Project Reality Forums

i rather prefer the the bitching than the glitching , dont you ?

but yea , i guess you have a point , and frankly i prefer a better system for APCs/IFV first than the tank ride thing.

maybe just for militia and russians ?

fludblud wrote:who said riding on tanks was WW2 thing? these pictures were taken this week.

Most if not all of these look like APCs.

It is unreaistic for tanks to provide transport. Those pictures in Georgia are APCs followed by trucks, the inf ride on top because it is cramped, claustrophobic and probably stinks in BMP's (no windows for one thing)

[R-CON]OkitaMakoto wrote:Reasons:
All of PR is a combat zone
:

you havent played kashan yet, have you? or kufrah oilfields? or battle for quinling? its not rare that ill spend 10+ minutes on one of those maps without seeing a single enemy.

why are you against the idea anyway? if youre afraid that youll get shot off the tank, then dont ride on it. let the other daredevils do that. and as i said, using heavy weapons while riding on a tank isnt going to be practical. a coaxial will scrape them right off.

'[R-CON wrote:OkitaMakoto;766093']Not easily avoided because if you let them fire you have the exploits, and if you DONT let them fire you have people whining about "Why cant I use my gun on the tank, its so unrealistic" Which is what I said.

Does FH2 use the same views as PR?



Anyway that stuff doesnt even matter, we're getting away from the main point: No, because there are APCs, transport choppers, and humvees to do the job. APC's especially need to be helping transport troops to the front line, transport choppers already seem to do a great job of this. APCs need to bring up troops, assist in engaging the enemy, and be ready to help bring another squad up to the front.

If they arent doing that job right now[and they arent] then thats the players fault. It sucks, I know. It really does. But players need to learn to use the assets as they are intended and not add more means to do something when they dont make use of the realistic method that already exists in game.

yeah, but an apc isnt as effective a combat vehicle as a tank, so when the troops dismount, the apc cant provide cover as well. read my scenario on, i think page 6.

WildBill,

Here's a little head's up. Think of it as "Community Basics - Member 101".

• The "JOIN DATE" section under a member's name tells you when they first joined the forums. Okita's is May 2006, which is two and a half years ago.
• The "POST COUNT" indicates how active that member has been in the period since they joined. Okita has over four thousand posts.
• [R-CON] in front of a name means [Reality Mod Contributor]. That means the member in question has, more often than not, played PR for a long long time and has actually contributed actual assets to the game - maps, models, textures etc.

In short, Okita, you can be pretty damn sure, has played Kashan Desert.

He's also played Al Kufrah Oilfields, The Battle for Qinling and every other damn map that's been played in the past three years. As well as a bunch of them that you haven't, yet.


In short, just watch your attitude please, yeah?



The idea of riding on Main Battle Tanks into combat (as opposed to APCs) is simply unrealistic. In RL, tanks are no longer designed to allow infantry to ride on their backs. The back of the M1, for example, gets too hot for infantry to sit there. Infantry can ride on the turret, but they can't carry personal belongings and they disembark as soon as contact with the enemy is likely.


In case you're not aware, Kashan is a 4km x 4km map... if you're within 5.6km (maximum distance across the map) you're at risk of enemy contact and infantry should not be riding on the turret.


So, I can say that I really don't expect this to be in-game anytime soon.

there are a lot of areas on those maps where enemies are not present.
and the idea is not to ride the tank INTO combat, its to get infantry closer to the front then provide cover for them or vice versa.
and, yes, the idea is to disembark before contact with the enemy.

i agree with everything you said, and your logic seems to indicate that tanks should be rideable if nessecary

Uh, I'm intreged. How do you KNOW where enemies are? The whole point is this:

Even if you know they're NOT about to open fire on you, you don't know that they're NOT behind the next ridge, line of trees, bend in the road.

You should never think that you're 'safe' to perch out in the open on the back of a tank in PR because at most, you're 5km from the nearest enemy. At most. And that's if the entire enemy team is crammed into one corner of Kashan or Qinling and you're standing directly opposite them in the opposite corner.

Given that it's very very rare for 32 players to try and cram themselves into one corner of a 16km^2 map, and given that only 2 out of 20 maps are that size, and given that on most maps you're a maximum of 2.8km from a hostile (again, assuming the corner-hiding-thing) I'd say your chances of stumbling across hostiles are pretty high.

Certainly high enough that no platoon or company commander would be letting their troops ride on the back of armour support.

Cyrax-Sektor wrote:It's possible, as said, Satnav made it and it's in the Allied Intent Xtended mod. However, the wrench could be used on board, possible exploit?

Imagine AA and AT on that baby.

Ive flown a blackhawk once and we got every AT member from every squad we we took out loads of tanks from the sky.

'[R-DEV wrote:Masaq;766143']WildBill,

Here's a little head's up. Think of it as "Community Basics - Member 101".

• The "JOIN DATE" section under a member's name tells you when they first joined the forums. Okita's is May 2006, which is two and a half years ago.
• The "POST COUNT" indicates how active that member has been in the period since they joined. Okita has over four thousand posts.
• [R-CON] in front of a name means [Reality Mod Contributor]. That means the member in question has, more often than not, played PR for a long long time and has actually contributed actual assets to the game - maps, models, textures etc.

In short, Okita, you can be pretty damn sure, has played Kashan Desert.

He's also played Al Kufrah Oilfields, The Battle for Qinling and every other damn map that's been played in the past three years. As well as a bunch of them that you haven't, yet.


In short, just watch your attitude please, yeah?

His attitude?
Harsh.

Beafy wrote:His attitude?
Harsh.

First, you have no idea who WildBill is and whether or not he's demonstrated an "attitude" elsewhere also.

Secondly, folk like Okita put a lot of time and effort into helping this modification. It's a little insulting for someone to insinuate that they have no idea how the mod plays or what it represents.

Generally, it's not a good idea to join the forums and then - as CodeRed so ably puts it - flog a dead horse by demanding something you want added because you want it there because you think it's realistic.

I'm sorry if I've come across harsh but that's what it amounts to - someone stating one of our Contribtors doesn't know jack about the mod and should bow to this guy's superior knowledge and experience of the game, and that the Devs/Cons should therefore spend time and effort including something that's already been discussed by them and deemed not suitable for inclusion.

In short, DON'T ARGUE/INSULT THE R-Crew SO READILY.

They probably do much more research (and have military advisors) than you!

Lol, riding on tanks. That's almost as funny as fastropes. Go get a hummee.

lets all take a chill pill man.....just chil.....man......

'[R-DEV wrote:Masaq;766284']
Generally, it's not a good idea to join the forums and then - as CodeRed so ably puts it - flog a dead horse by demanding something you want added because you want it there because you think it's realistic.

Look, I respect the Devs, Cons, Pubs, and Mods as much as every other player who loves this mod, but if we don't try and make our case, what's the point of making suggestions at all? We post, mods say no and that's the end of it? I've seen Devs first think and idea is bad but once it's talked out they love it. While he may be having additude elsewhere, the Suggestion thread is really where we have to kind of take a stand on an idea, even if the Devs/Cons/Pubs/Mods don't like it.

My 2 cents.
(Dives under table to avoid the fury of the Devs/Cons/Pubs/Mods)

Hey guys!

I didn't actually read the entire 10 pages of posts, so I'm sure that I've missed quite a bit of this conversation, but I've ridden on tanks in Iraq.

I've ridden on the top of M1A through Fallujah, Iraq a couple of times. I was attached to an infantry squad, and my team and the squad were all riding on 2 M1As. I think I have some pics of it somewhere.

Anyways, I'm not going to tell you it was the best idea in the world, but it does happen in modern warfare.

Not trying to get into a debate about wheather or not it should be included (personally though, I would love it), but I'm just letting you guys know that it does happen.

too late man, the debate's already started, and like it or not, YOU'RE IN IT NOW!

Beafy wrote:His attitude?
Harsh.

Mine? Im sorry if you find my strong opposition to the idea harsh. But you know what? Its a tough lesson people need to learn: use the assets you have already. You have plenty of means for transportation and they arent getting used. Rarely is an APC full of a squad, even MORE rare is that APC going back for a second load or making transport a role that equals its "sit and rape" method of engagement. If you or your team dont make use of your assets Im sorry but Im not going to support another means of transportation that is silly, gamey, and only there because you fail to use the rest of your assets.

Anyway, Im not going to argue anymore because frankly, I dont have to. I hope my opposition to this doesnt effect your thoughts on the PR team. We do make mistakes and we are not gods[obviously]

Let's just leave it at that and be friends, right?

<3
Okita

JESUS CHRIST SHUT UP Okita

stop putting your finger in the socket LOL

Thread closed until some other guy want to open this flaming ball of poop.

[R-DEV]coderedfox wrote:JESUS CHRIST SHUT UP Okita

stop putting your finger in the socket LOL

Thread closed until some other guy want to open this flaming ball of poop.

*grumble grumble*



I'll get you one of these days, codered!

I'm leaving it locked, I have nothing more to say, finally