Project Reality Forums

I was thinking that it might be interesting to make the different armies in PR even more unique down the road. It makes the different armies feel more like a different army and less like the same army with a coat of paint. We already have slight differences in the primary rifle for each army and in the new patch there will be a M2A2 with a TOW launcher something the other armies don't have.
Some ideas I had (these are not suggestions just thoughts) were:
For the PLA the Type63A amphibious tank would give the PLA a unique method of fighting on maps that feature significant amounts of water.
For the USMC a new kit featuring the M32 (I know its been suggested) would give them a powerful anti-infantry weapon.
The MEC already have the unique BMP-3 with its 100mm HE cannon and the US have the M2A2. I couldn't think of one for the UK the warrior (or is it scimitar?) IFV isn't very unique.
The Militia and Insurgents are basically already completely unique at the moment.

Ok... sounds pretty good. Sounds pretty undescriptive and predictable as well, but no matter!

The US have the M1A2........ i think the main job is to keep the mod as small as possible as they still get in reality and new factions. But good suggestion.

That's true Lt, PR is expanding pretty rapidly. They're not even near done making maps and we have at least 5 community mods going.

who would want the mod to be as small as possible? thats lame!!

P90 for MEC?

charliegrs wrote:who would want the mod to be as small as possible? thats lame!!

quality, not quantity

YES, i'm getting sick too of the even kit for kit and vehichle for vehichle balancing. why not make it asymetrical and give one team say something which dominates one realm and give the other team something which will dominate another, Air superiority vs ground. Few tanks vs no tanks but lots of APCs or HAT

US team get A10, MEC dont get frogfoot but get 2 MIGs to intercept the A10

i am wandering why you assume the warrior and the scimitar rent unique?

as they belong only to the British.... and have 30mm Radon cannons on them rather than the other APC's/ IFV's at 25mm

Dr2B Rudd wrote:quality, not quantity

Yes, that's true But what if we could have both


Asymmetrical ballance FTW!

CareBear wrote:i am wandering why you assume the warrior and the scimitar rent unique?

as they belong only to the British.... and have 30mm Radon cannons on them rather than the other APC's/ IFV's at 25mm

The BTR-90 also has a 30mm gun and the co-ax on the BMP-3 is too.

And they used to be really unique and realistic. But, unfortuneatley, like in real life, they sucked.

P90 for MEC?

I endorse this event or product.

Also there things coming that will enchance uniqueness. The British Harrier for example, it has no cannon but has VTOL

I'd like to see the infantry rifles changed further.

I can't see the MEC keeping auto fire on the G3 for example - historically the G3 when locked to semi-auto has been a more effective infantry weapon (L1 and SLR being examples of rifles which did this). In return I'd like to see even more recoil on it (the sight picture jumping by say half a screen when fired) and the accuracy tightened up to reflect that it's a battle rifle, not an upsized assault rifle.

The QBZ is a light rifle that is also configured as a bullpup, so it should recoil like an absolute woman who sleeps around compared to the heavy SA-80 and the conventional M16.

Likewise I'm hoping to see greater variation between different weapon classes, and that seems to be coming in 0.8 with PDW's more accurately modeled.


Other than that sort of thing, I'd like to see the numbers of kits requestable for each side, on each map changed to enhance realism and force awesomeness. Why would different forces make different specialists available in different battles, in different situations with exactly the same frequency? For example, why would the MEC deploy Special Forces on Jabal, and not deploy more MANPADS and Snipers?? Why would the NK Army and the USMC both deploy H-AT and MANPADS to the new APCless Kyon, and not more specialised infantry fighting kits?

Additionally, creating asymmetrical kits layouts would create some very interesting battles, say if Chinese forces had more snipers in Kyon controlling the highlands, but the US had more Special Forces sabotaging, or if on Bi Ming, one side had no marksmen but had twice as many grenadiers (and perhaps vice versa) - think of how it would stress the full use of a given kit's tactical possibilities.

The last thing is that I'd like to see some way of modifying how kits are limited per squad. There are situations where once squad would benefit from having two automatic riflemen, while the Armour Squad doesn't need any at all, or when it would be beneficial to have all the Recon Snipers and Special Ops in one squad. I know these can be achieved, but it's really inconvenient, particularly when someone dies and needs to replace it, and with the "New to squad, wait a minute/year..." rules. Obviously some would abuse this, and it would have the potential to fail really hard, but these possibilities already exist with lots of assets that are open to abuse and smacktardery. If nothing else, make it a commander's decision how it works.

We could make the brits more unique by giving them a war cries i.e. "COME AND AVE A GI IF YA THINK YOUR HARD ENOUGH!!!!!!!!"

Jonny wrote:The QBZ-95 is actually one of the easiest rifles to control in full-auto, AFAIK.

Oh :\..

Then make it that way...

I want some more assymetry though

Dr2B Rudd wrote:quality, not quantity

How about a huge amount of quality

G3<P90

lol i think the QBZ is good enough, i can allready pwn 6 guys with 1 mag firing in short bursts of 5-8 rounds, and these guys all facing me most of the time dont even scratch me with their bullets...did i mention i'm standing