Project Reality Forums

FFG wrote:I feel like some of your hostility towards people with differing opinions is due to the fact deep down inside, You know they are right.

i always ask myself if you really mean all that bullshit you write....holy fuck

also i cant stop laughing at all the people who come here and act like PR is a military simulation and not a BF2 mod with a realistic touch. and therefore act like 100% realism should be the goal here. you guys completely disregard balance and gameplay just for the sake of what? being closer to reality? go fucking play arma or whatever and join a milsim unit of old farts who werent good enough to be real soldiers and therefore have to play it online.

also im completely with frontliners post. its a well written post and i also am baffled by that fact how DEVs push out stuff like that and they say things like "yeah we knew what problems would come but but but but and we just remove weapons to fix that if necessary" what kind of DEV attitude is that? holy nutsack "we know it will be broken but we will just remove feature if needed to fix the stuff" i mean come on....

gwa1hir wrote:-snip-

What dev said they would remove weapons? Where is this post?

Rabbit wrote:What dev said they would remove weapons? Where is this post?

didnt he say that there will be M14s removed from most kits if necessary? (speaking of vietnam)

FFG wrote:PR isn't a run and gun, meme everyone with better mechanical skill game. I've always seen it as being a game of mentally outplaying the enemy.

You should be playing to the strengths of your weapons and being mindful of the strengths of the enemy weapons.

I know what this game is about. I've been playing PR for almost 10 years. Don't portray me as someone who desires this game to be like Battlefield/Cod.

All I'm saying is that along the road to realism you have to be mindful of game balance. There's plenty of things in PR that are not realistic but are like this for the purpose of fun gameplay while still maintaining an authentic experience that seperates it from the big budget mainstream shooters...

gwa1hir wrote:didnt he say that there will be M14s removed from most kits if necessary? (speaking of vietnam)

Ahh yeah I found it.

I may have to remove some of the M14's on Vietnam for example

Honestly I think that is one of the last weapons that should be replaced, I think currently it makes it a viable option for US now considering most just went with the lazor m16.

Rabbit wrote:What dev said they would remove weapons? Where is this post?

Zwilling literally said "Most submachine guns in particular got replaced with larger-caliber weapons in spawn menu kits. These were moved instead to ones that don't need firepower as much, like the engineer.", not a removal, but rather a preemptive manoeuver to negate their damage being an issue. They made these weapons terrible, and the only way around it, or so they figured, was to put them somewhere else so we won't see them as much. Too bad that SMGs play a significant enough role in all theaters but modern, especially in WW2 due to the lack of automatic firearms that make it interesting when you realize that the SMGs are much better than rifles in most situations. Except now they aren't, even without fucking body armour!

The issue WAS KNOWN BEFOREHAND and they thought the best idea was to NOT address it in an acceptable way. And that leaves me utterly baffled.

FFG wrote:PR isn't a run and gun, meme everyone with better mechanical skill game. I've always seen it as being a game of mentally outplaying the enemy.

>Battle Rifles trash everything in CQB
>"mentally outplaying the enemy"
>yeah no

I've researched it, and it appears that snipers from NATO countries would be using AP .300 win mag and AP .338 lapua mag as well as .50 BMG against adversaries with quality plate armor.

My point is, there is no possible realistic way that a NATO sniper would ever be going against a faction wearing plates and aiming for the legs because his rifle couldn't penetrate. It's not remotely realistic, and it ruins the sniper class in the game. The realistic option for in-game would be to change out all of the .308 sniper rifles on armor maps with .338. This is true for all factions, with insurgents possibly being the exception.

Bonecrusher76 wrote:I've researched it, and it appears that snipers from NATO countries would be using AP .300 win mag and AP .338 lapua mag as well as .50 BMG against adversaries with quality plate armor.

My point is, there is no possible realistic way that a NATO sniper would ever be going against a faction wearing plates and aiming for the legs because his rifle couldn't penetrate. It's not remotely realistic, and it ruins the sniper class in the game. The realistic option for in-game would be to change out all of the .308 sniper rifles on armor maps with .338. This is true for all factions, with insurgents possibly being the exception.

We're going off what these militaries currently use (to be the best of our abilities ofc) not what they supposedly "would be" using. We're certainly not going to create some make believe rifles on pure conjecture. So the switch you suggest won't be happening.

As a side note 7.62 sniper rifles didn't one shot kill through body armour in previous versions of the game either.

PR was always about gameplay and teamwork with a lot of content.

If people "adobt to the meta" a lot of content wont be used anymore (smg, shotgun, snipers)

Another point is the engagement range. With the new deadliness in closer combat people dont have time to teamwork. Take 7.6 AR and go full rambo is the better option now.

What PR really needed is more maps and balanced layouts (mostly asset wise)

At its core it's just not enjoyable. It may be more realistic or accurate or whatever but getting 1 shot just isn't fun. The longer engagements is what makes PR more enjoyable than its counterparts like arma/squad insurgency. The time to kill was at a perfect level before, it just isn't comfy anymore.

The clowny fights where two people bump into each other are some of the most enjoyable moments

I like the damage drop off, I don't like the increased 7.62 and i don't like the additional damage hitbox below the vest.

I'd like to see 7.62 toned down, to just slightly higher than it was before. The waist hit box damage reduced(but still higher than chest) and pistol and smg damage increased so they're not completely obsolete (falklands medic was already frustrating, now it's impossible)

in my opinion all caliber should be deadly on the clode range (~50m, ok 9mm less deadly) and may kill nmy 1-2 bullet, becouse IRL in CQB dosnt metter what kind of caliber hit your body. and this fact can make buffed smg and other weapon deadliest. after 50m all weapons may have "IRL" energy losses. and all will be fine, all weapons and kits can into CQB and we have different weapon energy on the long distance

[R-DEV]camo wrote:We're going off what these militaries currently use (to be the best of our abilities ofc) not what they supposedly "would be" using. We're certainly not going to create some make believe rifles on pure conjecture. So the switch you suggest won't be happening.

As a side note 7.62 sniper rifles didn't one shot kill through body armour in previous versions of the game either.

Respectfully,

Make believe rifles? Pure conjecture? .300 Win MAG, .338 Lapua, and .50BMG are in current use and have been for years. AP (black tip) ammunition has been mass produced and extensively used by the military, including the regular infantry, since World War 2.

An Introduction To Collecting .30-06 Cartridges - International Ammunition Association



Chris Kyle and other US snipers extensively used .300 WIN MAG in urban theaters of Iraq

https://www.sofmag.com/the-weaponry-of- ... al-sniper/



The next sniper system of the US military is also a .300 WIN MAG

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/M2010_Enh ... iper_Rifle



And yes, most of the sniper rifles have always one shotted in the game over the last 10 years that I have played. The only ones that didn't were the Russian one and the Insurgent ones. This was buffed a few patches ago by ZWILLING after extensive forum discussion and community consensus.

I will drop this if anyone can reliably show me that NATO snipers are being regularly trained and instructed to aim for the legs and arms because they can't make it through the plates? Respectfully, your implementation (as it relates to snipers) is not based in reality, and it reverses and destroys a game dynamic that has existed in PR for over 10 years.

Bonecrusher76 wrote:Chris Kyle and other US snipers extensively used .300 WIN MAG in urban theaters of Iraqhttps://www.sofmag.com/the-weaponry-of- ... al-sniper/

Wasn't he a SEAL?

Bonecrusher76 wrote:The next sniper system of the US military is also a .300 WIN MAG

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/M2010_Enh ... iper_Rifle

AFAIK, no model, sound animation etc exists for this to be implemented. Care to do something about that? Literally only you care about sniper rifles in PR.

I have an idea. Instead of putting time and effort into modeling new guns etc, why don't we just put the damage stats on the sniper rifles back the way they were previous patch?

The sniper bullets have always been defined by their own variable in the code separate from the bullets the other guns use. It would take 5 minutes to change the damage back to the way it was on the sniper bullets, without effecting any other guns or aspect of the game.

That is the way it has been, it worked fine, and everybody was perfectly happy with it. There is no reason the DEVs can't change that back and then work forward on the other aspects that people want/don't want.

The recent changes to the sniper damage does not accurately reflect the reality of snipers or their use and implementation by modern militaries. It has generally been the way it was (one-shot) in game for more than 10 years.

There was no reason to change it, no complaints, no problems. It worked. I was happy. Others were happy. These changes in regards to the sniper do not reflect reality, and they without discussion, fundamentally change a long standing dynamic of the game for no articulable reason.

This change that "nobody but (me) cares about," can be put back the way it has been for ten years by changing a few lines of code without effecting anyone else or any other aspect of the game in any way.

Bonecrusher76 wrote:And yes, most of the sniper rifles have always one shotted in the game over the last 10 years that I have played.

The AWM and Timberwolf have, the rest have required two shots to the chest.

The M24 (USMC on Muttrah) and the SSG 69 (MEC on Muttrah) one shotted in the chest. As did the SV-98 (Russia and China). I am 100% certain of this as I used them a lot in-game.


I have talked to ZWILLING, and expressed my concerns. I am going to drop this for now, and see what direction it goes.

Bonecrusher76 wrote:The M24 (USMC on Muttrah) and the SSG 69 (MEC on Muttrah) one shotted in the chest. As did the SV-98 (Russia and China). I am 100% certain of this as I used them a lot in-game.

No they did not. Probably in the legs and head, but the chest required two shots.

Sry Zwilling but after playing some rounds as MEC and USMC INF gameplay is just retarded.

G3 vs M4/16 was kinda balanced because of burst mode. Now its UNPLAYABLE.

People complained about 900rpm laser guns being OP (especially against AK74) but instead of fixing that you made all 7.62 weapons 1-shot guns... Now the AK74 is after the complete useless pistols, shotguns and SMGs the weakest assault rifle.

Thanks for listening to the community and our military adviser FFG°

Edit: Just reverse the change before people stop playing like 1.2 1shotbug, 1.35 turrets and other nice tries

fecht_niko wrote:Thanks for listening to the community and our military adviser FFG°

when someone know nothing and say something dumb