Project Reality Forums

One thing i found frustrating in the 1.0 beta with the 8 man squads is that APCs and Choppers could only carry part of my 8 man squad. I understand this will probbaly never change because of engine limitations, but tactics can change.

It was very frustrating on maps like Ramiel playing US when i would need to leave about half my squad behind because only 1 APC showed up. The guys who were left behind would never make it back to meet the rest of the squad because they would get over ran by superior numbers.

So if you are running a trans squad with multiple vehicles, please try to stick together when transporting 8 man squads. You can transport 1 8 man squad and maybe a smaller support squad.

I also find it annoying when a sniper team or some random blue guy gets in a transport which makes a full inf squad get split up. Even in .98. So please let the full inf squads get priority when waiting for a ride. They are the ones most likely going to be defending and attacking flags. Your little sniper games can wait.

Just a PSA....

Please do chaps 2 transports is how I expected people to automatically fly tbh, especially on the 128 player layers

and hell...why not bring an escorting attack helo too eh?

Not gonna happen, it's a waste of resources. If you want 2 vehicles then make sure to ask for them in mumble, otherwise there's no point risking a second asset for what might be no reason at all.

hobbnob wrote:Not gonna happen, it's a waste of resources. If you want 2 vehicles then make sure to ask for them in mumble, otherwise there's no point risking a second asset for what might be no reason at all.

And leaving half a squad out in enemy territory with limited kits is not a waste of assets? Please explain.

Conman51 wrote:And leaving half a squad out in enemy territory with limited kits is not a waste of assets? Please explain.

If they're in enemy territory they shouldn't be calling trans in the first place, they should be calling armour.

hobbnob wrote:If they're in enemy territory they shouldn't be calling trans in the first place, they should be calling armour.

APC....

ARMORED
Personnel
Carrier


Its a form of trans.....

Conman51 wrote:APC....

ARMORED
Personnel
Carrier


Its a form of trans.....

It is, and if you want more than one you should ask for it. It's tactically unsafe to risk 2 vehicles for a job that could most likely be done with one.

hobbnob wrote:It is, and if you want more than one you should ask for it. It's tactically unsafe to risk 2 vehicles for a job that could most likely be done with one.

Well if the trans squad knows they are going to pick up a inf squad then they should know to bring 2....BECAUSE IT CANT BE DONE WITH ONE AND THATS THE POINT OF THIS THREAD!!!

You know there are only 6 passenger seats in an APC and in 1.0 you can have 8 man squads right? You do the math.

OF COURSE what you are saying would be correct if we were talking about 6 man squads...but were not talking about that, we are talking about 8 man squads....

If there were only 4 seats then yes I would understand your point, but currently the maths don't add up. Use one vehicle to minimize the risk (leave the SL and whoever volunteers) or ask beforehand if they require a second vehicle. If they have any sense anyway they'd ask for a second vehicle before the trans deploys, it's common sense.

hobbnob wrote:If there were only 4 seats then yes I would understand your point, but currently the maths don't add up. Use one vehicle to minimize the risk (leave the SL and whoever volunteers) or ask beforehand if they require a second vehicle. If they have any sense anyway they'd ask for a second vehicle before the trans deploys, it's common sense.

So your saying its better to make a dangerous run in a trans TWICE instead of doing the right way the first time. please....

Also why in the fuck would you leave the SL behind when he could most likely set a rally for the people who get left behind to die......

Bro...do you even squad lead?

Conman51 wrote:Bro...do you even squad lead?

I've been leading infantry and trans squads since 0.5. I know both sides of the coin.

Again, if you need trans from an insecure location then you're in the wrong location.

hobbnob wrote:I've been leading infantry and trans squads since 0.5. I know both sides of the coin.

Again, if you need trans from an insecure location then you're in the wrong location.

What about transporting players from main?
It seems we play different PR..

a3dboy1 wrote:What about transporting players from main?
It seems we play different PR..

What about it? If you're going from main there's a good chance there are already 2 vehicles nearby.

Yeah come on Hobnob stop being such a tight-wad. You would rather go shoot bad guys instead of using the assets to assist your team?

xambone wrote:Yeah come on Hobnob stop being such a tight-wad. You would rather go shoot bad guys instead of using the assets to assist your team?

The best part is I don't even see what the point of your post is. Are you trying to insinuate that I should drop trans?

1) I actually make a squad make themselves clear on how many they have, and then task vehicles accordingly.

2) Rather hypocritical since I transported you yourself thousands of times on the mutt 24/7 server back in 0.85-0.9

He's saying that what you are suggesting doesn't make sense. The fact that there are 4 seats for transporting means that two APCs are going to be needed to carry a full infantry squad. That's not opinion, that's basic arithmetic. You're saying that it would be better to use a single APC and potentially leave half of the squad behind to die.

If that's the way that you run trans then maybe you should drop it.

Wheres_my_chili wrote:You're saying that it would be better to use a single APC and potentially leave half of the squad behind to die.

Incorrect. I'm saying an SL should specify how many men his squad comprises off to avoid being left behind to die.

2 is better than 1 for many reasons.

Pro's

1. You get more supply for the drop (especially important with the new light crate)
2. The rear transport can identyfy the threat if the lead transport is taking fire.
3. If you're in the air you can share flare cower.
4. 1 of the transports would have less passengers and it would be less catastrophic if it gets blown up...(it all comes to chance but it's a chance of getting less than total loss.)
5. Less organised enemy's would spread it's fire on the multiple targets instead of focusing it on 1 target and won't be as effective as they would be against a single target.
6. You won't split up a squad
7. You won't have to return to the drop site and face a now alert enemy.
8. It looks epic and more L33t

Con's

1. You could face total annihilation if the enemy is prepared with the proper forces to take on multiple targets.

I'd double it up at any opportunity I get.

Gracler wrote:2 is always better than 1 for many reasons.

Pro's

1. You get more supply for the drop (especially important with the new light crate)
2. the rear transport can identyfy the threat if the lead transport is taking fire.... If you in the air you can share flare cower.
3. 1 of the transports would have less passengers and it would be less catastrophic if it gets blown up...(it all comes to chance but it a chance of getting less than total loss.)
4. you won't split up a squad
5. you won't have to return to the drop site and face a now alert enemy.
6. it looks epic and more L33t

con's

You could face total annihilation if the enemy is prepared with the proper forces to take on multiple targets.




I'd double it up at any opportunity if the map allows enough transports to spawn....which they better do with 100p.

Con: If the enemy is anywhere near competent then it's 2 targets instead of 1
Con: If evasive action is necessary then it increases the chance of a collision, especially below rooftop level
Con: If an AA missile explodes nearby it's got more chance of dealing damage
Con: If another squad requires support they'll have to wait until one of the heli's are ready, instead of having one on standby like normal. Remember, this is only when the second heli isn't necessary for the current task.

No need to split up a squad, if they have more people than the vehicle can hold then assign 2 vehicles. You can easily find this out by asking them over mumble.

No need to share flare cover either. If you believe you'll be flying over a hot zone, alert the necessary forces to cover your flight. Sometimes it's a tank squad, sometimes it's a CAS heli etc etc whatever assures your safety. Flares should only be used as a last resort and a screen when landing just to be extra safe.

hobbnob wrote:Con: If the enemy is anywhere near competent then it's 2 targets instead of 1

yea that is the con i mention.

hobbnob wrote: Con: If evasive action is necessary then it increases the chance of a collision, especially below rooftop level

If you can read the sign on the back of the "leader" that says "if you can read this sign your too close" then your too close.

hobbnob wrote: Con: If an AA missile explodes nearby it's got more chance of dealing damage

I don't understand this?? your point is not to use flares??? If your trailing and flying through the friendly flares that would just be silly. It does require some basic "convoy" skills to be behind someone....when your flying you would want to be a little higher, if your on the ground you would want to be a little to one of the sides.

hobbnob wrote: Con: If another squad requires support they'll have to wait until one of the heli's are ready, instead of having one on standby like normal. Remember, this is only when the second heli isn't necessary for the current task.

The topic relates to infantry squads... I wouldn't bother to use 2 choppers on anything other than that. The amount of infantry squads are so low that it would be a total coincidence if they had to wait a short while.... this is PR after-all, waiting is part of the game. Chances are you would have more than 2 choppers running anyway so the 3rd chopper would be doing odd missions.

hobbnob wrote: No need to split up a squad, if they have more people than the vehicle can hold then assign 2 vehicles. You can easily find this out by asking them over mumble.

true if there is 6 you could just go with 1 like normally but if they need to build a fob (like 9 out of 10 responsible infantry leaders do) you still need crates which not all choppers have.

hobbnob wrote: No need to share flare cover either. If you believe you'll be flying over a hot zone, alert the necessary forces to cover your flight. Sometimes it's a tank squad, sometimes it's a CAS heli etc etc whatever assures your safety. Flares should only be used as a last resort and a screen when landing just to be extra safe.

You afraid of a squad waiting 1 min in main but you honestly believe that a team would wait until a ground convoy secure a drop zone? I dunno about you... but 1 time in my public PR career have I seen this been done. And people on the ground are naturally blind to what is around the next corner which makes them very poor at securing anything.

the real CAS (havoc-apache etc.) would always hesitate to cover someone... Your only chance is the less high profile Cas like eurocopter etc. which are good at exactly that id say.

As soon as you leave main.... your in a war-zone... there is nothing that is safe.


ps. im not trying to convince you about my point of view as it is clearly impossible, i just want to share my opinion.