Project Reality Forums

[R-DEV]Eddie Baker wrote:Don't you think enough mirroring has been done already? The Rarden is a powerful gun; the rounds it fires are almost the same size as those of the GAU-8 (on the A-10) and 2A42/GsH-30 (on the BTR-90 and Mi-28/Su-25).

Starting in 2008? The MoD works even slower than the DoD. I doubt that an entire battalion will be equipped with the new turret by 2013.

i dunno it just seems to leave the uk with a really weak transport, it not that fast, no doesnt have much of a kick in comparison to the other and cant go through water. the uk already seem to suffer from slow transport options apart from the jeep which only carries 3. if the devlopers are happy with the current equipment sported by the warrior then can we at least get more jeeps? because i just find the warrior a bit of a sitting duck, or do what the others suggested and let it volly fire so we can at least hit and run.

The most realistic representation of these reloading we can do is to have a large ingame mag size, with a slow fire rate of what would be fired off normally in r/l, otherwise you would have to reload every 6 rounds even if you did fire them off slow which would be kinda bad, but then good that you can still fire your rounds off fast

If the cannon is able to fire rapidly, why not let it do so? It should be up to the discression of the gunner whether he wants to let off a rapid-firing barrage of the shots or fire them singly. In regards to balancing, you could make it so that each shot generates considerable recoil so that firing it rapidly is not as accurate as firing it singly (but can be more damaging over a large area). IMO that is a much more convenient option than forcing it to fire slowly.

[R-DEV]Rhino wrote:yep kenwayy has basically got it. From what the guys at Bovington told us they would only fire it off on full auto using all there rounds in a real emergency which didnt happen at all often from what they told us. So this is really the most realistic way we can represent this weapon ingame at the moment.

Yeah but how often does the warrior engage other armored vehicles in the conflicts that it takes part in today? Of course it doesn't need to use the three round burst that often when they only encounter softskinned targets... In PR however The Warrior do meet other APC's and IFV's and sometimes even tanks... And in real life it would get shot to pieces due to having a gun that is to weak and not having a stabilized turret....

[R-DEV]Rhino wrote: otherwise you would have to reload every 6 rounds even if you did fire them off slow which would be kinda bad, but then good that you can still fire your rounds off fast

i prefer being able to fire fast and reload every 6 rounds than firing dead slow all the time.

Would it be possible to exactly reproduce the rarden? As in you need to click to fire each round (as opposed to holding down the trigger), have a 6 round mag then reload, and allow it to use its full ROF?

Yeah i'd have to agree with some other people that posted here. 6 rapid shots and a reload time would be most realistic and helpful.

Plus it'd help the coordination between driver and gunner, and even further cut down on one man tankers.

I don't mean to be harsh but did you ask why they prefer firing it slowly? There must obviously be some drawback; perhaps the 30mm is prone to overheating quickly, or is incredibly inaccurate when firing rapidly, or perhaps the vehicles just have relatively low ammunition capacity so it's "standard procedure" not to fire quickly. All of those can easily be coded, and those limitations will push towards players firing the weapon more slowly without the need for an unrealistic forced ROF.

Doedel wrote:I don't mean to be harsh but did you ask why they prefer firing it slowly? There must obviously be some drawback; perhaps the 30mm is prone to overheating quickly, or is incredibly inaccurate when firing rapidly, or perhaps the vehicles just have relatively low ammunition capacity so it's "standard procedure" not to fire quickly. All of those can easily be coded, and those limitations will push towards players firing the weapon more slowly without the need for an unrealistic forced ROF.

It was explained quite clearly early on in the thread,

The Rarden is a 30mm Anti-Aircraft gun (originally). It fires rounds that are manually loaded, using 3-round clips.

Clips cannot be reloaded whilst the gun is being fired. Two clips can be held at a time.


Effectively this means that the gun can be fired in two ways:

1) Six shots fired very quickly, with a longer reload time whilst two new clips are hand-loaded.

2) Three shots fired, with a shorter pause, and a single clip is reloaded, then three more shots fired, and reload a single clip.


The former allows the Warrior/Scimater to fire off six 30mm shots (remember, these are around the same size as the rounds fired by the GAU-8 Avenger in the A-10; this isn't a peashooter) quickly in an emergency situation.

The latter allows slower, but near-continuous, fire. It is this firing pattern that the DEVs have opted to model in-game, at present.

Why does the Scimitar's 30mm AP rounds do more damage then say a 25mm AP rounds from a M242?

The most modern round for the Rarden gun would be the 30mm L14A3 APDS, which can roughly penetrate about 63mm @ 1000m of RHAe, while on the M242 even the old M791 WHA APDS can penetrate 66mm @ 1000m, not to mention the newer M919 DU APFSDS-T which is roughly 72mm @ 1000m.

An 8x magnification image-intensifying night sight is fitted, and eight 94 mm Light Anti-Armour Weapon (LAW) HEAT rockets can be stowed in the vehicle.

Hmm...

Lol, I kid. That would be bad.

But I'm all for realism... I'd rather have the ability to fire quickly and scoot, whilst reloading those 2 clips.

[R-MOD]Masaq wrote:It was explained quite clearly early on in the thread,

The Rarden is a 30mm Anti-Aircraft gun (originally). It fires rounds that are manually loaded, using 3-round clips.

Clips cannot be reloaded whilst the gun is being fired. Two clips can be held at a time.


Effectively this means that the gun can be fired in two ways:

1) Six shots fired very quickly, with a longer reload time whilst two new clips are hand-loaded.

2) Three shots fired, with a shorter pause, and a single clip is reloaded, then three more shots fired, and reload a single clip.


The former allows the Warrior/Scimater to fire off six 30mm shots (remember, these are around the same size as the rounds fired by the GAU-8 Avenger in the A-10; this isn't a peashooter) quickly in an emergency situation.

The latter allows slower, but near-continuous, fire. It is this firing pattern that the DEVs have opted to model in-game, at present.

Yeh its understandable why the devs have done it, in enguagements currently IRL they dont have any major need to fire off so fast, but lets say you meet up ingame against another apc, it hasnt noticed you yet, you know its gonan take more than 1 hit to take this apc out but it has to be destroyed, you start firing and could have the oportunity to fire 6 rounds auicky before hiding again and they probably wont get a shot off at you either before they are destroyed or you can retread during a re-load, but instead you opt to shoot you shells off really slowly in which time they can find you target you and our damage you. This gun might not be a pea shooter but in its current format its not a huge amount more use in any situation against anything larger than a pickup truck.

i would much prefer the 6 shots and then a XX second reload time than havign to shoot so slowly that your pretty well always gonna die. I presume the schimitar also uses this sort of combination and should also be changed to the 6 shot then reload option.

See, this is where you and I part company

You're saying that your weapon has a weakness (slow RoF), and that it makes you vulnerable when attacking similar units - APCs etc.

Now, here's what I do on maps like Fool's Road, where there are several friendly units with the Rarden: Buddy up.

If you've got a Scimater and a Warrior together, you can combine the benefits of having a mobile platform for an infantry squad and effectively, an increased RoF from the gun. You also get the advantage of being able to have one gun loaded with HEAT and another with Sabot rounds, so you can instantly engage any units you come across, regardless of their type.

If you combine three or even four of the 30mm-cannon equipped vehicles (two Scimaters and two Warriors on 64p Fool's Road), you have four times the RoF. If all four units get their eyes on the T-62 and fire their first shot before the T-62 sees them, the tank will go down and will take maybe two of them out at most.

Alternatively, use hit-and-fade tactics to hit the enemy APCs if you're alone. Smack them, then run for cover. Wait for them to look for you, then hit them again and fade out. Relocate behind them, and then get some more quick shots onto them. Crewmen no longer have a wrench, unless they've got an engineer with them you'll be able to take them down that way.

Finally, use the terrain. If you get into a good hull-down spot (and Fool's Road has some positions that are brilliant - there's one in the NE area of the map where you can get so hull-down that only your gun and aerials are visible) - then you're far less likely to get taken down. My gunner in the Warrior was disconnected a few weeks ago, and no-one else in my squad was available to gun for me at that moment in time. The rest of the squad were on foot and getting hammered by a T-62 at the Airbase. I got nicely hull-down and waited for him to leave the helipad. He blitzed straight past me, and when I opened fire at about 300m he was unable to score a direct hit on me. I got enough Sabot rounds into him that he caught fire and bugged out; I followed and finished him off before he'd made it around the corner. I hate to say it but a solo'd IFV managed to kill a two-up tank

Sorry Masaq... Everything you say goes for a gun with higher ROF aswell... Even if it's just for six rounds...

Gyberg wrote:Sorry Masaq... Everything you say goes for a gun with higher ROF aswell... Even if it's just for six rounds...

Of course it does! Except hardly anyone ever uses the vehicles in that way - usually they're out and about all by themselves instead of working together. If there was a good chance that the enemy were doing the same thing and grouping up then yeah, it'd be moot. As it is, any side grouping its armoured units together is going to have an advantage - low or high RoF.

The tactic becomes useless when the high-RoF vehicles start using it against the low-RoF ones. They don't.

I do believe that the 30mm weapons need adjusting, and that if possible players should be given the option for High-RoF/long reload and Low-RoF/no reload modes. However, unless the "use the weapon as a shotgun"-style tinkering pays off, I can't see that happening.

Yup, it's really slow. It's really irritating. I've died more than a few times because it wasn't cycling quick enough... would it have stopped me dying, getting off six shots quickly?

Only if the other vehicle would be destroyed by six shots - and a fresh, undamaged enemy APC isn't.

[R-MOD]Masaq wrote:Only if the other vehicle would be destroyed by six shots - and a fresh, undamaged enemy APC isn't.

Spandrels are though. And being able to nail them in one swift burst would be incredibly useful.

I do not know if this is the case or not in 0.7 but is the Warrior significantly better armored than all the other APCs. Note i think all the other teams use APCs and not IFVs, therefore the armour theoreticaly should be less. But is it not also true that the Warrior when fitted with extra armour is exceptionaly strong, able to take some AT mines, numerous RPGs and from what i was told by a soldier in person, 120mm rounds (dont believe it). From this would the following not be both realistic and balanced:

Warrior = Legendary armour but mediocre gun

While other APCs and future IFVs = Less well armored but have a better gun than the Warrior


IS THIS NOT REALISTICALLY POSSIBLE?

Six shots fired very quickly, with a longer reload time whilst two new clips are hand-loaded.

I'd rather see that and it'd be more usefull in the context of this mod.


The 8 people on 4 apcs sounds good to try but just one guy with a LAT or HAT would be more effective. 4 LAT even more so and on fools road and other maps thats quite probably what will happen

Top_Cat_AxJnAt wrote:I do not know if this is the case or not in 0.7 but is the Warrior significantly better armored than all the other APCs. Note i think all the other teams use APCs and not IFVs, therefore the armour theoreticaly should be less. But is it not also true that the Warrior when fitted with extra armour is exceptionaly strong, able to take some AT mines, numerous RPGs and from what i was told by a soldier in person, 120mm rounds (dont believe it). From this would the following not be both realistic and balanced:

Warrior = Legendary armour but mediocre gun

While other APCs and future IFVs = Less well armored but have a better gun than the Warrior


IS THIS NOT REALISTICALLY POSSIBLE?

i have not noticed a significan difference between the warrior or other apc's (accept maybe the millitia one)

i swear i know this guy with the bag and the black hair in Rhinos pic... I think he live in germany i swear O.o or he has a brother or something O.o... I got a deja vu !

Here's the thing: Regardless of how the cannon is set, it's going to have certain negative and positive attributes. So the real deciding factor for me is realism. How can we set the weapon up so that it acts in the most realistic way, so that we can then use it in the most realistic manner, in order to play the most realistic games? Right now what we have is a compromise that doesn't satisfy realism in any way, without giving any real advantages, except that it is significantly easier to setup than the realistic system.

'Jonny' wrote:It needs to be modelled as a shotgun, using a magazine size of 6 and a batchsize of, I think, 7. I just need a little testing on the effects of this, but there is no reason to model the cannons unrealistically now that we know how to do it properly.

Now, being only an amateur, I'll look into doing this a bit more, but overall I think that we should be trying for realism. Given, the current cannon is workable. But the overall goal isn't just "workable", it's as close to real as possible.