Go Back   Tactical Gamer > Tactical > Battlefield 2 > Battlefield 2 - Project Reality Mod

Battlefield 2 - Project Reality Mod Discussion for the BF2 - Project Reality Mod

Reply
 
Thread Tools
Old 06-07-2007, 08:18 AM   #16 (permalink)
 
7ShadesOSin's Avatar
 
Join Date: Mar 2007
Location: Scotland
Age: 30
Posts: 186
Tournaments Joined: 0
Tournaments Won: 0
Re: Intended use of vehicles & weapons

Thanks asch, for taking the time to clarify.

Even if some of 'em still don't seem to get it...

__________________
7Shades

How sweet, thought lifeless, yet with life to lie,
And, without dying, O how sweet to die!
- from Thomas Warton's "Ode to Sleep"
7ShadesOSin is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 06-07-2007, 12:13 PM   #17 (permalink)
 
Donagel's Avatar
 
Join Date: Dec 2005
Location: Baltimore, MD, USA
Age: 41
Posts: 181
Tournaments Joined: 0
Tournaments Won: 0
Re: Intended use of vehicles & weapons

Just a clarification. The LAT is different than the insurgents RPG, correct?
Donagel is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 06-07-2007, 02:13 PM   #18 (permalink)
 
EBODude's Avatar
 
Join Date: Mar 2007
Location: Bolingbrook, Illinois
Posts: 94
Tournaments Joined: 0
Tournaments Won: 0
Re: Intended use of vehicles & weapons

Quote:
Originally Posted by Donagel View Post
Just a clarification. The LAT is different than the insurgents RPG, correct?
In my opinion, I think the RPG should be considered a L-AT.
EBODude is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 06-07-2007, 03:06 PM   #19 (permalink)
 
Join Date: Jan 2006
Posts: 323
Tournaments Joined: 0
Tournaments Won: 0
Re: Intended use of vehicles & weapons

Hardly fair, as it throws the whole "you should engage the enemy with your rifle" argument out of the window.
mingmong is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 06-07-2007, 04:26 PM   #20 (permalink)
 
Belhade's Avatar
 
Join Date: Apr 2005
Location: New York (no, not the city)
Age: 32
Posts: 1,885
Tournaments Joined: 0
Tournaments Won: 0
Re: Intended use of vehicles & weapons

Quote:
Originally Posted by Ferris Bueller View Post
Personally, I'd love to see some kind of locking system in place that requires a fix on a solid background calibrated for angles above normal ground (i.e. you cant aim at the road or low dunes, but you could aim at a mountain, wall, vehicle or rally point because of the high angles of the terrain/device), for a couple seconds before firing.
Some problems I forsee with that include AT ambush from high ground (shooting down onto a tank) and leading a tank in motion.
__________________
|TG-6th|Belhade
"I am actually looking forward to watching Jon and Kate plus 8." - Dirtboy




Belhade is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 06-07-2007, 05:38 PM   #21 (permalink)
 
Ferris Bueller's Avatar
 
Join Date: Sep 2006
Location: Hanging IV bags and charging paddles.
Age: 27
Posts: 6,406
Tournaments Joined: 0
Tournaments Won: 0
Re: Intended use of vehicles & weapons

Well, then simply make it so that it can only lock onto vehicles and not personnel or terrain.

The RPG is a different weapon entirely. You have that and a pistol, not exactly the best choice of weaponry, but still. You also have 2 rounds with it, which you cant kill a tank with unless you get REALLY lucky. But I think similar rules should apply to it as far as anti-personnel. Dont go one one one with it. As an insurgent, you shouldnt be running around on the ground with it out anyway. You should be on rooftops shooting down at groups of them. Much easier and better for the team as you're bound to die less.
Ferris Bueller is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 06-07-2007, 06:15 PM   #22 (permalink)
 
Sabre_Tooth_Tigger's Avatar
 
Join Date: Mar 2007
Location: freaking out!
Posts: 3,329
Tournaments Joined: 0
Tournaments Won: 0
Re: Intended use of vehicles & weapons

Its all restricted next version. The RPG appears twice on basrah as a pickup kit, it will become a rarity to see one.
In 0.6, engineer class seems the only way to spawn and kill a tank now for any side.

Just saying, I wouldnt argue too hard about it all when its changing anyway
__________________


If you find yourself in a fair fight, then you have obviously failed to plan properly.
Sabre_Tooth_Tigger is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 06-08-2007, 01:02 AM   #23 (permalink)
 
EBODude's Avatar
 
Join Date: Mar 2007
Location: Bolingbrook, Illinois
Posts: 94
Tournaments Joined: 0
Tournaments Won: 0
Re: Intended use of vehicles & weapons

Quote:
Originally Posted by Sabre_Tooth_Tigger View Post
Its all restricted next version. The RPG appears twice on basrah as a pickup kit, it will become a rarity to see one.
In 0.6, engineer class seems the only way to spawn and kill a tank now for any side.

Just saying, I wouldnt argue too hard about it all when its changing anyway
That's the way it should be. I love being sneaky and placing 3 packs of C4 on a tank.

Last edited by EBODude; 06-08-2007 at 09:26 AM.
EBODude is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 06-08-2007, 01:22 AM   #24 (permalink)
 
Cpt_RatBastard's Avatar
 
Join Date: Apr 2007
Location: Cali!
Age: 29
Posts: 52
Tournaments Joined: 0
Tournaments Won: 0
Re: Intended use of vehicles & weapons

Since when did the engy get 3 packs of C4?
__________________
<img src=http://webpages.charter.net/elmo130/tntcptratbastard%20(2).gif border=0 alt= />
Cpt_RatBastard is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 06-08-2007, 03:12 AM   #25 (permalink)
 
Join Date: Mar 2007
Posts: 143
Tournaments Joined: 0
Tournaments Won: 0
Re: Intended use of vehicles & weapons

Since the invention of riflemen


(edit)

The key diference I always saw between LAT and insurgent RPGs was the fact LAT had pretty much 0 deviation, whereas the RPG could easily miss a smallertarget merely by flying anywhere but the place you aimed.
__________________
"It's nothing to do with Stalker, really"
ChernobylKinsman is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 06-08-2007, 09:26 AM   #26 (permalink)
 
EBODude's Avatar
 
Join Date: Mar 2007
Location: Bolingbrook, Illinois
Posts: 94
Tournaments Joined: 0
Tournaments Won: 0
Re: Intended use of vehicles & weapons

Quote:
Originally Posted by Cpt_RatBastard View Post
Since when did the engy get 3 packs of C4?
The insurgents get 3 packs. IMO, 3 packs>2 RPGs
EBODude is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 06-08-2007, 07:43 PM   #27 (permalink)
 
Join Date: May 2007
Posts: 4
Tournaments Joined: 0
Tournaments Won: 0
Re: Intended use of vehicles & weapons

The ambusher class in .6 is the guy with C4 now and he only gets 2 packs. He can reload them and have a max of 4 (?) setup in game.
Fishw0rk is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 06-08-2007, 11:45 PM   #28 (permalink)
 
EBODude's Avatar
 
Join Date: Mar 2007
Location: Bolingbrook, Illinois
Posts: 94
Tournaments Joined: 0
Tournaments Won: 0
Re: Intended use of vehicles & weapons

Does he have a scoped rifle? Grenades?
EBODude is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 06-10-2007, 12:05 PM   #29 (permalink)
 
Sabre_Tooth_Tigger's Avatar
 
Join Date: Mar 2007
Location: freaking out!
Posts: 3,329
Tournaments Joined: 0
Tournaments Won: 0
Re: Intended use of vehicles & weapons

Scoped rifle is for riflemen I think and grenades, I dont think so.

Ambusher has mines, c4 & a shotgun - insurgent & militia mines do not ever display the red warning sign above them unlike normal forces but you still get the normal red sign at the sign of the screen that happens with friendly and hostile mines in every game.

I put a couple screen caps in the main 0.6 thread
__________________


If you find yourself in a fair fight, then you have obviously failed to plan properly.

Last edited by Sabre_Tooth_Tigger; 06-10-2007 at 12:31 PM.
Sabre_Tooth_Tigger is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 06-10-2007, 12:16 PM   #30 (permalink)
 
Switch's Avatar
 
Join Date: Mar 2007
Location: NJ
Posts: 1,409
Tournaments Joined: 0
Tournaments Won: 0
Re: Intended use of vehicles & weapons

Quote:
Originally Posted by TheSkudDestroyer View Post
Ugh, I got LAT'd in plain view, and it pissed me off quite a bit.

I was in the middle of a road. The guy ducks down after I fire at him, so I keep walking forward. I'm about 20m out from him. He comes back up with a damn LAT and blows me up. Infact, I'm almost certain it was an AT4, and he is chinese so... He purposefully picked it up.

LAT vs obstacles/entrenched enemy, sure.
LAT vs Lone infantry. Psh.
If he picked up a US kit, there's really no qualms what so ever about using a LAT on infy, if you think of it as a situational decision. Who cares about wasting an expensive round on a nominal target, you just took the weapon off the corpse of an enemy.
__________________
|TG|Switch

Better known as:
That noob who crashed the chopper.
That noob who ran over the mine.
That noob who TK'd me with a sniper rifle.
That noob who hit that APC at 300m with light AT! Our APC...
Switch is offline   Reply With Quote
Reply

Bookmarks


Currently Active Users Viewing This Thread: 1 (0 members and 1 guests)
 
Thread Tools

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 Off




» Log in
User Name:

Password:

Not a member yet?
Register Now!
» Advertisement



All times are GMT -4. The time now is 12:37 PM.


Powered by vBulletin® Version 3.8.2
Copyright ©2000 - 2009, Jelsoft Enterprises Ltd.
Search Engine Optimization by vBSEO 3.2.0
©2004-2008 - Tactical Gamer - All Rights Reserved