Project Reality Forums

Make all deployable assets mortar resistant or atleast able to take lots and lots of hits before actually being destroyed. Ofc you can still easily kill a tow gunner but you disincentives building of these things due to their ability to just get rekt by one area attack or some mortars, even if your asset is on the inside of a bunker.

If i for example deploy a wire and waste eyes, ears and hands to why should it be deleted from some random mortar?

Once an asset is built is should be more or less hard to kill without c4 or directly killing the operator.

I would agree, but what about super hideouts built up with barricade junk making it impossible to get to the cache as it is now?

Foxholes and wire, sure, but HMGs and TOWs no.

UncleSmek wrote:....
If i for example deploy a wire and waste eyes, ears and hands to why should it be deleted from some random mortar?

Once an asset is built is should be more or less hard to kill without c4 or directly killing the operator.

lmao. So you want to waste the time of a mortar squad instead? Understandable passing of the annoying gameplay.

Good points all around. It does suck putting up wire and foxholes as a SL knowing it will only be useful for a short period of time but I do agree with Jimbo. If I spot an enemy TOW smoked up and enemy MGs covering an area and give an accurate target for 81mm mortars to fire on, they would realistically be destroyed and should be in game, but foxholes IRL would be dug into the ground and possibly reinforced with sandbags the way they are in game, making them much stronger that the weapons emplacements. The razor wire is also connected to heavy metal tank traps which would be unaffected by mortars.

I think FOBs should be extremely limited compared to what they are now. Even though its nice to be able to use them.

Seems silly how many we can lay.

All the emplacements are a waste when you have 6 FOBs scattered allover the map like rallypoints. There is nothing special about a FOB. Might as well just have random spawn points allover the map.

Should just be 2 FOBs, make people worry about where they are more, and make them more important.

WingWalker wrote:I think FOBs should be extremely limited compared to what they are now. Even though its nice to be able to use them.

Seems silly how many we can lay.

All the emplacements are a waste when you have 6 FOBs scattered allover the map like rallypoints. There is nothing special about a FOB. Might as well just have random spawn points allover the map.

Should just be 2 FOBs, make people worry about where they are more, and make them more important.

Having only 2 fobs makes it useless. just give me none and make me depend on trans

WingWalker wrote:I think FOBs should be extremely limited compared to what they are now. Even though its nice to be able to use them.

Seems silly how many we can lay.

All the emplacements are a waste when you have 6 FOBs scattered allover the map like rallypoints. There is nothing special about a FOB. Might as well just have random spawn points allover the map.

Should just be 2 FOBs, make people worry about where they are more, and make them more important.

2 fobs is extreme 6 is indeed to much imho 5 or 4 could be interesting to see how it changes the gameplay.

And about the main topic making foxholes and razorwires stronger ok why not but then add building time to it.

Jimbo of Ameridan wrote:Foxholes and wire, sure, but HMGs and TOWs no.



lmao. So you want to waste the time of a mortar squad instead? Understandable passing of the annoying gameplay.

"lmao"? What do you find so funny? You dont even know how i play why are you talking about wasting stuff?

Also, this topic is about making wires and foxholes more mortar and HE resistant not about the amount of fobs you can have.

UncleSmek wrote:"lmao"? What do you find so funny? You dont even know how i play why are you talking about wasting stuff?

Also, this topic is about making wires and foxholes more mortar and HE resistant not about the amount of fobs you can have.

you're complaining about putting time into an emplacement, for the emplacement to be destroyed.
You would instead rather a mortar be less effective for the time investment, because blowing up things is annoying I guess. That is what's funny.

No its cause if i decide to shut of an alley in muttrah i dont want some indirect burst from the AAVP to clean it up in a matter of half a minute. If decide to shut certain parts of the map i would see it fitting to have an engineer or breacher go forth to clear it.

Its not about making any changes to the mortar damage its more the hp of the assets.

Big difference.

Im afraid of the build Meta arising again but its definitely a fair point.

There is almost no point in actually laying those down since you know they just going to get simply blown away easily. You don't see it happening all that often in PR.
But have to agree l would rather that it was restricted to Razorwire and Foxholes.

Dont make them invincible, just more health before they go down. This should not apply to any weapon emplacements.

Legit if are you not realising the power well placed wires have i dont know what to say bro

Also make it like you do with the arabs dirt emplacements so you can stack several

UncleSmek wrote:No its cause if i decide to shut of an alley in muttrah i dont want some indirect burst from the AAVP to clean it up in a matter of half a minute. If decide to shut certain parts of the map i would see it fitting to have an engineer or breacher go forth to clear it.
.

I agree, Smek. I feel like squads would spend more time building assets to support the FOBs if they had more defensive and strategic "value" thanks to their resistance to easy destruction. I frequently see squads putting up FOBs without any defensive assets. Also I like the idea of adding an inherent "risk" to taking out these defensive assets by requiring a squad to get close enough for the breacher/engineer to blow them up.

Another thing to think about is that bulking up the mortar resistance of defensive assets (foxholes, sandbags, mg bunkers, etc.) would further encourage the use of air burst munitions among the conventional factions. This would add a new degree of "realism" and tactical skill when it comes to calling in mortar support. It could encourages inf squads to communicate more with mortar squads since they will really have to "]Hey, we have dug in enemy! I need airburst on this position."

Anyways... that's my 20 cents on the matter.

Except TOW, AA and FOB, every other deployable should be resistant to almost everything, except C4.