Do you want Briefings on Maps?

ankyle62 · Post by **ankyle62** » 2010-05-04 05:57

PFunk wrote:Well since pretty much every server says you can't make a squad til 1:30? Yea you barely have time to organize unless you're with your mates and can talk about it the whole time you're even loading.

Briefings would make the PR storyline more accessible to us. We'd be able to understand. Hell you could even have people dedicated to writing out a downloadable PDF with info on battles being fought for like... PRaganda.

mumble, you can talk while the map is loading. join a better server, not making squads before 1:30 is dumb.

nochinese · Post by **nochinese** » 2010-05-05 05:54

I think this is simply unnecessary

Truism · Post by **Truism** » 2010-05-05 07:36

That's intense. You created an account not even to say it was undesirable or bad, but simply unnecessary!? I lurked these forums for over a year before posting about something that was under my skin, but I felt a little more strongly about it than you seem to.

Intense.

Imchicken1 · Post by **Imchicken1** » 2010-05-08 05:15

It'd be fairly interesting to have info on the battlefield you are headed into

Post by **K4on** » 2010-05-16 19:12

i don't care...
maybe u can add some background info about the map, like how long it was in development etc...

Cobhris · Post by **Cobhris** » 2010-07-21 19:12

I think a generalized briefing helps add to the atmosphere a bit. They don't need to be extremely detailed or tie together; something like the briefings in vBF2 and 2142 would be perfectly fine.

Kashan Desert (example): As US forces continue to push into MEC territory, the forces of the MEC 76th Armored move into position near an abandoned bunker complex deep in the Kashan Desert. This bunker complex lies near a strategic mountain pass that will provide the US forces with the best route of advance. Both sides have access to full air support, and the wide swaths of open terrain promise a massive armored engagement as the US Army forces collide with the 76th.

On continuity, I view PR as encompassing 3 separate conflicts:

1. Third World War (US+UK+other NATO allied nations vs MEC+China+Russia)
2. War on Terror (NATO allies vs Taliban, Insurgents, Hamas)
3. Police actions against the militia (Militia vs anyone who's pissed off at them)

Were I writing the briefings, the only rule for continuity would be that they would fall under one of the 3 conflicts listed above.

Wicca · Post by **Wicca** » 2010-07-21 23:36

what i would like, no offense to the Music makers.

Is to instead of having "Music" playing off, you have a sound file that plays a voice that tells you.

"To play project reality, make sure you have a michrophone, join a squad follow orders.

To flank make sure you have a suppressing element, when crossing a road, when you fly the helicopter the warm up time.

That would be nice?

Staker · Post by **Staker** » 2010-07-22 03:05

Wicca wrote:That would be nice?

With this voice. Definitely.

milla da killa · Post by **milla da killa** » 2010-07-22 21:11

I don't think we should have a briefing. HOWEVER. It would be cool to have a new gametype entitled "Scenario", which would be like Insurgency or Conquest, but the maps have different scenarios. Say, we take Faluja (however you spell it). Then that map could be split up into about 4 different maps, like "Rescue the pinned down squad", "Find and eliminate the enemy weapon cache's". Etc. But keep it seperate from the other gametypes so those that want to do a scenario type thing (Even an ambush type scenario) could do that, and those that just want to play, can play normally.

Sabre_tooth_tigger · Post by **Sabre_tooth_tigger** » 2010-07-24 14:44

Wicca wrote: Is to instead of having "Music" playing off, you have a sound file that plays a voice that tells you.

That would be nice?

every time you play a map ? no, people would turn off the music or disconnect their headphone while loading

Cossack · Post by **Cossack** » 2010-07-24 15:05

In real life armies doesn't fight without reason. Every battle what happens have briefing. Example: US Commander says before assault to Muttrah City : ''Kill all MEC soldiers what you can saw.'' Its ain't making any sense. Better be this one. Commander: ''Your objective is take out Muttrah City. If we succeed this place will be our foothold in Arabian Peninsula.'' Something like that.

Post by **Hitperson** » 2010-07-24 22:39

they were removed to make the maps ambiguous thus allowing equipment from different periods of deployment to be integrated (rather than basing off a single time)

Cobhris · Post by **Cobhris** » 2010-07-24 23:02

Hitperson wrote:they were removed to make the maps ambiguous thus allowing equipment from different periods of deployment to be integrated (rather than basing off a single time)

Aren't most of the maps fictional battles anyway?

Tallard · Post by **Tallard** » 2010-07-31 05:05

I like the way the briefings are now, but if they added little BF2/2142 style stories I wouldn't care. I do think that the loading music is getting way too much flak. I think it's cool and it gets me kinda pumped before I go spend 4 hours grinding the same map

herbanator3 · Post by **herbanator3** » 2010-08-01 04:01

dtacs wrote:Yes. The current soundtrack completely destroyed the atmosphere but the storylines should be able to bring back that feeling.

Although the new soundtrack is very nicely done, I agree with this completely

.

LithiumFox · Post by **LithiumFox** » 2010-08-01 15:52

I must agree, the newest soundtrack kinda makes me more "meh... deployed..." feeling then "Lets outwit this motha luckers!"

> >

And i think a briefing would be great. I know it's hard to write them, but... honestly....

I hate wasting time. (and briefings make me feel like i'm not wasting time ^_^)

AnimalMother. · Post by **AnimalMother.** » 2010-08-01 16:12

Hitperson wrote:they were removed to make the maps ambiguous thus allowing equipment from different periods of deployment to be integrated (rather than basing off a single time)

all that has to be done is make the briefing fit the current equipment on it. It in no way limits what the mapper can put on the map or even the validility of the map. It can just be a nice after thought to consolidate it all.

as some other have mentioned it depends how you look at the conflicts within PR, and in your head you come up with reasons as to why a certain map depicts the factions and equipment on it.
It'd be nice if there was some form of input from the mapper as to why they have created what they have. So the players get a feel of what the mapper was trying to acheive. As i doubt any mapper just moulds terrain, places statics and sorts out the GPO without any thought of a scenario in their head.

Brainlaag · Post by **Brainlaag** » 2010-08-01 16:16

A big YEEESSSSS would be really a nice addition

Squirrel-Ferret · Post by **Squirrel-Ferret** » 2010-08-01 18:40

i would love it

Quikli · Post by **Quikli** » 2010-08-03 18:37

NO.

NO.

NO.

NO.

NO briefings. No.

I make up my own stories, and I hated Battlefield 2's briefings about the MEC and Chinese forces.

Those briefings make you feel like you're simply replaying a battle again and again and again.

Without a briefing, you can imagine that it's a different battle...

Just don't bring us briefings.

Do you want Briefings on Maps?

Do you want Briefings on the Map Loading Screen?

Re: Do you want Briefings on Maps?

Re: Do you want Briefings on Maps?

Re: Do you want Briefings on Maps?

Re: Do you want Briefings on Maps?

Re: Do you want Briefings on Maps?

Re: Do you want Briefings on Maps?

Re: Do you want Briefings on Maps?

Re: Do you want Briefings on Maps?

Re: Do you want Briefings on Maps?

Re: Do you want Briefings on Maps?

Re: Do you want Briefings on Maps?

Re: Do you want Briefings on Maps?

Re: Do you want Briefings on Maps?

Re: Do you want Briefings on Maps?

Re: Do you want Briefings on Maps?

Re: Do you want Briefings on Maps?

Re: Do you want Briefings on Maps?

Re: Do you want Briefings on Maps?

Re: Do you want Briefings on Maps?

Re: Do you want Briefings on Maps?