Give the AA kit a rifle with optics

[random pants]

Consider what kits have optics and what kits don't, and the reasons for them having/not having optics.

The supportive kits (medic, engineer, ammo RM, auto RM) all use ironsights, and every PR vet understands the balance needed between optics/irons.

AA is not a supportive kit. The ideal way to play AA is to grab a vehicle that will dump ammo, and book it to a high point that will be a traffic area for enemy aircraft (think the mountains of Jabal, the hills of Quinling)

To me, it doesn't make sense that they wouldn't have optics, considering that engaging troops will likely be at distances over 100 meters. They also have 6 extra magazines, which seems more than enough ammo to defend oneself. I wouldn't mind at all if they even dropped a few mags off the kit later in exchange for optics.

If people think that giving this kit optics would change the way its played, or add too many more scopes to the battle, I disagree. People will only play this kit for the purpose of taking down aircraft, and adding optics to the kit doesnt change that. It does however, equip the soldier to properly defend himself.

When the rifleman AT kit had optics added to it, everyone (including me) thought that it was a fantastic move by the DEVs. I think that adding optics to AA would be a very subtle, but very sensible move.


agree/disagree? Discuss.

[@bsurd]

fully agree!

[Ghost1800]

I don't see any real issues with it, the kit has a 5 minute respawn and there are much better kits to use if you want a scope.

[@bsurd]

much better use for what? If you want to protect your sq from an air attack, there was no better kit...You dont take the kit because you need a scope. You take this kit because you want the AA Rockets...

And dont forget, why the AT kit has a scope and the AA kit not?

[random pants]

Originally Posted by Ghost1800

I don't see any real issues with it, the kit has a 5 minute respawn and there are much better kits to use if you want a scope.

I think he means he doesn't have issues with my idea which means he agrees with me.


What does everyone else think?

[AnRK]

Like with the H-AT, the AA is a system vital and expensive enough for your CO to probably want you limiting your rifle fire to self-defence, I'm sure in the field the things aren't up at the very front of the lines. Could well be wrong, but it'd be a little silly to promote engagement of anything, other then what the big expensive weapon your carrying is meant to kill, if you ask me.

[HellDuke]

You gave no GOOD reason for them having optics, since the kit will not be used to engage enemy infantry on bigger distances than the iron sights are effective at.

[random pants]

Originally Posted by AnRK

Like with the H-AT, the AA is a system vital and expensive enough for your CO to probably want you limiting your rifle fire to self-defence, I'm sure in the field the things aren't up at the very front of the lines. Could well be wrong, but it'd be a little silly to promote engagement of anything, other then what the big expensive weapon your carrying is meant to kill, if you ask me.

Why are you associating optics with a strictly offensive characteristic? You can't be issued optics to protect yourself from long range engagements? (Which you will likely only face if playing the kit correctly, high up, near air traffic)

Having shot down literally hundreds of choppers and around 10 jets, I can tell you from experience that the lack of optics gives this class a mistaken identity. It is a lone-wolf class, but without any defensive/offensive range.

Originally Posted by HellDuke

You gave no GOOD reason for them having optics, since the kit will not be used to engage enemy infantry on bigger distances than the iron sights are effective at.

Yes i did give a good reason, when I said "engaging troops will likely be at distances over 100 meters." Iron sights effectiveness vary with the terrain color and geometry, but they are really effective up to a maximum of 175 meters.

Keep in mind, my definition of effective doesn't mean "able to kill", it's "able to kill before being killed."

[Waaah_Wah]

Shouldnt you have a squad or atleast a rifleman with ammo with you anyways...?

[random pants]

Originally Posted by Waaah_Wah

Shouldnt you have a squad or atleast a rifleman with ammo with you anyways...?

No, because this takes too many soldiers out of the main fight. I firmly believe that effective AA is a lone-wolf camping style. Using this tactic I devastate servers. Scores like 17 and 0 and 21 and 0 I get all the time on Zatar wetlands camping in the hills near the carrier with an ammo dump.

The times I die are when people catch on and start to move up. It's very hard to defend yourself with iron-sights, and I don't think that in real life people with that kind of role would be denied a medium range scope on their weapons.