Project Reality Forums

Earlier this week the britsh army pulled their troops out of Basrah leaving basrah to the USMC.

I was susggesting we switch the USMC for the britsh army to be the coalliton force in AL Basrah.

YESSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSS! I was about to suggest this!

This has been suggested before...

Also as Basra is the only British insurgency map so why would you want to change that seeing as the USMC already has 2 insurgency maps? The US has 5 if you want to count the US army as well so why would you care about changing it?

vilhelm123 wrote:This has been suggested before...

Also as Basra is the only British insurgency map so why would you want to change that seeing as the USMC already has 2 insurgency maps? The US has 5 if you want to count the US army as well so why would you care about changing it?

Umm this happened in reality, we're playing Project Reality...

There used to be a server running "Basrah 2" which was exactly that. I don't think the server is up anymore though.

yes because the US and UK attacked china in reality...


either its the DEVs decision and they probably have thought about it

FuzzySquirrel =US= wrote:Umm this happened in reality, we're playing Project Reality...

Sars99 wrote:yes because the US and UK attacked china in reality...

This.

Reality doesn't mean the mod is entirely topical.

Muttrah City: USMC out Brits in
Op Archer: USMC out Brits in
Ramiel: USA out Brits in

That ok with you guys?




For all you know the AL Basrah map could be set in 2006.
The main PR faction has a shortage of maps as it is. I for one am sick and tired of playing US in pretty much every single game ever made. More Brits, Russians etc please.

Sars99 wrote:yes because the US and UK attacked china in reality...

Well seeing as this is based in the "near" future anything is possible...

Also as Basra is the only British insurgency map so why would you want to change that seeing as the USMC already has 2 insurgency maps? The US has 5 if you want to count the US army as well so why would you care about changing it?

If I wanted to play the "well they need a map" game then I think about the 4km Sagin they're getting.

FuzzySquirrel =US= wrote:Well seeing as this is based in the "near" future anything is possible...

under that same logic it is possible that the UK redeploys to iraq...

[R-DEV]Pride wrote:Muttrah City: USMC out Brits in
Op Archer: USMC out Brits in
Ramiel: USA out Brits in

That ok with you guys?




For all you know the AL Basrah map could be set in 2006.
The main PR faction has a shortage of maps as it is. I for one am sick and tired of playing US in pretty much every single game ever made. More Brits, Russians etc please.

Well, Seeing as the Brits are moving to Afghanistan put 'em on Korengal. Since you're tried of playing US in pretty much every game made..

I agree just it should be the US Army, since they really took it over.

Well, Seeing as the Brits are moving to Afghanistan put 'em on Korengal. Since you're tried of playing US in pretty much every game made..

Earlier you said this is Project Reality and yet you feel like they should remove US Army from a real combat zone there in?

NO, dont get the British out, anyway USA and USMC got about 5 maps, and even more not insurgency maps,[although in Op archers they only placeholders right?], not only the fit in pretty perfect there[landrovers. challenger tank and more] they also more enjoy to me to play them, and almost any game got US forces as the main force, using other forces usually just aganist US.
also what if british forces will go back in? PR is set in the near future, so anything is possible, please leave basrah as it is, and if you really want to play as US in it, there is a Basrah 2, though the server is down i think...

My country is better than yours. Can has on all maps nao?


No problem with it as is imo. In the end the asset layout is more important thant the faction imo but I don´t know whats wrong with brits on basrah?

Like its been said, we aren´t at war with china, mec is fictional....

[quote=""'[R-DEV"]Pride;1011284']Muttrah City: USMC out Brits in
Op Archer: USMC out Brits in
Ramiel: USA out Brits in

That ok with you guys?




For all you know the AL Basrah map could be set in 2006.
The main PR faction has a shortage of maps as it is. I for one am sick and tired of playing US in pretty much every single game ever made. More Brits, Russians etc please.[/quote]

With all due respect; most factions don't possess as many goodies like the U.S. forces have.

People usually want the U.S. faction in as they know it usually involves the use of some of the best known equipment, spurred by some of the most famed movies to go with it. I'm not saying this simply because I'm an American myself. I just like using assets and vehicles that are practical.

I mean let's think about it:

Merlin or Blackhawk? ... Blackhawk
Lynx or Littlebird? ... Littlebird
Warrior or LAV-25? ... LAV-25
Landrover or Hummer? ... Hummer

There's reasons why I say this. The downfall to certain transport helicopters over others is their ability to have additional defensive weapons on board. The downfall to some scout choppers over others is the ability to have miniguns and rocket pods. The downfall to certain APC's over others is their ability to be amphibious. The downfall to certain jeeps over others is the amount of protection they give to their occupants to incoming fire.

Not all vehicles are created equal. People usually like the best equipped team.

______________________________

[quote="Alex6714""]Like its been said, we aren´t at war with china, mec is fictional....[/quote]

That's another thing I've had some issues with. I personally feel that the M.E.C. should have been able to keep the BTR-90 for the sake of variety instead of the BTR-60 (even if it's a placeholder). It is a fictional army, but it's been stated in the past that although the BTR-90 isn't widely used, here is an exception.

We've already given them an arsenal of G3 assault rifles. I just feel that the BTR-90 is now just a model that's gone to waste. Doesn't make sense even if it's a detail in the gray area.

[R-DEV]Pride wrote:Muttrah City: USMC out Brits in

Muttrah with Brits sounds interesting to me.

Well i agree maybe brits should move out of the basrah map as it happened in real life but lets look at the map layout. British forces have Quinling, Ashad khal, al basrah, OGT and bi ming. Russians have fools road, kozelesk and that other map which i cant remember. US forces have, fallujah, korengal, OP archer, karbala, ramiel, muttrah, kashan, al kufrah ... etc etc. The americans have so many more maps than any other force in the game. Just constantly taking maps away from other factions will probaly defeat the main purpose of PR that was to introduce the british faction.

Just leave it as it is, also what's with US taking brit maps i mean, what happened to Al Kufrah?

British troops were there at the hight of the fighting, i.e. the kind of setting the map portrays. Although I doubt the US troops now there will have nothing to do, I think the spirit of the map should remain british. Job done, off home, not 'leaving the Americans to fight for us"

Lynx or Littlebird? ... Littlebird

lynx ty, to easy to shoot people on teh LB

Landrover or Hummer? ... Hummer

If I want a fire support group, I'm happy with the landy, its slightly harder to hit with an RPG. also, 2 landies carry a whole squad...hummer is annoying.

Merlin or Blackhawk? ... Blackhawk

If merlin wasn't bugged, I'd have no preference.

Warrior or LAV-25? ... LAV-25

I'd go LAV-25, only cuz its smoother to driver, being a wheeled vehicle rather than tracked, but the ability to turn on the spot has saved many a squad, so Its not a simple choice.

The ONLY THING the US team have thats better than what the british get ingame is the bradley for the TOWs

Bad suggestion, may as well remove the Brits entirely? The British have a chronic shortage of maps as it is!