Russian Breacher Class - Page 2

Rabbit · 2014-08-10, 12:07

Quote:

Originally Posted by Kingy

If two factions have an identical kit and you remove a piece of equipment from one then there is a clear imbalance. It's not asymmetrical warfare because you haven't added anything to the kit to compensate for what was lost, I just don't understand how you can justify these kinds of design decisions.

So back up iron sights and the ability to go full auto isnt imbalanced over no back ups and 3 round burts, but not having a shot gun for a gate is.

Spook · 2014-08-10, 12:10

Quote:

Originally Posted by Geronimo

I may be wrong on this but I cannot name any map with breachable doors with the russian faction on it.

How about adding 2 more magazines or 1 more grenade (flame on) or 1-2 more C4 (like WhiteRhino suggested) to the russian breacher? It would be realistic because he doesn't carry a heavy shotgun around.

Dovre has as some Gates. Beirut has some wooden doors. But all in all they are not that many.

Brooklyn-Tech · 2014-08-10, 12:52

why not give all factions the same guns? gameplay over realism, right? We got rid of the personality of each kit by giving them the same guns/scopes, now lets remove the personality of each faction.

EDIT: if that small wooden door next to the water on beirut is causing you trouble either jump on the ledge or the garbage can and jump over the wall. If you dont want to use up your precious stamina, put a C4 on the door.

[R-DEV]UTurista · 2014-08-10, 13:21

What if "tomorrow" a new map is launched where the Russians clearly need to open doors? Should we demand them to use C4 on each door? Should we demand them to use a PKM to breach it?

There are doors in PR, don't care about which map, and we need to allow players to open them. Using the shotgun was a pretty good method so yes Russian's breachers should have the shotgun back.

Unless of course we change the system to allow open doors with knifes.

Brooklyn-Tech · 2014-08-10, 13:30

Sledgehammer, Shotgun, Explosives (C4), keys.

those are four ways of opening a door. The Russian breacher has one of them. God forbid the squad should need a rifleman to rearm the C4 or have to call in supplies. "If" there will be a Russian map with thousands of doors, then maybe we should worry about giving the Russian breacher more C4's. As far as killing enemy crates goes, there are usually enemy rifleman kits next to them which not only have ammo but also nades which you could use to kill the crates. Throwing 1 enemy nade to kill a crate is better then 3 shotgun shells. Causes less noise and attracts less attention.

EDIT: Let's focus on solving current problems in PR first, rather than worrying about possible future ones. I dont think that the lack of a shotgun in the Russian specialist is a problem... it's a feature

PatrickLA_CA · 2014-08-10, 13:43

Well, what would make gameplay different if all factions had everything the same. It would be just like playing US with RU voices and skins.

Russians have BMPs with Cannons, ATGMs, Uber high angles and Very fast ROF. Does that mean that the LAV should get all of those things even though it doesn't have them IRL?
Or the havoc who has 16 HFs as opposed to the other attack choppers that have 8 (and that changes a lot).

StevePl4y5 · 2014-08-10, 14:49

I think part of the PR experience is playing as a faction, experiencing the various advantages and disadvantages the various factions have between each other. I don't want every team to have the exact same number of tanks, helicopters, planes, etc. and matching weapons and vehicles with similar values (you know, like Battlefield).

I want teams to balanced like: Ok, they have 2 BMP-3s, we've got 4 LAV-25, or they've got Trans helis and CAS, but we've got more APCs and trucks. Or even, they got a shotgun, but we got a larger caliber weapon.

Brooklyn-Tech · 2014-08-10, 15:23

Quote:

Originally Posted by StevePl4y5

I think part of the PR experience is playing as a faction, experiencing the various advantages and disadvantages the various factions have between each other. I don't want every team to have the exact same number of tanks, helicopters, planes, etc. and matching weapons and vehicles with similar values (you know, like Battlefield).

I want teams to balanced like: Ok, they have 2 BMP-3s, we've got 4 LAV-25, or they've got Trans helis and CAS, but we've got more APCs and trucks. Or even, they got a shotgun, but we got a larger caliber weapon.

PR used to be that way but now it's becoming more and more vanilla. In older versions of PR people ran in fear and terror from tanks and CAS. Now nobody seems to care since now we like to nerf things to keep them "balanced" and also we decrease spawn times of heavy assets so they depreciate in value and allow infantry to continuously spawn in through the magic of mysterious backpacks scattered throughout the map. Welcome back to vanilla.

PatrickLA_CA · 2014-08-10, 15:31

Quote:

Originally Posted by Brooklyn-Tech

PR used to be that way but now it's becoming more and more vanilla. In older versions of PR people ran in fear and terror from tanks and CAS. Now nobody seems to care since now we like to nerf things to keep them "balanced" and also we decrease spawn times of heavy assets so they depreciate in value and allow infantry to continuously spawn in through the magic of mysterious backpacks scattered throughout the map. Welcome back to vanilla.

Unfortunately I have to agree with this.

IMO the balance should be more asymmetric. For example if one side has got CAS, the other one should get AAVs instead of CAS.
That way Armor will be afraid of CAS as it won't be looking to kill the enemy CAS half the round. And also Armor will make sure they've got AAV support. And it should be harder for infantry to kill Armored targets with LATs so they have to rely on Armor.

Brooklyn-Tech · 2014-08-10, 15:37

Quote:

Originally Posted by PatrickLA_CA

Unfortunately I have to agree with this.

IMO the balance should be more asymmetric. For example if one side has got CAS, the other one should get AAVs instead of CAS.
That way Armor will be afraid of CAS as it won't be looking to kill the enemy CAS half the round. And also Armor will make sure they've got AAV support. And it should be harder for infantry to kill Armored targets with LATs so they have to rely on Armor.

As much as I agree and would love to expand on this discussion, we are getting a bit off topic. I am however thinking of posting a new thread soon about the direction that PR is currently going.

2014-08-10, 12:52	#13
Brooklyn-Tech Join Date: Aug 2012 Posts: 121 Poland	Re: Russian Breacher Class why not give all factions the same guns? gameplay over realism, right? We got rid of the personality of each kit by giving them the same guns/scopes, now lets remove the personality of each faction. EDIT: if that small wooden door next to the water on beirut is causing you trouble either jump on the ledge or the garbage can and jump over the wall. If you dont want to use up your precious stamina, put a C4 on the door.
Brooklyn-Tech Join Date: Aug 2012 Posts: 121 Poland
	Last edited by Brooklyn-Tech; 2014-08-10 at 12:59..

2014-08-10, 13:21	#14
[R-DEV]UTurista PR:BF2 Developer Join Date: Jun 2011 Posts: 983 Portugal	Re: Russian Breacher Class What if "tomorrow" a new map is launched where the Russians clearly need to open doors? Should we demand them to use C4 on each door? Should we demand them to use a PKM to breach it? There are doors in PR, don't care about which map, and we need to allow players to open them. Using the shotgun was a pretty good method so yes Russian's breachers should have the shotgun back. Unless of course we change the system to allow open doors with knifes.
	Dont question the wikipedia! Just because it reports different things on different languages does not make it unreliable source!

2014-08-10, 13:30	#15
Brooklyn-Tech Join Date: Aug 2012 Posts: 121 Poland	Re: Russian Breacher Class Sledgehammer, Shotgun, Explosives (C4), keys. those are four ways of opening a door. The Russian breacher has one of them. God forbid the squad should need a rifleman to rearm the C4 or have to call in supplies. "If" there will be a Russian map with thousands of doors, then maybe we should worry about giving the Russian breacher more C4's. As far as killing enemy crates goes, there are usually enemy rifleman kits next to them which not only have ammo but also nades which you could use to kill the crates. Throwing 1 enemy nade to kill a crate is better then 3 shotgun shells. Causes less noise and attracts less attention. EDIT: Let's focus on solving current problems in PR first, rather than worrying about possible future ones. I dont think that the lack of a shotgun in the Russian specialist is a problem... it's a feature
Brooklyn-Tech Join Date: Aug 2012 Posts: 121 Poland
	Last edited by Brooklyn-Tech; 2014-08-10 at 13:39..

2014-08-10, 13:43	#16
PatrickLA_CA Join Date: Jul 2009 Posts: 2,207 Yugoslavia Location: Macedonia	Re: Russian Breacher Class Well, what would make gameplay different if all factions had everything the same. It would be just like playing US with RU voices and skins. Russians have BMPs with Cannons, ATGMs, Uber high angles and Very fast ROF. Does that mean that the LAV should get all of those things even though it doesn't have them IRL? Or the havoc who has 16 HFs as opposed to the other attack choppers that have 8 (and that changes a lot).
	In-game: Cobra-PR

2014-08-10, 14:49	#17
StevePl4y5 Join Date: Feb 2014 Posts: 383 Portugal Location: CLASSIFIED	Re: Russian Breacher Class I think part of the PR experience is playing as a faction, experiencing the various advantages and disadvantages the various factions have between each other. I don't want every team to have the exact same number of tanks, helicopters, planes, etc. and matching weapons and vehicles with similar values (you know, like Battlefield). I want teams to balanced like: Ok, they have 2 BMP-3s, we've got 4 LAV-25, or they've got Trans helis and CAS, but we've got more APCs and trucks. Or even, they got a shotgun, but we got a larger caliber weapon.