project reality About the BRDM vehicle rules..

[Double_13]

With it I mean that then the asset is properly manned not abused like Muttrah. As example the tow Humber on khami is crewed by 2 people rather than been a one time transport for a random guy. 

Same can be said with a logi. If less skilled people would use the assets they are more likely to get tracked thus needing repairs. If my 8 man squad claims the logi just because I need it later it is up to the SL to then actually send someone to repair the asset. This means  he has to send it away. If the logi would be on call like trans it could be utilised better and serve both inf and armour. 

Here is how my view is. Bamyan 6 people in tanks camping the main until they run out of ammo and RTB they do not support inf in any possible way as they just farm kills shooting enemy’s long range that spawn back in capzone. Tow /apc /aa are all useless for their original intended task as the camping tanks do all. This results in people not taking a logi because it is slow and can’t rush flags plus the RTB taking 10 min is 10 min no points. The logi stays behind and gets grabbed by random people just to transport them self’s to the battle. This results in the asset stranding or getting killed somewhere without dropping crates or doing it is job. This in term results that the INF gets killed if the tanks do fall back with no point to respawn cus the logi got wasted. 

My opinion it is the tank to blain not the INF or the random people. Because the tanks preform camping (not even nesseseraly rule breaking) the INF has no close support and do not find the need to build fobs to build emplacements. If the tank would move in cap and not on the hill, they will help the team but risk getting damage and missing the 200 kills. This risk will cause inf to do bring logi so they can build fobs and repair the tanks that support them.

ask yourself the question why would You spend 10 min driving a logi out of main if the tanks do not support you and just camp on a hill? 

[WCCBadploy]

Ultimately everything mentioned in these posts gets resolved if the whole Team is Directly working together, regardless of the make up of the squads or their purpose.

I recommend that any admins on at the time of these incidents take steps to see that the game play, targets and outcome reflects this.

Be prepared to take whatever steps are necessary, promptly and wisely.

[=VG= Kavelenko]

2 hours ago, =VG= Double_13 said:

My opinion it is the tank to blain not the INF or the random people. Because the tanks preform camping (not even nesseseraly rule breaking) the INF has no close support and do not find the need to build fobs to build emplacements. If the tank would move in cap and not on the hill, they will help the team but risk getting damage and missing the 200 kills. This risk will cause inf to do bring logi so they can build fobs and repair the tanks that support them.

ask yourself the question why would You spend 10 min driving a logi out of main if the tanks do not support you and just camp on a hill? 

We're probably agreeing about the same thing here brother, this behavior of camping on hills, single manning TOW assets, racking up 200+ kills with HMGs and AR's is all about the points system. "I have the most kills therefore I'm the best player in the game because I'm at the top of the list mentality".

The points system IMO encourages that mentality and you guys have been trying to address it with suggestions of taking assets away, limiting spawn times. Why not look at the points system and reward Medics for reviving downed players, give TRANS squads more points for team work, and delivering crates to locations when they are under heavy fire, also penalise them for wasting assets and killing squads for their poor LZ decisions. I know this is not likely to happen any time soon but we should not be surprised when certain individuals exploit kits and heavy assets to become "King" of the map.

[WCCBadploy]

As this thread is addressing APC, IFV and Other light Armor vehicles, I would like to second actioning Kav's observations regarding Transportation.

Using Armor with transport capabilities as only "gun trucks" or "Kill camping castles" has to be discouraged.

Just like Air Trans Units, users of Ground Transportable vehicles have a duty to support the team first before anything else.

Besides, they will survive longer with direct infantry support, just like in real life.

[Double_13]

Points only motivate those who care about the score and not teamwork. If you would disable the whole thing in general it will not remove that tank on the hill and the lack of teamwork.

The issue we have is that the regulars/admins keep repeating the same method of playing a map which is camping and make an example to other players that repeat this as it gains points.

Yesterdays example of saareema only confirms this. I noted before and during the round that aslong the tank is alive you can not cap warehouse. This because the tank camps the bots outside the cap zone resulting in them spawning back in the cap one and countering. However people do not think like this. It took 7 attacks until the tank died and the bots weren’t camped. This is not to blaim on the person crewing the tank but on the method it is used by. The killing they do counters the team. On every other map this tactic works as you have a clear line of sight but on saarema it doesn’t work because trees.

Adding more multi crew vehicles forces people to communicate. Adding Bradley’s rather then tanks gives them only 6 kill shots before needing to RTB for ammo. Removing bradleys require people to build fobs and tows this resulting in better use of assets.

that week the one man assets where blocked was the best week in PR. Kashan bots had a chance and inf needed to coordinate with trans and APC for transport /crates to kill armour and cap flags. The 2 tanks defended the flag and needed repairs. And AA was needed. Now Kashan a 8 man tank squad 3 man cas is enough to prevent the bots leaving main. All troop trucks are gone logi and crap apc are left.

I do not blaim people for taking the unused assets in base as nobody is going to take them anyway. 

 

Anyway we drifting off topic 

AA can’t be claimed and should not be claimable. Except tanguska

The shilka falls under APC on sbene (2*2man apc 2*1man and 1*2man shilka= 8 full squad) this to prevent another locked 2 man squad.

fuchs/vab-vtt/batmobile/brdm should only be claimable if no heavyer asset is present

stryker becomes inf when bradley is present

I find those rules decent as like mentioned else we just end up with 5 mech inf squads

 

[=VG= Fastjack]

About claimable LogiTruck or atleast one of them.

A proper named Mortar Infantry squad should claim a LogiTruck automatically without mentioning it in the squadname. Make sense or not?

[=VG= m823us]

54 minutes ago, =VG= Fastjack said:

About claimable LogiTruck or atleast one of them.

A proper named Mortar Infantry squad should claim a LogiTruck automatically without mentioning it in the squadname. Make sense or not?

Yes, but that is more of a "First Come, First Serve bases" for the logi.  Something that I wish we had more of in the server communication was "Hey I am spawning at X, who  is taking vehicles?"  This would increase communication between all squads and players since it would trickle down the ranks, such as squad leaders informing squad of actions to be carried.  

I think some of our "better squad leaders" already do this, and some other people just jump in and go for the ride and see how the server plays out.  

 

8 hours ago, =VG= Double_13 said:

The issue we have is that the regulars/admins keep repeating the same method of playing a map which is camping and make an example to other players that repeat this as it gains points.

This is another valid point.  People do "tried and true" methods because they work.  The camping only increases score but not only, making the ability to capture strategic points difficult because people want to be "RAMBO", or a lone wolf.  

 

9 hours ago, WCCBadploy said:

Using Armor with transport capabilities as only "gun trucks" or "Kill camping castles" has to be discouraged.

Just like Air Trans Units, users of Ground Transportable vehicles have a duty to support the team first before anything else.

Besides, they will survive longer with direct infantry support, just like in real life.

This is a great point and I think needs to be addressed more with the server.  People should not be using the assets like this, we could also modify the game play and are to include how a disadvantage this will become when the new AI is implemented.  

 

13 hours ago, =VG= Kavelenko said:

Dedicated Logi truck squads can cause problems when they start building fobs all over the map and in the wrong places. Far too often these one man brigades setup locations to suit themselves, do not communicate with squad leaders as to where they want a FOB.

This becomes a double edge sword, so we must be careful on how we tread here.  As mentioned in the rules, LOGI is not a claimable asset, but if the server game play is not impacted by it go for it.  I have seen some maps where the only way to win is to have someone running constant supplies.  I mean this is why TRANS exists.  I do also wish we could give more props to TRANS for great crate runs and supply drops, making the boots on the ground more effective.  

[Ragnarok1775]

I think it would be more efficient if MECH INF had priority for IFVs and APC had priority for APCs. These vehicles are not remotely close to the same thing and perform very different roles with different capabilities and limitations. LAVs and Amtracks aren't either, but tracks are in their own units separate from the grunts.

Bradleys are meant to fight. M113s are not. It doesn't stop there. But all of the above vehicles are basically just used as a taxi service. Bradleys etc should act as dedicated, organic fire support vehicles.

[=VG= Inch]

This game were never having a dedicated armored Fire-Support Vehicle exist in-game, alongside Jeeps, APC, IFV, AAV, ATGM Vehicle, Tanks etc.

They're just considering least APC/IFV/AAV/ATGM as the Fire-Support Vehicle anytime back at field.

 

APC: Prior targets to ground forces, light/medium armors

IFV: Prior targets to ground forces, all types of armors including Tank (Taking it out with ATGM)

AAV: Prior targets to air forces, all types of aircraft. But, in some case, some of them can help engage ground targets (Inf, Light/Med Armors etc.)

ATGM Vehicle: Prior targets to ground forces, all types of vehicles (Especially Tanks). Restrictions are cannot engage Infs, but still can kill slow moving Aircrafts (Attack Choppers, Trans Choppers etc.)

 

But, here's one thing that i know. There's only one FSV exist in-game (But, it is called Medium Tank instead), which named AMX-10RC (French Forces), it is obviously a FSV, since it has wheel-based chassis vehicle with a Tank Gun mounted in turret (At least 105mm) capable to destroy modern armors these days.

 This FSV thing here is getting a modernization program (AMX-10RCR/Renove)

 

Some examples:

- PLA in IRL, has old FSV named PTL-02 (based on WZ551/ZSL-92 chassis, equipped with 100mm Hi-Pressure Tank Gun) and newer ones named PTL-09 (or ZTL-09, which is based on ZBL-09 wheeled APC chassis equipped with 105mm Tank Gun)

Left picture: PTL-02 and Right picture: PTL-09/ZTL-09

 

- US Army in IRL, has the M1128 Stryker Mobile Gun System/MGS (a FSV variant of M1126 Stryker ICV with 105mm Tank Gun M68A1E4)

 

And many more example of them, like Austrian Pandur II FSV's, Italian Centauro FSV series, Japanese MCV's (Maneuver Combat Vehicles) etc.

 

 

Honestly with all this, it's a bit confusing that PR were never seen updating the classiifications (At least for the armors), HUD, GUI for it, simple matter here. Not all people know about these things in-game or even IRL (Sorry about getting off-topic here), so they're just go with the flow without even knowing them well. Are these so-called wheeled-vehicles with Tank Guns had to/should be classified as Medium Tanks, instead of FSV's?

 

With armor upgrades, yes. Without that, maybe just a FSV, since it's very mobile along Tanks. It's a modern day Tank Destroyers (some old doctrines stick in my head)

 

- Inch