project reality header
Go Back   Project Reality Forums > PR:BF2 Mod Forums > PR:BF2 Suggestions
19 Nov 2017, 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.

Reply
 
LinkBack Thread Tools Display Modes
Old 06-18-2010, 02:03 AM   #11
Imchicken1

Imchicken1's Avatar
Default Re: Conventional Army Mine Increase

I <3 Ninja's idea



I won't cluck for you
Imchicken1 is offline Reply With Quote
Old 06-18-2010, 02:37 AM   #12
ytman
Default Re: Conventional Army Mine Increase

Well if we do get a Fascam suitcase... I'd be happy
ytman is offline Reply With Quote
Old 06-18-2010, 03:26 AM   #13
alberto_di_gio

alberto_di_gio's Avatar
Default Re: Conventional Army Mine Increase

FASCAM is a good idea. Though its not coming soon as far as I understood from Ninja

alberto_di_gio is offline Reply With Quote
Old 06-18-2010, 09:31 AM   #14
MikeDude

MikeDude's Avatar
Default Re: Conventional Army Mine Increase

Just get a new/better type of mine



[3dAC] MikeDude
Loving PR since 0.2.
MikeDude is offline Reply With Quote
Old 06-18-2010, 10:45 AM   #15
Wellink

Wellink's Avatar
Default Re: Conventional Army Mine Increase

Maybe the APC's should be able to lay a mine, might give the .50 APC's some interesting options. Not sure if its realistic tho.

Thanks Dennis for making this sig!
Wellink is offline Reply With Quote
Old 06-18-2010, 11:28 AM   #16
ytman
Default Re: Conventional Army Mine Increase

Well since we can't expect FASCAM too much, lets discuss this suggestion a little more.

Current Mechanics:

2 person minefield (max 60 mines):

100mx100m @ 60 mines = .006 saturation. (A little less than a key pad in a 4km map)
100mx50m @ 60 mines = .012 saturation.
100mx25m @ 60 mines = .024 saturation. (25 meters is slightly less than the two two lane streets in PR)

Suggestion:

If you double the mine placement to 120:

100mx100m @120 mines = .012 saturation.
100mx50m @ 120 mines = .024 saturation.
100mx25m @ 120 mines = .048 saturation.

Now of course the increase is 2 fold, and really a saturation of 24+ becomes too much. However, with such mine laying abilities it might be easier to lay a larger amount of smaller dimension and density of mines.

Again such a suggestion has a best impact on the 4km maps of the game.

Quote:
Originally Posted by mikeyboyz View Post
Just get a new/better type of mine
What do you mean?
ytman is offline Reply With Quote
Old 06-18-2010, 11:48 AM   #17
Jonny
Default Re: Conventional Army Mine Increase

Quote:
Originally Posted by ytman View Post
Well since we can't expect FASCAM too much, lets discuss this suggestion a little more.

Current Mechanics:

2 person minefield (max 60 mines):

100mx100m @ 60 mines = .006 saturation. (A little less than a key pad in a 4km map)
100mx50m @ 60 mines = .012 saturation.
100mx25m @ 60 mines = .024 saturation. (25 meters is slightly less than the two two lane streets in PR)

Suggestion:

If you double the mine placement to 120:

100mx100m @120 mines = .012 saturation.
100mx50m @ 120 mines = .024 saturation.
100mx25m @ 120 mines = .048 saturation.

Now of course the increase is 2 fold, and really a saturation of 24+ becomes too much. However, with such mine laying abilities it might be easier to lay a larger amount of smaller dimension and density of mines.

Again such a suggestion has a best impact on the 4km maps of the game.



What do you mean?
Lets add some meaning to those numbers:
assuming a gap of 2.5m will stop an APC, each mine must cover a 2.5x2.5m square area to stop it. This gives a 'saturation' (mines per area) of 0.16 to compare things against. Anything higher is more effective at stoppint movement, anything lower is less effective.
Jonny is offline Reply With Quote
Old 06-18-2010, 12:40 PM   #18
ryan d ale

ryan d ale's Avatar
Default Re: Conventional Army Mine Increase

I know that it would be realistic to have 'deployable' mine fields but I'm not interested in the idea for this particular game.

I like how the mine system is now

My 2p.

Project Reality's Unofficial Self-Appointed Anti vehicle mufti
Over 8 years and still not banned
Obligatory Epic Forum Quote (QFT + LOL)
saXoni: "According to ********'s title their server is for skilled people only, so this doesn't make any sense. Are you sure you were playing on ********?"

Indy Media
ryan d ale is offline Reply With Quote
Old 06-18-2010, 03:48 PM   #19
USMCMIDN
Default Re: Conventional Army Mine Increase

Quote:
Originally Posted by mikeyboyz View Post
Just get a new/better type of mine
Exactly we should put in game a nuclear mine...

Blue Peacock - Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia
USMCMIDN is offline Reply With Quote
Old 06-18-2010, 06:51 PM   #20
ytman
Default Re: Conventional Army Mine Increase

Quote:
Originally Posted by Jonny View Post
Lets add some meaning to those numbers:
assuming a gap of 2.5m will stop an APC, each mine must cover a 2.5x2.5m square area to stop it. This gives a 'saturation' (mines per area) of 0.16 to compare things against. Anything higher is more effective at stoppint movement, anything lower is less effective.
A gap of only 2.5m? I never place mines closer than 5m due to the phenomenom of overkill (and the general lack of coverage of the whole minefield as seperation becomes smaller). Many times I've seen a vehicle run over multiple mines after being destroyed simply due to momentum at time of destruction. Simply, when mines just straight out kill a vehcile (I disagree with this, unless it is a lightly amored vehicle), you only need to get lucky once.

Besides each 'layer' of a minefield doesn't have to have the same exact linear density. You have the heavy LD at the entrance and exit and the middle will be sporadic.

But in anycase that is a topic for the think tank.
ytman is offline
Last edited by ytman; 06-18-2010 at 07:00 PM..
Reply With Quote
Reply


Tags
army, conventional, increase, mine
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 11:14 PM.


Powered by: vBulletin. ©vBulletin Solutions, Inc.
Search Engine Optimization by vBSEO 3.6.1
All Content Copyright ©2004 - 2015, Project Reality.