Buzzing Topics on the realitymod forums

[Eavy Gunner]

Simple really. Increase the recoil from firing from the hip or unsighted, and it won't be used as a room clearing weapon. Why do you think the HK21 and PKM arent used like this.

[AlmightyLion]

Add Apache to Operation Archer

If people got what they wanted, there would be a Apache and A10 - on every map.....

[Celestial1]

Wow, lots of debate going on, I like it. I apologize for my extremely long post, but feel free to skim since I tried to group up the subjects in bold!

(Note: when I say SAW, I mean all ARs respectively. I haven't used them myself in play, so I don't know if the M249 is actually different in regards to accuracy/recoil other than it being the only one with a scope at the time being)
In regards to SAW 'realism': I agree that the SAW is realistic, and I wouldn't have it any other way. However, I believe that due to it's realism and the 'unrealistic' properties of the assault rifles, I think we should kind of give way at least a little bit for skilled players; Just like soldiers, the player can become better at the game, I don't think we need to 'average' them out, but of course balance does need to be kept in areas, of course.

.756 deviation and prone fail: I think a lot of people are glancing over the fact that BF2 1.5 patch will have a fix to prone deviation, like BF2142. This will mean that prone diving will become a thing of the past!

Knife: I see your point, Taip3n. Like you said, I definitely wasn't implying a high and mighty attitude about it. I'm more emphasizing the fact that it can be circumvented by instead making players avoid the situation entirely, whether it be by aiming more accurately, bringing more of his squadmates with him, using other means to avoid it like using grenades in doorways, etc. I would much rather see incendiaries limited than removing knives, but if removing the knife opened up the doorway for something that could really push long-range firefights or better CQB abilities, I would love to see it implemented over the knife if it gave enough benefit. If knife could be mapped to a key, ala CoD4 where you hit 'v' to perform a quick slash, I'd be all for it, since it would both free up a weapon slot and still incorporate hand-to-hand combat.

Commander 'involvement' in the game: I agree that the commander kind of acts like a chess player, and I like this concept-I don't want to remove it in any way shape or form... However, if the UAV's hellfire ability were only to be used like a JDAM/Artillery/Mortars where it would only be activated for a certain time, and would require a reload time even if the 'recon' UAV was in flight, I would prefer that. It would mean that while the commanders job is still first and foremost the RTS or Chess aspect, he could also kind of get a little bit of an attention grabber to keep him interested or involved, especially when he's got a plan in action and would rather be able to directly assist his troops than sit back and hope everything goes well. In short, I don't disagree that it shouldn't be a time occupier, but I wouldn't mind giving that kind of flexibility and 'entertainment' for some of our players with lower attention spans and need for immediate gratification to be more likely to enjoy commander at least every now and then.

No, no weapon mounted UAVs, we don't need more air assets with only 32 players on the field. Not all of them need to be watching the sky.

I don't know if you caught what the thread was implying; players wouldn't be using it, only the commander, just like he would control the recon UAV.

They are right, an apache or other attack chopper would ruin this map as the open areas would just be death for the Taliban and the Taliban would have no good anti air defense. It's another flyboy wish list item.

Agreed, the map doesn't need that kind of asset as it is.

Pilot - 1
Engineer - 1
Crewman - 2
Officer - 2
Medic - 2
Sniper - 2
Anti-Air - 2
Marksman - 3
Light AT - 3
Grenadier - 4
Auto Rifle - 4
Heavy AT - 4

Agree to most. Heavy AT seems to be the only one I'm really iffy about. While I like the idea of confining it's extreme power to larger, more 'capable' squads, I would like to see it brought down to 2, simply due to the fact that a small H-AT squad can act as a support squad to infantry without being a burden to the team (Officer + H-AT = less players used than Officer+HAT+Medic+AR), and has more mobility and stealth to engage armor targets more effectively from long range or from a flank.


SAW is overpowered: Yes. It is, it really is. But in a good way, for the most part. I like that it seems they are increasing the kick from it when being fired, to make shorter bursts more effective and accurate, without adding a gamey aspect to it. The only issue about the SAW being overpowered is the fact that other rifles do not possess this type of accuracy, meaning that a SAW gunner is mostly impervious at long ranges besides a skilled marksman, or focusing much of the squads firepower on the SAW. Personally, I think the SAW should still be the beast it is... but I believe that the gunner should also be a little bit more vulnerable, since leaving your head sticking up for so long even if you are firing hundreds of bullets all over is still just asking to be shot by someone you aren't suppressing. This would mean that while the SAW can still effectively suppress, it would also take skill to suppress properly to stop any of the enemy from popping up (firing in bursts to avoid being inaccurate, waiting until they actually come up before showering them immediately in lead, rather than just shooting everywhere and hoping they're too scared to pop up).

SAW in CQB?: I'm a little iffy on this. I believe that the SAW should first and foremost be a good weapon for medium-long range suppression. Perhaps, when undeployed you would still have the same deviation penalties or close to them (Same or perhaps even larger maximum deviation, 6 seconds or less till minimum?). This would mean that a SAW could fire as much as he wants CQB after running, but it would kind of shower the room rather than acting as an impromptu Automatic M4 with a huge mag. This way, when using the SAW in CQB it would be best that the SAW is not the first to enter the room; he would be best off coming in after a rifleman or 2 who would be doing most of the fighting, then the SAW would either take a knee for a moment or stand still for a moment and aim before unleashing a good burst. With high maximum deviation, high recoil, and a large movement penalty it will encourage him not rushing into rooms, but using his squadmates to clear the room and himself acting as a support role to keep the enemies down or dead. I don't quite encourage the SAW not being able to be fired while moving, as I think it's too much of a gamey element to encourage the right behavior. Instead, I think undeployed's characteristics should be changed to encourage but not attempt to fully 'force' this behavior.

SAW overheat: I think it should retain a mostly realistic value (as in that it could overheat, but it wouldn't be encountered when firing during a single magazine), while kind of upping the chance of it happening overall. The solution to this, in my mind, is to perhaps slightly reduce the amount of time used to induce overheat, but also make the 'cooling' take a lot longer. This would mean that you could fire off one mag straight, with no ill effects. However, if you were to do that, reload, and attempt to do it again on a second mag, you would eventually induce a long, dreadful overheat. For example: If you attempted to do this as quickly as possible, you would induce the overheat within about 1.8 mags worth of ammo. A full overheat could be longer to cool (perhaps even up to a full minute or more) to really encourage proper firing of the SAW effectively. Every bullet you fire would increase your 'overheat level' slightly, and when you stop firing it should take a long time before it cooled down. This would mean that using a SAW in long firefights (which could become more of the norm if rifles were more accurate and everyone was a little more vulnerable), you would want to balance effective suppression of the enemy and the cooling of your weapon (perhaps even some reiteration of the overheat bar could be brought back in, so that less experienced SAW users can still try to judge themselves, and the bar itself being in view could reinforce the thought in more players to manage the heat by firing in shorter burst, etc.







Overall thoughts on Deviation/Ballistics/Suppression, etc (Wall of text, sorry!)
Personally, I'm all for making players require more skill to be effective on the battlefield. However, not skill in the same manner of other games; Instead of just being able to place the crosshair on the enemy and fire and that be the end of it, I would rather see ballistics incorporated in some way shape or form (even if wind/etc cannot be simulated, it's a step further in my eyes). This doesn't mean that deviation has to be removed or reduced by extremes, as I believe that deviation is actually one of the bigger factors in making the game feel 'right'.

Personally, I would love to see CA's full ballistics, with no tracers (personally, I just don't think they're tracers are necessary... they're nice, but more often than not I'd rather take cover and listen to the firing than try to find the source by tracer because it means sticking my head out to do so). Since there are ballistics, long range firefights will be a lot more about knowing how to aim, and how to fire, and how to effectively and quickly do so. But this only effects up-down travel of the projectile, which means that it would be a simple 'range' estimate for the player, and he could score headshots all day long.

So, with these full ballistics, players would learn to fire over longer distances, allowing long-range firefights to be applicable but not too dreadfully easy. But it still needs a little something to kind of slow down the fights and make player skill just a little less reliable, and that is deviation... I believe that the .756 minimum deviation model was close, but .86's maximum deviation is a large improvement.

With .756's minimum deviation, players can be more accurate at larger ranges, to make long range firefights more feasible. With this, many of the restricted kits will become more useful: In a firefight at 300m, rifleman can peak, fire, and get relatively close to knocking the block off of anyone exposing themselves. However, a grenadier can easily, from behind cover, land a very accurate grenade round and kill a target; A marksman can take out a rifleman very easily due to his extreme accuracy, when someone is foolish enough to peak out of cover for too long. An Automatic Rifleman can pin the squad effectively with smaller bursts, and keep heads down so that other kits can function (ie keeping their marksman down while your riflemen engage other enemies).

With .86's maximum deviation, players that are defending have an inherit advantage due to the fact that no movement = no deviation. Assaulting teams are encouraged to either have more people involved quickly on firing at a target, or using grenades and such to assist in getting the advantage in a CQB situation.

With a suppression effect that acts as a 'blink' it will act as a reminder to get down for safety rather than trying to force the player back down because they are unable to shoot back. With the rifles being more accurate, it will mean that actual suppression will cause the player to react much more quickly to the 'blink' because he knows that if he gets the effect it means they're firing at him, and they're probably going to hit him.

In regards to grenades, I would very much like to see the current suppression effect to be caused as a 'shell shock' effect to anyone within a substantial radius, including through certain objects if possible. If done right, it would mean that throwing a grenade into a room would not only have the chance to wound or kill an enemy, but would also stun any enemies whether they be hiding behind a table, or another object in the room. Grenades in small areas would become much more effective to a breaching team because the single grenade in the room guarantees an advantage in assaulting a building if used. This stun radius should preferably be a bit larger than the actual radius in which the grenade does damage. This way, even if a grenade lands out of range to kill an enemy, there is a good chance he is stunned due to the explosion and will be quite a bit easier to kill if this stunning effect is taken advantage of. (IMO, grenades wounding radius should be increased. The kill/critical wound radius could remain the same, but a larger radius in which you would take up to say 25% damage would be also in place. A healthy soldier will be slightly wounded and need slight medical treatment if within this range, but will only be on the verge of beginning to bleed, so it won't be debilitating.)


And, lastly, more kills available. IMO, many things in the game should actually provide a kill, rather than a critical wound state. Here's my list:
(1) Headshots from Rifles. With rifles being more accurate to longer ranges but still retaining a bit of deviation and 'unreliability', center mass should be more focused on than headshots. Therefore, on the off chance you do get one, you should be rewarded for your skilled aiming and luck in deviation.
(2) Direct shots from large rounds or extremely close HE rounds. If you are hit by a large cannon (IFV, Attack Helicopter, Jets etc)'s AP round directly, you should be KIA. If hit by a HE round within a very short distance (<5m, maybe), there should be a good chance to be KIA.
(3) AT weapons. Though AT's radius has been decreased against infantry, a shot that hits a dead on should be a kill, and very close shots should either critically wound or heavily wound. Since the AT blast radius has been reduced to a very small amount, if the squad is spread the AT hit would only have the opportunity to wound any 1 man severely. If it hits within 2m, he should get the current suppression effect, and perhaps up to 50% wounding maximum. Within 1m, he should be critically wounded, and a direct hit should be a kill.
(4) Grenades. If a grenade lands within a short distance (3m) you should pretty much be a guaranteed kill. Within 6m, critical wounding. Within 8m, substantial wounding, and 10m slight wounding. All players in a 10m radius will recieve the suppression effect. This includes UGL rounds.
(5) Heavy Weaponry (Artillery, Mortars, JDAM, CAS weaponry). These large weaponry are much less frequent, and should really have the ability to shake things up when employed. Artillery/Mortars should have a reasonably small radius in which players would be killed directly by the blast, a medium radius for critical wounding, and a large radius for 'shell shock'. JDAM should have larger kill and wounding radius than arty/mortars, by a reasonable amount (10m kill, 20m critical?). A larger radius that spanned about half of the distance of the cloud of smoke created would recieve the suppression effect (preferably through wall) that would last a sizeable time, and outside this radius only smoke would effect the player directly. CAS weaponry on infantry should go along this same line of thinking (cannon rounds would act like #2 above, bombs act in a similar fashion to the area attack JDAM though relatively smaller radii, etc etc)

[snooggums]

I don't know if you caught what the thread was implying; players wouldn't be using it, only the commander, just like he would control the recon UAV.

Yeah I got the point of the thread, it would give the commander a remote killing weapon not unlike vanilla's artillery that did not require spotting. My comment was that since there are only 32 players per team already there are more air assets than needed already because on any map with air assets the ground troops have to keep an eye on the sky as well as the ground. At least with the current artillery setup you watch for the spotters on the ground instead of a UAV in the sky because it can kill you instead of just keeping out of sight for a spotting type UAV.

We have enough offensive air power. More would detract from the ground player's fun. AIX is a good example of 'only fun for the pilots on versus' and I don't want PR to go any further that way.

[Startrekern]

Honestly, the SAW makes a wonderful CQB weapon simply BECAUSE of it's massive deviation and rate of fire: Changes are, you're going to hit and kill them at close range firing from the hip, and you really don't have to worry about aiming. You burn through a lot of ammo this way, but it is effective.

[MarineSeaknight]

If people got what they wanted, there would be a Apache and A10 - on every map.....

*cough* and a TOW HMMWV *cough*

[Celestial1]

Yeah I got the point of the thread, it would give the commander a remote killing weapon not unlike vanilla's artillery that did not require spotting. My comment was that since there are only 32 players per team already there are more air assets than needed already because on any map with air assets the ground troops have to keep an eye on the sky as well as the ground. At least with the current artillery setup you watch for the spotters on the ground instead of a UAV in the sky because it can kill you instead of just keeping out of sight for a spotting type UAV.

I see your point.

However, since the UAV could still function just as any area attack would (takes 30 mins to 1 hour to charge, is only in effect for x amount of time, and then goes through the recharge cycle), as well as the fact that it could perhaps need to be 'requested' by a player (request on the target, the commander can accept the request, UAV 'spawns' and circles the target, lazes from players can be seen by the UAV and he can launch them at the targets), and many other ways this can be worked around... I have to disagree in this case.

Implemented wrong and it could be a nightmare (can fire missiles at any time by commander discretion, has a large amount of missiles per use, etc)... Implement it right and it basically acts as an 'interactive' area attack. Not only that, but it could be implemented on maps that do NOT have CAS; Asad Khal is a decent example... The MEC pinning you down with their BRDM, and your Area Attack is up? Call in the UAV, commander can then accept and engage the target, and you have a armored car out of the way.




IMO, I would much rather see more interactive area attacks where proper.
Want to use the JDAM on a moving target? Request the JDAM, get a laze on the target, and the JDAM will spawn up at 5000m or whatever, and will drop just like a normal bomb from a jet (will guide directly to the laze), making it more of a viable area attack against armored targets. If you don't want to hit a target that could move, you can always just request it as you do now, and it will work the same as it does currently.
Of course, things like artillery and mortars shouldn't have this ability, but giving more flexibility and use for them all would be great.

Not to mention the fact that like other area attacks it could be chosen to be available only on some maps (Just like JDAM/Arty/Mortars, only one of them would be available on the map), where it 'fits' in.

[Startrekern]

UAV 'spawns' and circles the target

The devs did say that they couldn't make the UAV circle.

[BigGaayAl]

Grenadier - 4
Auto Rifle - 4
Heavy AT - 4

I like this!
It gives tools to the largest squads. It will also cut down on some of the 'ambushes' where people shoot stuff out of the main from as close as the rules allow.

The saw limit is 2 now no? It should at least be 3 or even 4 (3 taking into acccount disconnects etc, but the normal squad is 6 so you have 2 to spare). I personallly like the current LMG more than any previous version (not that its perfect). But it eis too easy now to collect them because there are so many around. I've had squads where everyone except the officer and medic had an lmg. I know, I should have made em drop some .

[d1sp0sabl3H3r0]

Request kits I can think of off the top of my head and the squad size I think is appropriate:


Grenadier - 4
Auto Rifle - 4
Heavy AT - 4

These requirements would mesh nicely with the doctrines outlined in this document. Essentially a PR squad is actually a fire team, the requirement for numbers would parallel those in real life.


Fire team composition:


Squad composition:


I realize that these vary from military to military, but the point is that you won't see a SAW running around with a spotter alone, acting simply as a sniper team with a higher rate of fire.

However, no matter what, if any, changes are made to the kit request system and minimum requirements, people are going to do what they want. You can't mod the players is the single most import axiom in online gaming.

[Celestial1]

The devs did say that they couldn't make the UAV circle.

Because of the way it functions, it cannot circle on it's own as per the 'current' coding of the recon UAV. But we should all know that the vBF2 UAV circles. By using that model and attaching what essentially would be a helicopter gun cam, which could only fire hellfires, it can automatically circle and fire.


The UAV being put in place as of '0.9' will be basically coded as a hellfire vBF2 missile, that moves slower, cannot change altitude, the camera is aimed downward instead of forward, and the hellfire 'missile' has a UAV model instead.

Because it already is a missile, it is impossible (assumption, as I don't know the ins and outs of the engine) to have it fire off it's own 'missile'. By having a function like an area attack request that by code would remove the 'recon UAV' from the map, then spawns an 'attack UAV' in it's place that will automatically circle ala vBF2, with a guncam attached, it is possible that coding may allow it to fire missiles of it's own.

This is a much more plausible solution as opposed to trying to make a 'missile' fire it's own 'missile'. If the vBF2 UAV acts as a missile in the same respective ways, then no, it's not likely that it's possible.

(It's also possible that the DEVs don't want missiles from the UAVs and used the "it can't be done" phrasing to avoid comments on it. I'm not saying that's a bad thing; if they said it was possible but they didn't want it, then there would probably be more posts about it than there are about fastropes.)

[d1sp0sabl3H3r0]

But why have it fire a missile? Is it really necessary to add yet another "death from above" feature to PR? What would be the equivalent for the factions that do not get the UAV? Why does there have to be another CAS element on maps that don't currently have one?

[Wicks]

When oh when will the Dev's listen to me and implement the 'A.Wickens DEATH STAR'. It as a giant metal ball shaped not unlike my giant head that I would control with the (admittedly 2x AA battery) power of my mind. It would have a range of armaments including Lazor Death Ray, Wind of Fire (kinda combination cigarette/beer breath) enviromental attack and a mind control weapon called 'Frickin Obssession of the Pilots'. This would drive all players on the server to desire hugely imbalancing aerial attacks they alone could control to play out some twisted fantasy where the entire server has turned up just for them to live out their Tom Cruise/Fighter Pilot/I am descended from John Travolta as a 9 foot Alien/death from above/you are all just powerless pawns in my singleplayer dreamworld scenario!

[Dreadnought]

You do, however, have to appreciate any game that is so open ended that people have the option to specialize to the point of becoming whores.

[sporkife]

You do, however, have to appreciate any game that is so open ended that people have the option to specialize to the point of becoming whores.

Yes...which is why the AA should get buffed so I can be an AAV whore on quin and kashan.

I think something needs to be tuned about the SAW, but I'm not exactly sure what. I think the new recoil and animation thereof (in the .9 video) is a good step, and also the new marksman deploy mode, so there are more guns that can hit someone from over 350m accurately running around (good for killing LMGs, that thing is).