PDA

View Full Version : Event Project Reality v0.874D Open Gameplay Beta : Part 3


Jaymz
2009-11-27, 04:40
The Project Reality Team has been conducting, during this month of November, a public beta test on a select number of community servers to test gameplay changes to the spawning mechanics of the mod. You can read more about it in the previous news posts (https://www.realitymod.com/forum/f380-project-reality-news/70369-project-reality-v0-874c-open-gameplay-beta-part-2-a.html).

Although the month is almost over, we still want to test some new changes, so we appreciate any feedback you can continue to give on those as well.

The grouped changes since 0.874 are:


Lowered maximum spawn penalty from 60 seconds to 45 seconds.
Raised the maximum number of Forward Outposts available from 4 to 6.
Forward Outposts can be built 200m apart (decrease from 300m).
Forward Outposts can be built with one supply crate instead of two.
Deployable assets (HMGs, AAs, Foxholes, etc) require two supply crates do build.
Deployable assets can be placed up to 200m from the Forward Outpost (increase from 150m).
Limited infantry kits require a squad of 3 to be requested or spawned with (Automatic Rifleman, Medic, Grenadier, Rifleman AT and Marksman).
Rally Points expire after 60 seconds from being placed.
Rally Points cannot be placed with a single enemy close (100m radius).
Rally Points are limited to only one placement before needing to be "rearmed".
Rally Points are "rearmed" by the Squad Leader when spawning (except on the RP) or getting close to a Forward Outpost, Command Post or Supply Depot.


You may have noticed that although there are changes to older tweaks (maximum of 6 Forward Outposts, 60s RPs to avoid spammy "are you ready?" talk, 100m check for enemy presence when placing RPs), the biggest addition here is the limited Rally Point. We think these changes will diminish the following behavior brought by the temporary RP modification:


Squad Leader and one more staying back sending the 4 other squad members to attack.
Squad Leader trying to deploy it all the time using it as a radar for enemy presence.
Squads depending on the rally point too much.


But still have the RP available for those cases where it's worth it (new player in squad, squad separated for stupid reason, or maybe just a safe regroup) and get squads into a lower dependence on RPs, staying together, not giving up too fast, trying to revive fallen troops, being more careful, etc. A "bleep" sound with no message will let the Squad Leader know that he got his RP "rearmed" when getting close to the locations listed above.

As mentioned in the previous announcement, the primary goal is to see the average player's focus shift from Rally Point placement to Forward Outpost placement, something that the entire team will benefit from.

We really encourage everyone to give it a thoughtful try, and think about the overall team benefits. Also think of ways your gameplay will need to change for this to work, and how you can help others, especially with land transport. Always have a medic in your squad, and keep him alive, as he can keep your squad alive.

Like before, the changes are server side, meaning you don't need anything installed to try them out, just join one of the following participating servers:


Tactical Gamer (http://www.gametracker.com/server_info/64.34.161.157:16567/) - North America
Tactics & Teamwork (http://www.gametracker.com/server_info/217.146.85.30:16567/) - UK
GamingAU - BigD (http://www.gametracker.com/server_info/113.212.96.207:16568/) - Australia
10th Community (http://www.gametracker.com/server_info/217.160.6.240:16567/) - Germany
=CC= Comunidade Brasileira de PR (http://www.gametracker.com/server_info/189.1.174.121:16567/) - Brazil


These servers will have the version "0.874D" in their server name during the test.

We would like to encourage all our players to join these servers and report their feedback in the appropriate forum areas (https://www.realitymod.com/forum/f264-public-testing-feedback-forums).

- The Project Reality Team

ankyle62
2009-11-27, 04:55
loved the last version, makes people slow down and not be so expendable.

sounds like some good changes, thanks

maarit
2009-11-27, 07:01
hey,this sounds nice.
i think that limiting rally placements bring much to the game.
theres few exiting options to the squadleader now.
examble if our squad getting casualties,squadleader have to fall back "100m" to get reinforcements.

galeknight1
2009-11-27, 08:18
This sounds like the perfect balance, can't wait to try it out.

503
2009-11-27, 09:26
Beautiful. They look like the perfect changes.

Nebsif
2009-11-27, 10:14
wee thumbs up! one question tho, teh SL need another guy near him to place a rallyzor?

Heskey
2009-11-27, 10:47
My only question is:

How will the SL know when his rally has been rearmed?

maarit
2009-11-27, 10:50
A "bleep" sound with no message will let the Squad Leader know that he got his RP "rearmed" when getting close to the locations listed above.;)

Tartantyco
2009-11-27, 10:56
-The only thing that happens is that people start whining about having to walk over 9000 km after they've used the rally point.

Elektro
2009-11-27, 16:48
-The only thing that happens is that people start whining about having to walk over 9000 km after they've used the rally point.

use-teamtransport.com

Arnoldio
2009-11-27, 16:54
Nice... rearming the rally, as i suggested ^^

I will test tonight...

Threedroogs
2009-11-27, 18:16
this sounds like a major improvement over part 2 of the beta. i'll have to try it out this weekend.

MentalEdge
2009-11-27, 23:58
(I haven't played the previous C-Version but just had an evening with the current D.)

First of all, it needs some real personal adjustment to the changes but I find it rather imbalanced on insurgents-maps, that the Taliban have so many spawn-points while the US has real trouble to set some up:
Today I played one map as US and due to the 3 known weapon caches the US were torn apart and did not know what they should worry about first: Defending the firebases or attacking the caches! So they had approx. 6 parallel objectives (in AAS-mode you have 2-3 max.) and did not achieve a thing. I know that it can only work with teamplay but who can expect to find a server where you have 4-5 full squads who know what they do? In previous versions, you could still have lots of fun but today was devastating! sry...

I am not sure, if I observed it right but sometimes it was not even possible to spawn from a intact firebase. Does it require a radius free of enemies, too?

One reason you stated why there were changes to the RP-policy was, that you want to encourage to revive fallen squad-mates. Good idea we tried today, too (as always), but as soon as the medic-kit gets lost (because he is wounded for too long, you do not have any chance to get your squad back up.

Maybe I can adjust to the changes but I am not sure because endless walking is not, what I intend to do when launching PR :wink:

cu

Nick_Gunar
2009-11-28, 07:36
Firstly, I think that they came up with good stuffs really.
The unique use of rally point makes it more valuable. Now, it has to worth it when you put a RP ! It pushes the entire squad to regroup to elaborate a solid plan (exit the "one at a time spawn" which results in a scattered squad).

For insurgents maps, I must say that a lot of BLUFOR squads are reckless. The job of the insurgents is to set deadly ambushes and sometimes BLUFOR got overwhelmed because of that. You have to progress slowly but surely, clear the zone and move to the next one. Again, it depends on, a) is your team organized? is it good?, b) the players in front of you (good team as well?).

To sum up, it is just the beginning. These changes, as I understood, try to change the way average players play (less muscle, more brain, less rambo, more sun tzu). It will take some time though, but I am sure it is the right thing.

risyboy
2009-11-28, 10:37
Sounds like a very good balance!
although i think that when you are going to build hmg`s and aa`s you need two crates:P

risyboy
2009-11-28, 10:39
although i think that when you are going to build hmg`s and aa`s you need two crates:P[/QUOTE]

Hehe:P

didnt see that you had to;)

ViperHummel
2009-11-28, 20:26
I for one look forward to any development in PR that increases the chances of team work being used. I know that the eventual path away from RPs will take some getting use to. But I have faith that just like people did when changing from BF2 over to PR, they will adapt.
I feel the big reason ppl do go Rambo on games like this is because of the score board. Its our vice. We want to be at the top more so than the team winning. If the score board has to stay, then the next logical path is to make it hard on yourself and everyone if you do not rely on one another to get around. Sorry I was rambling.
Anyway, I look forward to this continuing development b/c I suck at the game and need more team mates to help me out :oops:

Polka
2009-11-28, 20:49
Sounds neat, will give it a try.

Greg Hale
2009-11-29, 22:38
I really like the rearming..... and i think you guys are doing an amazing job!!! with this mod. I was away for a few months to come back and find the mod game play being better than ever and all the awesome new content. Stand up job to all the DEVS!!! :grin:

Le_Chuck
2009-11-30, 12:51
Personally i dont like that new RP-system. I know, it was annoying, that some squads did their own useless thing and travel at places, where they shouldnt be. You tried to get rid of that by limiting the rally survival time, but people exploited it again for already mentioned reasons. By forcing the SL to reload its rally to set a new one, you make the rally almost useless, because you cant simply set one if needed. In my opinion, you should be consequent and take the rally away in general or stick with the normal system (non beta) or at least the C beta version without reload.

The temporary RP-system shurely has its advantages, because if you get the SL and the medic + 3 grunts, you can be almost shure, that you have eleminated the nme squad. Squad cohesion was sometimes much better. But that can be handled by a good SL too.
The disatvantage is, that on public servers, people already started not to join squads, because they think, that there is no rally anyway. Squadless amount of players will increase.

Dont try to influence peoples behavior that much by game changes. People who dont care about teamplay anyway, will not change their minds just because game mecanism forces them. Imo it will not pay out.

THX for your efforts by keeping this game running for that long though.

synch c
2009-11-30, 14:04
I like the changes but one temporary rp is a bit harsh. I'd prefer to see two or three rp shots or better yet one rp and the ability to always plant an rp next to a truck or apc. I think this would encourage mech teamplay, give value to the often abandoned trucks and give you a choice between a noisy but steady frontline or a stealthy foot approach where ROE are vital.

Protector
2009-11-30, 14:25
If i'm honest I think all this changing of the game mechanics is becoming a bit much. PR won MOTY for how it was. My advice would be don't fix something that isn't broken get more content in the game & maybe coders can take a little break ;)

Oddsodz
2009-11-30, 17:25
If i'm honest I think all this changing of the game mechanics is becoming a bit much. PR won MOTY for how it was. My advice would be don't fix something that isn't broken get more content in the game & maybe coders can take a little break ;)


Very VERY GOOD advice that.

Jagger
2009-11-30, 21:22
Very VERY GOOD advice that.

It's a fair point except for one thing. The numbers 0.874. Not 1.0, but 0.874 (a,b,c,or d).

This is a game under development and has been for a little while.Ever changing but still the same.A bit like real war where the rules change over time due to circumstances,like the A bomb for instance.Or the bow and arrow.Or IEDs for that matter.

One day we'll get 0.9 and then later we'll get 1.0 if we're good little soldiers and build enough FoBs.In the meantime,when you hear the whistle, just pop your head over the top and run toward the enemy for a bit.

Anyway,them Generals are always fiddling about......... :mrgreen:

Protector
2009-11-30, 23:34
Agreed that its always a WIP which is why they are beta testing it but I just think the guys are looking into it a little too much, maybe feeling because they havent changed this area massively recently they feel they need to now? I still think the new factions and weapons/vehicles will keep the community happy without having to change stuff like this.

Jagger
2009-12-01, 08:45
Agreed that its always a WIP which is why they are beta testing it but I just think the guys are looking into it a little too much, maybe feeling because they havent changed this area massively recently they feel they need to now? I still think the new factions and weapons/vehicles will keep the community happy without having to change stuff like this.

That is also a fair point.

Good job we've got a forum to discuss it in. :thumbsup:

SilentWarrior
2009-12-01, 16:03
Personally I think that this change must be brought with other major changes, if brought alone, it will damage the game.

Examples are :

- Scoped MGs seriously made long range fighting a joke, make them spawnable, but not scoped, I know it is realistic, but if you cant even pop your head out from 500m to try and sharpshoot the guy with your rifle, it will be much bigger pain with this new rally mecanic. It should have no scope, so he can still lay fire upon us, but not as acurate as poping us off at that exact sec we pop our head out. So we can actually sharpshoot the MG out, and say "MG down and smoke is up, move!".

- More vehicles, I cant stress this enough, we have tons of flight assets in maps like Muttrah.. where we should have some more water moving vehicles, yes ... boats! Boats are very good vehicles when you need semi-fast deployment and every nub with half hour flight time is trying to fly us in under AA cover. As with other maps, make the troop carriers (inf trucks) spawn more often, or even make them explode after 2 minutes of not beeing used, we still have tons of ppl that drive in them alone and abandon them in retarded locations.

- Give us deployable sandbacks, I cant remember where I saw this, i think it was on BF42 (as a mod), that can be placed just like foxholes, but in more quantity, and that can be destroyed by vehicles by driving fast into them, they really made the diference in some locations for setting up temporaly defences.

- Muttrah city only (muttrah is a very special example, I cant remember any other map where this is stressed so much) -> take out MEC missile AAs or lower their damage, but also take out cobra and attack huye, I know this may sound a bit odd, but, APCs and MGs are good enough at keeping transport choppers from going in hot zones, while it makes it possible (without bug using, will consider going out of map and back in a bug) to land ppl on the ground. Placing a AA in the far West area of the docks (the ship) and one in the castle area is enough to keep the whole American team looking at each other in the carrier. I know it is partly the fault of infantry, APCs and ultimately attack choppers, but on public servers you just dont have enough coordination to keep every single MEC from effectively building in said areas. And since MEC APCs will stay at range shooting down boats and HATs shooting down our APCs, it is always a very tight situation (game turning actually).

- EJOD Desert -> take out the MEC tank, since i dont really see it as beeing a balance point for that map, normal APCs can take out strykers without any problems anyways, the tank unbalances it alot if you happen to have a good crew in it. Give mec and us some more transport trucks.

- Some Russian maps have way too many heavy vehicles without proper ticket bleeding. This makes it so that infantry not only has a very hard time going in to battle, but also makes it beeing ignored a bit. With every single nub going for vehicles such as tanks and APCs, without providing transport to infantry or cover for that matter and simply going "duck hunting". The flag bleeding problem further stresses out this point, because, even if you manage to defend a flag for 30minutes, while fighting off enemy infantry, tanks, apcs, artilery, etc, you still dont cause enough damage on the opposing team, thus making the round last forever (with every single infantry having to walk a ton lot thus making ppl leave an otherwise good map, and no fobs arent really helpful due to the sheer mass of enemy vehicles walking around and trucks beeing unable to deploy crates on hard to reach terrain where a fob would make the diference).


I have more, but, I am tired of writing, and since this will make little to no diference, I cant be arsed more.

SilentWarrior
2009-12-01, 16:06
Forgot to add that, that all the stuff I mentioned were to give the players some "slack", so that we can still make mistakes, while not letting the team lose over just one mistake.

Gossy*AUS*
2009-12-02, 05:48
Weakening AA and De-Scoping the MGs are bad Idea, purely because it retracts from the realism.

To compensate for the Nubs who love to crash / lose choppers unnecessarily, maybe on maps which are very chopper-centric make sure there are other forms of transport available in case it does happen, IE Barracuda / Muttrah.

Increasing the amount of transport would only increase the number of tickets you lose when everyone runs off in their own truck.

If any map needs to be adjusted it is Korengal Valley. Getting a good FOB up in the opening minutes is nigh on impossible, made impossible because there is almost no where to do it anyway.

The Amount of insurgent spawns would have to be reduced or limited to only the main spawn and caches, or the period of time they are available drastically reduced.

Other than that, I believe the current beta version, for what the Devs are trying to achieve, is basically spot on.

JSteger
2009-12-02, 17:15
Just one question..
Since you cant have a rally point within a 100m range from the enemy. Couldnt they use this as a way to find out if there is an enemy near by?

Not to much of a big deal, just wondering.

Awesome changes btw.

Off topic - Has the PR team announced a possible date for 0.9?

PuffNStuff
2009-12-02, 19:42
I have one suggestion, make AA countermeasures, more effective. Its just a downer when u drop all your flares on the way back only to have a last chance missle come through all the flares and kill you. Especially for the planes, in reality, those places dont just shoot on flare out at a time, it shoots them out like it has flare diareea

Lindahl
2009-12-03, 14:40
Have not tried it that much yet but hopefully this will encourage more fireteams and better tactics, squad wise. I have seen to many squadleaders constantly running in the front of the squad with 5 members slacking behind. Maybe not on the more serious servers but its quite common that the sq leader is the first getting killed. Unfortunately,

More fireteams and more teamwork in the future and I thrust the Dev's, so whatever they will do 0.9 will be epic. :-D

Gossy*AUS*
2009-12-05, 02:06
Just one question..
Since you cant have a rally point within a 100m range from the enemy. Couldnt they use this as a way to find out if there is an enemy near by?

Not to much of a big deal, just wondering.

Awesome changes btw.

Off topic - Has the PR team announced a possible date for 0.9?

You have to rearm the Rally Point off a Firebase, so you would only be able to do it once, therefore negating the possible positive effect of doing it?

blachhawk
2009-12-06, 14:39
Hi all.

I see that the idea is really great for a well organized team. I know that this is what we all want and like to play in that way. But..... how many times are you playing with all members of the squad following orders??? Worst, all team???? I play a lot and can't see this too often.

In my comunity we used to play a lot to PR, now.... only 3 of us continue to play. Why? Because they think so many changes made it so slow. With this I want to let you know that making things "too real" sometimes makes its unplayable (not my case).

A good way to know if the changes are prefered is creating 2 idem servers, one with the change the other without it. After a month, see which one has more players. Keep that one. It is important to use the same server name and same maps for both.

Something like:
Tactics & Teamwork - 0.87
Tactics & Teamwork - 0.87 Beta

hiberNative
2009-12-06, 16:36
these updates tire me. i'll just let you guys test it for me and wait for 0.9.

Doom721
2009-12-06, 19:19
I think blachhawk has a point:

I'm not saying teamwork and working as a team is bad, its just from my experiences playing on TG with the open beta revisions, everyone ALWAYS works together

I almost feel you need a broader test group even past the 5-6 or so servers, and to test it on servers that aren't as strict on forcing teamwork, or with less active admins ( Public play, newer players etc. )

HAAN4
2009-12-06, 19:53
Personally i dont like that new RP-system. I know, it was annoying, that some squads did their own useless thing and travel at places, where they shouldnt be. You tried to get rid of that by limiting the rally survival time, but people exploited it again for already mentioned reasons. By forcing the SL to reload its rally to set a new one, you make the rally almost useless, because you cant simply set one if needed. In my opinion, you should be consequent and take the rally away in general or stick with the normal system (non beta) or at least the C beta version without reload.

The temporary RP-system shurely has its advantages, because if you get the SL and the medic + 3 grunts, you can be almost shure, that you have eleminated the nme squad. Squad cohesion was sometimes much better. But that can be handled by a good SL too.
The disatvantage is, that on public servers, people already started not to join squads, because they think, that there is no rally anyway. Squadless amount of players will increase.

Dont try to influence peoples behavior that much by game changes. People who dont care about teamplay anyway, will not change their minds just because game mecanism forces them. Imo it will not pay out.

THX for your efforts by keeping this game running for that long though.

I kwon the felling, i to has hated then how the changed AR kits to scoped.

so long this ideia is something that is making life Wrost, is something that i deply defend, the best estrategys don't come from the good thing,s but the bad ones.

IAJTHOMAS
2009-12-07, 00:31
I also prefer the all or nothing approach. Of all the betas, I've like no rallies the best, although it doesn't always work on all maps (the suggestion of reintroducing time limited supply drops for map with diffcult terrain, and expecially where one side has air superiorty, like Korengal was a good one to at least look in to imo).

Otherwise I'd rather just have the old rally system. The other varitaions seem very complicated with little gain that I've seen.

Personally I think that this change must be brought with other major changes, if brought alone, it will damage the game.

Examples are :

- Scoped MGs seriously made long range fighting a joke, make them spawnable, but not scoped, I know it is realistic, but if you cant even pop your head out from 500m to try and sharpshoot the guy with your rifle, it will be much bigger pain with this new rally mecanic. It should have no scope, so he can still lay fire upon us, but not as acurate as poping us off at that exact sec we pop our head out. So we can actually sharpshoot the MG out, and say "MG down and smoke is up, move!".

- More vehicles, I cant stress this enough, we have tons of flight assets in maps like Muttrah.. where we should have some more water moving vehicles, yes ... boats! Boats are very good vehicles when you need semi-fast deployment and every nub with half hour flight time is trying to fly us in under AA cover. As with other maps, make the troop carriers (inf trucks) spawn more often, or even make them explode after 2 minutes of not beeing used, we still have tons of ppl that drive in them alone and abandon them in retarded locations.

- Muttrah city only (muttrah is a very special example, I cant remember any other map where this is stressed so much) -> take out MEC missile AAs or lower their damage, but also take out cobra and attack huye, I know this may sound a bit odd, but, APCs and MGs are good enough at keeping transport choppers from going in hot zones, while it makes it possible (without bug using, will consider going out of map and back in a bug) to land ppl on the ground. Placing a AA in the far West area of the docks (the ship) and one in the castle area is enough to keep the whole American team looking at each other in the carrier. I know it is partly the fault of infantry, APCs and ultimately attack choppers, but on public servers you just dont have enough coordination to keep every single MEC from effectively building in said areas. And since MEC APCs will stay at range shooting down boats and HATs shooting down our APCs, it is always a very tight situation (game turning actually).

- EJOD Desert -> take out the MEC tank, since i dont really see it as beeing a balance point for that map, normal APCs can take out strykers without any problems anyways, the tank unbalances it alot if you happen to have a good crew in it. Give mec and us some more transport trucks.



These are all just points which come down to badly tactics and decision making.

If an MG is firing at your position, you don't pop your head out that the point of them. Don't complain about being killed by MGs if you're like trying to engage in a head on firefight with one.

If your pilots are morons and your SLs dont build FBs you lose.

If you're TOW is poor, you'll have trouble as US on EJOD.

What's the point of playing a team based multiplayer game if you don't want to rely on your team for anything?

SnipeHunt
2009-12-07, 17:59
Of the betas... I have to say that the no rally point was the best gameplay I've had.

Durandal
2009-12-07, 18:16
Also going to vote for the all-or-nothing approach. I see the problem with rallies, and I'd like to see firebases being the center of action a bit more... but on the other hand, I've had a lot of fun with rallies in the past (not exploiting them mind you). A lot of great extended battles to be had.

Plus, my biggest gripe is that in most cases, firebases are entirely useless. Only takes a couple of minutes (sometimes a matter of seconds) and you can't spawn on them anymore because a couple of hostiles ended up wandering nearby.

If you're going to get rid of rallies, you've got to fix the firebase thing. Otherwise, you'll just have some pretty big idle parties going on in the main bases.

WHPRaveman
2009-12-08, 01:13
those places dont just shoot on flare out at a time, it shoots them out like it has flare diareea

ROFL!!!!!!!1:-D:D:D:D

SilentWarrior
2009-12-08, 12:43
I also prefer the all or nothing approach. Of all the betas, I've like no rallies the best, although it doesn't always work on all maps (the suggestion of reintroducing time limited supply drops for map with diffcult terrain, and expecially where one side has air superiorty, like Korengal was a good one to at least look in to imo).

Otherwise I'd rather just have the old rally system. The other varitaions seem very complicated with little gain that I've seen.



These are all just points which come down to badly tactics and decision making.

If an MG is firing at your position, you don't pop your head out that the point of them. Don't complain about being killed by MGs if you're like trying to engage in a head on firefight with one.

If your pilots are morons and your SLs dont build FBs you lose.

If you're TOW is poor, you'll have trouble as US on EJOD.

What's the point of playing a team based multiplayer game if you don't want to rely on your team for anything?

I dont like to COMPLETELY rely on one single player for my gaming experience, when there is 32 players in my team.

I dont want to be forced to go AFK while waiting for next map because after a 30 minute walk I accidentaly turn the wrong corner and got MGed by the "Huye squad" member that went in there just for MG, asked for rooftop landing, and was there just 2 minutes on a completely retarded zone... where he fall off the building while moving forward on the edge.

If I am going to be owned like that, I want to go down in a fair, good firefight. Not because of some nub MG man on the edge of the map shooting me down from 600 meters.

SilentWarrior
2009-12-08, 13:07
"
If your pilots are morons and your SLs dont build FBs you lose.
"

Pilots are a lost cause most of the times.... it would be good to have a system to only allow pilots with enough flight time and reputation inside them (yeah, keep dreaming).

As for firebases, I see so much retarded firebase locations that it never stops amasing me. Specially those so called "FOB" or "Logistics" squads that make firebases in open areas where the enemy can easily spawn kill you (yeah it happens ALOT).


"
If you're TOW is poor, you'll have trouble as US on EJOD.
"

Having played TOW crewman before, I know it is pretty easy to lose it to enemy tank fire, specially if they know what they are doing. Those t72 are great at hiding in the desert, and if the driver gets out, you can pretty much forget about taking one down before he takes you down if they have a good gunner and your team doesnt provide you with enough intel. And i am not talking about the initial round rush for the kill either, since i never did that.


If you expect your team to be leetzor players, you are pretty much delusional. It only shows that you havent played PR enough. As much as I would like PR will never have the player base of BF42 or DesertCombat. Those are long gone, pretty much as soon as vBF2 came out, they too went out. There are simply way too many vBF2 players (vBF2 makes CS players cry atm).


The struggle right now is about gameplay VS realism on PR. You can only have so much realism before you screw gameplay.

To have very long range tank battles, you need to have very good anti-tank guarded locations where infantry can have their battles. Same goes for aircraft. Either that or make it so hard for them to see infantry or get near infantry that they would simply lose interest in chasing infantry.

I beleave the goal for PR (on BF2 engine) should be towards speciallized maps, such as "mostly infantry", "mostly tanks", "mostly aircraft", like Desert Combat was. There should be a tank only map, with loads of tanks for nice tank battles, like the DC "Battle for 73 eastings". Aircraft only like that map with the big "NO FLY ZONE" sign. Or infantry only (supported by transport choppers or cars or wateva light vehicles) like "Lost Village".

Maps like Kashan Desert, even tho balanced maps, have a weak infantry gameplay (even tho sometimes very fun).



On a side note, would love to see a building infiltration (hostage like) map. I asked for it for Desert Combat some years ago, but BF42 engine simply couldnt handdle it well. A Big building with swat like teams, against insurgent hostage takers. Where there was multiple floors, with multiple entry points. Insurgents spawning inside the building, and americans coming in by car or chopper then having to clear floor by floor. Say DCs "Oil Rig" map.


PS: where the hell is the edit post button?

Sliver
2009-12-08, 23:30
#EJOD is a MEC-Rush-Map:
Tank + APCs take City first and then Gasstation
If US Team is good, they can destroy the Tank or one APC before they got owned by the rest. Current EJOD-Record with 64 Players: 4 Min.

#Kongreal -> Basecamping Map, US havent a real chance to destroy more then 1-2 caches

#Ramiel -> US can destroy max. 5-6 Caches before they run out of Tickets

#Fallujha -> US can take max 3-4 Cashes before they run out of Tickets

#Al-Basrah ->Max. Cashes ~5, then no tickets left

#Archer -> Max. ~6, US loses to much Choppers (=Tickets), building Firebases does not work cause they are most time overrun/camped by taliban or to far away

#Fools Road -> Russian win if the other team does not destroy the mainbase-bridge

#Sunset -> A simple Team Deathmatch Map without any strategy

#Road to Kyongan Ni -> Remeber Sunset? -> nearly the same, +10% strategedy

#Asahd Kal -> Team Deathmacth Map Nr.3, a littlebit more strategic as Kyongan but still Deathmatch

#Qwai -> approximately balanced but the chin. APC's are a littlebit to heavy armed and they can swim so the Strikers are most time a metal-coffin if the TOW-Humvee/HAT cant destroy all heavy chin. APCs

#Karbala -> works perfect, remove the Little Birds so they cant wasted (->losing tickets) and its completly balanced

Even more Maps that work realy good with Beta-changes: Muttrah, Koselkz, Kashan, Quinling, Baracuda, Jabal, Ghost Train, Mestia, Tad Sae, "this old Night-Map where you play now at daylight (i forgot the name sorry :D )"

These are my impressions so far..
Biggest problem is the Insurgent-balance! They got tooooo many spawnpoints!!!!!!!!!!!!

By the way, sorry for my english ^^ xD

TOME Malambri
2009-12-08, 23:41
I despise this system, as does the rest of my clan. It gets in the way of our teamwork attempts.

Smith[EEF]
2009-12-10, 17:06
I despise this system, as does the rest of my clan. It gets in the way of our teamwork attempts. i thaught the same at first but it grew on me ;-) give it a chance

Scared_420
2009-12-11, 05:56
for heavy terrain map it is near impossible to get a good spot to actually put up an fob and defend it, usa should have a huey wth crate in some of these maps and i think it will work better

Bluedrake42
2009-12-11, 06:05
I think there should be some kindof icon, or other kind of status indicator for the RP's. Because otherwise its cumbersome for troops to find out if the RP is still up or not. A little icon in the top part of the screen or something like that would be nice just for a quick way to see if its up or not. (a countdown timer would also be nice to track the rp's "Lifetime" but I don't want to ask too much)

Bonsai
2009-12-11, 07:25
I think there should be some kindof icon, or other kind of status indicator for the RP's. Because otherwise its cumbersome for troops to find out if the RP is still up or not. A little icon in the top part of the screen or something like that would be nice just for a quick way to see if its up or not. (a countdown timer would also be nice to track the rp's "Lifetime" but I don't want to ask too much)

Yeah like the "timer" inside our helmets we have IRL that shows us if the enemy has found our backpacks?

//irony off

corp_calqluslethal
2009-12-11, 22:39
No rallies suck, simple as that. Please don't go through with this stupid change, ive played it for weeks now and i hate it. Makes for more walking people will build fb... and, who cares. People build fb already now it just seems like every squad is building them with the changes. The maps are huge people need rallies especially on insurgency, if your fb gets taking out you have to start from scatch. That change makes the game kinda suck.

eykis
2009-12-12, 01:07
No rallies suck, simple as that. Please don't go through with this stupid change, ive played it for weeks now and i hate it. Makes for more walking people will build fb... and, who cares. People build fb already now it just seems like every squad is building them with the changes. The maps are huge people need rallies especially on insurgency, if your fb gets taking out you have to start from scatch. That change makes the game kinda suck.

^ what he said

Calcor
2009-12-13, 09:40
I like the old, normal RP system.

Never touch a running system.

devildog279
2009-12-13, 16:40
I like the new system.

Ill start of with what happened.

Yesterday I joined the TG server, but I completely forgot that it was hosting the beta changes for you PR devs. I joined in at the beginning of a match, before it had started and joined an infantry squad. I was the AR. I am bad with remembering names but I know Blind_Firepower was in the squad. The round was on Al Bhasrah (spellings probably wrong). When the round started we spawned at the vehicle check point and moved out south on foot down the side of the road towards the city. We cleared several insurgents without anyone dying. We were then directed by our commander to check out a possible weapons cache in the most western suburbs of the city. We did not find one, but when we were finished, We Jumped in the back on an APC that had come to pick us up, and almost our entire team moved out as a convoy to the southern edge of the map where the bridge runs east-west south of the city. We then built a firebase and began to move out east. We crossed the river and immediately engaged several insurgents, killing all of them, with our squad using great team work. Our commander then directed us to pull back, as our entire team was going to go back to base to regroup, rearm, and reogranize. We all jumped in the logi's and WMIK's and we led the APCs back to base. Sometime on our way there our commander disconnected, which was unfortunate because he was doing a great job organizing the team. Once our team was reorganized we moved out to the far east of the map near the river, and set up a firebase then crossed the river. From there the team play did decrease, but It was still fun.

The deal is, the entire time I was playing, I never noticed the abscence of Rallies, because the team play was so great, and everyone was working together greatly in the best display of combined arms I have ever seen, and Ive been playing awhile.

MY VERDICT: if you skipped all the above, and just want to know what I think about the D version changes, then I like them. For a team to win, they force a team to work together to try to keep each other alive. It also increases the helpfulness of the commander as they can coordinate everyone. For these changes to work, it will require the support and the will of the players. The idea is sound but without the support of the players it will wreck PR. so while I like the ideas, I would hesitate to implement them until you know you have the majority of the PR community behind you.

Thanks for Listening - Semper Fi

PLODDITHANLEY
2009-12-14, 08:31
I don't think there is any doubt, on good TW servers the no rally is good.
However on more average servers (majority) that will make gameplay far more difficult.
It all comes down to where the DEVs want PR to go: easier with more players or more realistic and difficult with less run of the mill players.

For me personally in theory I like the no RP's for realism but in practice I think it will further reduce the playerbase (but as a lot of people say they would prefer less servers with good TW to lots of tardy servers).

A bit of a on the fence reply - sorry!

Why not have a vote?

Heskey
2009-12-14, 16:15
I prefer no rallies at all!