Project Reality Forums

*I searched ‘modular vehicle weapons’ and found nothing.

I don’t know if this would conflict with realism vs. gameplay, but I had this idea: military vehicles IRL have somewhat modular armament –can switch weapons.
I think it would be really cool if the commander can decide the loadout (to a minimal and realistic degree) for the vehicles. For example, in a given map, there will be at spawn 2 main battle tanks, 3 APCs, and 5 trucks. The commander, before the trucks spawn, should be able to
‘customize’ the vehicles’ weapons in correspondence to RL.
EX. The commander could decide that of the 5 spawning HMMVs he/she will have mounted/co-ax one with a TOW, three with a .50 cal mg, and one with M240/GPMG; and maybe a MK 19 (I hope US forces get this!) grenade launcher, or a GAU 19!.
The commander can switch the .50 cal on a MBT with a M240/GPMG or a some other co-ax weapon.

Any thoughts? Hard coded? PR seriously has the potential to be the greatest game of all time because of what it is, PR

it would be cool, dont get me wrong there. but i think the mk19 would be quite spammy and possible create lag.

I wonder how that might be done, a variety of different bunker types spawning different vehicles maybe.
Right now the firebase and bunker spawn the same model so who knows

that seems like a good idea
maybe make a menu like the kit request one.

Anderson29 wrote:it would be cool, dont get me wrong there. but i think the mk19 would be quite spammy and possible create lag.

why, how? I remember Desert Combat mod for BF 1942 had MK 19 for the DPV and it was really cool. You would have to burst fire a few rounds and see where they land, then walk them on target. no lag or spam probs.

I remeber seeing on the military channel that the US Army Stryker was modular too (where i got the idea). it can switch from a large 105mm main gun to a 25 or 30 mm cannon or even a .50 cal mg with controlled TV targeting. to implement this would be soooo cool!

PR for life

the Mk19 wouldn't be as unbalanced for gameplay as everyone makes out. Are IFV's unbalanced? Because their 30mm HEAT has nearly the same blast radius as a Mk19 in PR would. Hell, I'd even put a .50 cal on even ground with a mk19, (longer range, more ammunition, ungodly accurate, and a guaranteed kill).

This is made on the assumption that:

a. You have a Commander.
b. He knows what he's doing.

This would make for some excellent game play if it were at all possible.

Well your the DEV! Make it so!! lol jokes, but im not sure whether it would be as great as everyone makes out.

[R-DEV]Katarn wrote:Hell, I'd even put a .50 cal on even ground with a mk19, (longer range, more ammunition, ungodly accurate, and a guaranteed kill).

yes exactly

im cool w/ the mk 19 and the m240...but the mini gun??????..its not really that commonly used to be in pr

its just a biut gimmicy and i think one the "power" weapons are idenified the same vehicles would be used again and again, plus ontop of that it make balancing hard and its probably not possible.

Burlock wrote:its just a biut gimmicy and i think one the "power" weapons are idenified the same vehicles would be used again and again, plus ontop of that it make balancing hard and its probably not possible.

Wrong. If the Commander is given the power to request any vehicle, that power can be extended to different versions of the same vehicles. By limiting his ability to request 'power' vehicles, these vehicles can be numerically balanced with just a few (hundred?) lines of code.

with the new strykers comming out for .8, there would be so much potential for this

gclark03 wrote:Wrong. If the Commander is given the power to request any vehicle, that power can be extended to different versions of the same vehicles. By limiting his ability to request 'power' vehicles, these vehicles can be numerically balanced with just a few (hundred?) lines of code.

The way I'm seeing it work is the CO has a "Bank", every weapon mod he "buys" subtracts from the "Bank" with .50s being the cheapest and power weapons like the Mk. 19 costing a hell of a lot more. I like the idea, PR team wants to add more RTS aspects to the game, this would be a great addition, if it could work.

Another thought, has anyone played Command and Conquer Renegade? If we could implement a vehicle system like that... but maybe that's going too far.

Currency would be nice, but not realistic. Without dragging this thread further off its course, let me outline what I've been thinking: a simple ratio system.

Let's say the map is Kashan 16, on the US Army team. I don't remember the exact numbers, but for the purpose of making this post, there are 4 HMMWVs, 4 Supply Trucks and 2 Black Hawks at main base.

At the beginning of the match, two HMMWVs and one Supply Truck are spawned automatically. Without a Commander, the rest of the vehicles will spawn in five minutes, but cannot be respawned without a Commander present.

If there is a Commander, he can , using the four HMMWV slots, for example, request combinations of Mk. 19 and .50 cal HMMWVs. However, for the sake of balance, there cannot be more than one Mk. 19 for every three normal HMMWVs. If, for example, Korengal Valley has 12 HMMWVs, there can be 9 .50 cal vehicles and three Mk. 19 vehicles, but no more. Also, this opens the possibility for requesting repair vehicles alongside supply trucks, with the same 1:3 ratio with repair vehicles to supply trucks.

All vehicles, including HMMWVs, must be requested (from God?) by the Commander. Once requested, they appear in their normal spawn points, and can be used by the team until their destruction, at which time they cannot be requested again for a few minutes.
----

Moving on, such a system allows fielding the same vehicle with different weapons while keeping things relatively simple for everybody.

Wouldn't this idea be like Crysis then? The ability to purchase vehicles for use...

Requesting vehicles, not purchasing them with some imaginary currency, like tickets.

[R-DEV]Katarn wrote:the Mk19 wouldn't be as unbalanced for gameplay as everyone makes out. Are IFV's unbalanced? Because their 30mm HEAT has nearly the same blast radius as a Mk19 in PR would. Hell, I'd even put a .50 cal on even ground with a mk19, (longer range, more ammunition, ungodly accurate, and a guaranteed kill).

And there is other armys then US who got weapons that are almost the same as the Mk19.

gclark03 wrote:Currency would be nice, but not realistic. Without dragging this thread further off its course, let me outline what I've been thinking: a simple ratio system.

Let's say the map is Kashan 16, on the US Army team. I don't remember the exact numbers, but for the purpose of making this post, there are 4 HMMWVs, 4 Supply Trucks and 2 Black Hawks at main base.

At the beginning of the match, two HMMWVs and one Supply Truck are spawned automatically. Without a Commander, the rest of the vehicles will spawn in five minutes, but cannot be respawned without a Commander present.

If there is a Commander, he can , using the four HMMWV slots, for example, request combinations of Mk. 19 and .50 cal HMMWVs. However, for the sake of balance, there cannot be more than one Mk. 19 for every three normal HMMWVs. If, for example, Korengal Valley has 12 HMMWVs, there can be 9 .50 cal vehicles and three Mk. 19 vehicles, but no more. Also, this opens the possibility for requesting repair vehicles alongside supply trucks, with the same 1:3 ratio with repair vehicles to supply trucks.

All vehicles, including HMMWVs, must be requested (from God?) by the Commander. Once requested, they appear in their normal spawn points, and can be used by the team until their destruction, at which time they cannot be requested again for a few minutes.
----

Moving on, such a system allows fielding the same vehicle with different weapons while keeping things relatively simple for everybody.

I like this... I'm not such a big fan of implementing a currency system into this. It seems it might make things more complicated that they need to be, when something like this would get the job done with fewer headaches.