project reality header
Go Back   Project Reality Forums > PR:BF2 Mod Forums > PR:BF2 Feedback > Vehicles
22 Jan 2018, 00:00:00 (PRT)
Register Forum RulesDeveloper Blogs Project Reality Members List Search Today's Posts Mark Forums Read

Reply
 
LinkBack Thread Tools Display Modes
Old 01-02-2018, 12:35 PM   #31
Aleon
Default Re: Distribution of heavy assets over time

The number people on the server hardly has anything to do with this.

Increasing the number of infantry gives the asset guys more people to shoot at and that's it. 44 people with 1 hat will do just as well against a squad of tanks as 80 people with 1 hat will. They'll get rekt.

Aleon is offline Reply With Quote
Old 01-02-2018, 12:44 PM   #32
Wicca
Supporting Member
PR Server License Moderator

Wicca's Avatar
Default Re: Distribution of heavy assets over time

Quote:
Originally Posted by Aleon View Post
The number people on the server hardly has anything to do with this.

Increasing the number of infantry gives the asset guys more people to shoot at and that's it. 44 people with 1 hat will do just as well against a squad of tanks as 80 people with 1 hat will. They'll get rekt.
TOWs, LAT there are 7 lats in any team checking the .py files. There is 2 TOWs. All of them manned as opposed to them not all being manned.


Xact Wicca is The Joker. That is all.
Wicca is offline Reply With Quote
Old 01-02-2018, 02:53 PM   #33
Filamu
Supporting Member

Filamu's Avatar
Default Re: Distribution of heavy assets over time

LATs being able to take down tanks is great for close quarters, but on a map like kashan, I would like to see more HATs. I guess you can't tweek limited kits on a map basis, but maybe drop kits is the solution? One extra HAT somewhat hidden in main? Would be useful on open asset maps where it feels like the HAT usually is wasted.
Filamu is offline Reply With Quote
Old 01-02-2018, 03:05 PM   #34
Rabbit

Rabbit's Avatar
Default Re: Distribution of heavy assets over time

Quote:
Originally Posted by Filamu View Post
LATs being able to take down tanks is great for close quarters, but on a map like kashan, I would like to see more HATs. I guess you can't tweek limited kits on a map basis, but maybe drop kits is the solution? One extra HAT somewhat hidden in main? Would be useful on open asset maps where it feels like the HAT usually is wasted.
That was attempted on sbeneh for the FSA, unfortunately people didn't seem to notice.

Rabbit is offline Reply With Quote
Old 01-02-2018, 03:27 PM   #35
mebel
Default Re: Distribution of heavy assets over time

oh shit, just wrote a long post and closed a tab ;/
mebel is offline Reply With Quote
Old 01-02-2018, 04:57 PM   #36
mebel
Default Re: Distribution of heavy assets over time

You may find it not related to thread but Arnoldio was working on a vehicle physics mod that could actually do the thing and find a right compromise. I've wrote post about it, but lost it by closing a tab, hope I will cover again what I had to say in short, maybe elaborate later.

Personally I've found vehicles having too much mobility (not just heavy assets) - top speed, acceleration, climbing, etc. when compared to INF.

The thing is that terrain should affect any vehicle waaay more than it affects infantry in a matter of mobility, eg. mean speed through rough terrain is proportionally much affected in case of a vehicle.

BF2 engine cannot simulate detailed aspects of a terrain - and it is doing so now like all the terrain was made nothing but concrete with a nice grip. Not realistic, huh? Much older game - ofp:cwc was able doing that by implementing some kind of velocity maps to the terrain (and pseudo bumps offroad), wasn't a perfect solution but simple and it was working - eg. you can move faster on roads, don't know if it's possible in BF2 - it doesn't matter now, it's possible to make some workaround to achieve kinda same goal - like Arnoldio was/is trying to.
As I remember he was trying to reduce overall acceleration, make vehicles more prone to terrain shape, maybe also reducing/modifying top-speed.
On the other hand - reducing acceleration, soften suspension would make drivers feel that they're operating something that is actually heavy and valuable, would be a nicer feeling though, not just toy-like.

Like it was with inf damage model, we cannot put raw, theoretical values into game and voila. It wont be realistic and moreover, wont be fun because since game cannot simulate every co-related aspect we have to simplify/randomize things in a some kind of statistical way. Mobility is one of the aspect that seems to be overlooked, not just in PR. We just used to it. Even in a combat situation you would be likely not doing pedal to the metal things often, risking your vehicle and crew (except here would be a garry truck).

How above is related to the thread for me?
With this 'reduced' mobility of vehicles, infantry could eg.:
- predict vehicles movement better
- with a more precise prediction can make more effective ambush (HAT/mine)
- have more time to prepare defensive tactic, eg. take cover
- make more use of a terrain
- make vehicles more vulnerable to unguided HATs/slow-moving projectiles making those kits more 'noticeable' @Rabbit
and other things that You can think of

On flat maps like Kashan there would be not much difference, on the other hand on bumpy-forest ones difference should be noticeable - that solves some of Your concerns mentioned earlier.
It would be also kinda more realistic to spot vehicles where they are suppose to be. The idea of convoy could gain some importance.

As an inf player I have to say that playing vs. heavy assets is fun, but yes - I think they're kinda OP most of the time. Removing them drastically is not a solution, because we could loose a lovely property of PR.
Can't say much what I can expect from a crewman point of view, but don't think those changes would make PR less fun for them - heavy assets would be still playing a crucial role on a battlefield, maybe would be harder for them - but isn't game about being somewhat hard-rewarding?

A lot of words, but I'm not telling You about big changes, just slight optimizations leading towards reality/fun/whatever.
Keep in mind that changes proposed by Arnoldio were not this plain as I've described here, I've also extrapolated it cause I've found it useful in this thread. Here's original thread:
http://www.realitymod.com/forum/f388...rovements.html
mebel is offline
Last edited by mebel; 01-02-2018 at 08:35 PM..
Reply With Quote
Old 01-02-2018, 05:44 PM   #37
Rabbit

Rabbit's Avatar
Default Re: Distribution of heavy assets over time

Quote:
Originally Posted by mebel View Post
- make vehicles more vulnerable to unguided HATs/slow-moving projectiles making those kits more 'noticeable' @Rabbit
I always thought they were quite easy to find.
https://i.imgur.com/u1bD7Hc.png

https://i.imgur.com/K2YsMAA.png

Back then I was really hoping they would get used a lot so I could up the armor on mec and lower it on fsa.

Rabbit is offline Reply With Quote
Old 01-03-2018, 11:04 AM   #38
Piipu

Piipu's Avatar
Default Re: Distribution of heavy assets over time

Sounds like a good idea to me. Maybe with faster asset respawns we could also get rid of the stupid durability on APCs. It's especially jarring to have BTRs survive side hits from LATs with little or no damage. Same goes for tank-ATGM balance too, and I suppose CAS could be made more vulnerable against ground AA when they don't have to go afk for half an hour after one mistake.


MY STRONG PC SPECTS
Piipu is offline Reply With Quote
Old 01-03-2018, 12:17 PM   #39
viirusiiseli
Banned
Default Re: Distribution of heavy assets over time

Quote:
Originally Posted by Piipu View Post
Sounds like a good idea to me. Maybe with faster asset respawns we could also get rid of the stupid durability on APCs. It's especially jarring to have BTRs survive side hits from LATs with little or no damage. Same goes for tank-ATGM balance too, and I suppose CAS could be made more vulnerable against ground AA when they don't have to go afk for half an hour after one mistake.
Make PR BF2 again?


we've come a full circle
viirusiiseli is offline Reply With Quote
Old 01-03-2018, 12:40 PM   #40
Aleon
Default Re: Distribution of heavy assets over time

The point of this thread was to highlight an opportunity to increase balance by changing how heavy assets are distributed on asset maps. But seems like you guys are not buying it, so there is not much point in continuing.

If you want to discuss other means of balancing, I recommend making a separate thread that focuses on your specific idea, because this is already getting muddy.

/thread

Aleon is offline
Last edited by Aleon; 01-03-2018 at 01:03 PM..
Reply With Quote
Reply


Tags
assets, distribution, heavy, time
Thread Tools
Display Modes

Posting Rules
You may not post new threads
You may not post replies
You may not post attachments
You may not edit your posts

BB code is On
Smilies are On
[IMG] code is On
HTML code is Off
Trackbacks are On
Pingbacks are On
Refbacks are On



All times are GMT -4. The time now is 12:22 AM.


Powered by: vBulletin. ©vBulletin Solutions, Inc.
Search Engine Optimization by vBSEO 3.6.1
All Content Copyright ©2004 - 2015, Project Reality.