OWA Posted October 29, 2009 Author Report Share Posted October 29, 2009 Just wondering, with the GI and his Minimi and the GGI with the AT4, were you guys (or just OWA) planning on having their secondary weapons be super light and light damage types? I understood the Minimi, because you took the weapon type "para" from the rules.ini, but the fact that both the Minimi and AT4, technically, would actually belong to a regular GI standing up kinda made me wonder if those choices being light weapons was intended, or would you go for heavier stationary weapons if you wanted to? For example, the Minimi (also known as the M249 SAW) is handled like the Capitan does with his M60 in APB. It is designed to be used like any other rifle*, except that it is preferred that the user stay in a prone position for accuracy. The AT4, like its RPG predecessor, the LAW, is carried by regular soldiers just in case they come across a light armored vehicle. They guy with it shoots, throws it away, and his squad runs the hell out of there. They usually cannot deal enough damage to tanks, and obviously cannot even touch aircraft. Thus, I imagined the GI with either an M2 ".50 cal," which might be too big and look more overpowered than it really is, or an M240, which would probably be the better choice. Both are stationary machine guns that having the GI pull out of thin air would match the humor of him also being able to do that with his sandbags. The GGI then would probably have the Javelin. Once again, its stationary but portable nature makes it perfect for a foxhole, and you would have a better time being able to convince people it has anti-air capabilities than you can convincing them a Stinger can penetrate an Apocalypse Tank's armor. *Edit: I'm just saying this to give a general picture. Its usage is much more complicated than that, but to most people this is what it will look like to them when they see a squad with a member holding a SAW. Same goes with images with squad members of other armies with a PK machine gun. Although it makes sense in the real world (and would be an acceptable point in any realistic war game), AR is not meant to be realistic. It's just meant to be as close to RA2 as humanly possible. It's what we've always gone for with the direction of the mod and I'd never want to change that. Sure there are a few examples of where we've let our artistic direction overtake ourselves (see Crazy Ivan), but predominantly we aim to stay close to the source material. Plus there is also the "we've already made the models" argument, (however in the case of the AT4, this is not yet so). Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest AdrwIvrsn Posted October 29, 2009 Report Share Posted October 29, 2009 (edited) I'm actually asking for an artistic direction. The weapons you have now might be too light, and you can even bump it up a notch for something heavier, which would make them more badass. I'm just pointing out realistic examples that you could use. Edit: If you are not going for the Javelin, you can try the SMAW, which is sholder mounted and used for anti-tank. You can just alter the AT4 model to make it look like the SMAW by streching it and a few other things. Edited October 29, 2009 by AdrwIvrsn Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
OWA Posted October 29, 2009 Author Report Share Posted October 29, 2009 The SMAW would be reasonable suggestion next to the AT4 and we'll definitely consider it. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts