Project Reality Forums

Has anyone else noticed how feeble the M-16 is ATM? I appreciate it's an old gun up against some cutting-edge competitors, but it's a real liability. First kill I make, I try to grab a different gun, as it really unbalances the gameplay.

No scope, no full-auto, massive recoil on the TRB, lame damage.

"Reality" arguments taken into account, the M16A2 being limited to TRB was to aid accuracy. M16s in 'nam originally had full-auto fire, until experience showed that only the first three rounds fired on auto tended to hit.

As for gameplay arguments: To balance the M16 out and make up for the lack of a scope, it really needs significantly less recoil on the TRB so that all three shots hit a target at medium range. At present it is easier to do short bursts on full-auto with other iron-sights and kill than it is to hit people with an M16. The horizontal recoil is impossible to counter in a TRB, which often guarantees two or three of the shots miss, and the vertical recoil is just ridiculous.

Ideally the M16 should kill out-right in three rounds under pretty much any circumstance (well, not hits on the toes maybe, but you know), allowing a kill in a TRB. Then maybe people would be able to go toe-to-toe with the more powerful weaponry.

It is ridiculous that I can get 4 shots on an enemy sniper with the M16 and they survive.

Support LMGs:
The reason they are useless is two-fold:
1. You need to be prone to use them, which guarantees an obscured FOV in grass, not to mention the other obvious drawbacks of impaired mobility, etc.
2. Lame zoom, which guarantees you get picked off before you're in a position to return fire.

The former is unavoidable, the whole point of them is they use bipods to steady them. However, "realism" aside, these drawbacks need to be countered for the sake of playability.

Now, short of beefing up the zoom so they can compete with the assault rifles, or making them hyper-accurate, the only solutions I could propose would be a combination of: Reducing the recoil (while prone), increasing the conefire (retrograde, I know, but bear with me), and significantly increasing the ROF.

Make it so that supressive fire is lethal because it fires so much lead into a given area, if there's a head popped up in that area, one of the bullets will hit it. The epitome of "spray and pray".

You can then mix it up in different ways using the variables "ammo quantity" / "ROF" / "over-heating" and accuracy.

Make the PKM have higher zoom (comparable to some of the ARs), higher base deviation, heavy damage (comparable to the GL because of the heavy slugs it uses), but low RoF. Make it so small controlled bursts are needed, whereas full-auto is possible, but not 100% effective.

Chinese weapon has average deviation, low recoil, low over-heating, average RoF but also low ammo clips, so has to reload more often and for longer. Make it so you can pump a lot of lead into a tight area, but also have long reloads to give the enemy chance to return fire if your squad don't take over.

SAW has hyper-fast ROF, wide base dev (really low fire dev), low damage per shot, average over-heating, very high ammo count. Make it so that it fills are wide area with so much lead that anyone sticking their head up is liable to get splattered. The high ROF makes up for the relatively low damage per bullet, and the large clip size offsets this.

That's how I'd like to see it implemented at least.

Explosives:
With only 1 C4 pack in a kit, it really needs to be an insta-kill on tanks. It's already hard enough to get close to one as it is, what with their totally insane sniping that goes on at the moment (I get hit by tanks I can barely see scoped!) - it should at least be a guaranteed kill. Ditto with SLAMs - a single SF should be able to pop a tank, even if it takes all the SLAMs in his inventory to do so.

Undergrowth and fogging:
I have a sweet rig (check my xFire profile), and run BF2 (and consequently, PR) with all the settings set to max. This means that when there's grass or plants, there's LOADS of them. If I am prone in a field, I can't see squad, nothing, nada, zip. In BF2, low detail settings meant less grass, which means easier to see people prone in grass, and easier to see through the grass while prone. Either this has carried on into PR, and I am at an incredible disadvantage despite having superior hardware, or there's a bunch of freaking cheats, as I can go prone in a field after me and an enemy see each other, and yet he can pin-point me with his shots while I can't see a damned thing.

Similarly, I can get sniped by tanks, AA, LAVs, etc from miles away when they are barely visible due to fogging. I have my visible distance set to max, so how the hell a vehicle with no zoom whatsoever can pinpoint me when I can barely see them with a marksman kit zoomed in is beyond me. I'm loathe to be paranoid about reds (cheats) under the beds, but a high-contrast skin-hack would explain a lot... That or take a look at these vehicle's deviation.

Squad rally points:
I like the new requirement to have other SMs present to drop a rally, but the chances of getting three random people out of 5 possible squadmates to fall into line and help is often slim on the public servers I play on. They want to run towards the front lines, or go off and use their limited kits, not hang around next to the squad leader while he moves into a suitably out-of-the-way place to drop a rally. I think "number of people in the squad -2" rather than "minimum of 3+ Leader" would be preferable, so that a 4 man squad wouldn't need EVERYONE in the squad to drop a rally. One obstinate player can totally ruin the rhythm of a round and waste valuable time early on.

Squad rally points for those who don't have them:
Insurgents really need some alternative to rally points that are viable. While I really like defending and destroying supply caches in "insurgency" - I really hate having to walk miles and miles and miles to the front line every death because we can't build bunkers at flags (no commander) and have no rallies. Something like the Battlefield Vietnam "tunnel network" would be good (hey, civs have already got the shovels to deploy it, right?), or even just random-spawns that are similar to "supply caches" but work like pre-placed rallies would be good. I'm not asking for them to have limited / pick-up kit options, to resupply, or anything like that, just that I don't want to spend 5 minutes sprinting across the map only to be sniped by someone I can't see because I only have an unscoped AK to shoot back with. Spending 20 mins crawling the same distance just to get sniped again the second my head goes over a bump just isn't fun, no matter how you slice it.

I completely agree with you on the M16 and Spec opps. Also the grass can be bit of a problem to sometimes. Although having said that they're are more maps that are desert then full jungle (on our server rotation) and so I don't realise it as much.

Although the C4 shouldn't take tanks out in one. I think it should make them catch fire forcing the crew to jump out and do immediate quick repairs at the same time shooting you and it would also mean that they had to heal themselves. I believe this would more then demonstrate a tank receiving a powerful blow from planted C4.

As tank sniping at times does get annoying when its your main and for some reason other then a good defense, its taking ages for the enemy to camp.

In addition the heavy AT kit has been limited insanely. Making a stronger focus on helicopters and other vehicles to take out tanks. I think the Spec Opps should be next in line if the vehicles are lost, but they wont be as effective. ie die trying or not a successfully kill.

Maybe make it so two c4 are required and it brings the tanks health down and catch fire. Teach tanks to have close infantry support when in close quarters.
It may also encourage multi-crewing in all three places and have a 3rd gunner on top to prevent Spec opps. That be awesome

Every topic you have touched has been discussed about before.

Almost every topic go against PR's intentions.

A rifle with 5.56 will do the same damage as another rifle with 5.56.

M16A4 ACOG is in the works.

Weapons are based on the real life counterparts, that means no "Vanilla" deviation, made up rate of fires and zooms.

InstaKill on tanks? Tanks are tough. Use weapons designed to take out tanks. (such as ANTITANK)

Grass renders up to a certain distance (setting) no matter how 1337 your rig is. You consider someone having less money to spend on their rig a cheater Think again.

If your a bad SL, that's your problem, the solution is not to lead, or play on a different server.

Insurgents have moveable spawn points called SPAWN CARS, if you waste them, it's your fault.

Here ends my rant, and as some may say "Looks like you belong to vanilla".
Have a nice day.

D.F.A wrote:I completely agree with you on the M16 and Spec opps. Also the grass can be bit of a problem to sometimes. Although having said that they're are more maps that are desert then full jungle (on our server rotation) and so I don't realise it as much.

Although the C4 shouldn't take tanks out in one. I think it should make them catch fire forcing the crew to jump out and do immediate quick repairs at the same time shooting you and it would also mean that they had to heal themselves. I believe this would more then demonstrate a tank receiving a powerful blow from planted C4.

As tank sniping at times does get annoying when its your main and for some reason other then a good defense, its taking ages for the enemy to camp.

In addition the heavy AT kit has been limited insanely. Making a stronger focus on helicopters and other vehicles to take out tanks. I think the Spec Opps should be next in line if the vehicles are lost, but they wont be as effective. ie die trying or not a successfully kill.

Maybe make it so two c4 are required and it brings the tanks health down and catch fire. Teach tanks to have close infantry support when in close quarters.
It may also encourage multi-crewing in all three places and have a 3rd gunner on top to prevent Spec opps. That be awesome

The anti-tank kits have been limited a bit to much on maps with lots of Armor. Armor no longer respects Infantry. Tanks don't even hide from Infantry on maps like Kashan Desert anymore. AT shouldn't be a limited kit IMO. Anti-tank capabilities are available to Infantry Platoons. There should be enough Limited AT kits to supply 1 AT kit to each squad currently on any map that has tanks. It also should be guided like current AT weapons are. The AT4 is old school, but it is still effective. Except for Insurgents cause they use mostly RPGs.

Also map terrain needs to have more folds and humps and depressions to give soldiers more places for cover and concealment. Just because you up the view distance doesn't mean terrain should be so flat in all places to allow open viewing all the way across the maps. In a real life situation you would never catch Infantry out in the open with no place to find cover or concealment. Places like that are called "DANGER AREAS", and troops avoid them like the plague. Danger, Danger!!!

Couple large open terrain maps with ZERO places to find cover and concealment with uber accurate assault rifles, and you get total ownage (kinda like what happens now) of Infantry. That just won't happen in REAL LIFE cause the grunts aren't going to carry their asses out there to be slaughtered. Also it would be nice to have more Hummers or trucks/cars for grunts to move around in.

And why would tanks hide from infantry?
They are frigging tanks!

El_Vikingo wrote:Every topic you have touched has been discussed about before.

A rifle with 5.56 will do the same damage as another rifle with 5.56.

Not in real life, they won't. The damage a slug will do is tied to a number of factors. Not all weapons will have the same muzzle velocity, even though they fire identical ammo. Different velocities = different kinetic energy = different damage.

Weapons are based on the real life counterparts, that means no "Vanilla" deviation, made up rate of fires and zooms.

I'm glad they put so much precision into modelling the damage of a "stone", then. The BF2 engine is a virtual model, as such the values in it are totally arbitrary. Trying to tie them blindly into real-world measurements that they are divorced from is neither "realistic" or sensible. "No made up zooms" - so holding an M16 to your eye magically makes things appear bigger, then? What, you got bionic vision? I guess you should change your username to Steve Austin...

InstaKill on tanks? Tanks are tough. Use weapons designed to take out tanks. (such as ANTITANK)

Would be nice to, but unfortunately the chances of getting an anti-tank kit when you need one are next to 'nil. Because, completely realistically, the game awards limited kits to "those who ask first". Just like in the US army. "I've excelled in my specialist sniper training, where's my gun?" "We gave it to Private One-eye, he baggsied it first."

Grass renders up to a certain distance (setting) no matter how 1337 your rig is. You consider someone having less money to spend on their rig a cheater Think again.

*READ AGAIN*. It was the grass rendering at point-blank that is the issue, not the grass rendering at a distance.
http://www.tweakguides.com/images/BF2_6.jpg
There you can see the different quantities of vegetation depending on detail settings. As you can see, on low settings the grass is considerably more sparse, meaning that it is possible to lie flat in it and still be able to see through it with relative ease. Sit in exactly the same position with detail set to high, and all you see is green taking up 9/10ths of your screen.

Is having your settings on "low" cheating? No. Is being able to see through grass that otherwise totally obscures another player's field of view unfair? Certainly. So, if the idea is for everyone to have low quality graphics so as to have both the fastest framerate possible, and the clearest view, surely it would make sense for the devs to either force that, or at least put a warning up saying "guess what, on high you won't be able to see squat in tall grass, while other players will!"

Where does "cheating" come into this? As I said (and hopefully you can now see, having read what I said again) - if on these maps changing the LoD doesn't effect the visibility through undergrowth significantly, then there are definitly cheats with no-vegetation hacks or aimbots. I don't care how skillfull you are, if all you can see is grass, then all you can see is grass. I don't believe in "remote viewing" or ESP.

If your a bad SL, that's your problem, the solution is not to lead, or play on a different server.

Why yes, of course, how stupid of me. The short-comings of other players and their unwillingness to play in a team-conscious manner is *my* fault as a squad leader. Nevermind the fact that many of them can't speak English, can't aim for toffee, and would much rather just go snipey-snipey. I guess I should just buy my own server, and fill it with like-minded players with a twizzle of my magic wand. So where will I get the cash? You, sweetheart? Didn't think so. Maybe I should just migrate to America so I can play alongside all you pros! Just ... gotta ... scrape ... together ... airfare.

Insurgents have moveable spawn points called SPAWN CARS

Not on the map I was just playing, they didn't. Or, if they did, they lasted slightly under a minute before they were totalled for the entire round...

But, on a more personal note, I truly appreciated your high-handed condescension, dismissive attitude, and generic "everything's perfect, and if you were oldschool as I am, you'd know it" fanboy attitude.

PS:

And why would tanks hide from infantry?
They are frigging tanks!

In Grozny the defending chechen rebels annhilated soviet armour columns with RPG fire. The Israelis lost a massive percentage of their armour in the yom-kippur war to infantry manned fly-by-wire soviet missiles. Improvised roadside explosives have annhilated British challenger tanks in Iraq. They aren't made of adamantium, you know.

El_Vikingo wrote: Weapons are based on the real life counterparts, that means no "Vanilla" deviation, made up rate of fires and zooms.

[font=&quot]If the weapons are truly based on real life counterparts then they should have "deviation built in. Only it's not called deviation in the real world. It's called MOA. Which stands for Minutes Of Angle. Even the best sniper rifles in the world have "deviation". Only we don't call it that, we call it MOA. If a Sniper rifle for example is said to be a 1 Minute Of Angle (MOA) rifle. That means that when I take that rifle to the range it should prints shot groups that fit into a 1 inch circle at 100 meters, 2 inches at 200, 3 inches at 300 and so on and so on. Assault rifles are mass produced, and they aren't nearly as accurate as a 1 Minute Of Angle Sniper rifle. Not even close!

So since MOA can't seem to be emulated in PR, something else will have to be used instead. Deviation seems the likely canidate at this point. Cause no shoulder fired rifle on Earth can print a shot group measuring 1/4 inch at 500 yards. At least no one that can be carried into combat. SO ALL REAL LIFE WEAPONS HAVE DEVIATION, WE JUST DON'T CALL IT THAT! We call it MOA. Please go read up on MOA. Do a google search on it, but stops saying real world rifles don't have it cause they DO. It's just not referred to as deviation, it's referred to as Minutes Of Angle. Most over the counter hunting rifles sold in the US do about 1.5 MOA (or 1.5 inches at 100 yards) that's way better than any "Standard Issue Assault rifle" with or without a scope.

Sorry I don't mean to sound like a ********, but I'm tired of people thinking that rifles are lazer beam accurate, cause they are not in real life. Bullets seldom land EXACTLY where they are aimed, if ever. Except at very close range, and even then it's not exact. You guys have watched Sgt. York one to many times.
[/font]

I honestly have more trouble controlling 3-round bursts than full auto... but thats just me.

Outlawz wrote:And why would tanks hide from infantry?
They are frigging tanks!

Infantry units have radios, and on the other end of the radio is other tanks. Also there is Artillery, Naval guns, and A-10 TANK KILLERS! A tank that doesn't want to hide is a dead tank.

ReaperMAC wrote:I honestly have more trouble controlling 3-round bursts than full auto... but thats just me.

But, the guns are modelled in the most minute detail to real life. Surely that must mean that three round burst is harder to control that full auto?

I mean, they couldn't change the recoil on the M16 to make the game more balanced, because the recoil is based on *real life* measurements. Because the devs worked out the muscle-strength, control and precision of every player who plays the mod, and hard-coded the M16 recoil to be PRECISELY CORRECT for that individual. Right Viking?

I have no problem killing with the M16. I actually like it in a perverse way. I know up close, and at a long range the enemy has the advantage. Now, I know that the USMC rifleman M16A2 in game now is a placeholder, so whilst I wait patiently for .7 and the M16A4 with the ACOG, I'll just have to change the situation until it's in my favor. There is nothing wrong with shooting the enemy in the back, and the M16 is quite good at it. The reason the M16 helps me do this, is its presence on the screen reminds me that I have to use my head and my teammates to kick some ***.

Ace42 wrote:But, the guns are modelled in the most minute detail to real life. Surely that must mean that three round burst is harder to control that full auto?

I mean, they couldn't change the recoil on the M16 to make the game more balanced, because the recoil is based on *real life* measurements. Because the devs worked out the muscle-strength, control and precision of every player who plays the mod, and hard-coded the M16 recoil to be PRECISELY CORRECT for that individual. Right Viking?

I would think that it would be a bit lower than it is now. Doesnt make sense to me to have 3-round bursts harder to control if you are shooting a smaller amount of bullets at the same time. Cause the gun just jumps waaay up.

If that is *real life* measurements. Im okay with it.

Actually I agree on a few points of the M-16. It has too much recoil. I have fired on before and PRs take on it is well, wrong. Its recoil goes backwards and barrel goes slightly up and to the right. Right now it goes all over and the barrel climbs like crazy. Also the gas on the M-16 is fed through the top of the barrel to compensate for the recoil. Right now, its still not that much lower than the G3. I mean, the whole point of the M-16 is to have a light, low recoil, presicion weapon. And your sarcasm is cautiously noted Ace42.

http://video.google.ca/videoplay?docid= ... &plindex=0

Yeah I've never been a fan of the M16 recoil, but it's a topic that's been discussed to death in the past.

On another note, support kits are perfectly fine. I've used them, and have seen other players use them with satisfactory results. The thing is, the constant line of tracer rounds the support kits tend to put out seems to draw enemy fire towards your direction, which is really a good explanation as to the short life expectancy for support gunners. Though they can be used to great effect when covering bottlenecks and chokepoints.

On the note of tanks... umm no. Actually, most of the tactics you describe can easily be re-enacted ingame, so long as you choose the proper kit. If you run into an enemy tank, hopefully someone in your squad was smart enough to take some form of AT with you guys. Otherwise, spot the tank, and hope armor support, air support or someone else with AT comes to your aid. Either that, or simply avoid the tank outright.

Someone mentioned Infantry using radios to call in friendly support, that concept already exists ingame. Simply spot the target, and it should appear on everyone's minimap. In a sense, it's basically you using the radio to reveal the enemies' position. Or another way to look at it, would be the SL is the radioman. He/she simply contacts the Commander, and asks him/her for any nearby friendly squads with armor or air assets to assist in destroying the enemy armor. All it takes is a little bit of communication, cooperation and coordination (The three big Cs to playing PR )

Ace42 wrote: Why yes, of course, how stupid of me. The short-comings of other players and their unwillingness to play in a team-conscious manner is *my* fault as a squad leader. Nevermind the fact that many of them can't speak English, can't aim for toffee, and would much rather just go snipey-snipey. I guess I should just buy my own server, and fill it with like-minded players with a twizzle of my magic wand. So where will I get the cash? You, sweetheart? Didn't think so. Maybe I should just migrate to America so I can play alongside all you pros! Just ... gotta ... scrape ... together ... airfare.

Lighten up Francis! You have any cheese to go with that whine?

If you're the squad leader and don't like the members of your squad then kick them. If you not the squad leader then leave the squad and create your own. Lock your squad then INVITE people into your squad. Problem solved.

Ace42 wrote:Not in real life, they won't. The damage a slug will do is tied to a number of factors. Not all weapons will have the same muzzle velocity, even though they fire identical ammo. Different velocities = different kinetic energy = different damage.

Go ask someone who's been in combat how effective 5.56 is.

M-16 zoomed in 3 Burst to inaccurate, many marines drop this for G3 with scope.


MG really useless in most situations, in reality have longer effective range as assualt rifle cause of longer and heavier barrel, solution can be make zoom for all Mgs as US-Rifleman has.

For ralley point should be squadleader and 2 men enough, halfsquad should be able to operate, because some squads need to give a possibility for crewmen and pilots to take action.

I'm sure most will agree with the M16 argument. Two things, the recoil model is inaccurate for most guns...muzzle climb like that (sticky) isn't the best idea IMO.

Besides that here in lies the issue...I can put as many shots on the same target in a 30sec period with M16 as I can the G3. This is grossly inaccurate as the G3 has 4 times the amount of recoil: M16_4.1ft/lbs ----- G3 approx 15ft/lbs. In-game the difference in recoil between the guns is negligible. But hey this is .6 and the first time mass scoped rifles have been put to use. The M16 kills just fine, but the sites mess it up....this is ok cause 16A4 is coming soon. BTW the three-round-burst seems just worthless at anything greater than 30meters, doubt its this bad IRL.

There are a lot of issues surrounding light arms that I hope will improve\change. The following have all been talked about, but to summerize my opinions:

1- I'd like to see a new, more real, way of modeling recoil...sticky climb doesn't feel right.
2-The guns actual recoils need to be present and modeled correctly.
3-The guns MOA would be very nice to have.
4-No more insta-aim\proning. (i know...I know, might not happen)
5-Getting shot should NOT allow you to still have perfect accuracy when returning fire...some sort of quick effect is needed.
6-Suppression modeling/metaphor is needed.
7-Weapon sway (might not happen)

These are all things that effect the infantry combat and are\have being talked about. Ace needs to chill out or leave...this is a constructive environment...not a complaint forum. As to all the other stuff...tanks are good, I've ALWAYS been able to request LAT kit, LMG kills good but lack of suppresion model limits it sometimes...grass isnt a problem for me...I just lay down on the edge of rise, grass rendering is being worked on etc etc.

To the recoil of the M16:

First, the M16 of the rifleman has a x4 zoom built into the ironsights as a placeholder for the ACOG, so when using ironsights, the recoil will seem much harder than it actually is.

Secondly, yes,the IR the recoil goes mostly backwards and the soldier has to compensate against this with his shoulder.
But in PR we cannot let the Alter Ego of the soldier you are controlling handling everything, so that he will automatically adjust for any recoil occuring. Thus, to make you do it yourself by moving your mouse, we can only simulate the weapon going upwards since you can't adjust for recoil going backwards only by using your mouse & keys.

As to the C4: The C4,and the SLAM's especially, have hardly any armor-piercing capabilities. That's just is it. When put C4 onto a tank it will be shaken hard (including the people inside,who will be stunned for some time) and maybe the hull will be dented, but most likely there won't be any damage big enough to completely disable/destroy.
The point is, the armor of a MBT is designed to withstand designated armor-piercing hollow-charges and even tandem-hollow-charges. This things can penetrate 35 cm of usual steel plating, and a tank can actually survive them. So a simple explosive which is not even directed (at least in the case of C4) will have a hard time to do anything against this.

And I think that the ROF's of the LMG's ingame are representing the reality as close as possible withing the limits of the engine.(There is a limit to the ROF,IIRC somewhere near 800 rpm).
(Hey,let's bring in the MG42 for MEC, 1.200-1.500 rpm,baby )
And AFAIK LMG's with scopes on them are in the work.

And people shooting you from so far afar have the same problems with the fog as you have, but vehicles have on the contrary a very high zoom,and although zoom does not influence the range of the fog, they can make out your shape far better than with the only x4 zoom of the DMR.

Insurgents DO have spawncars, and in Basrah especially they can spawn at a wide variety of places.

Well,that you can't find enough people for your RP shows that you have to be harder to your guys. If somebody disobey's you,kick him from your squad. Do this until you only have people left who will at least do what you say.
And try e.g. the iGi-Server, you are more likely to meet teamplay-orented people there than on most other publics.(At least in my experience).

unfortunately there hasn't been a game made yet that accurately models all the possible mechanical and electronic failures that can happen to a tank under AT and opposing tank fire. PR does have the 'tracked' feature but it doesn't seem to happen on a consistent basis (at least in my experience). so while an AT kit, light or heavy, should not blow up a tank sky high, it would be more plausible to expect these weapons to render some vital part of a tanks systems inactive causing the tank to bug out.