Project Reality Forums

Hello all, I was introduced to this mod recently during the 1.0 Beta and had great fun with it. I have been perusing the forums to learn more and it has come to my attention that players prefer IFVs to be in independent transport squads. With the 8 man squads coming there has been discussion on how transport squads should operate.

I am not concerned with helicopters as they are inherently highly mobile yet fragile so while they can deliver infantry they can't hang around for a fight too long. What I am concerned about is the popular thought that IFVs should remain mere transports, battle buses, as they have evidently been. I disagree; with 8 man squads I think IFVs will be able to perform their truly intended role of working with infantry and staying on the front line. IFVs may be crewed by two players while the rest of the squad may ride inside and dismount for battle, the IFV should advance with the infantry as appropriate, assisting with its guns to defeat emplacements and other vehicles, and offering a greater amount of immediate supply to the squad.

This would require that people no longer reserve IFVs for IFV only squads that run around the map acting as battle taxis. Rather IFVs would be organic to infantry squads and should an infantry squad wish for such they ought to have the ability to claim a single IFV.

The close cooperation of IFVs with infantry is a tenant of modern mechanized warfare and I feel it would be a shame if this aspect of the game were absent due to player sillyness.

What do you think?

https://www.realitymod.com/forum/f10-pr ... 0-a-5.html

As stated in this thread, I and many others believe IFVs should be directly integrated into INF squads to facilitate communication and transport and maximize efficiency.

Yes it can work rather well, although it dose tie the IFV/APC down to only one squad and that's squad is only a force of 6 in areas where the IFV/APC can't support, and the IFV/APC has to go off and find something to do with his time in those areas he can't help in.

Sometimes its better to team up multiple APCs/IFVs in a squad, then transport 1 squad in two APCs, or even two squads in three to the same location and then once they have dropped off their troops they can pull back to transport another squad, or help support them if they can.

Although you would see many different variations of squad leading.Unfortunately, I would have to disagree.

In my own opinion I believe that squads should be communicating with one another and coordinating with other squads ;and in addition to developing teamwork and cooperation ,this also encourages players to use mumble so that it is not just exclusive to squad chat only.

Also,on terms of organization I just think it's more orderly . Assuming there will be a strain of assets not every squad will be getting IFV's.So the squads that have acquired the IFV's will be more inclined to perform their own squad's goals instead for the betterment of the team.

A single Mech Inf squad can be effective (tryed it at fools road 1.0 and it worked ok)
Many Mech Inf squads can be really effective. Imagine 2-4 squads, each with their own APC for mobility.
The biggest problem I see is the SL. Personally I would prefer to have the SL with the Inf, but that leaves the APC without a way to communicate with the other APCs. So the SL has to stay as the driver in the APC and he has to define someone who leads the Inf.
This can work well, if the SLs know what they are doing.

RocketPropelledGoat wrote:Although you would see many different variations of squad leading.Unfortunately, I would have to disagree.

In my own opinion I believe that squads should be communicating with one another and coordinating with other squads ;and in addition to developing teamwork and cooperation ,this also encourages players to use mumble so that it is not just exclusive to squad chat only.

Also,on terms of organization I just think it's more orderly . Assuming there will be a strain of assets not every squad will be getting IFV's.So the squads that have acquired the IFV's will be more inclined to perform their own squad's goals instead for the betterment of the team.

I don't understand why inter squad communication shouldn't still be present, or suffer from this. The main advantage of having an armored vehicle assigned to your squad, is that you can directly talk to it and be sure it's available for you when needed and not roaming somewhere in the desert fighting invisible enemies.

Yes, integration of IFVs/APCs into INF squads seems natural. Thats a ways to have them by your side, useful, covering. Not fighitng their own wars in the wastelands together with tanks, getting blown up with all sorts of shit.

SL either drives the APC or leads dismounts, it is a pity though for not having radios in vehicles...

I think that the IFV squads work very well, some of the most efficient rounds i've had are where two squad members operate the IFV and the squad lead leads 6 men as infantry. In terms of inter IFV cooperation it didn't make much difference except the IFV crew wasn't flooded with irrelevant information that so often comes with being in a armor squad when people don't speak on local. Instead our squad had a powerful asset that provided all the necessary ammo and transportation our squad needed without the hassle of having to rely on the IFV squad leader's ability to convey information to one of his IFV's. As a side note we did not loss any helicopters as we had no need of them since we had our own fast transportation.

Both ways will work imo

On a map like Basrah I think I'd really love an APC in my squad

On a map like Saareema, I think I'd really rather the APCs group up and support my squad as a separate element because of more fluid need of the team for transport.

If I have to have a APC in my squad but that APC is desperately needed 600m away, I'll end up 2 men down and may need to increase radio traffic considerably as I may be a coms node for the APC to talk to other SLs. In an APC squad of 2-3 vehicles, this coms traffic is much more managable as I have only 3 units to command, in an infantry squad I'll have at least 5.

It can work you just got to be able to have experienced squads being able to communicate with other squads better, having a commo system setup for squad leaders and their squad they are leading.

However this game is still restricted to the population size and being able to provide more coverage over an area would be harder not to mention map isn't that big compared to real life.
As well as players ability to walk like a kenyan sprinting at full speed and recover with no ill effects, walking is just as good as riding.

Most decent players only need to get transport up to a certain point and just hoof it. Riding closer and being around any Mech assets can be a liability. This is all purely in-game perspective, in reality you WANT and NEED armored assets to get boots to and fro, as well as direct fire support for an element.

Roguehellhound wrote:Most decent players only need to get transport up to a certain point and just hoof it. Riding closer and being around any Mech assets can be a liability. This is all purely in-game perspective, in reality you WANT and NEED armored assets to get boots to and fro, as well as direct fire support for an element.

As Rudd said, it mostly depends on the map what tactic is more effective.

In tight areas having addition 5 eye pairs that can directly interact with an asset are a huge advantage.

Edit: Don't really know why I quoted you Rogue, lulz.

Brainlaag wrote:As Rudd said, it mostly depends on the map what tactic is more effective.

In tight areas having addition 5 eye pairs that can directly interact with an asset are a huge advantage.

Edit: Don't really know why I quoted you Rogue, lulz.

you know you love me

No.... I don't find it usefull. I already have attempted "a APC+INF" squad, and it failed.

The squad leaders are way to focused on pointless ****. Especially when they tell you to take a enemy tank out w/ a darn BTR 30mm? Nope, not right.

APC squads are much better then "APC + INF".

If any server actually implants this as a "rule" i will never play on that server again.

Mechanized infantry is not a strange concept; no problem with one squad of 6 infantry + 1 apc/ifv.

matty1053 wrote:No.... I don't find it usefull. I already have attempted "a APC+INF" squad, and it failed.

The squad leaders are way to focused on pointless ****. Especially when they tell you to take a enemy tank out w/ a darn BTR 30mm? Nope, not right.

APC squads are much better then "APC + INF".

If any server actually implants this as a "rule" i will never play on that server again.

It seems as if the squad leader was your problem and not the concept, give it another go sometime.

APC+INF squads often end up with inf doing their own thing running around where the APC can't go and then when they get in trouble, APC gets called in only to get hatted.

MECH INF only works if the infantry moves in the limits of the APCs survivability. I still don't consider it as a valuable tactic though. Better idea is to have the APC somewhere closeby to the squad killing people that are attacking the squad and infantry not moving too far away from it.

It's a very valid tactic when you adjust the infantry's and IFV's tactics to fit together. Infantry need to stay near the open and not get cut off from support and the IFVs need to know when to stay back and when to push up.

I do this a lot in 0.98, but because of the 6 man squads, usually only as a fire support group. So I will be the IFV driver, have a medic, HAT, rifleman and other kit. You take that force, engage on your terms and your favourable terrain and you can rack up the kills, cut off areas and stay alive with some skill, and luck.

viirusiiseli wrote:MECH INF only works if the infantry moves in the limits of the APCs survivability. I still don't consider it as a valuable tactic though. Better idea is to have the APC somewhere closeby to the squad killing people that are attacking the squad and infantry not moving too far away from it.

How is that better idea, not a APC+inf squad? You get two less infantry but you get organic firepower, that should now be safer because of more eyes and easier comms between inf and apc (random rifleman, to gunner for example). On the downside its harder to manage than blue mob of 8 people, and less forgiving since 1 HAT ruins your day.

If you want APC drivers to be squadleads, you would need a new kit type or something to give a command role in an APC. Maybe like a mounted SOFLAM on the tank, but that really wouldn't work.

APCs are a support role, so they support the infantry. They shouldn't be exclusivly integrated with one squad- That would cause confusion massively.

From what I've seen though, if any squads should merge, it should be trans helis and APCs/IFVs. Not inf/IFV.

I think APC/IFVs should be almost always teamed with infantry, apart from realism it adds its usually tactically advantages to the APC as it offers protection from close range ambushes and infantry threats. Id like more APC-INF squads or at least the ability for infantry squads to have APCs as well.

viirusiiseli wrote:APC+INF squads often end up with inf doing their own thing running around where the APC can't go and then when they get in trouble, APC gets called in only to get hatted.

MECH INF only works if the infantry moves in the limits of the APCs survivability. I still don't consider it as a valuable tactic though. Better idea is to have the APC somewhere closeby to the squad killing people that are attacking the squad and infantry not moving too far away from it.

Viirus you just kill 100+ players a game, so this doesn't go towards you.


But honestly, it's just a bad idea. Most of the time the squad leader would just want the apc to go somewhere stupid and then get stuck/hat'ed.