project reality header
Go Back   Project Reality Forums > PR:BF2 Mod Forums > PR:BF2 Suggestions
26 Apr 2018, 00:00:00 (PRT)
Register Forum RulesDeveloper Blogs Project Reality Members List Search Today's Posts Mark Forums Read
PR:BF2 Suggestions Suggestions from our community members for PR:BF2. Read the stickies before posting.

Reply
 
Thread Tools Display Modes
Old 12-21-2010, 01:28 PM   #1
Dv83r
Default Suggestions to improve Insurgency.

Collaborate | Define Collaborate at Dictionary.com

This definition above will be the basic meaning of these first few suggestions. Please take note in the definition that a Collaborator does not FIGHT for an enemy nation but supports it. Also take note of the synonyms. PLEASE read the entire suggestion first before responding back.

WARNING: There is a lot of information you are about to read.

Right now in Project Reality the BLUFOR can kill a Collaborator and lose all of his/her points and earn -100 teamwork points. An attitude has arisen out of these small penalties to where no BLUFOR player will respect Collaborators and some will shoot them on site. I have figured out a way for this to be stopped even though some may not like this idea.

1. First, when a BLUFOR player kills a Collaborator outside of ROE, he/she will receive a private message warning him/her of not to kill Collaborators outside of ROE and to arrest them with either restrainers or a shotgun. When a BLUFOR player kills two Collaborators outside of the ROE, he/she will be auto-kicked from the server. If he/she rejoins and kills another Collaborator, he/she will be auto-banned for the duration of the round. Yes, this suggestion sounds harsh, but it will help curb people?s attitudes toward Collaborators.

Now some of you are thinking that a lot of people would go for the Collaborator kit now. This is where my second suggestion comes into play.

2. Collaborators should be limited to one per squad. This is a valuable kit and it serves the purpose of the medic for the Insurgent faction. Therefore, it should be treated like such as in one per squad.

Again, some of you are thinking that any player would then drop his/her kit and become a Collaborator by being unarmed. Again this next suggestion should help curb this play-style.

3. After dropping your kit and becoming unarmed for sixty seconds, unarmed kits lose the ability to wield handheld, vehicle, and deployable weapons. This would be enforced by the screen going black and the player given a warning of not being able to use weapons for the Insurgency. This same principle would apply to Collaborators in how they would not be allowed to use handheld, vehicle, or deployable weapons. Also take note of what is in an unarmed kit's arsenal. If you become a Collaborator through dropping your kit, all you have is your fists, unarmed, and a cell-phone. This means this kit will be severely handicapped compared to the regular Collaborator kit.

So if my definition states that Collaborators do not fight but support an enemy nation, then Collaborators need to be limited from using weapons.

4. Collaborators are not allowed to use any suicide vehicles. This includes bomb cars, 'Big Reds', or 'Garys.' Also Collaborators would not be allowed to use the .50 caliber machine gun or the RPK on any technical. Last, Collaborators would not be allowed to use any mortar position or SPG-9 position. If a Collaborator got into any of these vehicles/positions, he/she would have his/her screen go black and receive a warning of not being allowed to use these types of vehicles/positions as he/she is a Collaborator and not an Insurgent.

These next few suggestions have to deal with other elements of Insurgency game-play that need to be improved upon.

5. If a vehicle has been deemed a suicide vehicle, why does it need more than one seat? There is no logical sense for a second seat for a suicide vehicle that will be blown up a few minutes later. Therefore, this second seat should be removed from the suicide vehicle as it might give the wrong impersonation to newer players who might use it for transportation.

Right now in Insurgency, as the Insurgent faction every player can become a Sapper. This means that 32 players can set up to 960 mines, 160 pipe-bombs and 128 grenade traps. Now that's a whole lot of explosives for one team in one map. This needs to be improved upon greatly.

6. The Sapper kit needs to become a limited kit. This kit needs to become limited to one Sapper per squad. Instead of having the amount of explosives I mentioned earlier, the maximum is now 270 mines, 45 pipe-bombs, and 36 grenade traps. I?m pretty sure that not every Insurgent is informed in how to properly set mines, pipe-bombs, and grenade traps. Therefore, this suggestion makes much more sense than it does now. If this change were to be implemented, this would open up the ability for Sappers to be able to set more mine markers whenever they set down explosives.

Also, I have noticed lately squads rushing up to caches and throwing C-4 down and driving away and blowing it up. This seems like a vanilla player?s tactic and should be changed.

7. Right now, caches can be blown up with one C-4, three incendiaries, .50 caliber bullets, APC's main cannon, tank's main cannon, etc. Caches need to be strengthened a little more too where they can not be took down by hit and run tactics. Therefore, to combat this certain play-style, caches need to be edited to be stronger where they can be taken down by 2 C-4s, 4 incendiaries, etc. This means that BLUFOR has secured the area and seized the cache.

Last, in Insurgency, deployables do not require any source of supplies to place. Any Insurgency faction can basically place these deployables any where on the map and attack from that location.

8. My final suggestion is to edit Insurgency deployables to require supplies just like the BLUFOR. This would apply in how Hideouts would require one ammunition box just like the BLUFOR Forward Operation's Base. The other part is how the Mortars or Anti-Tank deployable would require two ammunition boxes equivalent to their BLUFOR counterparts. Therefore, this change would require more teamwork for Logistics on the Insurgent/Taliban/Hamas factions.

Thank you for reading this suggestion and please respond back with constructive criticism.

Edit:

These next few suggestions I have wrote down are due to the feedback and criticism of others.

9. If a BLUFOR player kills a Collaborator outside of the ROE, the player has his/her kills turned back to 0. This is to work in conjunction with the pre-existing conditions of having the player's score changed to 0 and given -100 team-work points. This suggestion is to further increase the reasoning of not killing Collaborators on purpose.

10. Collaborators are usually not in perfect physical shape for battle situations. Therefore, Collaborators' sprint times need to be edited where they can not outrun a physically trained BLUFOR player. This can be done as Collaborators can run faster but not as far to simulate them attempting to escape from the BLUFOR.

11. A server message would come across when a BLUFOR player kills a Collaborator outside of the ROE. This is to let the other BLUFOR players not the Insurgents know when their friendlies lose them five tickets and intelligence.

12. If a Collaborator comes within 100 meters of a cache, the Collaborator goes outside of the ROE and can be killed. This is to simulate the Collaborator is now acting as an Insurgent and will be treated as such.

13. Collaborator spawns need to be lengthened to imply that the kit is an important kit and to combat Martyrdom. This can be done by adding 15 more seconds to the re-spawn time.

14. Collaborators should have the ability to set markers with their cell-phones. Therefore, Collaborators have another objective to carry out for the Insurgents. I did not realize they didn't not have this ability until a few minutes ago.

15. Whenever a Collaborator is killed outside of the ROE, the BLUFOR team loses five tickets to help encourage individuals to stop hurting the BLUFOR team. This is also to help get the BLUFOR team to discourage individuals from killing Collaborators on purpose.

16. If a Collaborator comes within 10 meters of any Insurgent vehicle, he/she goes out of the ROE and can be shot for helping the Insurgency.
Dv83r is offline
Last edited by Dv83r; 01-09-2011 at 04:22 PM..
Reply With Quote
Old 12-21-2010, 02:47 PM   #2
Bunnyman

Bunnyman's Avatar
Default Re: Suggestions to improve Insurgency.

I like the limits on the drop kit/civilian kit thing, although I'd add it so that once you have dropped kit you can't pick up another during that life. I still think they should be allowed to drive cars though since that is realistic, although naturally in such a case they are still aiding and abetting and are within ROE.
Another seat in a suicide vehicle is realistic and allows the added ability to drop of another player on route to an attack which seems reasonable to me. I also don't have a problem with them being able to set mines etc since this is the biggest killer in the Ghan, and again is quite realistic and gives the faction an actual 'point'. I mean after all they are really hampered by their load out choices otherwise (majority of weapons are unscoped) and no tanks or aircraft.
I suppose it is a personal thing though, you do have some good points generally though but I'd be aware of realism and balancing tbh

Bunnyman is offline Reply With Quote
Old 12-21-2010, 03:00 PM   #3
Dv83r
Default Re: Suggestions to improve Insurgency.

Quote:
Originally Posted by Bunnyman View Post
I like the limits on the drop kit/civilian kit thing, although I'd add it so that once you have dropped kit you can't pick up another during that life.
I must of forgot to add in that part about not being able to pick up kits after becoming a Collaborator. I have that written down in my notes.

Quote:
Originally Posted by Bunnyman View Post
I still think they should be allowed to drive cars though since that is realistic, although naturally in such a case they are still aiding and abetting and are within ROE.
Yes, Collaborators would still be able to drive all the vehicles except for the suicide vehicles.

Quote:
Originally Posted by Bunnyman View Post
Another seat in a suicide vehicle is realistic and allows the added ability to drop of another player on route to an attack which seems reasonable to me.
I can see both parts to this argument even though I lean toward removing the seat, since I've never seen more than one person riding in a suicide vehicle.

Quote:
Originally Posted by Bunnyman View Post
I also don't have a problem with them being able to set mines etc since this is the biggest killer in the Ghan, and again is quite realistic and gives the faction an actual 'point'. I mean after all they are really hampered by their load out choices otherwise (majority of weapons are unscoped) and no tanks or aircraft.
Well that suggestion I wrote down could go either two ways in my view. Either limit the kit to one or two per squad. These settings would need to be tested to see which would be better though.

Quote:
Originally Posted by Bunnyman View Post
I suppose it is a personal thing though, you do have some good points generally though but I'd be aware of realism and balancing tbh
Thanks for the constructive criticism. It took me awhile to write all of those down and piece them together. I'm also trying to think of some more suggestions for Insurgency when I have some spare time.
Dv83r is offline Reply With Quote
Old 12-21-2010, 03:44 PM   #4
Wh33lman

Wh33lman's Avatar
Default Re: Suggestions to improve Insurgency.

1. no. its overly harsh to be kicked/banned from a server for killing a civi.

2. maybe. medics are limited to 1 per squad, it would make sense to limit civilians.

3 and 4. no. theres already a system in place that if your in a vehicle, any vehicle, you can be killed without penelty. if you suicide in a vehicle(i.e. a bomb car) you recieve the penelty and blufor recieves the intel.

5. who cares. a bomb vehicle make for impractical transportation anyway.

6. sapper kit is limited.

7. caches were strengthened with the last release. you used to be able to drop a couple grenades on them and they would explode. 3 incindarys or 1 C4 makes them much harder to destroy. incindaries dont have a big damage radius, so you have to drop them directly on the cache. you also have to protect your engineer all the way to the cache if you want to use C4.

8. no. the logistics system is already in place. if you have mortars, your going to have someone running ammo, and changing anything wouldnt make a difference.

Wh33lman is offline Reply With Quote
Old 12-21-2010, 04:09 PM   #5
Dv83r
Default Re: Suggestions to improve Insurgency.

Quote:
Originally Posted by Wh33lman View Post
1. no. its overly harsh to be kicked/banned from a server for killing a civi.
Please carefully re-read my first suggestion. I designed it to have warnings before kick/ban. Also, a kick should act as a warning to not do it again without any long-term consequences. Last, the ban would only be for that round. This system is based off of the team-killing system with three punishes.

Quote:
Originally Posted by Wh33lman View Post
3 and 4. no. theres already a system in place that if your in a vehicle, any vehicle, you can be killed without penelty. if you suicide in a vehicle(i.e. a bomb car) you recieve the penelty and blufor recieves the intel.
Yes, you are correct; however, in my definition a Collaborator does not fight but assists the Insurgency. This definition, Collaborate | Define Collaborate at Dictionary.com, backs up my claim for Collaborators should not be able to use weapons but provide other services to the Insurgency.

Quote:
Originally Posted by Wh33lman View Post
6. sapper kit is limited.
Show me where the Sapper kit is limited because I just played a round of Insurgency with three Sappers in my squad.

Quote:
Originally Posted by Wh33lman View Post
7. caches were strengthened with the last release. you used to be able to drop a couple grenades on them and they would explode. 3 incindarys or 1 C4 makes them much harder to destroy. incindaries dont have a big damage radius, so you have to drop them directly on the cache. you also have to protect your engineer all the way to the cache if you want to use C4.
Re-read my suggestion again please. I have seen players use hit-and-run tactics and drive up and throw a C-4 onto a wall next to the cache and drive off and blow it up.

Quote:
Originally Posted by Wh33lman View Post
8. no. the logistics system is already in place. if you have mortars, your going to have someone running ammo, and changing anything wouldnt make a difference.
Obviously there is a Logistics system but it just rearms mortars not to build them. My suggestion was to make deployables require supplies. The deployables would be just like their BLUFOR counterparts.
Dv83r is offline
Last edited by Dv83r; 12-21-2010 at 04:29 PM..
Reply With Quote
Old 12-21-2010, 05:44 PM   #6
Total_Overkill
Default Re: Suggestions to improve Insurgency.

Vehemently disagree with everything you suggested Dv8. I know you hate civy's but this is ridiculous man
Total_Overkill is offline Reply With Quote
Old 12-21-2010, 05:51 PM   #7
USMCMIDN
Default Re: Suggestions to improve Insurgency.

Quote:
Originally Posted by Dv83r View Post
Collaborate | Define Collaborate at Dictionary.com

This definition above will be the basic meaning of these first few suggestions. Please take note in the definition that a Collaborator does not FIGHT for an enemy nation but supports it. Also take note of the synonyms. PLEASE read the entire suggestion first before responding back.

WARNING: There is a lot of information you are about to read.

Right now in Project Reality the BLUFOR can kill a Collaborator and lose all of his/her points and earn -100 teamwork points. An attitude has arisen out of these small penalties to where no BLUFOR player will respect Collaborators and some will shoot them on site. I have figured out a way for this to be stopped even though some may not like this idea.

1. First, when a BLUFOR player kills a Collaborator outside of ROE, he/she will receive a private message warning him/her of not to kill Collaborators outside of ROE and to arrest them with either restrainers or a shotgun. When a BLUFOR player kills two Collaborators outside of the ROE, he/she will be auto-kicked from the server. If he/she rejoins and kills another Collaborator, he/she will be auto-banned for the duration of the round. Yes, this suggestion sounds harsh, but it will help curb people?s attitudes toward Collaborators.

Now some of you are thinking that a lot of people would go for the Collaborator kit now. This is where my second suggestion comes into play.

2. Collaborators should be limited to one per squad. This is a valuable kit and it serves the purpose of the medic for the Insurgent faction. Therefore, it should be treated like such as in one per squad.

Again, some of you are thinking that any player would then drop his/her kit and become a Collaborator by being unarmed. Again this next suggestion should help curb this play-style.

3. After dropping your kit and becoming unarmed for sixty seconds, unarmed kits lose the ability to wield handheld, vehicle, and deployable weapons. This would be enforced by the screen going black and the player given a warning of not being able to use weapons for the Insurgency. This same principle would apply to Collaborators in how they would not be allowed to use handheld, vehicle, or deployable weapons. Also take note of what is in an unarmed kit's arsenal. If you become a Collaborator through dropping your kit, all you have is your fists, unarmed, and a cell-phone. This means this kit will be severely handicapped compared to the regular Collaborator kit.

So if my definition states that Collaborators do not fight but support an enemy nation, then Collaborators need to be limited from using weapons.

4. Collaborators are not allowed to use any suicide vehicles. This includes bomb cars, 'Big Reds', or 'Garys.' Also Collaborators would not be allowed to use the .50 caliber machine gun or the RPK on any technical. Last, Collaborators would not be allowed to use any mortar position or SPG-9 position. If a Collaborator got into any of these vehicles/positions, he/she would have his/her screen go black and receive a warning of not being allowed to use these types of vehicles/positions as he/she is a Collaborator and not an Insurgent.

These next few suggestions have to deal with other elements of Insurgency game-play that need to be improved upon.

5. If a vehicle has been deemed a suicide vehicle, why does it need more than one seat? There is no logical sense for a second seat for a suicide vehicle that will be blown up a few minutes later. Therefore, this second seat should be removed from the suicide vehicle as it might give the wrong impersonation to newer players who might use it for transportation.

Right now in Insurgency, as the Insurgent faction every player can become a Sapper. This means that 32 players can set up to 960 mines, 160 pipe-bombs and 128 grenade traps. Now that's a whole lot of explosives for one team in one map. This needs to be improved upon greatly.

6. The Sapper kit needs to become a limited kit. This kit needs to become limited to one Sapper per squad. Instead of having the amount of explosives I mentioned earlier, the maximum is now 270 mines, 45 pipe-bombs, and 36 grenade traps. I?m pretty sure that not every Insurgent is informed in how to properly set mines, pipe-bombs, and grenade traps. Therefore, this suggestion makes much more sense than it does now. If this change were to be implemented, this would open up the ability for Sappers to be able to set more mine markers whenever they set down explosives.

Also, I have noticed lately squads rushing up to caches and throwing C-4 down and driving away and blowing it up. This seems like a vanilla player?s tactic and should be changed.

7. Right now, caches can be blown up with one C-4, three incendiaries, .50 caliber bullets, APC's main cannon, tank's main cannon, etc. Caches need to be strengthened a little more too where they can not be took down by hit and run tactics. Therefore, to combat this certain play-style, caches need to be edited to be stronger where they can be taken down by 2 C-4s, 4 incendiaries, etc. This means that BLUFOR has secured the area and seized the cache.

Last, in Insurgency, deployables do not require any source of supplies to place. Any Insurgency faction can basically place these deployables any where on the map and attack from that location.

8. My final suggestion is to edit Insurgency deployables to require supplies just like the BLUFOR. This would apply in how Hideouts would require one ammunition box just like the BLUFOR Forward Operation?s Base. The other part is how the Mortars or Anti-Tank deployable would require two ammunition boxes equivalent to their BLUFOR counterparts. Therefore, this change would require more teamwork for Logistics on the Insurgent/Taliban/Hamas factions.

Thank you for reading this suggestion and please respond back with constructive criticism.
hell no to #1... What if a tank shoots inside a cashe building and kills several civis there goes the tanks gunner essentially leaving the tank defensiveness many examples can occur like this ... I see it all the time... If anything the ROEs should be loosened. If a civi is within a certain range of a bad guy then free fire or something... It is fine the way it is now i guess,
USMCMIDN is offline Reply With Quote
Old 12-21-2010, 05:53 PM   #8
Bunnyman

Bunnyman's Avatar
Default Re: Suggestions to improve Insurgency.

I can see there being a point to harsher rules against killing civies I mean if PR is about realism- in the armed forces you get immediately arrested for doing that. TBH I've done it myself regularly, I drive up to an enemy position spot an insurgent he quickly turns himself into supercivvie and raises his hands. He wants me to go in and arrest him when I know he's using me as bait for his matesa round the corner. So I shoot him in the head and carry on with an assault taking the initiative from them. It isn't really realistic since the ROE aren't going to make me think twice

Bunnyman is offline Reply With Quote
Old 12-21-2010, 06:04 PM   #9
Dv83r
Default Re: Suggestions to improve Insurgency.

Quote:
Originally Posted by Total_Overkill View Post
Vehemently disagree with everything you suggested Dv8. I know you hate civy's but this is ridiculous man
I don't hate Collaborators. I hate BLUFOR's attitude in their treatment of Collaborators. I respect Collaborators unlike many individuals who play Project Reality.

Quote:
Originally Posted by USMCMIDN View Post
hell no to #1... What if a tank shoots inside a cashe building and kills several civis there goes the tanks gunner essentially leaving the tank defensiveness many examples can occur like this ... I see it all the time... If anything the ROEs should be loosened. If a civi is within a certain range of a bad guy then free fire or something... It is fine the way it is now i guess,
USMCMIDN, you are looking at my suggestions and you are taking them out of context. You are just looking at that suggestion alone and you fear what will happen but you don't take account of what else I've said. Suggestion two comes into play here and limits the amount of Collaborators per squad. Suggestion three limits people from exploiting the unarmed kit to get BLUFOR players kicked/banned for Suggestion one. If you guys would stop looking at my ideas in a provincial way and open your minds, you would realize these suggestions in conjunction would greatly improve Insurgency.

The ONLY reason I even spent my time writing these down and typing them up was to change the Insurgents from a vanilla tactic team to an actual high quality Project Reality faction.
Dv83r is offline
Last edited by Dv83r; 12-21-2010 at 06:43 PM..
Reply With Quote
Old 12-21-2010, 06:22 PM   #10
killonsight95
Supporting Member

killonsight95's Avatar
Default Re: Suggestions to improve Insurgency.

maybe not 3 civi kills for temp ban maybe 4 or 5 to make way for like someone suggested above that there being a lot of civies in the building when fired, however a tank shouldn't just randomly fire into city buildings. Not many poeple take civi now anyway maybe limit them to 12 civis to the team to make them more numerable and to have mroe thna one in a Squad, this is because irl colaborators will usualy act in groups as they feel safer this way.

Civi = colaborator.
killonsight95 is offline Reply With Quote
Reply


Tags
improve, insurgency, suggestions
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



All times are GMT -4. The time now is 11:35 PM.


Powered by: vBulletin. ©vBulletin Solutions, Inc.
All Content Copyright ©2004 - 2018, Project Reality