htm

http://www.sightm1911.com/lib/history/meusoc.htm
Lol pistol dating from 1945 is better than most modern Mk23. As to giving the AT anything i still maintain it should be a PDW to provide close up protection which is where any of their fighting should be happening. A good compronise however would be to give them more mags for the M9.

trogdor1289 wrote:http://www.sightm1911.com/lib/history/meusoc.htm
Lol pistol dating from 1945 is better than most modern Mk23.

Heh-heh, even older. It served in both World Wars.

'[R-DEV wrote:Eddie Baker']Heh-heh, even older. It served in both World Wars.

It must be a good design.

'[R-DEV wrote:Eddie Baker']Then you will have lost because you didn't think ahead and work as a team. The PLA does not have a second, larger caliber sidearm. Aside from the QSZ-92 and Type 80 (both 9mm Parabellum, but QSZ-92 is available in 5.8mm), the other weapons are a smaller caliber (either 7.62mm Tokarev or .32 ACP). Since we are treating the MEC as a conventional army at the moment, we'd have to find a larger caliber pistol indigenously manufactured by or in-service with one of those states, and we have not found one. In short, to keep it within the bounds of authenticity/realism, the best you can hope for at the moment is the standard sidearm with more magazines. The non-standard handguns are used by SOF.

Any reason we are focusing solely on the TT-30/33 export to PLA? Which igrores the Type 51/54 and TU-90 (7.62 x 25 mm) ? Or the Makarov which still has a place in the PLA ? Or even the Type 67 which is used by PLA SOF? The ignorance of the 64 is also puzzling. Perhaps you could expand on that as they are the realistic 7.62 cal weapons used by the PLA. And of a larger calibre why is there no mention of the 77B 9mm?

As for MEC - what nations are included?

'[R-DEV wrote:Eddie Baker']That is an M16. And, oh my, do you see the Command Launch Unit attached to the Javelin missile he is carrying? He could be an assistant gunner. But the CLU might be in that bag on his left hip. Either way, is the Javelin in ready-to-fire position? Nope.

Maverick, I think you are mixing acronyms. The Mk-153 SMAW is unguided. Fire-and-forget means it is guided. The SRAW is going bye-bye; right now it is a place-holder and it was not modelled by PR, but by the BF2 staff. The Predator SRAW program has been placed on indefinite hold, if not already scrapped. Eventually we will have the SMAW and other unguided launchers (with multiple round types) in addition to the Javelin.

Yea, the clu is in the bag. But trust me, i've had my M-4 and the Javelin. Had to fire at infantry, picked up the javelin, killed two BMP's, and killed some more infantry. It's not that difficult honestly.

Thanks for clearing that up Deuce6.

Trogdor stop trying to get 900 posts

^ lol

darn you caught me lol. No i got carried away eariler.

Any idea if we can implement different types of 7.62 rounds? I know there are variations. Anyway we can get those to work on this engine?

And 7.63 and 7.65 rounds too in the case of the PLA

7.63 and 7.65 rounds exist are they any good.