Project Reality Forums

Bringerof_D wrote: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.

You haven't played enough then. This kind of thing can be easy to do if the squad is good and supporting the HAT at the firebase. Some say this is teamwork, but it ceases to be teamwork when you are just relying solely on an infinite resupply source for huge rockets.

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

They are not going to store an assload of javelin rockets at a forward position, those are more likely to be back at the greenzone or the main deployment area. The SRAW costs THOUSANDS!!!!!! of dollars, so they are not going to be used like candy, they are going to be used wisely, another reason why firebase spamming them is unrealistic.

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

That's nice, but that was Hitler lead Germany not America and those weapon systems are nothing compared to an SRAW which costs thousands for the unit itself and thousands for the projectile. No comparison and the German's were lead by Hitler who didn't care as long as they won. We want to win today, but it has to be done according to the rules.

Bringerof_D wrote: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

The HAT was on the hill overlooking the River Fort flag on 7 Gates. You don't think I or any other person in my squad or team tried to take them out? Yes, we did, but as I have already said, there was a whole squad or 2around that firebase and so if the HAT was killed, someone else picked it right back up and continued with it.

You have played in my squad before, so I am sure you know that I don't let people get away with things or are going to complain about a situation, but having infinite HAT shells by camping a firebase is just unfair, unrealistic, and not fun.

There is a reason why it is banned in the Official PR Tournament. That is where the most teamwork is found in this game and they seem to agree that it is unfair and easy abused when at a firebase.

https://www.realitymod.com/forum/f18-pr ... ons-8.html

He is when he has 1-2 full squads-half his team there. Lets see you just waltz right up and take him out then. I have seen so many situations where the HAT just sits at a firebase on the front lines where his whole team is there to back him up that it isn't funny. There is no reason whatsoever that he should get unlimited rockets to spam from that position.

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

And they are just going to let you walk right up to it and let you take it out, especially with a guy that has an unlimited amount of thounsand dollar projectiles?

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

I don't know who you have been playing against, but they must have sucked. If the guy with the HAT is smart, next to a firebase, and surrounded by a squad or half his team, there is no reason whatsoever why he will be an easy target.

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.

That's because IT IS A TOW! A Tow can't move or change position and has to be reloaded while you are in it, exposed. You can't compare it to HAT spamming from a firebase.


I have no problem whatsoever with shooting a HAT at infantry or whatever, but there is no reason whatsoever why they should be an unlimited amount of ammo, which equates to thousand dollar rockets each, from a firebase to spam at a target.




And you still have yet to answer my question. If it is not a problem when this happens, why is it banned on Tactical Gamer and the Project Reality Tournament where the most teamwork is found? I am obviously not the only one. Tell me?

Come on guys lets try and keep it civil, shall we? It's a discussion not a knock down drag out.

some times the LAT is needed to clear out bunkers

also i kinda agree taht a HAT sniper should not get infinite rockets..and there should be a limit on bunkers until like a supply truck drops a new crate off at a bunker or FB....but idk if the bf2 engine can do this....so for nw..u just have to live w/ and kill those HAT snipers

I use L-At for Suppresing squads or 'blind firing' when we know theres a hostile presence in the general direction. Doesnt sound so unrealistic to me.

H-AT sniping works because of the BF2 engine IMHO. Shrapnels and explosions are two different killing methods. H-at Javelins and such use armor defeating munitions, which are not lethal to troops over a wide area like a frag grenade. The concussive effect would be very effective though but only to knock them off. Not inflict grevious injury over a wide area.

H-AT takes an ungodly amount of time to reload. Suppresive fire at that point usually solves the deal against the H-at user. I've shamefully been a victim of it but hey it was a slow day.

okay so nulifying player score on teamkill is a crappy solution. Teamkilling is gonna happen and there are allready stuff in place when the teamkiller picks up the dead guys kit, they drop dead. great solution to kit stealing. So what about other aspects of smacktardery. Like baseraping and noobing the jets and one manning?
#1. baserape: the enemy's dome of death will kill you very quickly, when within 500 meters of the enemy airfield.
#2. Whoreing jets: make the warmup time for jets 2 minutes. i dont think any pilot thats good enough to use them would mind.
#3. onemanning:I have put a LOT of hours into tanks, and (A) I have never seen a crewman DC/CTD (B) I find it rediculous for a tank to roam into the wilderness to look for a crewman, they should be back at base. i am really adamant about that one, soloing Assets is not excusable for PR, it sucks *** imo. and is very irresponsible. So a simple solution is, the tank stays still and inactive until it has two crewmen.

00SoldierofFortune00 wrote: And they are just going to let you walk right up to it and let you take it out, especially with a guy that has an unlimited amount of thounsand dollar projectiles?

Then get a HAT kit and blow up that firebase. Or roll um with an APC just after he fires that rocket.


I don't know who you have been playing against, but they must have sucked. If the guy with the HAT is smart, next to a firebase, and surrounded by a squad or half his team, there is no reason whatsoever why he will be an easy target.

Ofcource hes an easy target. If you have ever sniped in this game you should know that HAT gunners are the easiest targets in this game, after .50 cal gunners.

That's because IT IS A TOW! A Tow can't move or change position and has to be reloaded while you are in it, exposed. You can't compare it to HAT spamming from a firebase.

Read my post again plz. "enemy team had built a firebase right next to that TOW and kep firing both TOW and HAT rockets into the flag." meaning they had a guy on the TOW and another on the firebase with that HAT kit. And yes, there was a shitload of infantry around them.


And you still have yet to answer my question. If it is not a problem when this happens, why is it banned on Tactical Gamer and the Project Reality Tournament where the most teamwork is found? I am obviously not the only one. Tell me?

Because people (like you) who cant find an effective counter find it cheap?

Bold.

WEll, if you use H/L-AT on infantry it is really your choice, I actually find it a stragetic advantage to launch a LAT into a bunker on Mestia.

Though I agree, lonewolfs with HAT is annoying, specially when firing against an invidual, but hey, if a tank approaches and you only have 1 remaining shot.. Then they know why the hell they are F*ck'd.

And remember every situation isn't what it looks like, could be they have a LAT/GL equipped due to another situation, but because they have to move to another stragetic position and bumps into you, we all know what we would do, we would take you with us in the fall, instead of you gaining 1 kill score and we go all like "well.. He did ambush my hole squad from the position I encountered him, took out our rally point and literally *ssraped our squad leader.. But HEY! At least I didn't abuse the H/L-AT/GL I had in my hands right guys... guys?? *KICKED FROM SQUAD*"

Other way around, if I have the HAT kit on kashan, I see a hole bunch of units going into a random building, probably to set a rally point.. Then I don't think I will try to take them out with my unscoped rifle, I would shoot the HAT at the building, destroying it and hoping to take some out with the shot.

But no, if I see a invidual wolf running for him self with the LAT kit, I know I can kill him with my rifle, and my rocket could come to better use later.

But really, it is up to the player in the end if they wish to abuse the H/L-AT/GL kit.

Waaah_Wah wrote:Then get a HAT kit and blow up that firebase. Or roll um with an APC just after he fires that rocket.

Again, you try to oversimply things. We were at River Fort and defending our Bunker which they kept spamming with HAT. I couldn't exactly just grab one because our Bunker kept getting blown up every other second and I had to help rebuild it. When there was a lul in the fire, even if one of us grabbed a HAT, there was no place with cover to effectively take out the Firebase from that was not exposed.

Ofcource hes an easy target. If you have ever sniped in this game you should know that HAT gunners are the easiest targets in this game, after .50 cal gunners.

Yea, and everytime I stuck my head out, HIS SQUAD would either light us up or the HAT would shoot. Yea, and you can't exactly get a sniper when the bunker is getting Heavy ATed every second and the RP is away from the firebase and the HAT is not even exposed.

The HAT guy was not in the open, not exposed, and out of range, so how are you trying to lecture me on how easy it is to take him out? Ok, maybe in your situation where they are not using it effectively but in this situation and if used in the PR Tournament, the HAT/Firebase combo is pretty much unstoppable.

Read my post again plz. "enemy team had built a firebase right next to that TOW and kep firing both TOW and HAT rockets into the flag." meaning they had a guy on the TOW and another on the firebase with that HAT kit. And yes, there was a shitload of infantry around them.

I know that location and it is not the best location either because it is exposed. This one was on the highground and the only way up there was from the far south, pretty much making it one of the easiest positions to defend.

And did you not read what I said? We had 3+ squads up there trying to take it out, but they failed because half-all of their team was there with the HAT guy being surrounded by his squad.

Because people (like you) who cant find an effective counter find it cheap?

Are you even in the PR Tournament? Then how are you going to make that accusation? The Tournament makes the best teamwork on Tactical Gamer look like nothing and it was agreed upon that it would be a detriment to gameplay.


http://i31.tinypic.com/34q3hqo.jpg

Yea, because I can't find a way to counter something lol

When something is blantantly unfair, you can't do anything about it. Why don't you just admit it? Doesn't TG have the most teamwork of any server? So if it wasn't a problem, why is it banned then? Why is it banned in the PRT when we are on TS and should be able to take it out "easily" like you say?



Exactly. Having an unlimited amount of HAT rockets from a firebase is plain unrealistic too. I understand LAT because those are small and and portable, but someone is not going to stock 8,000+ thousand dollar rockets to be spammed. The military also keeps track of what is fired and what isn't and if something was abused, you can guranteed that your *** will be in trouble.



Again, I am not against shooting the HAT at infantry, but having an unlimited amount of SRAW rounds from a firebase is just plain unrealitic and it was not intended to be used that way, as a spam weapon by the DEVs.

We can all agree that unlimited HAT spamming is unrealistic and in poor fashion when playing a mod based on reality. Also I was thinking your estimation of the cost of the SRAW was a bit low so I looked it up.

SRAW-MPV

SRAW-MPV
IOC: 2004
Production: 700
Unitary Cost: USD$118,000

ostupidman wrote:We can all agree that unlimited HAT spamming is unrealistic and in poor fashion when playing a mod based on reality. Also I was thinking your estimation of the cost of the SRAW was a bit low so I looked it up.

SRAW-MPV

SRAW-MPV
IOC: 2004
Production: 700
Unitary Cost: USD$118,000

AFAIK that the cost of the whole thing not just the rocket.

00SoldierofFortune00 wrote:Again, you try to oversimply things. We were at River Fort and defending our Bunker which they kept spamming with HAT. I couldn't exactly just grab one because our Bunker kept getting blown up every other second and I had to help rebuild it.

Im not oversimplying things, your overcomplicating them. If your bunker keeps going down, replace it behind a wall or behind the fort itself.

When there was a lul in the fire, even if one of us grabbed a HAT, there was no place with cover to effectively take out the Firebase from that was not exposed.


Good God... No cover?? Your in a fort for the love of god. Theres lots of cover in there. Certainly more cover in the fort than it is in that other guys firebase.

Yea, and everytime I stuck my head out, HIS SQUAD would either light us up or the HAT would shoot. Yea, and you can't exactly get a sniper when the bunker is getting Heavy ATed every second and the RP is away from the firebase and the HAT is not even exposed.

You know that you can request it from the main and walk untill your in a much better position?

The HAT guy was not in the open, not exposed, and out of range, so how are you trying to lecture me on how easy it is to take him out? Ok, maybe in your situation where they are not using it effectively but in this situation and if used in the PR Tournament, the HAT/Firebase combo is pretty much unstoppable.

Look, if he can fire at you and hit, hes not out of range, and if hes squad lights you up everytime you stuck your head out, hes certainly not out of range.

I know that location and it is not the best location either because it is exposed. This one was on the highground and the only way up there was from the far south, pretty much making it one of the easiest positions to defend.

You know that you dont actually have to walk up there to kill him?

And did you not read what I said? We had 3+ squads up there trying to take it out, but they failed because half-all of their team was there with the HAT guy being surrounded by his squad.

Did i tell you to walk up there and shoot him or did i say that its pretty easy to take him out with a sniper/marksman/HAT kit?

Are you even in the PR Tournament? Then how are you going to make that accusation? The Tournament makes the best teamwork on Tactical Gamer look like nothing and it was agreed upon that it would be a detriment to gameplay.

Nope im not in the PRT

http://i31.tinypic.com/34q3hqo.jpg

Yea, because I can't find a way to counter something lol

Obviously you cant...

When something is blantantly unfair, you can't do anything about it.

But you can do something about a HAT guy on a firebase cant you??

Why don't you just admit it? Doesn't TG have the most teamwork of any server?

Not as far as i have seen actually. I've had far more good rounds on T&T or .:iGi:. server

So if it wasn't a problem, why is it banned then? Why is it banned in the PRT when we are on TS and should be able to take it out "easily" like you say?

Like i said, some people cant counter certain things and make up rules about it.

Bold

Now the only real game problem of abuse in PR is AA Rifleman vs Infantry.
THAT is unrealistic... But hey if I had a SAM launcher in open warfare and a dude with a ak-47 running towards me, I wouldn't have the time to change to my rifle now would I?..

I would fire that AA missile towards him and hope for a freaking headshot.

Truly how kits are used is really up to the gamers to decide.

If you get struck by a HAT, praise yourself that, that could have been the shoot to take down a tank, unfortunatly because of the idiotic kill your friendly nearby tank survives and takes out their rally and so forth.

Thread closed..... Oh wait I can't do that, would just be a cool finish off line

That is the cost for the whole thing Waaah but the SRAW as far as I understand is disposable. It's not meant to be reloaded, similar to the AT4. Both CAN be reloaded but it is heavily advised against and replacement rockets aren't really on hand you would have to get them out of another launcher. So yeah that's the cost per shot.

Waaah_Wah wrote:AFAIK that the cost of the whole thing not just the rocket.

The individual rocket is something like 8,000 I believe.

Im not oversimplying things, your overcomplicating them. If your bunker keeps going down, replace it behind a wall or behind the fort itself.

It was behind the fort.......

Good God... No cover?? Your in a fort for the love of god. Theres lots of cover in there. Certainly more cover in the fort than it is in that other guys firebase.

A fort with destructable bunkers and barriers and that is open and exposed. And no, the other guy had more cover from the fort because he was on the high ground, so he could back up 10 feet and be out of sight.

You know that you can request it from the main and walk untill your in a much better position?

There is only 1 way to get to their firebase and it was from the south. You can't flank from the East or North because it is too mountainous and high and the west is right next to their main.

Look, if he can fire at you and hit, hes not out of range, and if hes squad lights you up everytime you stuck your head out, hes certainly not out of range.

You must understand that the HAT is a fire and forget weapon. All you have to do is come close with the rocket, you don't have to hit the actual person or object. I admit that he was not out of range for a sniper, but he was no exposed. And like I said, if he died, someone else was right there to pick up the HAT and continue the spamming.

You know that you dont actually have to walk up there to kill him?

When someone is out of sight 70% of the time, it is kind of hard to kill him from afar. You don't think we tried?

Did i tell you to walk up there and shoot him or did i say that its pretty easy to take him out with a sniper/marksman/HAT kit?

Yea, and I said that he was out of sight most of the time and with the cover of the firebase, the trees, and being on the highground with a whole squad to half his team, he had the perfect mix of cover and support.

Nope im not in the PRT

Exactly why you don't understand why it is banned. I disagree when people use it against infantry, but we all know that if it were to be allowed to be spammed from a firebase, it would become unfair, vanillaish, and abused. I am sure Tactical Gamer feel the same way.

Obviously you cant...

The score says otherwise. What, is something that only needs to be 10 feet away from someone and has unlimited ammo and half a team behind it supposed to be easy to take out?

But you can do something about a HAT guy on a firebase cant you??

Of course, if he is alone or even if he has a squad with him. The problem is when the people set up a firebase, have unlimited ammo, and spam HAT rockets from afar from a good or easy location. It is called HAT SNIPING, with the SNIPING meaning from afar. With the HAT, you don't need to hit the actual target, just close to it, making it easy to use from long distances and since you have unlimited ammo, you have unlimited ammount of tries. How could you not get any more vanillaish?

Not as far as i have seen actually. I've had far more good rounds on T&T or .:iGi:. server

iGi is barely up most of the time and T&T is good, but I even admit that Tactical Gamer has the most and the best of the teamplayers on it even with their sometimes absurd rules or admins.

Like i said, some people cant counter certain things and make up rules about it.

So you think everything in this game is fine and cannot be abused? I am unlike most because I am sceptical, but not in this situation. Ok then, why don't we go back to the times of the uber laser M4? From your reasoning, someone would say just grab a LAT and rocket him back or grab a SAW.

Hey, lets go back to when the G3 was complete **** and the M16 was owning it. After all, you can counter it

Improvision is one thing, but when something is blatantly abused and made into a Vanilla weapon and becomes unlimited, it just throws off gameplay and becomes unrealistic and unfair.

00SoldierofFortune00 wrote: It was behind the fort.......

Then replace it

A fort with destructable bunkers and barriers and that is open and exposed. And no, the other guy had more cover from the fort because he was on the high ground, so he could back up 10 feet and be out of sight.

There is only 1 way to get to their firebase and it was from the south. You can't flank from the East or North because it is too mountainous and high and the west is right next to their main.

You must understand that the HAT is a fire and forget weapon. All you have to do is come close with the rocket, you don't have to hit the actual person or object. I admit that he was not out of range for a sniper, but he was no exposed. And like I said, if he died, someone else was right there to pick up the HAT and continue the spamming.

When someone is out of sight 70% of the time, it is kind of hard to kill him from afar. You don't think we tried?

Yea, and I said that he was out of sight most of the time and with the cover of the firebase, the trees, and being on the highground with a whole squad to half his team, he had the perfect mix of cover and support.

Okay, what map grid was that firebase in?

Exactly why you don't understand why it is banned. I disagree when people use it against infantry, but we all know that if it were to be allowed to be spammed from a firebase, it would become unfair, vanillaish, and abused. I am sure Tactical Gamer feel the same way.

I have never seen a round where this had a big impact on gameplay. Not once.

The score says otherwise. What, is something that only needs to be 10 feet away from someone and has unlimited ammo and half a team behind it supposed to be easy to take out?

Its not exactly "easy" but its not impossible either. Like i said, its totally possible to counter it with your own HAT kit, sniper or a marksman kit.

Of course, if he is alone or even if he has a squad with him. The problem is when the people set up a firebase, have unlimited ammo, and spam HAT rockets from afar from a good or easy location. It is called HAT SNIPING, with the SNIPING meaning from afar. With the HAT, you don't need to hit the actual target, just close to it, making it easy to use from long distances and since you have unlimited ammo, you have unlimited ammount of tries. How could you not get any more vanillaish?

Spawn at main, request a HAT kit, walk to a good position, find some cover, fire one shot at the enemy firebase, duck down, reload, and fire again.

I understand what your saying, this can get annoying spammy and a little "vanillaish" but its not that hard to counter it.

iGi is barely up most of the time and T&T is good, but I even admit that Tactical Gamer has the most and the best of the teamplayers on it even with their sometimes absurd rules or admins.

I disagree.

So you think everything in this game is fine and cannot be abused? I am unlike most because I am sceptical, but not in this situation. Ok then, why don't we go back to the times of the uber laser M4? From your reasoning, someone would say just grab a LAT and rocket him back or grab a SAW.

What your talking about is unbalanced weapons. But this doesnt really apply here since both factions have HAT kits.

Hey, lets go back to when the G3 was complete **** and the M16 was owning it. After all, you can counter it

Err, what version was that in?

Bold.

Then replace it

yea, I guess you keep missing the fact that if we "replaced it", the River Fort would of been lost and we would of lost the game. Stop dodging the fact that they used the HAT on us over 10 times to bring something down they should of had to engage after the first two HAT shots. Sitting at a firebase and spamming HAT rockets does not encourage teamwork, moving in and taking it out yourself does. If he used 2 HAT shots fine, but he sat there spamming.

Okay, what map grid was that firebase in?

It was in the hills west of River Fort. There is no need to question my judgment as if I felt it was able to be eliminated, I would have done so.

I have never seen a round where this had a big impact on gameplay. Not once.

Then they were either using it wrong or you were in a server where teamwork does not occur. Besides T&T, IGI and Thors aren't exactly known for teamwork, no offense to them.

It has been used in a negative way before in the tournament and I have seen it on other maps and it has been used as a spam weapon plain and simple.

Its not exactly "easy" but its not impossible either. Like i said, its totally possible to counter it with your own HAT kit, sniper or a marksman kit.

Yea, and where are you going to get this HAT kit from? Our firebase was down every other minute on the River Fort and if you say walk from main ok, but after your two shots, they had enough people there to simply rebuild it.

Spawn at main, request a HAT kit, walk to a good position, find some cover, fire one shot at the enemy firebase, duck down, reload, and fire again.

Read above. They were at a position with UNLIMITED ammunition and we were still able to keep our Bunker up. You don't think they would of done the same, especially in that position? And the whole area around River Fort is a river bed, not exactly the best place to stand up and hit them.

I understand what your saying, this can get annoying spammy and a little "vanillaish" but its not that hard to counter it.

Yea, when the retards are alone, but when they have a whole squad there or half their team there, HAT spamming is simple as pie. On servers where there is teamwork and this is allowed, it isn't vey hard to accomplish.

"Counter it" is just a lame excuse for something that shouldn't be, isn't realistic, and is unfair and wasn't intended. Why didn't you just say "COUNTER IT" to the 0.5 M4? What about "JUST COUNTER IT" to the M16 before the G3 was any good??? You didn't, because it was broken.

What your talking about is unbalanced weapons. But this doesnt really apply here since both factions have HAT kits.

No, its actually worse because if you camp a firebase with a marksman, you have to actually hit the person to kill him and a bullet will not take down a firebase or bunker. With a HAT, you don't even need to hit someone and one shot will eliminate a firebase. Basically, if you had unlimited ammo in QUAKE or DOOM, would it be fair? No, it would be easily because you don't need to know the ammo locations or when to fall back.

Err, what version was that in?

G3 was around 0.6. If you never played with it when it was ****, how are you going to use an analogy for the HAT?


Fact is, this isn't Quake and this isn't Doom or Vanilla BF2. The HAT was not meant to be an uber weapon against infantry, it was primarily meant for armor and vehicles. I am sure no one has a problem with it if used against infantry in hectic time, but no one intended it to be a spam weapon against infantry, Bunkers, etc.