Project Reality Forums

I'm curious, is there any work being done on the AAVs so that they aren't so uber? Like instead of allowing one man crews? Though I've heard that the original AAAVs are being replaced with AAMVs, so whats going on here?

Sorry if its been asked already, its late and I was a bit tired when I thought about this

AAVs arent even in the mod. LAVs are, is that what your talking about?

Tungusta, that PLA AA vehicle, the M6 Linebacker

charliegrs wrote:AAVs arent even in the mod. LAVs are, is that what your talking about?

PR uses AAV to refer to anti-air vehicles in some onscreen menus. Personally, I'd rather see them use something else to avoid confusion, even if AAVs (the USMC APCs) aren't in game. SPAA perhaps?

DeltaFart wrote:I'm curious, is there any work being done on the AAVs so that they aren't so uber? Like instead of allowing one man crews? Though I've heard that the original AAAVs are being replaced with AAMVs, so whats going on here?

Sorry if its been asked already, its late and I was a bit tired when I thought about this

The only thing the AA vehicles (except the GB one) are "uber" against is unsupported infantry in the open and light vehicles like humvees and trucks, everything else kills it hands down.

Well the Tunguska makes toast of most APCs and if everyone wants to be realistic, then AAs will stay uber, since they are that.

AA vehicles are one man because of playersize limitations, not because they are intended to be 'uber' they do die pretty easy so I'm not worried about them

I haven't had too many problems with AAVs. Albeit I did kill an APC with the British AAV once. Just fired missiles right into it.

Solid Knight wrote:I haven't had too many problems with AAVs. Albeit I did kill an APC with the British AAV once. Just fired missiles right into it.

As far as I know it is able to do that, and if you think the tunguska is uber now, you should see it with its real rate of fire and caliber in game.

Should have less of them on maps.

So it's more of a burden if one dope goes about blasting infantry without looking at the skies, then gets taken out by an MBT or CAS, leaving the team without mobile AA for a bit...

Let the Tunguska kick major ***, but give the MEC some kind of missile-only AA on combined-arms maps like Kashan. I don't know if the Tunguska can serve as a Bradley-like troop transport, but it should be used along the BMP-3 as an APC on asymmetrical/mech. infantry maps.

If they start having the MEC facing unconventional forces Id like to see it but the thing is over kill against everything

So is the Vodnik.

Not everything Soviet is old and worthless, and I'd like to see a game that shows the true power of every country's arsenal, not just the mighty United States.

Balance is still a concern, of course, and that's the responsibility of the mappers.

The US equipment is nerfed to the extreme.

gclark03 wrote:So is the Vodnik.

Not everything Soviet is old and worthless, and I'd like to see a game that shows the true power of every country's arsenal, not just the mighty United States.

Balance is still a concern, of course, and that's the responsibility of the mappers.

Are you playing the same Project Reality that I am playing? In almost every case, the counterpart to the U.S. forces assets have the advantage.

Durandal wrote:Are you playing the same Project Reality that I am playing?

Judging from the post date i'd say no, probably not.

This thread is dying...

Let it die.

(I'm cringing at the posts I made back then...)

Before the necro lock, I'd like to remind you that AA missiles, in general, are the most powerful weapons in PR. The AIM-9M Sidewinder missiles on an attack helicopter could destroy ANYTHING in the game if the aircraft could hold more than two at a time.

If the AA missiles on anti-air vehicles are used on anything other than aircraft in real life, so it should be in PR. It only makes sense from a tactical point of view.