This si swwet, but needs these....

USM-ST3.Spyder · Post by **USM-ST3.Spyder** » 2006-01-31 21:53

1. People camp in vehicles, like vodniks.
* Fix by requiring a driver for a gunner to enter the vehicle
2. People camp APCs and Tanks
* Fix by needing a driver for a player to get in the turrent

Even though in real life it is possible, for game sake its noobish. And for real life its not practical nor can you switch between driver and gunner that quick.

3. People can instantly go back and forth between vehicles.
* Fix by making animations to enter/exit vehicles. And its badass.
4. Smoke Grenades are too small and short.
* Make smoke last 1 min and make its 10 times bigger

though it may cause some people a 1ms diffenence in lag it would be tight.
5. Also players can go prone and crouch to fast
* Fix by making animations to go prone and crouch then stand back up
6. Americas army lets you change speed at any stance
* Fix this by....ahh adding it into the game

IDEA: Allow players to hold their stance key (unless prone then any stance key) and adjust their height. SO they can peak of objects better.

7. Guns sometimes glitch and and in the cover and players head sticks up yet they still shoot
* Flix by making the gun hit the cover and show that it actually cant go over the cover to the player.

Ill think of more right now its dinner time
http://www.usmsquad.com

Post by **Happy** » 2006-01-31 22:54

USM-ST3.Spyder wrote: 5. Also players can go prone and crouch to fast
* Fix by making animations to go prone and crouch then stand back up

Will be fixed in the next patch for vanilla.

Post by **JavaMoose** » 2006-01-31 23:13

See, I don't like the "no gunner without driver" idea personally. I mean, I would think that is pretty realistic to have a gunner providing cover from his HMMV while the rest of his squad is scouting/defending etc.

At least, I know I have seen soldiers doing just that on CNN...

Tom#13 · Post by **Tom#13** » 2006-01-31 23:20

'[R-CON wrote:JavaMoose']See, I don't like the "no gunner without driver" idea personally. I mean, I would think that is pretty realistic to have a gunner providing cover from his HMMV while the rest of his squad is scouting/defending etc.

At least, I know I have seen soldiers doing just that on CNN...

yeah, its alright with jeeps and other lighter vehicles, but i think he meant tanks. I doubt many soldiers jump into the nearest tank turret hen he gets shot at

edit
my keyboards f'ed up so i wrote hen he instead of when they

Post by **JavaMoose** » 2006-01-31 23:25

Tom#13 wrote:yeah, its alright with jeeps and other lighter vehicles, but i think he meant tanks. I doubt many soldiers jump into the nearest tank turret hen he gets shot at

Oh, yeah, I seemed to have glossed over that detail...

USM-ST3.Spyder · Post by **USM-ST3.Spyder** » 2006-01-31 23:37

No, here let me reexplain the vehicles thing. When a vehicle comes under fire, every one gets out, uses the vehicle for cover, and the gunner stays on the 50. What i am saying is that inorder to get on the gun you need to have had another guy driving. When the driver gets out the gunner stays. If he drives away he cant get on the gun until a 2nd person enters the vehicle and either drives for him or jumps in really quick.

Post by **BrokenArrow** » 2006-02-01 00:34

It isn't overly difficult to flank them and take them out either, humvees and vods are a little more difficult than tanks but not all that bad.

beta · Post by **beta** » 2006-02-01 00:40

Really need to make switching between vehicle positions take longer.

Should take longer to board a vehicle too.

Post by **JavaMoose** » 2006-02-01 00:51

solodude23 wrote:Thats one thing I do agree on though. You will see a single guy some in on a vod, the vehicle stops, and he instantly is gunning you down with the HMG on the top. it should at least take a few seconds while hes switching positions to the gun turret.

Yeah, that I do agree with. I can't imagine it is all that easy to go from the drivers seat to the gunners in a HMMV (or any vehicle, for that matter)...

Edit: Whoa, magically an R-CON!

Post by **BrokenArrow** » 2006-02-01 01:03

Unless.... You're magic!

USM-ST3.Spyder · Post by **USM-ST3.Spyder** » 2006-02-01 01:18

Like I said, its possible to be driving around the stop and get i the gunner seat. But one thats a waste of a vehicle. Usually you drive around and srop troops of or supress and enemy as you guys move up. But to allow players to grab a vehicle, park it 200 m away or more from a spawn and fire on people is really quite noobish and not realistic. When you start firing on them the switch to driver and drive to a new spot.

And I'm sure it sounds all good to you to say, well dont walk into the open or flank it, which USM does. Its the fact that in most realism games you only find 20 people total in the server. If you have ever played the map Oasis you would inderstand what im saying. You need the firepower to take out infantry, an m9 is usless. And about that M9, why dont you give the rocket infantry M16's they sould have them. Add more power to the rocket so they only carry one or two.

Anyways those are my only beefs with the game. People vehicle whore why too much, its rediclous. BF2 is made to be realistic...sorta. Then people find every noobish thing in the game possible. THEN a realism mod is made, AND PEOPLE STILL LOOK FOR NOOBISH ****. Adding the need for a driver to get on the gunner spot adds more need for tactical play and lowers the amount of vehicle camping

I have heard alot of complaints about this from tons of players. It would also increase the infantry fighting as opposed to using vehicles. I mean if you have a 16 man server, why dont you make it so there are no vehicles. Like all vehicles dont exist on 16 man servers automaticly.

Keep posting guys I'd like to hear your input,

CPT Spyder
USM Commander

http://www.usmsquad.com

Post by **BrokenArrow** » 2006-02-01 01:27

The point behind giving the AT man a pistol is that he shouldn't really have to be fighting through infantry, that's why the squad gets riflemen and guys with SAWs. Maybe this will change but needing a driver just to opperate the MG doesn't make sense. A delay in position switch and the ability to shoot through the windows (i.e. killing him while he's driving before he can get inot the MG seat) would be more realistic ways to stop this. Having a man stay in the turret of a vehicle to lay down cover for their team or set up a defensive position is realistic, though I do agree the driver->gunner->driver->gunner lightning fast switches are annoying.

USM-ST3.Spyder · Post by **USM-ST3.Spyder** » 2006-02-01 01:56

im just saying to take a vehicle and keep it all to yourself is quite noobish. Would you take a vehicle and park it on a hill. No thats stupid. Also people is server grab every vehicle and stop on a hill. They then shoot at you with no intent to supress you just to kill you for the stats while an armored plate protects him.

Oh i havent checked but can you shoot through glass now?

Post by **BrokenArrow** » 2006-02-01 02:41

Not yet, I'm saying that would be a better way to prevent this than requiring a driver for a turret to opperate. Even if the vehicles need a driver then the driver could sit there in the vehicle and gather driver kill assist points. Either way this is far less noobish than bunnyhopping or dolphin diving or using the grenade launchers as CQC weapons. Personally I don't find it terribly hard to get rid of people camping vehicles, even from head on. If you find yourself in the position of being in the line of fire from one of these try to stay out of its way, if you're in a squad it should be even easier to get rid of them.

beta · Post by **beta** » 2006-02-01 04:45

USM-ST3.Spyder wrote:im just saying to take a vehicle and keep it all to yourself is quite noobish. Would you take a vehicle and park it on a hill. No thats stupid. Also people is server grab every vehicle and stop on a hill. They then shoot at you with no intent to supress you just to kill you for the stats while an armored plate protects him. ...

Well, this example isn't really a flaw in the vehicles, it is more a flaw in the map.

Why do these people take a vehicle and camp on the hill? Because they can get easy points from it, AND accomplish (or help in accomplishing) the map's objective.

Make the map's objective harder, instead of being able to take a flag from 50m out, how about only being able to take the flag from inside a buidling, or on a bridge, or in a bunker?

Quite simply, make the maps more complex. Have some CPs where you can't spawn at, so they will be a point of heavy combat, make the spawn points in intelligent places, instead of in the middle of the street just asking to be camped. The map maker just has to THINK, while they are making the map, what would this be like during gameplay?

Do that instead of, hey lets make a city/jungle/desert/moon map and the realism and overall fun factor will go up.

USM-ST3.Spyder · Post by **USM-ST3.Spyder** » 2006-02-01 19:54

Thats true, but im not sure if you understand what im saying.

Lets say you have a hummer right. You get into it because because you all by yourself you cant get on the 50 cal.

Now, lets say you fill the jeep. Start driving along, and you need the 50 to cover you. You all get out (exept the 50 cal) and move up. Then he can pull the vehicle up and you move on.

This adds more of a teamwork nesessity to the game.

Post by **BrokenArrow** » 2006-02-01 20:21

I really don't think that you should need a driver to operate a weapon on the vehicle.

USM-ST3.Spyder · Post by **USM-ST3.Spyder** » 2006-02-01 22:37

Well I do, but atleast make animations for them to switch spots and enter/exit vehicles.
What about the other things though, like the smoke and all that.