Project Reality Forums

People get hurt inside choppers(both transport and attack), jets, and obviously people get shot out of FAV's and boats. What we are missing is realistic damage from explosives.

The 20mm cannon on the choppers and jets should kill any passanger in a vehicle that it comes in contact with. If you guys put back a .50cal antimaterial rifle that would have the same effect. APC armor piercing rounds would have the same effect without question. Most importantly though, the AT weapons that use a shaped charge should kill every passanger whether it's in an apc or a transport chopper. Even if it is not a fatal blow the plasma jet that shot through the armor would be deadly to any living thing inside the armor. The only vehicles that wouldn't feel this effect would the MBTs.

One way this could be done would be to make it so that all the armored vehicles were made up of armored glass. What I meen is that if the standard skin's of the vehicles don't allow this effect I know the armored glass on the choppers, jets, and hummers allow this kind of effect, at least for the armor peircing bullets though I know the nade launcher can blow through the glass. This glass is perfect because it blocks all small arms fire but allows for heavier bullets to shoot through.

The only real problem I see with this is for vehicles like the APC. I'm not completely sure if a player model is even technically inside the vehicle. If it's not this would be impossible to pull off on APC's but I guess that's what would make the APC's good for transport.

This might be a big undertaking for the coders, but if it's possible it would add a whole new level to vehicle realism.

great idea - it would also be nice to have hit boxes representing the vehicle's engine IN vehicles like jeeps, light helichopters, and jets where if you say, shoot the hitbox representing the engine, the vehicle would stop, or at least slow down

IRL 50 cal amr weapons arent used to shoot people out of vehicles, they are more often used to crack the engine block and stop the vehicle, making the people get out, then get shot - it would be great against the light helicopters forcing em to rtb for repairs

it wouldnt work against larger attack helicopters since most of those such as the apache can (claim to, at least) take shots of up to 23 mm and it not do anything - for those of you that dont know, 50cal = 12.7 mm

I like both ideas, both to be able to take out ppl inside vehicles as well as the vehicle's engines. The latter would make it more valuable to know the "anatomy" of vehicles, to figure out where to hit it to stop it. I think the concept of rendering a vehicle inoperable without actually "blowing it up" or automatically killing passengers would add a lot of realism (at least according to my vague idea what realism is).

Ah, we also have the concept of flattening tyres of both APCs and Jeeps. Exact effect could be discussed, but the ability to maneuver the vehicle could be affected, especially at high speeds. OTOH, these vehicles are often built to be controllable and mobile inspite even if a tire is lost. At least some APC I read about were operable with 4 of it's 8 wheels deflated. (I read it on wikipedia, so then it must be true )

How about tanks? The threads of a tank are a weak spot, but today in the game (ahem, I'm referring to Vanilla BF2, see note below...) a hit there with AT shots will just damage the entire tank a lot. It would be cool if a hit in the threads of a tank actually broke them (just the threads), and that this then affected the tanks movement, be it grinding it to a halt, slowing it down or making it only capable of turning around (using the remaining operable thread). Of course, if someone takes time to repair the damaged thread, the tank get's the mobility restored. Other things to consider is a hit in the right place breaks the armor's engine or make it unable to rotate the turret but I don't know how realistic such isolated "internal" damages are in a tank. If you manage to penetrate the tank's armor and broke the engine or turret rotation facilities, I can imagine you pretty much has demolished everything else inside (poor crew included).

I know that some e-sporters and arcade players might frown on things like the above, but being a "simulationist" who want to play BF2 and mods like Project Reality in order to get at least a bit of the sense of "actually being there" on a dangerous battlefield (in a sane virtual way of course, I'm fully aware that real war is truly horrible and I have full respect for all those who have been unfortunate to experience it in reality both as fighting forces as well as civilians) I would love to see the above implemented.

Disclaimer: I've not yet downloaded, installed and played the Project Reality Mod yet. *cough* even if it will happen as soon as I get some time for it. So if I seem clueless above for being a PR-forum poster, this might be a reason.

Best regards

/IlvJa

Edit: some sentences were ambigous and unclear... just had to fix that.

The reason I said the whole vehicle should be made of "armored glass" was because I don't think the good old BF2 engine can handle things like specific damage to a vehicle. What I meen is that if you shot a copter in the tail rotor, it wouldn't recognize "hit in tail rotor" rather, I think it only effects the damage the vehicle takes on to it's HP. This is probably due to the fact that a vehicle in BF2 can't be disabled. The armored glass on the other hand can recognize a specific hit and relay it to whether or not it hit's the player behind the glass.

Yea its not realistic that you are safe in apcs and armour until it acctually blows up. The people inside should take damage as they take hits and be able to be killed inside. I know this is possible as one of the last ea patches made this happen.

HOLD ON! What happens when the Warrior comes along? Being able to kill the troops inside defies the hole point of an APC!

Plus the Warrior uses Cobham armour (as someone has mentioned before) so anythink that can affect it can also effect an M1 Abrams (Keeping in mind the Abrams uses Chobham armour, dont forget the Challenger 2 uses Doncaster 2nd generation Chobham witch makes it vastly more protected)

If you put a Sabot round into any of those vehicles, I'm pretty sure theres a good chance of hurting/killing anyone inside.

'[R-PUB wrote:BrokenArrow']If you put a Sabot round into any of those vehicles, I'm pretty sure theres a good chance of hurting/killing anyone inside.

But what about RPG's and LAW?

I think that would kill everyone inside if it could pierce the armor, unless the driver was in a different compartment anyway.

lonelyjew wrote:I think that would kill everyone inside if it could pierce the armor, unless the driver was in a different compartment anyway.

It would defie the point of APS's so its impractical.

I think this is a great idea, after all anti-armour weapons are MADE to pierce the armour and send LOADS of spalling and "plasmafied" (fancy new word!) metal INTO the interior of the vehicle, killing anyone unlucky enough to be inside.

It would defie the point of APS's so its impractical.

Not true, the point of an APC is to protect infantry until they can get to the battle, then to support them while in the battle (for IFVs anyway). Not very many APCs offer the same protection as MBTs, they mainly offer protection against small arms fire, such as assault rifle/LMG/HMG fire.

And if the APCs were less invincible to munitions meant to destroy them, maybe they would be used realistically instead of driving straight to a flag leaving all the poor infantry to sprint across the field through MG fire ...

Pence I was referring to a sabot round, RPGs and LAWs have the ability to disable a tank but I don't think they'd really destroy it.

Pence wrote:But what about RPG's and LAW?

Enough RPG's in the right places, like the tracks, will surely immobilise tanks, in which case they are then bombed by friendly jets (if they can't rescue the tank and toe it away for repairs) to avoid sensitive material getting into the hands of undesirables

Although there was a 'story' or news item about a Challenger 2 getting ambushed, and surving about a dozen RPG rounds, and still making it back home.

beta wrote: Not true, the point of an APC is to protect infantry until they can get to the battle, then to support them while in the battle (for IFVs anyway). Not very many APCs offer the same protection as MBTs, they mainly offer protection against small arms fire, such as assault rifle/LMG/HMG fire.

I know how to fight along-side IFV's, an IFV is parcticly an APC. The IFV drives together in a line formation (If assaulting a large area), The men dismount after the IFV platoon finds a nice covering spot, the men then assault the positions under covering fire from there IFV's.
In Built-up areas the dismount teams lead the way clearing buildings as they go, the APC's assault up the streets in a modified column formation.

Pence I was referring to a sabot round, RPGs and LAWs have the ability to disable a tank but I don't think they'd really destroy it.

Yabo, i get you now.

Although there was a 'story' or news item about a Challenger 2 getting ambushed, and surving about a dozen RPG rounds, and still making it back home.

Yea its true, it was also hit by one or two ATG rounds.