Project Reality Forums

Go hovercraft! Go LCAC! Urrah!

How tanks should work (extending our conerns about 3rd person view)

No 3rd person view for anyone.

We have 3 basic positions for a tank:

Commander/Driver

Main Gunner

Secondary Gunner (top mounted Mg or some extra weaponry, missles on bradly)

Commander Driver can move the vehicle, and designate firing targets (sort of like spotting an enemy in BF2, make the target appear on the mini map)

He normally is viewing from the periscope, where he can turn his head to look through the differnent view ports. Hold ctrl or whateve to make him duck, and he has a nice view of inside the tank, or some alternate viewing mehod (tank dependant)

Main gunner controls the main cannon, ammo type, and the coaxial mg. hopefully he can have some kind of view like the tv guided missles in the cobra, as he is seeing things through a camera (again, tank dependant)

Secondary gunner is already pretty much the way it needs to be. with some tanks, this gunner will have a computer view of his target while he is actually inside the tank.

And maybe just for kicks, wit hthe abrams, actually add a guy into the model who loads the main cannon, so that the commander could see him moving when he checks everyone inside.

The tank needs to have an interior model, so that sabot rounds and heap rounds will work right (they kill the crew/ disable the engine, not desintegrate the whole tank)

i agree with all of that.

I expected bf2 to be more strategic and athmosperic- but after playing the demo a while i was quite dissapointed that it still doesn´t deliver the feeling of a mitlitary-combat situation. So thank you a lot for this cool modification project! I think it will bring in the features that will make bf2 the most challenging and exciting mp game ever.

After reading most of the discussion, these are my suggestions to bring more realism into the game (hope they have not been mentioned yet):

- more maps with poor viewing conditions (night, dusk, dawn, fog)
- maps with difficult terrain (where soldiers would have to travel a relatively long distance through hills on narrow footpaths when not taking the risk of beeing shot from the sky on an airlift by helicopter or plane)
- better camo for infantry units (i.e. facial camo, material that is attached to helmets and / or equipment) to give more surviability when advancing a target
- much larger maps to bring more strategic elements into the game (i.e. strategic use of airdrops, sniping, Artillery)
- if possible, an increase of the items of each kit while the type of loadout is dependant of the map /mission. i think about small first aid kits; flahbang, smoke, frag, phosphorous and he grenades in a combination for each class that makes sense; law launchers for sf-operators against none / lightly armored targets for example, more silenced weapons in night missions,
- airdroppable / -movable vehicles like in bf vietnam would be cool
- night fighting maps where infantry with advanced night vision systems and silenced weapons fight against slightly better armed mobile forces equipped with flashlights and flares (similar to some blackop-maps in operation flashpoint)
- amphibious maps (landing operation on a coastline) with marines (using LAV and AAVs) and seal units that can either swim or (more covert an secure) dive by using a rebreather (as part of a kit). i´m not really sure if the engine allows diving.
-maps with complicated bunker systems and urban environments with sewer system that can be used for a covert approach

Agreed

Id like a city with houses and buildings we can acutally enter, instaed of just one or two buildings troughout the entire map that arn't plastered shut.

ive always been a fan of the night vision idea, as well as missions where there is more involvement from the weather

Indeed.... the surronding enviroment has a huge part to play in an battle. May as well make it a good enviroment ....

I remember a scene in the demo, where a T90 got blocked by some kind of wheeled vehicle. in reallife i guess it could be difficult to do that.^^
depending on the height, weight and speed of the wheeled vehicle in relation to the values and climbing abilities of the tank, the tank should be able to push, flip or run over and flatten the vehicle (or parts of it). so i guess the values and physics of vehicles should be rechecked. imagine a tank meeting a parking civil car ingame (or other compareble obstacle) and first beeing lifted up a little but then regaining a stable position again while compressing everything under it to a pancake-like metalthing. that´s realistic i think.


how about different ways for troops to be insertion from the air? dependant on the air-vehicle used and the unit in cargo there should be a deployment

-by jumping with parachute (from low to high altitude at any speed*)

-jumping without parachute (at very low speed, very low altitude, over water or directly obove the ground)

-fast roping (hovering above the ground)

-on foot (when aircraft has touched the ground and is not moving anymore)

*in reallife it is a little more complicated, depending if an automatic or manual system is used

I am sure this has already been suggested, But If not, here it is:

EA really messed up with they decided to "modify" the Cobra from Vietnam and put in BF2. They should have scraped it, and went with the AH-64 Apache Helicopter. Here is a link for info if you need it http://www.fas.org/man/dod-101/sys/ac/ah-64.htm

They also messed up by not providing a Stealth Fighter, F-16, and various other vehciles that are being used over in Iraq as we read this. I guess EA wanted us to do it ourselves.. So I say if we are going to do, then do it right.

With all the conflicts in the middle east, solmiala, and of course Iraq, there should be more than enough info on detailed maps of battles, cities, attack plans, etc on the net. and with the BattleField Mod software, not only could you put the exact vehicles used in a REAL Battle in the game, but make the Map to fit the area as well..

I recall seeing on CNN a IRAQI Cemetary that was quite a Battlefield for a few weeks.. that would make a great Close Combat Map.

Just throwing out ideas here.. I hope they are taken seriously..

I am a Professional Graphics Artist, so I could help out if needed, when my regular work didn't get in the way.. "can't be playing games all day".. LOL

Cheers..

Lazy a** EA. An apache would be great in bf2.

most of that has indeed been mentioned. but they're still good ideas and the things that weren't mentioned before are as well.

actually as far as the game goes EA was right in not including an apache because the US forces invovled are marines and do not use the apache, the do use the cobra, as far as a stealth fighter, the US fighter in (at least) the gulf of oman is a stealth fighter (no radar friendly right angles on that thing!) but there is no radar on planes, so a stealth fighter doesnt do very much and wouldnt anyway because the maps are too small to matter, since in real life there is alot of sky to hide in.

As for when PR comes out ill bet they include apaches where they are supposed to be, with the Army, and leave the cobra with the marines... so you will see your apache! and maybe they will even throw in a few more stealth fighters and even radar so that being stealth will actually mean something!

the apache model is already there in the media gallery.

3 things:

Stuff that can be run over SHOULD BE RUN OVER ABLE! I don't care if the sandbags have to be modeled to look like ****, gameplay over graphics. A Tank can take out a 6 inch wide tree! It's not going to stop it! Same with fences, sandbags, etc!

Shit needs to get blown up. A lot. A situation I often find hating is this:
Myself being an avid Heli pilot, loving the new controls and physics, I'll go in for a quick missle attack on one of those IGLA's that is trying to make me go deaf. BAM BAM BAM BAM, 4 missles land within 5 feet of it, and it is sitll working fine.... AND ALL THE SANDBAGS AROUND IT ARE STILL IN THE EXACT SAME POSITION! Excuse me, but I think the IGLA and the sandbags would be blown apart.
Same for tanks shooting walls and such. Even if it issn't totally acurate to where the round hit (you could sorta go with the sections approach, as AA has with the BDMs), a 120 mm round hitting a wall and exploding is going to do a lot more than make a black mark. wall go bye bye.

Last thing: ADD RADAR BACK IN! Its gone, they got rid of it! It's all constant tracking system beeping, but there is no radar! Put it back! Please!

agreed! i´m curious if the engine will allow the surrounding (houses, walls, bunkers, barriers) to be destroyed as they promoted as gamefeature.^^

has anyone already posted a suggestion for those crazy us special units like firefinder (http://www.globalsecurity.org/military/ ... finder.htm), Talon unmanned fighting robotics and those systems that use very loud, low frequency sounds to fight riots. imagine missions in very dense urban situations where there is only limited / no vehicle or air support and only those and other hightech units play a role. is the landwarrior system equipment already in duty? guess it would be fun running around with this hightech gear, beeing able to scan around corners, having advanced zoomable seighting systems with ir and night vision, friend / foe identification, improved bodyarmor and only having those weak units (non lethal) and one of those armed robots as support against heavily armed mobile infantry an helicopters. this would also be a good playground for high tech weapons such as the xm8, oicw, scar and such. regarding the aspect of reality, all this equitment is already developed if not fielded in some testing-units jet. what do you think? would this be too far away from reality for a mod like this?

somewhere in this forum i found a post where someone was asking for anti-terrorist missions. hostage rescue i.e. is it somehow possible to build missions where you have to capture someone? war criminals, leaders or personal for interrogation needs? if so, wouldn´t it be senseful to have flexcuffs?

How many battlefield/war gameshave you seen with modern british forces with weopons and vehicles in them, next to none, I say you should make the mode 100% british forces. fighting an army of ur choice, i mean add British Army, Royal Marines, Paratroopers and etc and even have the vehicles they use aswell, like a chinock, the royal marine, landing craft i cant remember the name, and other vehicles, also you should include the weopons and uniforms used, i maybe to late in saying all this now but you could also consider it within a next version of the reality mod if already havent done so.

Dave.

hey dave,

as much as i know they are already planning to build in british forces. have a look in the gallery section of the forum. to be honest, i alo would like to see the french foreign legion (2. rep) and the german ksk. but i think this will totally bust the size of the mod.

cheers, t10

i dont really think you can take the americans out of it.... in a war the size of that in the game it was a huge mistake to leave the british out in the first place it would be even worse to totally remove the americans, most of the time, and it would be a deffinite in a WWIII type scenario, the british and americans would fight side by side, there is no one without the other, PRs got it the way it should be.

That goes with the saying, 'America is the worlds police but Britain is her truncheon'. You can probably decipher the meaning from that.

The inclusion of a British force is a must though.

i wanna see some commowealth armies like the aussies or gurkhas cos theyd help the british especially if its a jungle war