Project Reality Forums

One of the strong points of this mod is the infantry-based fighting.
It would be nice if there was a serverside variable which would replace all armoured vehicles with transport vehicles like the hummers. That way more teamplay and infantry-based servers would be possible.

Gretingz, Monk.

I think it would be better/more fun to make special infantry based maps, rather than just removing the armoured vehicles.

It could be a fun feature, that's for sure, but then it should also be possible to remove the aircraft/choppers from a map.

It couldn't hurt to have it has a server option though.

JoeB wrote:I think it would be better/more fun to make special infantry based maps, rather than just removing the armoured vehicles.

I think it's being considered, with specific Regiments & Corps etc in mind for specific maps, i.e Airborne, Amphibious assaults and the likes...

They should remove heavy armour in urban maps (such as Abrams or T90), but allow Bradleys, BMPs, etc.

If they decide to allow heavy armour to take part in urban combat, then they should severely limit the speed. When was the last time you saw an M1A2 blazing down a street at 40mph?

I don't think Abrams are supposed to take part in urban combat anyway because of the possibility of top down attacks from rooftops with RPG's. Plus the exhaust gives off something like 3000degree's C (no shit) which literally cooks troops alive, which is why they're not (supposed to be) used supporting infantry close up.

Yeah, someone on this board said they only have 15mm of armor on the top of the Abrams

Yer, that was me lol.

So it's settled. U.S. forces will receive Humvees, Bradleys, AAVs, and LAV-25s during urban combat. Not all of those in one map, obviously.

And those damn Middle Eastern forces need to stop using fancy Eryx's. Where the hell did they get the funding for those things? They need RPGs.

Considering that the armor specifications on the Abrams are classified, and not even Jane's has published them, I would seriously consider second-sourcing your information, Max.

As for it not being used in urban combat . . . tell it to the Marines.

Is the glass under the main gun a Windscreen or 3 Camera lenses? (periscopes then )

I was told by an ex-crew member who then turned mechanic how thick the armour is. Also, the Marines use Javelins on buildings and air strikes for 3 blokes in a house, so subtlety isn't something they seem to care for.

It's a periscope for the driver. (the glass under the gun barrel)

I believe those are the periscopes for the driver's hatch.

Mad Max wrote:I was told by an ex-crew member who then turned mechanic how thick the armour is. Also, the Marines use Javelins on buildings and air strikes for 3 blokes in a house, so subtlety isn't something they seem to care for.

If he told you that and his credentials are genuine, I believe that's a violation of his security clearance. As for subtlety, it's probably not always a requirement in dismounted close-combat. But I don't know, since I've never been in it. I know you haven't either, so perhaps you should stop being a Monday-morning quarterback?

'[R-DEV wrote:Eddie Baker']I believe those are the periscopes for the driver's hatch.

Damn, I was hoping for a potential ingame .50 cal target. Wether or not it would actually make it's way through it anyway, is beyond me...

When was the last time you saw an M1A2 blazing down a street at 40mph?

March 1991, Challenger 1, Kuwait.




This is a MOD for BF2. The BF franchise revolutionized gaming with interactive vehicles..............ALL the established games followed suit and added the vehicle aspect game-play. Why remove the BF bread and butter?

Amazingly, there are some of us who prefer full on armor rather than CS intimacy.

'[R-DEV wrote:Hickman']March 1991, Challenger 1, Kuwait.




This is a MOD for BF2. The BF franchise revolutionized gaming with interactive vehicles..............ALL the established games followed suit and added the vehicle aspect game-play. Why remove the BF bread and butter?

Amazingly, there are some of us who prefer full on armor rather than CS intimacy.

Operation Flashpoint beat it. It was out a few months before BF42 and had been in development since late 1997 (from when they finalised most of the engine).

'[R-DEV wrote:Hickman']Amazingly, there are some of us who prefer full on armor rather than CS intimacy.

I'm terrible at using the armour of all types, I just feel open to attack & vulnerable all the time. However having been in the Royal Artillery - I guess it's not the case. (off topic, would you say that being in the RA has affected the way you play BF2? I'm just intreagued as to how)

I believe armour should be kept on the maps, but the spawns should be really long so that it's never wasted.

I am not good using armor. Or planes. Or the LAV either really. Don't mean I want em out though. It's amazing seeing the guys who really excell at using the armor go to work. I play the support role for those guys a lot. Being the wrench guy on a tank can be the difference between keeping the offensive or getting pushed back. Tanks do instill fear in the enemy. And they piss off the AT guys when they hit em 3 times and don't destroy it.

IRT Yojimbo


Not in BF2, as we no longer have player controlled arty, In DC I headed up a arty bty. which was as effective, if not more effective than the current setup.
I cut my teeth on BF42. I never played CS or other similar games so I suck at one on one. Perhaps it's because I am an old git with the reaction times of a sloth on valium but BF2 removes the skills once acquired in '42/DC. Guided weapons add to the fear factor, bombing reticals......the list goes on.

As for RA effecting my gameplay. NO! I still stand 10 meters from a BF2 arty strike knowing that all's well. If anyone coded arty correctly we would have a very boring game.