Mobile Heavy Machinegun and small mortar teams

[Nestor Makhno]

My observations are not based on assumption of any kind - they are based on experience.

There are some players who will co-operate. There appear to be more who will not. This is not so much a reflection on anyone's intelligence as on what they want from a game. Whether someone is capable or not of working in a team is less the issue than whether they choose to.

 

[Raneman]

The best way to get people to work in a team is to create an experience that rewards working in teams. Design your games against ramboes.

You need oppurtunities for teamwork that are rewarding, but require the effort of multiple players.

A crewed HMG would be perfect for this. It's a gigantic force multiplier but it requires effort on the part of more then one person. RO2 is a game that attracts a large realism fanbase, many of them are also fans of games such as ARMA, PR, and such.

If you create optional oppurtunites for team work that create a huge advantage, then you will have teamwork.

There's a reason PR has no ramboes. It's the community around the game and the design of the game itself. No admins need to even be involved most of the time.

 

[Landrik]

Good point on the crew operated HMG.

Tanks are large, blind hunks of metal and firepower on the battlefield and are best operated with more than one person. However, it's not impossible to solo-tank. It's just much more difficult. Could the same be applied to HMGs and crew operated AT-Guns?

 

[Frostedfire]

Good point on the crew operated HMG.

Tanks are large, blind hunks of metal and firepower on the battlefield and are best operated with more than one person. However, it's not impossible to solo-tank. It's just much more difficult. Could the same be applied to HMGs and crew operated AT-Guns?

or a more appropriate question : does the addition of a ball-scratching "ammo *****" empower the team more than having an extra rifle on the team to shoot and cap with?

edit: someone's been throwing the curses around inappropriately

 

[Raneman]

Yes, yes it does. An HMG will cut the building in half. A rifle will barely be able to harm the occupants inside if they're behind cover.

 

[Nestor Makhno]

With 30-rd clips and a slow rate of fire, the Type 92 or even Type 3 is going to make slow work of cutting down any building tbh.

 

[Frostedfire]

Yes, yes it does. An HMG will cut the building in half. A rifle will barely be able to harm the occupants inside if they're behind cover.

does the hmg stop if I shoot ammo-man though? or can they limp along without the buddy?

 

[Crackshot]

does the hmg stop if I shoot ammo-man though? or can they limp along without the buddy?

Hypothetically, I suppose one could make it that the gunner can keep using the weapon and reload it by himself, but he can't displace until the loader/ammo carrier respawns and links up with the team.

 

[Redit]

With 30-rd clips and a slow rate of fire, the Type 92 or even Type 3 is going to make slow work of cutting down any building tbh.

Relative to the 1919, the Type 92s rate of fire was not all that slow, and as I've said before a slower rate of fire is not necessarily negative. The weapon does not overheat, it can place more accurate and controlled bursts, it does not go through ammo as quickly and it can be quickly reloaded with a stripper as opposed to lugging a whole new belt or box which leaves a longer gap of no outgoing fire. Any machine gun is fearsome, your contempt for this one is beyond my understanding. I don't suppose you have tried hiding in a building covered by a Type 92 Nestor?

 

[Nikita]

Relative to the 1919, the Type 92s rate of fire was not all that slow, and as I've said before a slower rate of fire is not necessarily negative. The weapon does not overheat, it can place more accurate and controlled bursts, it does not go through ammo as quickly and it can be quickly reloaded with a stripper as opposed to lugging a whole new belt or box which leaves a longer gap of no outgoing fire. Any machine gun is fearsome, your contempt for this one is beyond my understanding. I don't suppose you have tried hiding in a building covered by a Type 92 Nestor?

??? That's quite the defensive response...

Sure, on the attack I'd take cover from a Woodpecker just as quickly as I'd take cover from a M1919A4, but if I were repelling a banzai charge, I'll take the 250-round belt of .30-06 over multiple 30-round clips of 7.7 x 58mm Arisaka any day.

And if I had to make a five-second rush to save my life while under fire from a mounted machine gun, I'd certainly prefer to face a Type 92 over a M1919.

It's not contempt--it's just respect for the better weapon. I love the Mosin-Nagant, but the Mauser Karabiner 98k is just a better, more accurate, more ergonomic weapon. That said, both have their own advantages.

 

[Homuth]

??? That's quite the defensive response...

Sure, on the attack I'd take cover from a Woodpecker just as quickly as I'd take cover from a M1919A4, but if I were repelling a banzai charge, I'll take the 250-round belt of .30-06 over multiple 30-round clips of 7.7 x 58mm Arisaka any day.

And if I had to make a five-second rush to save my life while under fire from a mounted machine gun, I'd certainly prefer to face a Type 92 over a M1919.

It's not contempt--it's just respect for the better weapon. I love the Mosin-Nagant, but the Mauser Karabiner 98k is just a better, more accurate, more ergonomic weapon. That said, both have their own advantages.

Yeah except that the Americans didn't do Banzai charges, so you won't need the Type 92 for that. I guess the Type 92 had the advantage of letting the enemy think they can start moving when it stops firing, but it would only take a sec to load a new strip.

 

[Nikita]

Yeah except that the Americans didn't do Banzai charges, so you won't need the Type 92 for that. I guess the Type 92 had the advantage of letting the enemy think they can start moving when it stops firing, but it would only take a sec to load a new strip.

It was a theoretical situation. The test subject is standing with a Browning Model 1919A4 on his left and a Type 92 heavy machine gun on his right. Fifty Japanese infantrymen armed with rifles are charging at him, yelling "Ten Thousand Years to His Heavenly Highness!" from 200 yards away, closing in fast on his position. Which weapon does the subject opt for?

With fifty against one, the subject is probably going to die either way, but I for one would feel a lot more comfortable with the M1919 in my hands regardless.

 

[Nestor Makhno]

Contempt?

Strong word. Maybe try posting that one again.

 

[Victhor-ASH]

Why not implement the reloading team as AI? instead of players? like you beeing the gunner and having two bots to follow you wherever you want to place the gun and fire it, would be the same like in HoS but instead of you loading one of the bots would load while the other gives the ammunition, and if one of the bots gets killed the reloading action becomes slower.

 

[migmadmarine]

I suppose it depends who you would be crewing with... I will use Mount and Blade, Napoleonic wars as an example. I've played as loader while a friend of mine (who I am on TS with) fires, and had a great time being part of a cannon team with the highest rate of fire on the map. When it is left to just happen (Ie. only so many cannons, and possibly a few more cannoniers) things can go badly, as I have tried to help others fire, and they often attack me, thinking I am trying to steal the cannon from them... But of course, the amount of communication and co-operation I see in Red Orchestra vastly exceeds the amount on a seige server in M&B, NW.