Update: Project Reality v0.874C Open Gameplay Beta : Part 2

[corp_calqluslethal]

Well im 32 years old and my opinion is the rally point 30 second time change is plain dumb. Placing outposts allows for members to be exposed to APC's infantry etc. A rally point is much better strategy in lots of cases. Not to mention the AAS concept of the game. If your all way at the docks and you have to retreat all the way to mosque because some dumb rally point rule, and your whole team fb has been destroyed in north city. Wow great AAS a simple incendinary can stop a whole army. That was dumb Devs. Sorry but just an older player helping to correct your thinking. You should be able to see what i'm trying to say if you have open ears not closed.

Not one to be a ungrateful player. I love this game and all you guys do. The positive far out weighs the negative when it comes to the amount of fun you have brought a lot of players. But the negatives of the rally point 30s far out weighs the positive. I personally don't like building fire bases cause it exposes my squad to the enemy while they are busy. I build if i have to but i don't care about the fb points etc. I care about winning not points from fire bases.

I can adapt to the changes but you just turned tides in favor of the enemy : (

[LeChuckle]

"Well im 32 years old and my opinion is the rally point 30 second time change is plain dumb"

you know what they changed from right?

[[R-CON]ChiefRyza]

I can adapt to the changes but you just turned tides in favor of the enemy : (

Huh?

You realise your enemies are at the same disadvantage as you lol?

[Tannhauser]

What I find currently is that falling back will be a more effective move.
It will also prevent squad leaders from tardrushing and getting killed first (seeing as they're the only way a fall back action can be performed with RP).
It's also a better representation of the term ''Rally Point''.

Current modifications as much as those from 0.874B makes gameplay more oriented towards teamwork on larger scale. If you're unhappy that you can't defend yourself when building an FOB, then it should of been up to the commander or the other squads to be there to back you up while you fortify.

The best layout for conventional warfare in PR is to have squads together watching eachothers back while armored assets provide firesupport.

However, this won't work for insurgency.. It seems Insurgency being as it is, gives a severe advantage to defenders (insurgents/talibans). The only way to adapt in such situations is to either overwhelm defenders with infantry and armored firesupport, or to divide and try to multiply the chances of hitting a less defended/undefended cache.

With that, maybe the increment of present caches from 2 to 3 would make it more possible for BLUFOR to win, altho it's just an idea and might be a flawed one for many reasons.

[PLODDITHANLEY]

Interesting ....

Sounds good, having an emergency RP available which obliges squad cohesion as it will only be there for 30 seconds. (please put a decent/long delay or numerical limit per map before it can de replaced - so it is really a fallback). Hopefully would only be used when really needed otherwise use FOBs.

The placement of FOBs is still vital for the WHOLE teams benefit and success.

Btw I am even older than 32 but don't see what thats got to do with it!

[Rudd]

Originally Posted by [R-DEV]fuzzhead

It was our intention from the start of this beta to run these 2 configs, we hope everyone tries both.

are the R-DEV team considering running hte no-FBs later as a hardcore mode to run alongside the RP softcore mode?

that would be ok imo, but I'd always stick to no-RPs, RPs make squads too insular, you can have great squad tactics but lousy team tactics, but tbh in that state you might as well play skirmish maps with one squad vs another squad.

FBs etc encourage teams to stay together, have a squad on your flank, you need to move forward? ask that squad to cover you, you're getting ahead now, Stop, tell the rear squad what is happening and that you'll hold for them to catch up etc.

Maybe there should be a team rally point that requires the presence of 3 squad leaders to set

[[R-CON]ChiefRyza]

Originally Posted by Dr2B Rudd

are the R-DEV team considering running hte no-FBs later as a hardcore mode to run alongside the RP softcore mode?

that would be ok imo, but I'd always stick to no-RPs, RPs make squads too insular, you can have great squad tactics but lousy team tactics, but tbh in that state you might as well play skirmish maps with one squad vs another squad.

FBs etc encourage teams to stay together, have a squad on your flank, you need to move forward? ask that squad to cover you, you're getting ahead now, Stop, tell the rear squad what is happening and that you'll hold for them to catch up etc.

Maybe there should be a team rally point that requires the presence of 3 squad leaders to set

Far bloody out, I just thought of how cool* getting 3 full squads together to make a rally would be!

[mat552]

The lack of definition of "close" is troubling. Any word on how far that actually is?

Also looking forward to it, middle ground here I come! (after work)

[Heskey]

[QUOTE='[R-DEV]Jaymz;1185593']The new additions in v0.874C are:

1. Squad Rally Points expire after 30s from being placed.
2. Rally Points cannot be placed with enemies close.
3. Limited infantry kits require a squad of 3 to be requested (Automatic Rifleman, Medic, Grenadier, Rifleman AT and Marksman).

Hi Jaymz,

A few questions:

1.) How close do enemies need to be to prevent RP placement?
2.) If an RP is placed and enemies approach, will it disappear as it used to or will it now re-require a knife?
3.) How many squad members are required to have an Officer kit?
4.) How many squad members are required to place a RP and how close must they be to the Officer?
5.) You say 3 SM's to REQUEST kits; does that also include spawning with the medic/Auto rifle squad? When starting up servers, or when most other squads are full/locked it's advantageous that a 2 man squad has an officer and a medic, rather than going out into the field to die.

[Myru]

Originally Posted by corp_calqluslethal

Placing outposts allows for members to be exposed to APC's infantry etc. A rally point is much better strategy in lots of cases. Not to mention the AAS concept of the game. If your all way at the docks and you have to retreat all the way to mosque because some dumb rally point rule, and your whole team fb has been destroyed in north city. Wow great AAS a simple incendinary can stop a whole army.

That's exactly what's gonna happen if ppl continue to play in the uncoordinated fashion which can be seen many times in PRs current version.
With the new RP-Rule, FBs will become a high important objectiv to defend. So if a squad is forced to walk back half of the map it's a fault both of the team and the SL of that squad, because the defence of the FB was either non-existant or insufficiently supported when being attacked and the formerly mentioned SL didn't lead his squad correctly, so that he neither managed to stay alive nor to organise the rest of the squad to get him revived.