Jump to content


  • Content count

  • Joined

  • Last visited

About XB0CT

  • Rank
    Platoon Leader

Profile Information

  • Gender
  • Location

Recent Profile Visitors

954 profile views
  1. U.S. Army Anti-Tank

    javelin makes more sense. its the weapon that would be used in the case of a conventional conflict, which squad represents. no carl g pls
  2. could just make it so you can "capture" downed enemies, meaning they cant be revived anymore. and you cant just shoot at bodies from 2 miles away still
  3. rally points are way OP now, they work better than FOBs and you have them pretty much whenever you need them. would like to see some input from the devs if they are going to change this system
  4. Vehicle & AT damage clearification

    they wouldnt be useless, M2 and KPVT has an effective firing range of like 3500 metres, and the M72 LAW has an effective range of 300M with the RPG7 being slightly longer than that... if the vehicle crew are stupid enough to be in range of that it isnt the ATs fault
  5. Soldier career

    as long as its on the list
  6. Soldier career

    still waiting for PEQ-15 boxes on the M4
  7. So, at the moment, there is no reason not to lay down and mag dump your M249 or equivalent, with little to no recoil in the prone position and with bipods abeing introduced, this gameplay style is going to continue. My suggestion is to add a barrel overheating mechanic, similar to red orchestra or ACE arma 3. This will punish LMG gunners who spray and pray without any regard. With this mechanic being introduced the gunner will need a spare barrel, so the LMG gunner will carry a spare barrel with him and he can switch the two out during gameplay. With these gameplay changes, LMG gunners will be forced to use controlled bursts as in real life, and of course contribute to squads "combat realism" philosophy.
  8. uniform customization wont be added, and the brith wont be added without the L85...
  9. New armament, equipment and factions

    no one uses the M16A3, AN-94 or the HK416 (except for the norweigans.) the game isnt battlefield
  10. Replace LAW with AT4

    the AT4 can be issued at two per squad, it's not exactly rare..
  11. i think this should be implemented, currently the US AT is lacking (3 LAWs to destroy a BTR which is a bit ridiculous) and russians can completely demolish US infantry without any response. I personally think this can be fixed by replacing the LAW with the AT4 HEDP whilst keeping the amount of LAT kits per squad at 2 and only giving one AT4 to each soldier. this will fix a good amount of the current issues; the AT4 will one shot the BTR, encouraging vehicles to stay behind infantry and stop rushing ahead without giving a **** because the crew know they can tank the damage.
  12. LAW is underpowered

    that's not my point at all, im saying that the M72 is not doing enough damage realistically.
  13. LAW is underpowered

    no the point is that irl the LAW would **** up the BTR with one hit, minimum disabled, most likely destroyed. 3 hits is way too much
  14. at the moment, the LAW is very underpowered. takes 3 LAWs to the front of the BTR to destroy takes 2 LAWs to destroy a ural. i do not think this encourages good gameplay, BTRs should very afraid of being in close contact with infantry, and neither is this realistic, BTR armour is paper ****ing thin.