project reality header
Go Back   Project Reality Forums > PR:BF2 Mod Forums > PR:BF2 Suggestions
20 Apr 2014, 00:00:00 (PRT)
Register Forum RulesDeveloper Blogs Project Reality Members List Search Today's Posts Mark Forums Read
PR:BF2 Suggestions Suggestions from our community members for PR:BF2. Read the stickies before posting.

Contact Support Team Frequently Asked Questions Register today!

Reply
 
LinkBack Thread Tools Display Modes
Old 04-04-2006, 12:48 AM   #1
~WPN~ Buggies

~WPN~ Buggies's Avatar
Default AT Class under powered!

Surely you cannot send an AT gunner into combat with just the AT missle and a pistol? How often do you see AT gunners in the field with just a pistol. Can you change this? The class needs some sort of shoulder fired weapon you would think?


To view links or images in signatures your post count must be 1 or greater. You currently have 0 posts.
~WPN~ Buggies is offline Reply With Quote
Old 04-04-2006, 01:32 AM   #2
DangChang

DangChang's Avatar
Default

The pictures you're probably seeing of soldiers running around with a rifle probably isn't an AT soldier, more like a light AT soldier. Did he happen to carry an AT4? AT4's weigh in at about four pounds, while the SRAW weighs in at about twenty-two. Because one isn't enough to take out a tank, they give you three (should be two In my opinion).

EDIT: Whoops, AT4 Weighs about 18 pounds.


To view links or images in signatures your post count must be 1 or greater. You currently have 0 posts.
DangChang is offline
Last edited by DangChang; 04-04-2006 at 01:54 AM..
Reply With Quote
Old 04-04-2006, 01:37 AM   #3
Katarn
Retired PR Developer
Default

2 and a PDW should be enough in my opinion. The AT rockets are getting a boost in power for .3 though, so you won't have to wait too long for this to be balanced.
Katarn is offline Reply With Quote
Old 04-04-2006, 01:41 AM   #4
Neuromante
Default

^ I agree on this, they should be two. And more splash damage should be added too. BTW going back to the topic, I remember the devs saying something like so to explain their choice on these forums: "We did this for teamwork purposes. Protect your AT guy, or be raped by armor."
Neuromante is offline Reply With Quote
Old 04-04-2006, 01:46 AM   #5
Katarn
Retired PR Developer
Default

rifleman will still be able to destroy an AT gunner at range, and ideally, that's whom the enemy would like to aim for, assuming they're an organized enemy. Splash damage I believe will not be boosted, but I don't think you'll have to worry about that, since we might be incorporating an RPG-7.
Katarn is offline Reply With Quote
Old 04-04-2006, 02:58 AM   #6
RikiRude
Retired PR Developer

RikiRude's Avatar
Send a message via AIM to RikiRude Send a message via MSN to RikiRude
Default

i dont mind the splash damage on the AT rockets, i rather fire an AT rocket because im out of pistol ammo at someone and have it not kill them, then having noob tubers using rockets all the time

Proud n00b tub3r of 5 spam bots!

To view links or images in signatures your post count must be 1 or greater. You currently have 0 posts.

To view links or images in signatures your post count must be 1 or greater. You currently have 0 posts.
Quote:
Originally Posted by [R-CON]2Slick4U
That's like being the smartest kid with down syndrome.
To view links or images in signatures your post count must be 1 or greater. You currently have 0 posts.
RikiRude is offline Reply With Quote
Old 04-04-2006, 03:06 AM   #7
weidel
Default

If introducing the RPG-7, why not go all the way and introduce the SMAW or the AT-4 for the marines. Then they will be able to field a proper weapon besides the AT weapon instead of just a pistol. Then the AT soldier will be a rifleman with a specialty when handling vehicles, just like the medic is a rifleman with a specialty when handling wounded.
weidel is offline Reply With Quote
Old 04-04-2006, 03:08 AM   #8
RikiRude
Retired PR Developer

RikiRude's Avatar
Send a message via AIM to RikiRude Send a message via MSN to RikiRude
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by weidel
If introducing the RPG-7, why not go all the way and introduce the SMAW or the AT-4 for the marines. Then they will be able to field a proper weapon besides the AT weapon instead of just a pistol. Then the AT soldier will be a rifleman with a specialty when handling vehicles, just like the medic is a rifleman with a specialty when handling wounded.
^PR is going to implement something like this, I think they are putting the AT-4 in.

Proud n00b tub3r of 5 spam bots!

To view links or images in signatures your post count must be 1 or greater. You currently have 0 posts.

To view links or images in signatures your post count must be 1 or greater. You currently have 0 posts.
Quote:
Originally Posted by [R-CON]2Slick4U
That's like being the smartest kid with down syndrome.
To view links or images in signatures your post count must be 1 or greater. You currently have 0 posts.
RikiRude is offline Reply With Quote
Old 04-04-2006, 03:27 AM   #9
Top_Cat_AxJnAt
Default

I really belive that it should take 2 soldiers to take an Abrams out becuase this encourages team work and in reall life i think that a small team of insurrgent with RPG would be needed. (mEC should carry RPG adn made more arab with head scarfs and all)

Another 2 ideas are:
A single rocket can be carried by a soldier, wihile not droping his main rifle.
But it would take 4 shots to destroy a MTB. THis is a perfct number beucase a small squad (4) of men with mabey 2/3 rockets would not be able to take one out but a larger one with more single rocket carring men OR the new class i suggest below would have no probs atall.

Could mantian a class that carries 2/3 and no rifle. Dont think in reall life you can carry 3 beucase most of the rockets are diposable tubes and it would be very bulky.
However this could be improve if a non disposable launcher was found (mabey the javlin) and 1 man carried the launcher and a single shot while a 2nd man carried his own rifle and 2 rounds OR no rifle and 3 rounds! THis would take 2 shots to disable a MBT.

I belive this could improve gameplay considerable - tanks are less fearfull of dying becuase the majority of enemies will not be equipted with the big anti tank rocket but at the same time alot of soldiers (carring 1) will be able to have a crack at one.
Fair for all sides i think and would mean you could really set up a defensive position with one of the big missiles becuase 2 men working together could, if accurate take out 2 MTB's.

THIS whole system can be improved by making maps larger and more open.
Including more small jeeps (hunvees and the like). WHERE men gain point for transportign people around e.g 2 points = 2 people/ 4 = 4people.
Providing more cover, both natural and man - made that enbles fire fights to happen.
These things would ensure one anti tanks man can not sit near the centre of the map and destroy ever tank he sees - making vehicles life's easier BUT the terrain and the new transport system would enable anti tank crews to work more effectively. And if a AT crew foudn them selves with out transport there threat would be signafcantly diminsished, due to Very long walk to get to the enemy!
Top_Cat_AxJnAt is offline
Last edited by Top_Cat_AxJnAt; 04-04-2006 at 03:39 AM..
Reply With Quote
Old 04-04-2006, 03:13 PM   #10
~WPN~ Buggies

~WPN~ Buggies's Avatar
Default

Anyway... my post was lost in all this. What I am saying... give the AT class an M4 or something.


To view links or images in signatures your post count must be 1 or greater. You currently have 0 posts.
~WPN~ Buggies is offline Reply With Quote
Reply


Tags
class, powered
Thread Tools
Display Modes

Posting Rules
You may not post new threads
You may not post replies
You may not post attachments
You may not edit your posts

BB code is On
Smilies are On
[IMG] code is On
HTML code is Off
Trackbacks are On
Pingbacks are On
Refbacks are On



All times are GMT -4. The time now is 01:42 AM.


Powered by: vBulletin. ©vBulletin Solutions, Inc.
Search Engine Optimization by vBSEO 3.6.1
All Content Copyright ©2004 - 2014, Project Reality.