SpecialAgentJohnson

Member
  • Content count

    88
  • Joined

  • Last visited

About SpecialAgentJohnson

  • Rank
    Fireteam Leader
  • Birthday
  1. Would be more usable without the huge scope.
  2. How can you say it's good? At high elevation you can't even see what you are aiming at.
  3. Nice. How about reversing an animation halfway?
  4. Values seems high but I guess you are pro clan members or similar. Regarding the m203 out. Yesterday I was lying 3m from an enemy him looking away for a minute or so. Very rare. I had my RPG out. Then pressed the wrong button. Got my smokes up by mistake. Then finally pressed the button for my rifle and started to wait like the 5 seconds it takes for the animation to finish. By that time he turned around, looked at for a seconds or so. Then finally he shot me just lying there. It was so frustrating to have to sit out the animations completely just to be able to get back my main gun. That has to be fixed! It's not realistic that you can't stop taking out the smokes even when you don't want to anymore. Of course there should be an animation for taking stuff up, but of course equally well the animation should be able to be reversed at any point in time without having to wait for it to finish completely. So frustrating! I mean in real life you would just drop the bloody smoke and not give a shit about it at all.
  5. Never seen almost anyone ever get 40 kills in any game. So where this number comes from I don't know. SuperFOB bombardment? I almost don't get any kills with the GL mostly because I can't see what I am aiming at but also because the arming distance is so long (although that is in order of course). Could we get rid of the scope we could at least see, and might also be good too balance down the effectiveness in close combat now that you say the GL is so extremely effective as a weapon
  6. The sights on the m203 are completely unusable. The scope is in the way so you can't see anything and even if you could you can't tilt the gun so whats the point. Can we get rid of the scope on the rifle with the m203 or something? I wish there could be a better way to actually use the sights but I don't really have any good suggestion to something quick and easy.
  7. Is that right now. We were clearly the better team. You mean teams can't suck? I can testify of the opposite. It was also on Al Basrah. I jumped into a Humwee that took forever to assemble the people and take off. Then it just went straight into the river and exploded. Went back. Jumped onto another Humwee and it tried to jump the river instead of taking the bridge as do normal people. It also exploded. By that time the enemy had already capped 75% of the map. We managed to hang around the north western region of the city but were soon pushed back to village because of genuine incompetence and lack of coordination. After that we lost village as well. Was probably the shortest game in history. Total disaster.
  8. I was more thinking us is more powerful because of the Stryker vehicle. We we playing last night and we were only a few so I guess the super-rpg didn't unlock. We hit it multiple times with the rpgs but we didn't manage to take it out and when it was hit it just ran back to base and repaired itself then came back before we had chance to do much else. It was pretty hopeless to counter with either infantry or 50 cals on vehicle as well because it can sustain such huge amount of damage. Anyways we could never cap the last point because of this Stryker. Even though we were superior team and had capped all the other flags.
  9. Hi folks! I feel (although it is quite fun to build power-fortresses) that it is somewhat (very) unrealistic to have sandbags be 100% resistant to everything thrown at them, e.g. incoming rpgs, 50+cal, etc. A sandbag would of course be blown to hell by any kind of rpg round, even a hesco would be bad off. Most likely, a sandbag won't resist that many 50 rounds either before its protective ability has been greatly diminished (sand running out anyone?). Think about it, if sandbags would be so great we would have sandbagged vehicles instead of armoured vehicles. Also, if sandbags were to be destroyable then it would be easier and more realistic to clear out those super-FOBs that some people are bitching about (although I, personally think they are super-FUN, but that's just me). So, I propose a super-easy quick-fix that I am sure the devs propably thought about, but haven't come about for some reason I don't know. It goes like this: We assume that a sandbag has like 100% buildpoints when it's build (right?) and that it is completely unbuilt (disappeared) at 0%. OK, so why don't you just take away 100% of the build points of the sandbag receiving the direct rpg hit so it just disappears? Maybe it doesn't look supernice, but probably won't be noticed so much in the smoke and all. If you want to make it even better, remove like 50% from those around it too. And even better -well some stuff flying around, but my point being here of course: Give us the quick-fix ability to clear away sandbags right here and now (all the mechanism are already there, it would be super-easy I am guessing)! It would add much dynamics to the gameplay and bring about much more interesting gameplay at almost no developer's effort! If it doesn't look 1000% supernice, it is still OK! (Actually, can't rpgs remove build-points from just about anything that way?)
  10. Great! How run in 5.1 then?
  11. This is the most fun I have ever had in this game. Building super FOBs. Usually building a super FOB seems to be a bad idea in order to win but who cares when game becomes so much fun! Probably the devs gonna be boring and ruin it because of "serious" players wanna be boring, but I hope not. Game should be fun, right? I think this will balance out naturally however when heavy weapons such as tanks and artillery comes into play. Given those weapons be given somewhat realistic penetrative power that is. No need to do anything at this point that is.
  12. I like the idea, given that it is called princess of the pillow. In my "defensive mode", however, I thought the game could end with the winner being simply the team at the point when the timer ends or such. No time scores or whatever. Or maybe like defend the cache but cache is always fixed in one place and if you loose it you have lost. I can agree it feels a bit "Quakie" otherwise. Attack and defend can always be justified though I feel.
  13. Why not just plain "Defensive mode". Defend the stronghold until a timer reaches zero, opposing team: Capture the stronghold before timer reaches zero. I think this mode would be more relevant actually. Balance could be achieved by various factors. One of them could be attacked simply having more soldiers.
  14. Devs have to fix this. Deeply annoying. Total freeze of entire computer with hard reset only option. Plz fix!