Project Reality Forums

That voip idea is so cool XD
Be even better if you could use it with a suicide vest
I'd scream "Allah Allah Allah" before running into my target and taking him with me in a fiery ball of doom

gerardnm wrote:If you watched the Gulf war you d of seen the US foces firing AT rockets at buildings.

Now unless Iraq managed to get an APC or MBT onto the 2nd or 3rd floor then there's a pretty good chance it was anti infantry.

Well of course it can anti-infantry... it's pretty much a sure kill if you fire a weapon with a big blast radius through a window... I was referring to SRAW's, ERYX's, and weapons of that nature being used on infantry with absolutely no cover

MADTKBOY wrote:That voip idea is so cool XD
Be even better if you could use it with a suicide vest
I'd scream "Allah Allah Allah" before running into my target and taking him with me in a fiery ball of doom

Well, usually the trick is to survive whilst your opponent dies. But I like your suggestion for a phrase!

What about: "Durka Durka this."

A bit shorter, more to the point. That would be more suitable for Insurgents.

But then again, you will get twats who would just shout random, unfunny obscenities down the thing. That is a problem.

Intresting, yes I have come trough this issue too. Any army will use RPG's to take out infantry. Taking out snipers in bunkers or so seems to be the most popular when it comes to the real life army. But not one rocket to take out ONE guy walking along the street, thats just wasting ammo. Project reality wise, things like taking out snipers and groups is acceptable for the main factions of PR. But there is one exception, insurgies. Insurgents I think are the only faction that can use an RPG to take out on guy, mainly because their lack of powerful equipment and so.

That doesn't justify the insurgent use of RPG's at all

Cerberus wrote:That doesn't justify the insurgent use of RPG's at all

Insurgents don't need to justify using RPGs. They're insurgents! Do you want to argue with them? (And plus, have you tried using the pistol on enemies? I reckon the binoculars that the Insurgent RPG Gunner has probably have more of an effect. ¬_¬

Just because they're insurgents doesn't mean they can do anything they want. They don't have infinite funds. I have used the pistol on enemies and it's very effective if you know how to use it.

Anyway, I was playing Operation Compton today and this ********* teamed up with a rifleman and they were just spamming us with heavy AT all day, despite us having no armor. That **** shouldn't be tolerated. I don't think you're going to be carrying 20 SMAW or ERYX rounds to fire at infantry. It was more effective than a sniper rifle by a long shot.

AT4 Arming distance, should be 10 metres. IRL
I know that the SMAW has a varying fuse that makes it effective against soft (bunker) targets as well as armoured ones, but it still has a 10m arming range.
Eryx, not sure.

Has anyone compiled a definitive RL arming distance table for all UGL's, RPGs and AT weapons?

Arming distance solved the noob-tube "grenade-launcher-in-the-face" tactics, and the same thing can be properly applied and tested to AT weapons.

Cerberus wrote:Using AT as a bunker buster is absolutely fine due to it being used that way IRL and the fact that you would not likely be able to engage those inside otherwise... however, when the enemy is in the open and you can use a rifle, that's when I get furious.

I keep seeing people running with AT4s up and blowing up the first lone wolf, they encounter.
Some also spawn as Light At just to TK Humvees, A10s and shoot Cobras and down them.

Good thing, thats 0.5, no such stuff in 0.6, thankfully...

Cerberus wrote:That doesn't justify the insurgent use of RPG's at all

Hizbollah divides its fire-teams into two RPG gunners and a guy with a rifle. The rifle guy is there to protect the RPG team while they do the killing.

"And speaking of AKs, another lesson of this war is that the era of the automatic rifle as basic small arm may be ending. We may be heading back to some kind of shoulder-fired cannon (just like Champlain's!). Most of the IDF casualties in this war were inflicted by RPGs, just like most of our casualties in Iraq. The Chechen guerrillas have gone to a new formation, with three-man teams consisting of two RPG gunners with one AK man whose only job is to protect the RPGers. That may be the wave of the future."

Cerberus wrote:I hate how people always try to use that argument that the ammo bag advocates teamwork. Same with the medic kit. The act of giving ammo during a firefight is not what teamwork is about... teamwork is about covering your sector, listening to the squad leader, staying in close proximity, and using tactics as a team.

I disagree. On both accounts. As a rifleman I can find myself scouting and rearming troops positioned to cover sectors. As a medic, I can also find myself behind my squad trying to revive or patch up badly wounded soldiers. And both cases can end up with me not firing my rifle once. Even in a round with 400 tickets.

Problem is, I have a very hard time finding these people that actually give up their own gaming experience to help others get to play G.I. Joe.

Raniak wrote:Even with a squad, if you start firing at another squad over distances, they will spread and get cover... I've never seen a squad destroy another squad over 200m(without sniper or PLA optic)... their squad leader alway get away, wait for respawn and flank your squad resulting in casualties on your side and possible lost of the flag you are defending...
Note: I never lone wolf, the situation I was talking about was hypothetic and not something that has happened to me.

It happens more often than you think. Best example is EJOD and on that bloody western hill. When the AT has done its damage, the marksman/sniper takes out the rest.



I agree on this term - one single H-AT going lonewolf. Now thats waste of equipment and potential. Yes, he will have the upper hand on the first encounter, but now he has to reload for 30 seconds. So if you were not lonewolfing yourself, your buddy will kill him for you, and I revive you. (You get the point I am trying to make)

And when people ***** the most is when the H-AT guy has a support group. That means himself, 1, rifleman, 1 RPG, 1 SL, 1 medic and marksman. With a supply crate next to him and 3 ammo packs in close proximity.

True. Why try shooting some guy with an AK when you can just launch an RPG at the wall behind him, blowing him into thousands of pieces? I recall hearing that one rocket costs only a couple of hundred $, which is not too much for using it against infantry. Though I can understand people getting frustrated by H-AT snipering, which should be less of a problem with the new rules I think (with the 30 second wait, it's usually not worth the risk of firing at some infantry when armour might come along soon)

dunehunter wrote:True. Why try shooting some guy with an AK when you can just launch an RPG at the wall behind him, blowing him into thousands of pieces? I recall hearing that one rocket costs only a couple of hundred $, which is not too much for using it against infantry. Though I can understand people getting frustrated by H-AT snipering, which should be less of a problem with the new rules I think (with the 30 second wait, it's usually not worth the risk of firing at some infantry when armour might come along soon)

The beta has really cut down on AT and especially H-AT being waisted on non-critical targets. The value of the anti-armour weapons has gone up in price considerably now. The insurgents can usually afford to use the RPG on troops still if they stick close to an ammo dump but thats about it.

I think the main problem with AT use in game is people sprinting around with the launchers as if they were rifles. Correct me if I'm wrong, but I don't really see conventional military forces sprinting around with AT4s out, and then crouching, shouldering the launcher and firing it at an enemy infantryman within 3 seconds. It just feels weird that people are as agile with an RPG on their shoulder as they are holding a rifle. AT should really be used from behind cover, with the operator getting in position, taking the launcher out, checking backblast area, aiming, and then firing.

Look at how it's done in America's Army (which is in many ways more arcadey than PR) - when you take out an AT4, the animation has you unlocking two safeties. Once you have it shouldered, you cannot sprint, you can only walk. On top of that, when you start walking, you engage one of the safeties, and take it off only when you stop. This prevents people from running around with a rocket launcher, UT-style.

In .5 i used the RPG (I only used the AT4 and Heavy AT on tanks/helos/etc mainly because of ammo getting issues) on anyone and everything range wasn't a factor.

If you're right in front of me my first sub conscious reaction would be to point my RPG at the floor and fire, either that or i could let you kill me and go on to get more of my team mates. Sorry no thats not going to happen I dont care if you whine about it. (For the record i dont do this when near teamates or do it with the UGL, usually because i dont walk around with the UGL equipped, i walk around with the RPG equipped because the pistol wont win me a fight unless i'm behind the guy i'm about to kill)

You guys who go on about how much an AT round costs dont seem to realise this is a game and that isnt a factor. The fact is if i can stop you from killing me or my team mates quicker than you can with a bullet then I will.

I also think that many of the haters and moaners have done the exact thing they are bitching about. I dont believe you if you say you wouldnt RPG a guy running along a wall or comming round a corner face to face, because your natural reaction is to just click, unless you've only just started playing the FPS genre.

daranz wrote:I think the main problem with AT use in game is people sprinting around with the launchers as if they were rifles. Correct me if I'm wrong, but I don't really see conventional military forces sprinting around with AT4s out, and then crouching, shouldering the launcher and firing it at an enemy infantryman within 3 seconds. It just feels weird that people are as agile with an RPG on their shoulder as they are holding a rifle. AT should really be used from behind cover, with the operator getting in position, taking the launcher out, checking backblast area, aiming, and then firing.

Look at how it's done in America's Army (which is in many ways more arcadey than PR) - when you take out an AT4, the animation has you unlocking two safeties. Once you have it shouldered, you cannot sprint, you can only walk. On top of that, when you start walking, you engage one of the safeties, and take it off only when you stop. This prevents people from running around with a rocket launcher, UT-style.

Good point. I was talking more towards the excessive/inappropriate use of AT in 0.5 vs. 0.6. I know that currently the Dev team can't do anything when it comes to animations, so to create some new longer ones probably is out. Perhaps when you bring up your sites there is a meter on the screen (like when reloading a hand gernade) set for an appropriate amount of time to simulate setting up. I don't think they can change mobility based on the weapon in hand like in CS:S? I think mobility is set for the kit overall?

Because it makes the game seem rather unrealistic. The teams that represent RL forces would not use them in the fation they are used.

-It gives the incentive to just use up GL/AT ammo then set to auto and go down with as many kills as possible.

-Seeing soliders run out around a corner and fire AT, without aiming at the floor next to another solider, only to run back into cover.

-Forces would not expend munitions so wastefuly. They have beullets for a reason.

-It is a cheap way of gamming just to ensure a high kill count and stops others from playing the game realisticly(properly). Also very easy to do.

-Rediculously over used. Iv seen squads at a time all fire on a small-med group of INF with light and heavy ATs. If the DEVs wanted rocket attacks, they would have implemented them in the realistic fashion of Rocket platforms and mobile artilary.

Basicly, its all the reasons why we play PR and not BF2.

...mongol...

If you want to get realistic how about you ground each pilot for 48hrs after each blue on blue....

But seriously, the ones we ***** about are the ones who are organized. And then we have the odd lonewolf against lonewolf.

please note realism is achieved by correct modelling
not via artificial "can't do this can't do that" rules

if the enemy wants to waste ammo, or suicide in CQC...let them

rockets and C4 has big explosion and can't be used like in vBF2
and thats great