Project Reality Forums

Hey Devs,
I got a few questions about the current and upcoming MGs;

1., Will the USMC get the M240G version of the gun, or they have to do with the army or british/canadian type?

2., How will the new MMG/GPMG affect gameplay, in what way are they going to be different from the current AR class?
From the first devcast [1:20-1:40] and the pkm/m240b animations video it seems they'll have no extra "portable" slot -- the weapon apparently deploys when aiming down the sight, with no possibilty to fire without doing that -- is that an MMG-only thing or the whole AR/MG logic has been rethought?

4., How are you going to handle factions which have no LMGs/ARs/SAWs in their TO&E only MMG/GPMGs in western terminology? [i.e. Russians]
I don't think the RPK is as widespread as the PKM -- I don't even recall seeing pictures of russian soldiers with RPKs in real fighting zones

3., How are you going to handle factions which have no proper/army-issue scope for their MGs?
I'm specifically thinking about the russian PKMs -- they have no standard issue scopes, and I REALLY hope it is not going to be picatinny railified. AFAIK the Pecheneg has a standard scope but no model for the weapon exists for the mod as far as current public information permits

4., Speaking of rails -- are you going to remove the rails from the MG3?
It looks like a "sci-fi'd"/forcedly modernised weapon from a call of duty game, and no such config exists in real-life. This way also the unreal ELCAN accessory could be removed. The only standard scope is mounted on the unportable lafette tripod, to be used in conjuction the weapon. Hope the influence of the modern warfare series worn off by now...
(Yeah, I have seen pics of mg3s with elcan, but how widespread is that to faciliate the scoped version ingame? Were they custom-made or properly issued modifications? Anyway, they were not mounted on rails so the question remains valid)

5., MG3 rate of fire -- are you going to have the proper 1200 rpm instead of the current 900 (as appears in the tweak file)?
The majority of internet sources shows the former rate of fire. I remember something about hardcoded rpm maxs, but also, if I remember correctly, the Forgotten Hope 2 team bypassed this problem for their MG42, by having a slower rate fire but firing more bullets at a time (similar to a shotgun in game logic)

6., M249 rate of fire
Currently it has 900 rpm [source: tweak file]. According to fas.org the normal rate of fire is 750, with a switch for higher rate (1000) only authorized when the normal rate is degraded because of field conditions. The latter switch was omitted in the PIP version (leaving the 750 rpm) -- currently ingame. What does the military expert pr consultants say about this?


Cheers.

Some of these questions will be answered in the next devcast.

Hey Buren, I might not be a dev, but perhaps I can answer some of your questions:
Though I can't recall the source anymore I heard there were plans sometime ago about creating the PKP Pechenev. This would allow for scopes, while perhaps this might fill the Russian HMG slot next to the LMG PKM (just a guess, don't pin me on it ).

As for the firerates: I believe there's something about the bf2 engine that only allows firerates that are a sum of 300, not entirely sure about the number but this would be the reason a number like 750 isn't possible.

Nothing solid, alas, but perhaps you'll find it helpsome.

edit: Ninjaed, looking forward Bloodydeed!

1.) They will.
2.) Should be answered in the future.
3.) RPK and PKP
4.) Most likely, if that faction does not have optics, their mgs/lmgs wont have optics.
5.)The MG3 w/Elcan is used for a fictional faction, so no its not getting its rails removed.
6.)Weapon RPM's are hardcoded to specific values. We cant do 750 for example.

@ RealPlay, I and I think most Dev's like this thread

[R-DEV]Tim270 wrote:PKP

Awesome. That is all.

@[R-DEV]Tim270

3.) RPK and PKP

If the russians must have the RPK, at least it's going to have the 45 round magazine? Nice to hear about the Pecheneg in this semi-official channel, though!

4.) Most likely, if that faction does not have optics, their mgs/lmgs wont have optics.

In plain language that means conventional armies will have optics and insurgency won't. Okay.

5.)The MG3 w/Elcan is used for a fictional faction, so no its not getting its rails removed.

Artistic freedom...
Well then, I read somewhere the germans will have MG3 as their MMG -- are theirs going to be removed? Or perhaps you have an HK121 under your sleeves?

6.)Weapon RPM's are hardcoded to specific values. We cant do 750 for example.

Ah well...
I also checked FH2 and in their latest release they've given up on their former bypassed solution and just gave the MG42 900 rpm...

But then again, how is the huge rate of fire calculated for aircraft guns? (If I remember correctly one amount of ammo "clicked" fires multiple shells/bullets, right?)
Couldn't that solution be applied for the MG3?
[Ok, I'm getting to feel obsessed about this right now, but I can't help my fanboyism. These small nuances make stuff feel different on a practical level]

Either way, thanks for the answers!


@Wakain

This would allow for scopes, while perhaps this might fill the Russian HMG slot next to the LMG PKM

The funny thing is, the PKP was designed for the SAW role while the PKm remained in the GPMG role within the russian army! [source]

Actually, 1200 RPM would be possible, if I'm not mistaken. 300, 600, 900, 1200 should work.

Anyway, I don't think any infantry weapon except for shotguns will get multiple rounds per shot, for hopefully obvious reasons. A slightly lower ROF is still significanty more realistic than a shotgun effect for a machine gun, allowing it to theoretically hit twice or two targets with a single semi automatic shot.

I think apart from several projectiles per shot, what's most often done to simulate very high ROF in vehicle weapons is simply splash damage.

ShockUnitBlack wrote:Awesome. That is all.

Same lol.


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

[R-MOD]Spec wrote:Actually, 1200 RPM would be possible, if I'm not mistaken.

I'm afraid you are. The only valid RPM values are numbers that you can divide 1800 by and end up with a whole number. 1800/1200=1.5, so it's not a valid fire rate.

devs, why are you answering some, perfectly valid questions but not other ones?

EDIT: got that one answered

Because we are evil

It's mainly because we just want some to be unanswered as their answer will be revealed at a later point.
Or the DEVs answering simply don't know it or are not allowed to tell it.

Why does the foxhole look nothing like a foxhole but looks more like a mortar pit?

tankninja1 wrote:Why does the foxhole look nothing like a foxhole but looks more like a mortar pit?

It's not possible to adjust the terrain in real-time to make an actual foxhole (dug out into the terrain), so this is about as close as it can get.

Still waiting for the alt old foxhole with firing ports.

Are we going to have arm animations for driving, like we are going to see the arms when driving a bike, riding a heli like Forgotten Hope 2 and Battlefield Alpha Mod?

I remember how much stuff was in PR 0.8 to 0.9, like molotov cocktails, rotor tails being deadly, a bunker asset, uav, drivable cars in Muttrah etc ?

Why were they taken out and will there ever be a chance to return?

The drivable cars though, probably for the best.

Molotov kill ppl in vehicles, rotar tails made a lot of tks, bunker is very unrealistic... just to answer a few. Im pretty sure the devs think before they remove something and only do it when there are good reasons

Will we have a new Devcast for Christmas Eve, dear developers ?

Ha yes come on !!! Another one please !!!

How many people in total have worked on BF2 R since the dawn of time? Not just counting DEV's, cause that is 181 people, or so it would seem... I mean everybody.

Are there any intentions to add post-processing effects or otherwise improve PR's overall graphics in v1.0?

Star Wars or Lord Of The Rings?

Thanks,

Shock