BAVS Suggestions

Discussions, Suggestions and Questions about upcoming Berget 18
Post Reply
Panzergraf
Major
Major
Posts: 647
Joined: 01 Dec 2007, 15:04
Location: Norway

BAVS Suggestions

Post by Panzergraf » 22 Jul 2019, 06:07

Let's collect all our suggestions to improve the BAVS system in this thread :)

I don't know if all of these are technically possible, but here goes:

Small green diode on the receiver computer when the power is on. It's almost impossible to read what's on the display, and something to let the crew inside the vehicle know if their receiver is working or not would be helpful. Constantly keeping an eye on the receiver pole to see if it blinks red (once each minute) is not always possible.

Reduced range and beam-width on the AT-4. Currently it's possible to hit multiple vehicles at extremely long ranges. Realistically an AT-4 should have shorter range than a machinegun, or even a rifle. It's not a TOW.

A louder firing sound on BAVS weapons. They make a small beeping sound currently, but in a firefight you won't hear it.

A chance to miss with BAVS weapons. IRL, weapons like AT-4's and 40mm grenades aren't easy to hit with, especially not VS moving targets or at range, but the BAVS versions can't miss (if suggestion 2 is implemented, that might change though).
From what I've heard, the tanks have some kind of reactive armour that gives them a random chance to ignore some BAVS hits.
Would that be possible to implement on all BAVS receivers, maybe making it so that 50% of shots miss? The receivers could beep once to notify everyone that they were fired upon, but not hit.
The tanks could get this in addition to their reactive armour, making them live a bit longer.
Maybe, if it's at all possible, the TOW launchers could have a higher chance of hitting than the AT-4, so for example 75% rather than 50%, to simulate that they are guided. The tank guns too, as IRL tank guns are very accurate and can easily hit moving targets.

Slightly longer range on the 40mm. Currently these things are nearly useless. Maybe offset the increased range with a lower chance of hitting than the AT-4, like 30%? With longer range I would still consider it a buff, even though you would have to fire more shots to ensure a hit.

When booking the BAVS receivers, customers should be able to choose which type of battery connectors they want, either Tamiya or Deans.
Veteran of 11 Berget Games
B6, 7, 8, 9, 10, 11, 12, 13, 14, 15, 16, 17
B17 - Red Mech

User avatar
MiqaFox
Corporal
Corporal
Posts: 44
Joined: 14 Oct 2012, 19:38

Re: BAVS Suggestions

Post by MiqaFox » 22 Jul 2019, 16:57

I definitely don't agree with the realism aspects of your comments in regards to the AT4. It is a means to an end. That is, to give infantry a fair chance against vehicles.
Panzergraf wrote:
22 Jul 2019, 06:07
Reduced range and beam-width on the AT-4. Currently it's possible to hit multiple vehicles at extremely long ranges. Realistically an AT-4 should have shorter range than a machinegun, or even a rifle. It's not a TOW.
It is obviously not operated like an real life AT4, why pretend it is? The only reason that it is specifically an AT4 is that you can make it look rather convincing with just a bit of PVC and some foam. You can think of it as a Javelin or whatever for range purposes, despite the BAVS being a reusable system. If you are supposed to decrease the range because it does not correspond realistically with in game HMGs/sniper rifles, then we might as well make all assault riles and SMGs sub-Joule guns. The possibility of multi-hits should of course be addressed.
Panzergraf wrote:
22 Jul 2019, 06:07
A chance to miss with BAVS weapons. IRL, weapons like AT-4's and 40mm grenades aren't easy to hit with, especially not VS moving targets or at range, but the BAVS versions can't miss (if suggestion 2 is implemented, that might change though).
From what I've heard, the tanks have some kind of reactive armour that gives them a random chance to ignore some BAVS hits.
Would that be possible to implement on all BAVS receivers, maybe making it so that 50% of shots miss? The receivers could beep once to notify everyone that they were fired upon, but not hit.
The tanks could get this in addition to their reactive armour, making them live a bit longer.
Maybe, if it's at all possible, the TOW launchers could have a higher chance of hitting than the AT-4, so for example 75% rather than 50%, to simulate that they are guided. The tank guns too, as IRL tank guns are very accurate and can easily hit moving targets.
Seems very unnecessary. Will just increase "time to kill". Just tweak the damage output in that case.
I guess this stems from a "need" to balance primarily the AT4. Knowing fully how effective it is, I still question that need.
From my experience, the number of vehicles seem to increase for every year. If the experience was ruined by the "OP" AT4, that wouldn't be the case. Mech still need to walk less and has the ability to completely stomp the poor ones not equipped with BAVS. In total, I'd guess they get significantly more combat than infantry. If that means they "have" to stay in respawn for longer, at times, I think that is a fair price to pay (it's not like most of the team can't walk like regular infantry while the vehicle is being repaired). Besides, BAVS only kill the driver, the majority of the force is still in play, even when the vehicle is disabled.

If mech played like the scenario they are actually in, then the need to repair the vehicle would dramatically decrease. That is, they are driving light armored vehicles in tight forest filled with enemy troops with anti-armor capabilities. Perhaps tread more carefully. And when under fire from that, you GTFO.
Panzergraf wrote:
22 Jul 2019, 06:07
When booking the BAVS receivers, customers should be able to choose which type of battery connectors they want, either Tamiya or Deans.
Also seems increase complexity for no gain. Either supply an adapter with all or state what plug is required and let the players supply their own adapters.
B11-12: Ravens
B13: Ikaros
B14-16: UPIR
B17: GFM
"If at first you don't succeed, go get a .50 cal" - DemolitionRanch

User avatar
grasulas
Lieutenant
Lieutenant
Posts: 213
Joined: 03 Oct 2008, 14:57
Location: Bucharest / Romania
Contact:

Re: BAVS Suggestions

Post by grasulas » 23 Jul 2019, 19:42

AT4

- limited ammo (10 shots), and then get in base to be recharge it via a RFID device found ONLY in base or at a ammo box
- install a powerfull piezo buzzer like the ones in the smoke detectors, who can make a loud sound when the AT4 is used

BAVS Grenades

- Do not sell them to the persons who are unable to prove they have a grenade launcher, I`m sick to see people shooting the Bavs from their hand, guys Berget is not an Iron Man simulator ok !
_______________________________
Berget Veteran

User avatar
Arradin
Berget Crew & Site Admin
Berget Crew & Site Admin
Posts: 731
Joined: 05 Jul 2012, 16:06
Location: Göteborg, Sweden

Re: BAVS Suggestions

Post by Arradin » 03 Nov 2019, 10:00

grasulas wrote:
23 Jul 2019, 19:42
BAVS Grenades

- Do not sell them to the persons who are unable to prove they have a grenade launcher, I`m sick to see people shooting the Bavs from their hand, guys Berget is not an Iron Man simulator ok !
This is against the rules.

In general, Bavs is extremely difficult to balance when it comes to " Sound " vs effect. Sure, it could make one huge loud bang, and then the battery is out and it need to be recharged. Realistic? Maybe, but fun?

The system already have the possibility for limited amounts of shots before it needs to be reloaded by GMs, and it's being discussed to bring this back.

But right now for balance, someone actually have to carry around an AT4, and it doesnt feel like a huge issue, we rather make improvements on the vehicle side, like we have with the Tanks ( Chance to not penetrate armor, less chance from front, greater from the back etc )
We want to reward people who come with vehicles that really look armored, and we also want to reward people who carry around 'heavy' weapons.
Please send ticket & payment questions to:

payment@berget-events.com

L4gi
Captain
Captain
Posts: 493
Joined: 26 Jun 2008, 19:19
Location: Finland
Contact:

Re: BAVS Suggestions

Post by L4gi » 03 Nov 2019, 19:31

If its against the rules then why has a high level GM said "Just tape it to the barrel" if you dont have an UGL?
B7 / B8 / B9 / B10 / B11 / B12 / B13 / B14 / B15 / B16 / B17

User avatar
Arradin
Berget Crew & Site Admin
Berget Crew & Site Admin
Posts: 731
Joined: 05 Jul 2012, 16:06
Location: Göteborg, Sweden

Re: BAVS Suggestions

Post by Arradin » 03 Nov 2019, 19:58

L4gi wrote:
03 Nov 2019, 19:31
If its against the rules then why has a high level GM said "Just tape it to the barrel" if you dont have an UGL?
Taping it to the barrel is not the same as holding it in your hand.
Holding it in your hand is against the rules.
However, taping it to the barrel wont be allowed much longer either :)
Please send ticket & payment questions to:

payment@berget-events.com

Post Reply