Project Reality Forums

Going through some slides which I presume are used to train Bradley crewman, I stumbled upon these interesting features for the A3 series of the vehicle. This basically means that the Bradley can lock onto anything with sufficient FLIR contrast, be it a flare, infantryman, tank, anything.

I also saw that the K2 Black Panther has this feature, quoted by Army Guide, which is not as sure, but it suggests that this feature is rather common amongst modern AFVs.

Should it be in Project Reality?

Evidence for the Bradley's autotracker functionality is evidenced by the attached photos, screenshotted from the pdf here: https://www.benning.army.mil/infantry/1 ... rogram.pdf on page 248.

In other words...
Should aimbots be present in PR?


I dont think i know a sufficient curse word for such a thing.

Is it realistic? Yes. Does it negatively affect teamwork? No. Would it radically redefine armor vs. armor engagements? Yes. Would it allow vehicles to more effectively engage emplacements on the move? Yes.

It's not an aimbot when you have to acquire the target first.

I'd like to have some reasonable discussion on the gameplay implications if this were to be implemented, not a "lol this is aimbot."

How is a device that scans the environment, identifies, and locks onto targets anything less than an aimbot?

Computer- "Hey DUMBY! SHOOT HERE!"

Gunner- "Derp KK!"

Total_Overkill wrote:How is a device that scans the environment, identifies, and locks onto targets anything less than an aimbot?

You search for it, identify, then apply tracking gates so FCS can lock onto it and only then it auto-tracks the target.

You do realize that this is a device that lets the gunner select an object that contrasts from it's background to track, in order to reduce gunner workload? The gunner still has to identify the target and also have it contrast from it's background to work.

This is no different from the Javelin's "aimbot" and the Apache's "aimbot".

Edit: Dammit, ninja'd.

Anyway, I think this would vastly increase the ability for current AFVs in PR to stay alive, currently tank vs. tank battles are more about who stays still instead of who can prioritize targets and identify targets, and also who can better utilize the terrain to their advantage.

Also, tank vs. TOW battles would be far less lopsided, and the tank would have a chance as long as it identified the TOW emplacement before the missile gets close enough to kill the tank, regardless of whether the emplacement was destroyed or not. The tank wouldn't have to stop and try to deal with the constant bucking.

Hunt3r wrote:You do realize that this is a device that lets the gunner select an object that contrasts from it's background to track, *snip* The gunner still has to identify the target and also have it contrast from it's background to work.

Indeed, thats how generic FPS aimbots works granted, skin textures are changed, and prioritized pre-game, but its not like a pre-contrasted t-90 or BTR couldnt be loaded into the system ahead of time either.

Hunt3r wrote:The tank wouldn't have to stop and try to deal with the constant bucking.

Oh? and why is that? would the autotrack be artificially manipulating the turret so that it stays on target? I think theres a word for that... ??:

Total_Overkill wrote: Oh? and why is that? would the autotrack be artificially manipulating the turret so that it stays on target? I think theres a word for that... ??:

Eh, yes I think that would be the point for autotrack, be able to move without having to burn a hole in your mousepad compensating for the movement thus improving your odds of not being hit by a other tank because you can use evasive manouvres.

Allow me to re-itterate my point...
(I fail at embeds, so i wont try)

YouTube - Project Reality 0.85 Addon: Fire Control System Demo


YouTube - PR Combined Arms Test Gameplay

Both clearly show what you want to have instituted into PR. by 2 similiar means.
Guess the bad news for people like me is, these exist in a sister mod to PR (combined arms) so its not exactly a stretch to implant it into PR.
Personally this style of "gameplay" disgusts me

If infantry were doing this, they'd be banned for life... but not the armored snipers! oh no ;-p

Well at the very least, modern tanks have gyroscopic stabilization, which means you will stay pointed directly at a stationary target, and you simply have to just use the joystick to keep aiming at a moving target. The autotracker simply automates the tracking of moving targets. It's not perfect, it's still bound by the 60 deg/sec limit, and any sudden jolt will affect accuracy.

It's also BF2, you can't load "pre-contrasted" textures without being PB kicked. Not to mention that this would not truly be tracking targets based off of contrast for balance, due to balance and engine limitations.

Well it's realistic, is this not Project Reality?

The only way this could be implanted realistically is with using hacks. Aiming at a point for x amount of time while pressing a button would loosely lock your center of the screen at that object it reaches whenever this object is moving or not. This would be realistic wouldn't it? Also target prediction could be done this way.

COuld be done like AA, but with ground vehicles...

Total_Overkill wrote:Indeed, thats how generic FPS aimbots works granted, skin textures are changed, and prioritized pre-game, but its not like a pre-contrasted t-90 or BTR couldnt be loaded into the system ahead of time either.


Oh? and why is that? would the autotrack be artificially manipulating the turret so that it stays on target? I think theres a word for that... ??:

For one, an aimbot doesn't need to see contrast, it reads game data and moves the players view when it detects an enemy somewhere. It doesn't need to examine the screen at all, that's why it can find enemies behind the player. Heck, actually examining the screen would be entirely inefficient. It would have to check every pixel of the screen every frame, looking for any pixels that were that shade of red. That would be silly.
The coloring of players/vehicles etc is part of an ESP hack, not the aimbot. And no, the ESP hack doesn't use the coloring either. It does it so the player can distinguish enemies and friendlies through walls and way outside of the view distance.

Secondly, the autotrack doesn't even need to manipulate the turret, it could provide a lock-on like anti-air missiles. Are anti-air missiles an "aimbot"? Are hellfires? Do tell the difference between a lock-on system like anti-air or hellfires to the turret staying on target for a few seconds.
In both systems, the player has to point the turret at the target, wait for lock, and then can only maintain that lock and fire while still aiming near the target. Either way they hit the target with 100% accuracy. The only significant difference is whether the player's turret is aiming directly on or a little away from the target.

Celestial1 wrote: In both systems, the player has to point the turret at the target, wait for lock, and then can only maintain that lock and fire while still aiming near the target. Either way they hit the target with 100% accuracy. The only significant difference is whether the player's turret is aiming directly on or a little away from the target.

Well if it works like that IRL and you can make it work like that in PR I see no reason why not to implement it.

It always bugged me that WW2 tanks could fire stable shots when moving over rough ground but my 21st century PR tank couldnt

This would either need a hack or Mosquil like coding. So i'd say its nearly impossible but is possible. Question is, is it on the to do list?

The system already exists in PR: Combined Arms when every vehicle has a laser target. I guess it would take away the need for a laser spotter, but it doesn't take away teamwork since aircraft will still need coordinates to find targets.

Well either it could lock onto vehicles via actually searching for contrast between two pixels within a designated box of a certain size, or the reticle could move to appear to lock on to the vehicle, and basically be firing guided missiles of high speed, and very limited turn rate.

The addition of laser targets to all ground vehicles could prove to be interesting, but I think that having the laser target stay on wrecked vehicles would be important to make a need for the vehicles equipped with this system to properly identify whether this vehicle is friendly, enemy, and whether it is destroyed or not.

Total_Overkill wrote:Allow me to re-itterate my point...
(I fail at embeds, so i wont try)

YouTube - Project Reality 0.85 Addon: Fire Control System Demo


YouTube - PR Combined Arms Test Gameplay

Both clearly show what you want to have instituted into PR. by 2 similiar means.
Guess the bad news for people like me is, these exist in a sister mod to PR (combined arms) so its not exactly a stretch to implant it into PR.
Personally this style of "gameplay" disgusts me

If infantry were doing this, they'd be banned for life... but not the armored snipers! oh no ;-p

Stop being such a troll... If you cant beat them join them.

Hunt3r wrote:Well either it could lock onto vehicles via actually searching for contrast between two pixels within a designated box of a certain size

Like I said, that's hugely inefficient. It would check that box every frame (eg. 60 frames a second = box is checked 60 times in a second). It's one thing to do this on a computer devoted to that and few other tasks. We're also running the rest of the game at the same time. Which means that we also have less intensive ways to get that same data.

If it's inefficient then adding laser targets to all vehicles and FOB/FOB emplacements that would appear and be able to be targets to both sides, regardless of whether it is unmanned, manned, destroyed, or healthy.

Letting individual infantry be locked on would be too much though.