Project Reality Improvement Compilation

[[R-DEV]Masaq]

Yup, and the T-90 can detect the heat and light of the incoming projectile, IIRC. I think that's how it can react to a wire-guided rocket anyways.


Regardless, back on topic: Warren this is the best suggestion/feedback post I've seen, certainly in a long long time if not ever. Don't necessarily agree with it all, but it's certainly a good piece.

To others : this is how it should be done

[LtSoucy]

lol Masaq. great post and most of the problems need to be fixed.

[x.trEm*e]

yup to be exact its "wire" guided
thats a point, about which ppl will discuss forever
off the realism pov its not there and should be removed and forgotten about
but off the other point of view its the descision whether Gameplay > Realism
if gameplay is more important, then PR has to change many things persistent at this time, and thus return the sound alert

[Viper5]

Originally Posted by [R-MOD]Masaq

Yup, and the T-90 can detect the heat and light of the incoming projectile, IIRC. I think that's how it can react to a wire-guided rocket anyways.


Regardless, back on topic: Warren this is the best suggestion/feedback post I've seen, certainly in a long long time if not ever. Don't necessarily agree with it all, but it's certainly a good piece.

To others : this is how it should be done

Any chance we can get flaming arrows to cause a distraction?

[M.Warren]

Heavy Anti-Tank Weapons:

1. SRAW details here.
"The SRAW missile itself consists of three modular components: (1) a Flight Module, (2) a Target Detection Device (TDD), and (3) a Warhead. The Flight Module consists of several components, the heart of which is the Guidance and Control Unit (GCU). The GCU controls the missile flight profile and provides flight path correction commands to the missile. The missile intercept solution is designed to over-fly the target. The TDD is a dual mode device that combines a laser ranger and magnetic detector. The TDD commands detonation of the warhead when both laser ranger and magnetic detector have confirmed target over flight."
<Note: Essentially the SRAW uses a fire and forget system that is supposed to detonate over the target firing a secondary munition down into the top of the tank where it's armor is the most thin. Also it uses a combination of both laser and magnetic sensors for target aquisition after being designated by it's user and after the point of missle launch.>

2. Eyrx details here.
"Guidance: optically tracked, single wire semi-automatic command to line of sight. Control: thrust vector controlled. Sights: optical and thermal imagery."
<Note: The Eyrx is a more basic modern anti-tank weapon working on the basis of a TOW (Target On Wire.) method. The user spots the target with normal sights or thermal imaging and manually guides it to it's target destination.>

In any case, it's difficult to define the fine line of realism. Because the BF2 engine still works on the basis of requiring the missle to strike it's target by any means. However, the intended purpose of the SRAW is to track with a laser/magnetic sensor and detonate above the target to deliver a deathblow with a secondary munition. Whereas the Eryx by chance works out as intended as it's a TOW and meant to strike it's target in a conventional method by manual guidance.

So essentially, we have a loophole upon the basis of how Heavy Anti-Tank operates in this particular mod. We can either go with or without laser tone with our armor. So it simply comes down to what is preferable. Our options?

1. Return the missle tone to Heavy Anti-Tank against armor so APC's have a fighting chance. Not to mention you can still scare off enemy tanks with the missle tone even if you don't intend to fire or are out of ammunition.

2. We leave it as is without missle tone and could possibly be worse off than we were in the v0.6 patch where everyone was complaining about Heavy Anti-Tank sniping. Seeing the very reason why all these Heavy Anti-Tank alterations generated from to begin with. Also the fact that because of Heavy Anti-Tank the likelyhood of people being encouraged of developing mechanized infantry squads has just gone down the drain.

You decide.
__________________________________________________

On another note upon the Qwai River subject...

Chinese forces:
Type 98 Main battle tank:
Pros: 1-Heavily armored. 2-Can destroy an APC and lesser targets in 1 shot. 3-Deadly accurate against infantry units. 4-Being defeated by an APC is highly unlikely. 5-Being defeated by light helicopters highly unlikely.
Cons: 1- Slow and loud.

USMC forces:
HMMWV TOW:
Pros: 1-Light and swift. 2-Can destroy an APC and lesser vehicular targets in 1 shot.
Cons: 1-Gunner is unprotected and easily killed by infantry. 2-Can be destroyed by 1 Light Anti-Tank shot. 3-Can be destroyed by heavy mounted MG fire. 4-Driver has limited vision, cannot magnify/zoom and see 360º all around. 5-Cannot engage infantry units as per some server rules.

LAV-25 APC:
Pros: 1-Light and swift. 2-Amphibious. 3-Capable of offering ammo.
Cons: 1-Can be destroyed by Heavy Anti-Tank and Tanks in 1 shot. 2-Does minimal damage to enemy tanks. 3-Driver has limited vision and cannot see 360º all around.

Infantry Heavy Anti-Tank:
Pros: 1-Can hide/easily concealable in building areas. 2-Can destroy an APC and lesser vehicular targets in 1 shot.
Cons: 1-Offers little infantry combat capability. 2-Cannot hide from tanks in open areas where foliage does not render at long distance. 3-Cannot engage infantry units as per some server rules with SRAW.

With all that said, it's not impossible for USMC to win Qwai River. However it takes a significant amount of effort and high amounts of coordination to compensate for the 2 Chinese Type 98 tanks as they are quite simply massively capable of handling almost any situation.

From my own personal opinion as being an armor enthusiast and a skilled driver, there are very few things to worry about in a tank if you play your cards right and remain constantly vigilant. I can assure you, I'm not looking from the USMC side screaming "Nerf!" I'm more on the perspective of being on the Chinese side saying "This isn't right." out of sympathy. Because kill streaks with a gunner of mine being 78-0, somethings gotta be wrong with that kill/death ratio.

Like I said, you decide.

[Ghost1800]

Would it be at all possible to make the SRAW not give off a lock tone until after the missile has been fired? That seems to be what your indicating happens in real life (at least for the T90 anyway).

Honestly I prefer it the way it is now, HAT kits are hard to get, hard to keep alive, and must remain stationary for what (in infantry terms) is close to suicidal in a full blown firefight in order to hit the target. Besides, we're arguing this point based on one potential target of this weapon out of many many more that don't have the same capabilities.

On a separate note, could the optics on the Eryx be slightly adjusted to match up with the cross hair indicators? It's just a small annoyance.

[[T]Terranova7]

Originally Posted by M.Warren

On another note upon the Qwai River subject...

Chinese forces:
Type 98 Main battle tank:
Pros: 1-Heavily armored. 2-Can destroy an APC and lesser targets in 1 shot. 3-Deadly accurate against infantry units. 4-Being defeated by an APC is highly unlikely. 5-Being defeated by light helicopters highly unlikely.
Cons: 1- Slow and loud.

USMC forces:
HMMWV TOW:
Pros: 1-Light and swift. 2-Can destroy an APC and lesser vehicular targets in 1 shot.
Cons: 1-Gunner is unprotected and easily killed by infantry. 2-Can be destroyed by 1 Light Anti-Tank shot. 3-Can be destroyed by heavy mounted MG fire. 4-Driver has limited vision, cannot magnify/zoom and see 360º all around. 5-Cannot engage infantry units as per some server rules.

LAV-25 APC:
Pros: 1-Light and swift. 2-Amphibious. 3-Capable of offering ammo.
Cons: 1-Can be destroyed by Heavy Anti-Tank and Tanks in 1 shot. 2-Does minimal damage to enemy tanks. 3-Driver has limited vision and cannot see 360º all around.

Infantry Heavy Anti-Tank:
Pros: 1-Can hide/easily concealable in building areas. 2-Can destroy an APC and lesser vehicular targets in 1 shot.
Cons: 1-Offers little infantry combat capability. 2-Cannot hide from tanks in open areas where foliage does not render at long distance. 3-Cannot engage infantry units as per some server rules with SRAW.

With all that said, it's not impossible for USMC to win Qwai River. However it takes a significant amount of effort and high amounts of coordination to compensate for the 2 Chinese Type 98 tanks as they are quite simply massively capable of handling almost any situation.

From my own personal opinion as being an armor enthusiast and a skilled driver, there are very few things to worry about in a tank if you play your cards right and remain constantly vigilant. I can assure you, I'm not looking from the USMC side screaming "Nerf!" I'm more on the perspective of being on the Chinese side saying "This isn't right." out of sympathy. Because kill streaks with a gunner of mine being 78-0, somethings gotta be wrong with that kill/death ratio.

Like I said, you decide.

A good squad manning the TOW Humvees (Which only takes about 4 people at most, just the same as the two chinese tanks) can be just as effective. Usually, the PLA tanks will come down the southern highway, so many times from what I've seen the TOW Humvees will position themselves on the South Bridge, and 75% of the time the Humvees will engage the enemy tanks and/or APCs.

There's also the strategy of blowing the bridges to deny the tanks an immediate route to cross (With the only option being the land bridge to the North, where an ambush can be easily set up).

Don't forget that the U.S has a transportation advantage with their numerous littlebirds. So technically they have the capability of getting around the map a lot faster though I've personally yet to see a decent set of transport pilots on this map yet.

Another big thing about this map is unlike something like Al Kufrah, there's plenty of cover & concealment for infantry to maneuver around and away from the Chinese tanks. Often times opening up opportunities for engineers to close in on stationary tanks with mines.

All the map does is demand different tactics than the usual from the U.S. Something like an attack chopper would make things too easy.

Though, I think you make good points overall (I especially like the idea of the BTR-90 doing a full rotation from a stationary position).

[maverick551]

Great post warren, very interesting reading all the information given. I would have to say I agree with pretty much everything you said, but it seems to be missing the fast ropes :P Just Kidding.

[[R-DEV]Drav]

Im pretty sure tanks can tell when a laser is pointed at them nowadays. However, there is no way of telling a wire guided missile is looking at you until it launches.
There are various systems to tell you something has been fired at you that look for the heat from exhaust gases, look for things moving extemely quickly, and this sets off an alarm, and often, automatic countermeasures.

However, in PR this is kinda useless, as time to target for a HAT missile is typically less than a second, as missiles move so quickly. Have a look at this video and see if you think this is accurately depicted in game.

YouTube - ERYX


One solution I can think of is to have the missile 'pop' out of the tube like the eryx does, then accelerate, rather than blast out at full speed. If the alarm went off when the missile fired (rocket booster fires, tanks electronics pick it up) that would give a tank crew a better chance to react, while providing a realistic depiction of anti tank warfare.

Of course smoke and moving is the biggest defence against an optically guided AT system, so having this delay at the start of the missiles flight would give a switched on crew a chance of defeating the missile. Likewise the operator would have to stay targeting the missile for longer. At present a warning light once the missile is fired might as well have 'you are about to die' written on it!

I think within the confines of the PR world this might be the most acceptable compromise for a realistic solution all round.

[M.Warren]

Originally Posted by ironcomatose

EDIT: Oh and everything else is good and i mostly agree with it. You missed a few like fixing the animations for all the new sniper rifles(M40, Mosin Nagant, L96).

After bringing up this valid point I decided to check up on these sniper rifles in particular. However I had not noticed any unusual animations coming from the M40 (USMC sniper rifle) and the L96 (Chinese sniper rifle). Each properly deploys the bipod, properly operates the bolt, holds the rifle in a realistic fashion and also reloads correctly.

However I had noticed issues with the Mosin Nagant (Insurgent and Militia sniper rifle) and the L115A1 (British sniper rifle). Each of which has had their conflicts updated and posted in the list.

If there is something wrong with the M40 (USMC sniper rifle) and the L96 (Chinese sniper rifle) that I have overlooked, please let me know.