Project Reality Forums

Poor crewmen, poor pilots, poor engineers. How often does a crash because of lag happen? Or a friendly mine is not seen?

I have gotten alot of TK's just because a the driver of the APC that drove a whole sq couldnt see the mine symbol. SHould I get punished for putting out a mine and then a big *** of a driver dont notice that big skull.

Dr2B Rudd wrote:haha, its worth coming on the PR forums just for phrases like these

also, this is true.

I suggest you read "The Hitch Hiker's Guide to the Galaxy" by the late, great, D. Adams. Which is where Masaq nicked that quote from.

Someone suggested increasing the spawn time if you use the HAT "incorrectly" that if it didn't hit an armored taget you increase the spawn time. Well the HAT is not only for use against armor, it is an anti-emplacement and troop weapon. NOT JUST ARMOR. You shouldn't be punished for choosing to use one of it's other abilities. Also if that were implemented you would be given a long spawn for missing a target if it doesnt hit armor. So someone who might be shooting at armor would be punished for missing. What happens if you hit a Humvee or apc with a bunch of troops next to it? Does hitting them cause more spawn increase?

[R-MOD]Bob_Marley wrote:I suggest you read "The Hitch Hiker's Guide to the Galaxy" by the late, great, D. Adams. Which is where Masaq nicked that quote from.

Yup, good spot

Although you shouldn't read the book, you should listen to the original radio series.

or for lazy people the audio book.

Nah, still not as good as the radio series.

Well this topic is going off track fast..lol

[quote=""'[R-MOD"]Masaq;712990']Uh, why? All that does is punish players who make an accidental TK or two - and they will happen, blue-on-blue is inevitable. The players who come on in order to cause trouble don't give a foetid dingo's kidney about the score because all they're there to do is cause grief.[/quote]

Of course its going to happen, the problem is it happens too much, most public players are to incoherient to slow down their pace and consider what they are firing at. I personally dont see a negetive side to it. if you dont want a rediculous score, dont do rediculous things. i think its a better system.

[quote="Zimmer""]I have gotten alot of TK's just because a the driver of the APC that drove a whole sq couldnt see the mine symbol. SHould I get punished for putting out a mine and then a big *** of a driver dont notice that big skull.[/quote]
Yes. bad placement, in real life i think it would result in court marshal.

Spec_Operator wrote:Poor crewmen, poor pilots, poor engineers. How often does a crash because of lag happen? Or a friendly mine is not seen?

Simple solution, dont use things if the conditions dont allow them to function properly. (for example: i wouldnt fly on an australian server.)

The fact that you dont like this, means it would work very well in my opinion, any player worth his salt would restrict himself and consider his objectives a bit more wisely, if he actually valued his score/life. Right there is no reason for a player to value his life, except to further his skills as a gamer.

ostupidman wrote:Well this topic is going off track fast..lol

Shh it's bobs fault.


i think a negative score system would be great but there is just no feasable way of doing it though.

Psykogundam wrote: Yes. bad placement, in real life i think it would result in court marshal.

Bad placement? Frak no, idiot driver who didn't pay attention to the mine marker. No, punishing players for a TK by instantly giving zero or negative score is useless against smacktards because, as noted, they don't care about score and serves no other purpose than punishing players who either screw up a tiny bit, have connection problems, or have team mates who are dumb enough to think that mines are filled with candy.

well yea okay, they are all valid points, but i dont see any better way of getting rid of smacktards.

The problem is the only way to get rid of smacktards is vigilant admins on servers, unfortunatly there are times when those admins aren't there and the smacktards strike, until we find a way to read the players mind about their intentions, there's not much we can do that we aren't, as a community, already doing.

Waaah_Wah wrote:Not to be an ***, but nothing is impossible. Your talking like the guy in invincible where he sits and spams rockets at you. Hes not

It was 32v32 and no one was able to take out nor get close to the firebase where they were spamming rockets from, so it was pretty much impossible to take it out. And like I said, you keep ignoring the fact that I said that if we would of killed him, his squadmates were there and ready to pick up the HAT.

What, would you want us to abandon the flag like the rest of the squads to attack that firebase to take out 1 guy and let them come and take the flag which we needed in order to win on 7 Gates?

Then continue with shooting them untill noone dares to stick their heads out.

You keep simplifying this when it is not simple at all. I am not one to complain, but even in this situation we were not able to take out the HAT. Suppressing fire? Sure, do that then you would get HAT or sniped by 1 of the 10 guys sitting up on that firebase.

It IS that simple really.

Considering you weren't there, you wouldn't know in this particular situation and no it was not simple. I already gave answers for why it was not possible. We had 3 squads trying to attack and take out their firebase, but it was dug in. We still won the game and I am not complaining about that, I am complaining about the fact that a HAT was able to fire down on our Bunker and people every 30 seconds with us not being able to counter it by any practical means except taking out their firebase which did not work.

I have NEVER had any problems with HAT sniping. Yes the guy might kill me a couple of times but its not really harder than taking a marksman kit or if your the SL get someone in your squad to take it.

Tell me where or on what map?

This was on 7 Gates at the River Fort flag and if you think you could magically walk out into the middle of the riverbed, take a shot at the HAT or go to the top of the Fort and do that without being HAT sniped, then you I would applaud you. But the fact is, there was not a viable way to take out the HAT because he just kept spamming our Bunker and personal who had no good positions to shoot the HAT from because he was either out of sight or you were too exposed. And this was not merly 10 feet away, they were up in the hills where they had the advantage and in the woods where they had plenty of cover in addition to the Firebase.

I normally don't complain, but there are situations which most would agree with that the HAT can be severly abused. Just saying "pick up a weapon and fight" is an excuse and an overly simplified one when in some situations, there isn't an easy way.

Tirak wrote:The problem is the only way to get rid of smacktards is vigilant admins on servers, unfortunatly there are times when those admins aren't there and the smacktards strike, until we find a way to read the players mind about their intentions, there's not much we can do that we aren't, as a community, already doing.

yea, well thats smacktards, and i was talking about altering the points system to get other effects. not just deter smacktards. people are focused enough on safety.

Is the ability to re-arm (at a firebase for example) a HAT hardcoded? If it isn't make it a requestable kit as normal but with no ability to re-arm after the two charges are used.

Supply of kits is limited, but has a respawn rate that is related to the respawn rate of the enemy target type (armour, tanks etc) that such a weapon was specifically designed to destroy.

If it is hardcoded this idea is void, so forgive me, I'm a bit new here

00SoldierofFortune00 wrote:It was 32v32 and no one was able to take out nor get close to the firebase where they were spamming rockets from, so it was pretty much impossible to take it out. And like I said, you keep ignoring the fact that I said that if we would of killed him, his squadmates were there and ready to pick up the HAT.

Like i said, your talking like hes invincible where he sits. Well, hes not.

What, would you want us to abandon the flag like the rest of the squads to attack that firebase to take out 1 guy and let them come and take the flag which we needed in order to win on 7 Gates?

If they have a firebase there, is most sertainly worth taking out.

You keep simplifying this when it is not simple at all. I am not one to complain, but even in this situation we were not able to take out the HAT. Suppressing fire? Sure, do that then you would get HAT or sniped by 1 of the 10 guys sitting up on that firebase.

Considering you weren't there, you wouldn't know in this particular situation and no it was not simple. I already gave answers for why it was not possible. We had 3 squads trying to attack and take out their firebase, but it was dug in. We still won the game and I am not complaining about that, I am complaining about the fact that a HAT was able to fire down on our Bunker and people every 30 seconds with us not being able to counter it by any practical means except taking out their firebase which did not work.

Seriously, i have no idea what servers you play on, but I have never seen someone survive for long while firing those rockets.


Tell me where or on what map?

This was on 7 Gates at the River Fort flag and if you think you could magically walk out into the middle of the riverbed, take a shot at the HAT or go to the top of the Fort and do that without being HAT sniped, then you I would applaud you. But the fact is, there was not a viable way to take out the HAT because he just kept spamming our Bunker and personal who had no good positions to shoot the HAT from because he was either out of sight or you were too exposed. And this was not merly 10 feet away, they were up in the hills where they had the advantage and in the woods where they had plenty of cover in addition to the Firebase.

I normally don't complain, but there are situations which most would agree with that the HAT can be severly abused. Just saying "pick up a weapon and fight" is an excuse and an overly simplified one when in some situations, there isn't an easy way.

Last time someone did this vs my team was on 7 Gates. The enemy team had built a firebase right next to that TOW and kep firing both TOW and HAT rockets into the flag. It still didnt stop me from getting a marksman kit, going to those woods south of the River Fort flag and shooting the piss out of both the HAT guy and everyone who was trying to man the TOW. Shortly after an APC from my squad moved forward and blew up the firebase and everyone close to it.

Bold.

00SoldierofFortune00 wrote:I was playing on 7 Gates and I was on China and defending the Bunker behind the first flag, and there was an enemy firebase on the hill and for every 30 seconds to a minute after the start of the game, they were firing HAT round after HAT round down onto that firebase and kepy spamming it until the end of the game. It was at a minimum, 10 HAT rounds fired, but I am sure there were much more because I went off with my squad to attack a RP. We managed to keep the Bunker up, but tell me that is realistic or fair.


And yes, IT WOULD BE possible for a single guy to fire off 100 rounds of a HAT during an entire game if it was long enough. All you need is a firebase, a HAT, and some high ground or a good location.

And I doubt that they would store that much rounds in a firebase. We are not talking about a LAW or LAT or SMAW, but basically a Javalin round.

the fact that your whole team let that guy live long enough to continue fireing HAT shells is shamefull to be honest, i have only seen in person this happen ONCE and in that one time the guy fired off 2 and we had his head on a fence pole the next minute. one minute 15 seconds the whole bunker was gone.

AND YES THATS THE WHOLE FREAKIN POINT OF MY POST! IF THE SITUATION ARISES A REAL BUNKER/FIREBASE COMPLEX WOULD HAVE STORED ENOUGH JAVELIN SHELLS TO TAKE OUT A WHOLE FREAKIN TANK CORP! THATS THE WHOLE FREAKIN REASON FORWARD FIREBASES EXIST IS SO TROOPS HAVE A PLACE THEY CAN BE SAFE AWAY FROM HQ

Operation barborosa ww2, 1 german infantry regiment got cut off behind russian lines. they got an airdrop of nothing but STGs and 7.92mm rounds and after defending their position for over a week, they faught their way back through 50+ miles of russian tanks and troops.

they stored enough ammo to kill god himself

00SoldierofFortune00 wrote:
You keep simplifying this when it is not simple at all. I am not one to complain, but even in this situation we were not able to take out the HAT. Suppressing fire? Sure, do that then you would get HAT or sniped by 1 of the 10 guys sitting up on that firebase.

has any one on your team cincidered...STOP SPAWNING AT THE FREAKIN BUNKER THEN or spawn, wait for 1 shell to hit then you got 30 seconds the GET THE FREAK OUTA THERE.

Considering you weren't there, you wouldn't know in this particular situation and no it was not simple. I already gave answers for why it was not possible. We had 3 squads trying to attack and take out their firebase, but it was dug in. We still won the game and I am not complaining about that, I am complaining about the fact that a HAT was able to fire down on our Bunker and people every 30 seconds with us not being able to counter it by any practical means except taking out their firebase which did not work.

If 3 squads cant take out one firebase thats just very very shamefull, and again this is where real teamwork comes in, in reality if this were to happen it would be everyone lays rounds into and around the whole thing like you want it to dance and have a small group flank and nade the **** out of it and set explosives

Tell me where or on what map?

This was on 7 Gates at the River Fort flag and if you think you could magically walk out into the middle of the riverbed, take a shot at the HAT or go to the top of the Fort and do that without being HAT sniped, then you I would applaud you. But the fact is, there was not a viable way to take out the HAT because he just kept spamming our Bunker and personal who had no good positions to shoot the HAT from because he was either out of sight or you were too exposed. And this was not merly 10 feet away, they were up in the hills where they had the advantage and in the woods where they had plenty of cover in addition to the Firebase.

again here would be a time to spawn at another flag and go all the way around the map, lazy gamers get killed, the gamer who's willing to waste time doing long boring and tedious work wins the round for their team

I normally don't complain, but there are situations which most would agree with that the HAT can be severly abused. Just saying "pick up a weapon and fight" is an excuse and an overly simplified one when in some situations, there isn't an easy way.

If you honestly cant think your own way out of this kind of situation, you sir are a disgrace to humanity...please dont take this too offensivly you gotta say if you're willing to bother to think alot of these suposedly complicated problems have really simple solutions

Non reloadable HAT kit is just a bad idea. There is usually more than one piece of armor on a map let alone together in the same place. You fire off you two HATs at a tank and then are screwed for 10 minutes when an APC or another tank that was with him shows up. No thanks. How about we just leave it up to the server admins to deal with spamming HAT-tards.