Project Reality Improvement Compilation

[ERASERLASER]

Offtopic but why was the tanks removed from Ejod?

[M.Warren]

Originally Posted by ERASERLASER

Offtopic but why was the tanks removed from Ejod?

They were removed in order to encourage the use of all available APC's so that they could mainly focus on the "Mechanized Infantry" (APC support with a dedicated infantry squad combination.) aspect of combat.

This tactic which is very seldomly seen might I add, is not easy to perform as it requires a high level of coordination between two different squads. Squad 1 being the APC support (Solely the (SL)driver and a gunner.) and Squad 2 being the 6-man infantry squad (Having an (SL) officer to develop a rally point and having one dedicated engineer to service the APC works best.).

However to perform this in the most efficient manner possible the Squad Leaders from either squad must be able to communicate between eachother efficiently by the use of an outside communication service such as Teamspeak and Ventrilo. Essentially so people would properly crew LAV-25's and BTR-90's and ferry a dedicated squad of infantry around that would remain highly mobile to deploy themselves in remote locations.

If you ever stumble across fuzzhead, dbzao or M.Warren (myself) on the TG (Tactical Gamer) server during a round of Ejod desert it's possible to see us performing this method. Or atleast attempting to as it was significantly easier last patch with lesser kinks in the works... Damn that Heavy Anti-Tank.

[Tartantyco]

Originally Posted by M.Warren

They were removed in order to encourage the use of all available APC's so that they could mainly focus on the "Mechanized Infantry" (APC support with a dedicated infantry squad combination.) aspect of combat.

This tactic which is very seldomly seen might I add, is not easy to perform as it requires a high level of coordination between two different squads. Squad 1 being the APC support (Solely the (SL)driver and a gunner.) and Squad 2 being the 6-man infantry squad (Having an (SL) officer to develop a rally point and having one dedicated engineer to service the APC works best.).

However to perform this in the most efficient manner possible the Squad Leaders from either squad must be able to communicate between eachother efficiently by the use of an outside communication service such as Teamspeak and Ventrilo. Essentially so people would properly crew LAV-25's and BTR-90's and ferry a dedicated squad of infantry around that would remain highly mobile to deploy themselves in remote locations.

If you ever stumble across fuzzhead, dbzao or M.Warren (myself) on the TG (Tactical Gamer) server during a round of Ejod desert it's possible to see us performing this method. Or atleast attempting to as it was significantly easier last patch with lesser kinks in the works... Damn that Heavy Anti-Tank.

-I usually have the APC crew in my squad, 2 guys on that and 4 guys on foot. Communication problems resolved.

EDIT: The APCs still go up into the hills most of the time though.

[[R-DEV]77SiCaRiO77]

Originally Posted by ERASERLASER

Offtopic but why was the tanks removed from Ejod?

there was a lot whiners that cryed about the tanks wtfpwning their tacticools moviment of their squads , hence , tanks removed .

[TheSkudDestroyer]

Tanks made the map boring:

1. USMC/MEC tanks go to West/East hills and wait on enemy armor.
2. USMC won much more due to the elevation advantage around Gardens and North Desert
3. Tanks couldnt maneuver within the city, so they just sat in hills.

[ReaperMAC]

Originally Posted by M.Warren

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.

The US TOW is a valuable addition to the USMC Forces. It is extremely manueverable considering it's immense firepower. In addition to what you've said above, the TOW Humvee can kill a Chinese Tank in 1-shot... from the rear. Not to mention that you have TWO that can easily do hit and run tactics on enemy armor/vehicles. The tip is to be on the move, not to camp the south bridge until you get nailed from a distance... If you play on TG, using TOW against infantry isn't a problem anymore .

But as you said, it requires immense coordination on either side to take out TOW Humvees/Tanks. If you have a skilled tank crew vs. unskilled TOW Crew, vise versa, the outcome would be in the better crew's favor.

But putting a Cobra on the freaking map... no no no.

[fludblud]

yeah, tanks in ejod were too annoying, they would simply camp the hills all rounds.

although i do like the idea of tanks in urban combat maps with destructable environments. imagine walking down an alleyway when suddenly a T90 smashes through the wall in front of you and turns its turret in your direction.

[Ironcomatose]

Originally Posted by M.Warren

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.

i thought the brits used the L96. I knew the chinese had the vanilla version but i thought the brits had the PR version. NVM that one then.

And the M40's animation if you ask me is just ugly with little parts sticking out and such.

[[R-MOD]Mongolian_dude]

Warren is right about Qwai.
It does take more effort and coordiantion to win as the USMC and the No HAT VS INF rule on some servers can be tedious, when you know the enemy team is sporting tanks with HEAT shellz. Even then, your clearly at a disadvantage because you have just 4 TOWs, compaired to 20 Heats, full armour, 50cal and a coax.

The Light helis were implemented to counter that; to re flect the difference in stratergy, to make a balanced, no symetrical map, but its not the case.

After all, they are just light choppers, each vaulnerable to small arms fire (about two full clips from a 5.56 seems to make one drop out of the sky).
The strong point for the USMC is increased mobility, however, Qwai is so small that this is hardly the case. Now with AA vs light choppers, that advantage has gotten even smaller.

I dont think Qwai really is a tank map, TBH.

...mongol...

[M.Warren]

Originally Posted by ironcomatose

I thought the brits used the L96. I knew the chinese had the vanilla version but i thought the brits had the PR version. NVM that one then.

And the M40's animation if you ask me is just ugly with little parts sticking out and such.

Perfectly understandable. Infact the L96 in reality is truely a British sniper rifle anyways, but as we all know there are slight trade-offs in game in order to simply provide some sort of weapon for a particular faction.

The M40 (USMC sniper rifle.) though, might not ever be altered as the details are small and could possibly be due to your graphic settings aswell. Suprisingly a handful of weapons currently present in Project Reality were imported from other Battlefield 2 mods.

However it's clear that the L115A1 (British sniper rifle.) and the Mosin Nagant (Insurgent and Militia sniper rifle.) have the largest amounts of obvious visual imperfections that should be repaired and cleaned up.