Project Reality Forums

[R-DEV]ohnomelon wrote:i never thought i'd be so excited to see acupat, let alone toy with the notion that at least in the fpv the pattern looks a little large? i'm guessing any lower and you'd lose the contrast from medium and far distances or something?

Sorry, couldn't resist

Some older ACU skins just looked plain gray from distance, at least thats what I've experienced.

Good job guys, can't wait to see the Stryker in action! I'm guessing that maybe, the BTR-90 could be downgraded to the BTR-80 in order to balance things a bit. Guess I'll probably have to wait until part 2 to find out.

moj wrote:Good job guys, can't wait to see the Stryker in action! I'm guessing that maybe, the BTR-90 could be downgraded to the BTR-80 in order to balance things a bit. Guess I'll probably have to wait until part 2 to find out.

I think its all but written in stone that the US Army will be getting the Bradley IFV as well.

agentscar wrote:
Quick Fact: Did you know Strykers are street legal in the U.S. ,you just have to have a "Wide Load" or "Oversized Load" thing on it.

makes me feel safe on a battlefield...

Yea,USI has the BEST Bradley IFV out there...

ironcomatose wrote:I think its all but written in stone that the US Army will be getting the Bradley IFV as well.

Yeah I can't wait. So maybe we'll be seeing Stykers and Bradleys Vs. BTR-80s and BMP3s on Kashan?

Oh my GOD. MY EYES ARE BURNING!!! MY EYES ARE BURNING.

Ok a few things from an US Army officer in a Stryker Brigade.

1) We DONT HAVE SAND COLORED STRYKERS. They are CARC Green.

2) Stryker's in a combat theater of operations will have SLAT armor on it. You will never see a Stryker in Iraq/Afghanistan without SLAT armor.

3) Weapons: WE DONT LIKE USING THE M68 as an optic, and we DONT use iron sights anymore. Every primary weapon in the Stryker brigade has some sort of optic on it. The priority is 1) ACOG 2) EOTECH Reflex and finally 3) If you have no other option, but an M68 on it.

I asked a long time ago if the team needed help with some references. In fact, I even put together a pretty large powerpoint together so that we could avoid these problems.

I really hope the team can sort this **** out before it's in final production.

PM me if you guys need help.

EDIT - Another thing I noticed that is KILLING ME.

The Stryker pictured is an 1126 ICV (Infantry carrier variant) HOWEVER, it's bumper says it's part of 2-25 ID, 2-14 CAV.............If it's in the CAV its an 1127 RV (recon variant) we dont use ICV's in the CAV.

Thank you.

Uh oh looks like someone didn't do their homework

Wow,you gey em' Mike!

I think we all knew about the weapons on it,camo color,and armor..At Least I did,but I kept my mouth shut...Yes,lets hope it gets sorted out...

Tis slightly in the future. Maybe the slightly in the future US made desert Cameo for them or something.

[R-CON]MikeAP wrote:Oh my GOD. MY EYES ARE BURNING!!! MY EYES ARE BURNING.

Ok a few things from an US Army officer in a Stryker Brigade.

1) We DONT HAVE SAND COLORED STRYKERS. They are CARC Green.

2) Stryker's in a combat theater of operations will have SLAT armor on it. You will never see a Stryker in Iraq/Afghanistan without SLAT armor.

3) Weapons: WE DONT LIKE USING THE M68 as an optic, and we DONT use iron sights anymore. Every primary weapon in the Stryker brigade has some sort of optic on it. The priority is 1) ACOG 2) EOTECH Reflex and finally 3) If you have no other option, but an M68 on it.

I asked a long time ago if the team needed help with some references. In fact, I even put together a pretty large powerpoint together so that we could avoid these problems.

I really hope the team can sort this **** out before it's in final production.

PM me if you guys need help.

EDIT - Another thing I noticed that is KILLING ME.

The Stryker pictured is an 1126 ICV (Infantry carrier variant) HOWEVER, it's bumper says it's part of 2-25 ID, 2-14 CAV.............If it's in the CAV its an 1127 RV (recon variant) we dont use ICV's in the CAV.

Thank you.

You could word it a bit differently, imho

You think the DEVs are oblivious to this stuff? Sand colored... picky. PR is not current conflict rather somewhat in the near future. I would hope we could get our act together and put a little paint on them for use in areas like Kashan.

Optics = balance issue. No ones saying it wont ever be changed but that seems to be the decision right now. I do agree though, it'd be nice to get proper optics for the G3, m16/m4 and Ak weapons at some point [non scoped optics]

I agree with the bumper thing though, if you are correct.

[edit: wow, I accidentally said Karkand instead of Kashan at first ]

agentscar wrote:BTW,I've always wondered...What's up with that random little chunk missing on the left side of the "chickenplate" on the Humvee?

Quick Fact: Did you know Strykers are street legal in the U.S. ,you just have to have a "Wide Load" or "Oversized Load" thing on it.

Yes, I've seen them on I-5 north of Seattle.

-REad

agentscar wrote:Wow,you gey em' Mike!

I think we all knew about the weapons on it,camo color,and armor..At Least I did,but I kept my mouth shut...Yes,lets hope it gets sorted out...

It's not about 'getting them'

I'm pretty pissed because back before the development I offered to help. I'd say I'm qualified to help with this considering I'm part of a Stryker Brigade and deployed to Iraq with them. I guess you can consider my word 'coming from the horses mouth'

What really upsets me is that I was told 'we have this under control'...to me thats like being told to PISS OFF. Unless they have someone more qualified than me doing historical advising for them, then I'd take it as an insult.

BTW. Looking at the Stryker model again, I see they're missing the vehicle commander's hatch. It's suppose to be next to the gunner. Defin another big boo boo.

'[R-CON wrote:OkitaMakoto;700526']You could word it a bit differently, imho

You think the DEVs are oblivious to this stuff? Sand colored... picky. PR is not current conflict rather somewhat in the near future. I would hope we could get our act together and put a little paint on them for use in areas like Kashan.

Optics = balance issue. No ones saying it wont ever be changed but that seems to be the decision right now. I do agree though, it'd be nice to get proper optics for the G3, m16/m4 and Ak weapons at some point [non scoped optics]

I agree with the bumper thing though, if you are correct.

Even in the future Strykers will NEVER be painted 'sand colored' whatever color that may be. There are reasons why the Stryker is carc green.

The bumper thing, IF I'M RIGHT? Hey guy, this is what I do for a living!

Nice spot Mike, all of us were too busy oohing and ahhing, I suppose we all need a dose of reality (pun not really intended).

Okita, he's got a valid point, this mod strives for realism, and this guy knows his vehicle. Most of us like the model, but it's not right, does it need to be changed, yes, but I'm sure we're all willing to take the current one being offered until a fixed version comes along.

Anyway, let me throw in my Oooh, Ahhh, because regardless of what Mike says, it still looks sexy.

The problem is not saying things are in need of changing, its the manner in which its said. Especially from a team member and taking your follow up post into consideration. I'm dropping it here because I don't care to continue and make things worse by bickering.

If you have a problem with the Stryker or the way the PR team treated your offerings, take it up with someone higher up via PM, no need to bash the team on the public forums. I also apologize for throwing this out into the open, but I believe the PR team needs to be mindful of the way it portrays itself on the public forums.

[R-CON]MikeAP wrote: Even in the future Strykers will NEVER be painted 'sand colored' whatever color that may be. There are reasons why the Stryker is carc green.

Pardon my ignorance, but why is it this way?

why, because most of the world has a tree in am mile, and they can camo better. And look better. But i have to agree with mike hee, if we can jsut change there color it would be alot better, most cant see or even read typing on back so its no a issue. But everyone can see the color.

The bottom point is,Mike is an ACTUAL Stryker operator...So he needs to be listened to,I can understand why he's upset.No one else to blame here,but the Devs in charge of making this vehicle...

What you've got to take into account is that this model was made nearly a year ago, by someone who isn't on the PR team.
Vehicle: Stryker! - Game Artist Forums
Therefore, you have to realise that, yes, although some things on the model may be a tad unrealistic, it is probably too late in the production process to change these things. The effort required for these details is not worth the effort for something 99% of people will not notice ingame.

And looking at your points:
The commanders hatch does seem to be there to me (well a hatch next to the gunner), it's just closed. Take a look at this render of the model:
http://img.photobucket.com/albums/v112/ ... ol/6-2.jpg

If there is a reason for the green paint, like you say, i'm sure this can be quickly and easily edited. Likewise for the number on the back.

There was definitely a stryker modeled with slat armour, look here:
http://img.photobucket.com/albums/v112/ ... gol/19.jpg
however, i don't know why it wasn't used. Probably because the cage didn't look good ingame or something.

Pride wrote:What you've got to take into account is that this model was made nearly a year ago, by someone who isn't on the PR team.
Vehicle: Stryker! - Game Artist Forums
Therefore, you have to realise that, yes, although some things on the model may be a tad unrealistic, it is probably too late in the production process to change these things. The effort required for these details is not worth the effort for something 99% of people will not notice ingame.

And looking at your points:
The commanders hatch does seem to be there to me (well a hatch next to the gunner), it's just closed. Take a look at this render of the model:
http://img.photobucket.com/albums/v112/ ... ol/6-2.jpg

If there is a reason for the green paint, like you say, i'm sure this can be quickly and easily edited. Likewise for the number on the back.

There was definitely a stryker modeled with slat armour, look here:
http://img.photobucket.com/albums/v112/ ... gol/19.jpg
however, i don't know why it wasn't used. Probably because the cage didn't look good ingame or something.

yep, the model was made outside of the mod and there are a few issues with it thou that is down to the MAs didn't really get many WIP pics like they do with our inside models. Most of the issues like pride said are to late to fix, and to small to really worry about.

As for the colour our MAs inform us that in a few years some "tan camo" strykers should start coming out of production, it is a fairly new weapon in the US Army and its still being fully integrated into it.

As for the cage, we will probaly put that on but it caused lots of problems sticking it on the scimitar.