Map changes

[Tarantula]

For infantry i think it should be slightly different for realism purposes and it may slightly show the game down.

The suggestion:

When you bring the map up, you dont see anything unless you are stationary for 4 scs to simulate the map being brought out and unfolded and checked. After the four seconds you see all of what you do in the map now.

I realise that this would be hard and sacrifice gameplay so instead it then has the radar effect of everything on the map showing up every 2 seconds then fading out. (after the initial 3/4 scs of pulling the map out.)

For vehicles the map should stay the same, they would be aware where everyone is at all times and have GPS and whatnot.


Why:

realism without sacrificing too much gameplay, the PR way.

At the moment people can just whip out their map very quickly and just quickly check oh thats a friendly up ahead. With this squads will have to stop while the squad leader takes out his map to call in an airstrike or direct tanks and it would add not only to immersion but to the gameplay experience.

Please disscuss, if this is not do-able or too hard for some then use this post to discuss other ways the map could be changed.

[Ecko]

Really, I don't see much gain from this. You already are exposing yourself by bring up the map. If your using the map whilst on the run you are putting yourself at risk from enemies.

[abbadon101]

Not a fan of the idea as it would only mean the SL would get left behind as his squad moves forward for the 4 secs.

[Tarantula]

1.
Then you open the map under cover with the support of your squad

2.
Then the SL should stay "stop i need to check my map, regroup on marker"

[bust331]

1.
Then you open the map under cover with the support of your squad

2.
Then the SL should stay "stop i need to check my map, regroup on marker"

1: Fair enough

2: Do not like...stop a whole squad just to look at a map? You are aware there are GPS's, correct?

[Tarantula]

true cpl gangster. Maybe later on when mumble is fully up and a part of PR and people may be more ready for ideas like this.

bust: do regular soldiers carry GPS's around with them? i know they're taught to read a map and whole squads would stop to look at a map, whole platoons stop to look at a map.

[Smegburt_funkledink]

A problem with BF2 is that you can't always tell who you're looking at from a long distance, kists don't render and some factions look similar at range. In real life, you'd be able to distinguish soldier characteristics much more easily than you can in game. This makes spotting friendlies occasionally difficult in PR. To counter this problem, friendly locations should stay on the map and should be able to be seen rather quickly. Waiting 4 seconds seems a bit over the top. If the map PR was realistic (needing to open the map etc...) then friendly locations shouldn't be there at all but it's not a realistic map, it's just a gameplay device that helps bump your situational awareness back up towards realism.

In my opinion.

[Threedroogs]

1: Fair enough

2: Do not like...stop a whole squad just to look at a map? You are aware there are GPS's, correct?

2: it's the SL's squad. the squad is at a severe disadvantage when away from the SL. if the SL needs to stop and look at the map to see what's going his squad should stop with him.

you dont always have to stop to look at the map, of course. when i am pretty sure it's a safe area, i will open up the map while moving, knowing my guys are near me and covering me in case it's not safe.

and i dont like the idea of a 4 seconds timer to open the map. the delay could be increased a little bit but 4 seconds is too much.

[JKJudgeX]

For infantry i think it should be slightly different for realism purposes and it may slightly show the game down.

The suggestion:

When you bring the map up, you dont see anything unless you are stationary for 4 scs to simulate the map being brought out and unfolded and checked. After the four seconds you see all of what you do in the map now.

I realise that this would be hard and sacrifice gameplay so instead it then has the radar effect of everything on the map showing up every 2 seconds then fading out. (after the initial 3/4 scs of pulling the map out.)

For vehicles the map should stay the same, they would be aware where everyone is at all times and have GPS and whatnot.


Why:

realism without sacrificing too much gameplay, the PR way.

At the moment people can just whip out their map very quickly and just quickly check oh thats a friendly up ahead. With this squads will have to stop while the squad leader takes out his map to call in an airstrike or direct tanks and it would add not only to immersion but to the gameplay experience.

Please disscuss, if this is not do-able or too hard for some then use this post to discuss other ways the map could be changed.

I disagree... and here's why (some already mentioned):

1) Visual clarity. In real life, you can see much, much better than in game. With 1-20 pixels representing someone, ALL they are is an indistinguishable mess in-game. That's about 300 meters in game, with people wearing light brown and light green on light brown and light green backgrounds.

2) Friendly fire incidents are already very common in game... about as common as they are in real life, and that's with a map that shows friendly locations.

3) Communications. Because it's a video game, people are less informed by others than in real life. In game communication WITHIN A SQUAD is even more laborious than it is in real life, so, your CO doesn't spit out each and every little detail as he would in real life... no capability to communicate between squads, even if they are standing with you or in the same APC, etc makes for a situation where your tactical view of the field is highly limited.

4) Preparation and briefing. In the military, you will be briefed for days, even weeks, before you are deployed to a theater. Then, you'll be briefed on the ground for even more time. The whole time you'll be studying maps, learning the area, figuring out objectives, etc etc etc. This is something that doesn't happen in PR, and, I think that's why the map is left in. It represents your soldier's knowledge of the area, so you don't have to have it.

5) Playability. Even if it is unrealistic, some features have to be left in to make up for the fact that we are playing on a flat screen with speakers and we have no way of feeling or smelling our environment. You're out realistic depth perception, you're out of realistic hearing abilities, you've already had taken from you your hit indicator... you have just about as much spatial awareness in PR as a fully numbed and mostly blind and deaf man has in real life... not that of a soldier. The more "conveniences" you completely remove in search of realism, the more unplayable the game becomes. The more "conveniences" you can replace with a realistic in-game proxy, the more "realistic" the game becomes.

Example: Energy bar is removed, but bleeding is added, visual effects for being hit put in, lethality is upped a bit, and medics are changed. More realistic and more enjoyable because now our soldiers react to pain in a semi-realistic manner, which forces us to play more realistically and adds a "fear" element to the game.

Example 2: Directional hit indicator is removed. Less realistic because now our soldier has no sensory perception as to the source of pain, which soldiers really have. Nothing is added or changed beyond this tool's removal, thus, the game becomes less realistic and less enjoyable because of a "gameplay" decision that the devs strongly believe in. Just makes the game more frustrating, because nothing was added in to supplicate what the BF2 makers had originally done. Less playability, less realism.

Example 3: You can no longer spawn as a guy with a rocket launcher. More realistic because rocket launchers are a resource that is in reality, limited. It's replaced by allowing you to request the kit from a supply crate, and the number of them held in check. Also, the vehicles that you would be fighting with said kit are of limited number, and worth tickets to your opponent, thus increasing the VALUE of this kit with the increased VALUE of the enemy vehicles. More realism, features added, nothing just "taken away" or "crippled".

The question should never be "what can we strip from battlefield 2 in order to make it more realistic?" It should be, "What can we implement a more realistic system for that Battlefield 2 has that will make the game more immersive?"

Anything that gets removed must have something replacing what it was... sometimes less convenient, but more realistic. If the core game already makes less realistic any replacement you are trying to make by it's own merit, it's probably best to leave it in. The map is one such thing.