Project Reality Forums

1. Deployable 50 cal HMG's. There warm-up time seems to be abit to long. I have have noticed that alot of the time people are killed before they can even use the HMG on the target. Its to easy to kill a gunner in the first place, make the warm-up time abit shorter just to give a better chance of them being used effectivly. The only time it is used right is when your firing on innacurate troops, or when your in it before the enemy attacks. Anything else results in a stationary target waiting for his gun to be ready.

2. Hat damage. Is it possible to make it so HATs only damage mobile vehicles? I have found that when firebases are getting attacked that HATs have a tendancy to come flying out of nowere and kill HMG's and foxholes and other things like that. I have also found they are used on infantry alot instead of vehicles. Making it so it only damaged mobile vehicles we result in proper use of the HAT.

Ccharge wrote:1. Deployable 50 cal HMG's. There warm-up time seems to be abit to long. I have have noticed that alot of the time people are killed before they can even use the HMG on the target. Its to easy to kill a gunner in the first place, make the warm-up time abit shorter just to give a better chance of them being used effectivly. The only time it is used right is when your firing on innacurate troops, or when your in it before the enemy attacks. Anything else results in a stationary target waiting for his gun to be ready.
Since you cant really "1 man" a hmg nest quicker warm up time does make sence

2. Hat damage. Is it possible to make it so HATs only damage mobile vehicles? I have found that when firebases are getting attacked that HATs have a tendancy to come flying out of nowere and kill HMG's and foxholes and other things like that. I have also found they are used on infantry alot instead of vehicles. Making it so it only damaged mobile vehicles we result in proper use of the HAT.
Just because its meant to kill vehicles doesn't mean it wont kill inf/bunkers

Answers in bold

1. Look at the player stance in HMG, just getting into that small thing will take a while then you need to check gun etc., imo its ok

2.using HATs and LATs on hard targets/inf is completely realistic and "proper"

1: What is the warm up time, 5 seconds? If a person isn't in the gun for a few seconds they shouldn't be able to hop in and fire away accurately any more than a SAW gunner should. If someone is manning the gun and a teammate spotting targets (which is how it should work) then there is no issue.

2: HATs are used on hard targets in real battles from what I have seen, so using them against FOBs would be logical. Although I would prefer a smaller blast radius myself to neuter their infantry killing I understand that would make them less effective against hard targets. Making them not hurt infantry at all would just be silly.

Thats like saying Abrams can't use their HEAT rounds to kill Insurgent snipers, but they have.

I would actually agree to an extent with the 50cal position. This is because 1) if you die on it...your dead dead, and 2) it is rather easy to shot the HMG gunners.

I'd actually support having a worse arc for teh MGs if there was a smaller opening for the HMG, to protect the gunner.

Your first point: Yes..no wait...HELL YES!

I am so frustrated with the idiocy of having to wait, what am I waiting for? I am simply waiting to die, because no matter what DEV intention was, it usually results in a useless, only-for-show asset.

I am completely pissed off about waiting...

Your Second point: SRAW's are actually used to take out many different types of targets including hardened positions somewhat like an HMG. I remember seeing footage of the invasion of Iraq where Marines shot a SRAW to take out a sniper. I am sure there are many different warhead available for SRAW's anyway, its just that it wouldn't make much sense to have an ammunition-type selector on the weapon as you would a tank or APC. It is much simpler to just have the weapon take out targets, of multiple types.

I would like to see zoom or binos with that MG nest.
Maybe then it could be actually used.
It's just a useless assets when other similar weapons are easily available with scopes.

If put into visible spot can be used as a area denial tool as SAW:s, but in the other hand it would be easy to spot the firebase.

This is a no-brainer. In real life, after the first time the MG has been set up and prepared, you only have to climb in and press the trigger, the next time you need to use it.

It's the same stupid problem with the AA asset. After being constructed, I understand it has to be set up and so forth, the first time you're going to use it. But if you have just spawned alone by the firebase, the asset is not right next to the firebase structure, and you hear an aircraft approaching in the distance - the asset is completely useless. Because by the time you have reached it, entered and the asset has been "warmed up" again - the aircraft has come too close and launched a missile right up your butt. Even if you just exited it to use your binoculars or something else, you will often struggle to be ready again before the aircraft has blown you to smithereens.

This needs to be fixed and btw: why not add an AT asset to the firebase as well, so we can defend it against APCs and tanks?

Wolfguard has it right.

Does it really take 5 seconds to push a button after you've got yourself into a MG nest?

They need to make the HMG dug outs provide more protection to the gunner, it just too easy to snipe some one out of them, The character is sitting up in full view of the enemy the sand bags might as well be removed for the amount of protection they offer.

Optimally the gunner should be crouched down exposing only the top of his helmet.




In principle this is a good machine gun nest.




The design does not matter so much what does matter, is you only expose a very small proportion of your body.

RHYS4190 wrote:


The design does not matter so much what does matter, is you only expose a very small proportion of your body.

In certain situations that would be better, in others it would be worse.

• Little to no angle of depression
• Complete 180 degrees exposure to the gunners rear
• The ability for anyone with the slightest elevation advantage to plink off the gunner with ease

'[R-DEV wrote:Jaymz;1209308']In certain situations that would be better, in others it would be worse.

• Little to no angle of depression
• Complete 180 degrees exposure to the gunners rear
• The ability for anyone with the slightest elevation advantage to plink off the gunner with ease

put a roof on it, put sandbags behind it.

as for the depression, simply put the bipod higher or even ontop of the sandbags. Only when aiming down will you be exposed, only that the guys your shooting at are down below you.

Ccharge wrote:put a roof on it, put sandbags behind it.

as for the depression, simply put the bipod higher or even ontop of the sandbags. Only when aiming down will you be exposed, only that the guys your shooting at are down below you.

M2HB is a tripod mounted weapon.

-REad