BF2:PR vs ArmA2 Questions

General discussion of the Project Reality: BF2 modification.
Post Reply
160thSOAR
Posts: 4
Joined: 2011-09-22 01:30

BF2:PR vs ArmA2 Questions

Post by 160thSOAR »

I looked around this forum for some sort of "Newbies Post Here" place but couldn't find it. If it is there, and I'm just some sort of idiot for not seeing something staring me in the face, please tell me so. I also tried to run a search, which was unsuccessful.

On to the actual topic.

I have played ArmA2 for about a year now, but my old computer broke in August and I just got a new one, an HP Envy 14.5 inch. Despite supposedly being "better" than my old computer. it failed to run ArmA2 without a large amount of lag. Is BF2 :P R less demanding than ArmA2?

On to some gameplay questions:
1. How do things like vehicle combat measure up against ArmA2? Does PR have the same type of damage system where different parts of a vehicle can be damaged/destroyed instead of a simple hitpoints kind of thing?

2. Is helicopter flying more like the BF2 system, where your rudder still functions even at top speed and helicopter handling is overall rather clunky? Helicopters in BF2 are easy to fly well (I almost never have to use flares any more in BF2 when someone shoots a missile at me, and most threats, even jet pilots, are kind of a joke), but the handling feels just lacking compared to ArmA2. How do PR's helicopters measure up?

3. Something I've noticed that definitely does appeal to me is that there seems to be an ArmA2 - like amount of helicopters, and a more extensive covering of jets. Do these come default or do you have to use other mods to get them?

4. How does CQC measure up against ArmA2? ArmA2 has godawful close-quarters handling.
Maverick
Posts: 920
Joined: 2008-06-22 06:56

Re: BF2:PR vs ArmA2 Questions

Post by Maverick »

What I can say is that the PR:BF2 system, their physics of helicopters, isn't really "realistic"(You can fly upside down XD, but if you have a mature pilot, it shouldn't happen) but PR:BF2 is less instance than Arma2, but it's pretty high up there because of the amount of content and what the DEVs have done to push the Refractor2 engine to it's limits. The jets and helicopters in Arma are ALOT more realistic, but as of right now, there are no jets in PR:Arma2, mainly because it's a beta.

Regarding armor battles, if you get hit in the wrong place, your going down, it's as simple as that, just deploy smoke, and your safe for the time being, there are different visions that you can see through to help you spotting the enemy, the engagement ranges are WAY farther than PR:BF2 I believe.

P.S, back to the helicopters, I feel that the countermeasures in PR:A2 actually work, rather than in PR:BF2 the flares have a 60% fail ratio for me.


Quick Edit: I have taken like 2 or 3 RPGs to the side of a Warrior in PR:Arma2 before, I was with Aborted_Man when this happened.
Last edited by Maverick on 2011-09-22 02:40, edited 1 time in total.
ImageImage
goguapsy
Posts: 3688
Joined: 2009-06-06 19:12

Re: BF2:PR vs ArmA2 Questions

Post by goguapsy »

BF2, for it runs in an older engine, is less demanding than ARMA2. BF2 :P R is "heavier" than vbf2 because of the map sizes, graphics and whatnot.

1. You can't destroy a part of a vehicle (such as blowing a car's tires), but different regions of the vehicle suffer more damage (ie. makes the vehicle lose more HP) than others, such as, if you hit the front of an APC, the damage is not nearly as close as it would be if you hit the back of the APC with an anti-tank weapon. About armors, there is a chance that, when the vehicle has few hitpoints, the vehicle will get "tracked" (ie. will not be able to move unless someone repairs it with a logi truck). I believe it's also possible to disable a tank's main gun, but don't quote me on that.

2. The helicopter flying is harder - much harder, if compared to vbf2. It's not like you can't learn the basics (DO NOT press W before the warm-up time is up, normally 30 seconds; DO NOT hold S for too long to slow down, chances are your helicopter will lose control) in 15 minutes in offline practice, however. Rudder doesn't work too well on high speeds.

3. Assets are map-dependant. Whilst 4km maps normally have jets and choppers, smaller maps might be limited to just choppers and 1km maps (ie. infantry-sized maps) no choppers or air assets at all. They all come with the download of the latest PR.

4. It's okay. I am not sure how to compare it to ARMA 2.
Maverick wrote:P.S, back to the helicopters, I feel that the countermeasures in PR:A2 actually work, rather than in PR:BF2 the flares have a 60% fail ratio for me.
Really? I don't recall getting shot down in (or shooting down) a chopper whilst deploying countermeasures in PR:BF2. Just make sure you drop flares whilst flying over enemy territory, even without a lock signal/noise (which are delayed, so are normally too late).
Guys, when a new player comes, just answer his question and go on your merry way, instead of going berserk! It's THAT simple! :D

Image[/CENTER]
ShockUnitBlack
Posts: 2100
Joined: 2010-01-27 20:59

Re: BF2:PR vs ArmA2 Questions

Post by ShockUnitBlack »

Your PR:ArmA lag issues may be a result of a poor netcode, not your computer's performance. It's been a problem for everyone - wait for ArmA 2 v1.6.

CQC is currently much better in BF2 PR than in ArmA.

Flying is the opposite; if all you want to do is ride around in a helo, I'd play ArmA.
"I Want To Spend The Rest Of My Life With You Tonight."
160thSOAR
Posts: 4
Joined: 2011-09-22 01:30

Re: BF2:PR vs ArmA2 Questions

Post by 160thSOAR »

I'm not talking about the normal Domination lag kind of thing though. I'm lagging in singleplayer too, so it isn't an internet problem. But whatever.

I'm assuming you launch this the same way you launch ArmA2 mods, so I'm going to go try it out now.
Rudd
Retired PR Developer
Posts: 21225
Joined: 2007-08-15 14:32

Re: BF2:PR vs ArmA2 Questions

Post by Rudd »

1. PRBF2's vehicle combat system is much simplier than A2's, and imo needs tweaking. Different parts of vehicles cause different damage levels, with the possibility of system failures; whereas A2's is more realistic and deliberate; hit the gun and damage the gun.

2. A2's flight system is considerably more realistic than PRBF2's, I think we've gone as far as we can with BF2 flight physics tbh, though there may be some improvements possible from the combined arms minimod.

4. I find CQB in A2 is more realistic tbh, can't swivel 180 degrees to engage, I find the desyncing is the primary problem with A2 CQB.
Image
=]H[=TangFiend
Posts: 265
Joined: 2008-08-14 01:51

Re: BF2:PR vs ArmA2 Questions

Post by =]H[=TangFiend »

I would like to offer an unbiased Point for Point objective analysis of BF2 :P R and PRa2 as of 9/22/11 based on my experiences.

System Requirements:

PR:BF2 - Built off the older engine, it is considered the lighter of the two mods. However some of the urban maps ie Ramiel can be pretty GPU intensive so a nice muscular graphics card with modern drivers is needed to play the game at highest levels with full AA.

PR:a2 - The ArmaII engine is more CPU intensive so a nice i5 or i7 processor is recommended. Good fast RAM and mobo too will help with the frames per second. Even small overclocks to my processor (PhenomIIx4) seem to affect performance noticeably.

Controls

PR:BF2 - There are a lot less controls in the Battlefield 2 engine, it is certainly more streamlined approachable to a new player. You can get into the game and get going with minimal remapping to play as an effective infantryman.

PR:a2 - There's no hiding the fact that the base controls for ArmaII are a hot mess. They are a major reason ArmaII scored so low in the meta for PC game review sites. Multiple toggles, multiple ways to perform the same action (ie Prone & Go Prone). Vague names for functions like "Reveal Target or Optics Mode" don't help. Setting up your controls in PR:a2 is kind of like whittling a piece of wood, you work on it for awhile then play a round then go back and whittle some more till you shape it into something you can use.


Network Latency

PR:BF2 - Better

PR:a2 - Crunchy, the desync is highly variable. Mostly its degrees of fair to poor, but at least it's being worked on.


In Game Menus

PR:BF2 - Clumsy at best, with practice you get used to getting things done in the older PR but it can sometimes even for a vet be a struggle. Dealing with kits and other in game technical things can be so bass ackwards to use. Building assets can only be done by the squadleader and also can be very sluggish & cumbersome.

PR:a2 - The Interaction key alone puts PR:a2 head and shoulders above PR:BF2. Come up to an object, crate or body and click a key. . .-what do you want to do with this?- Open it? Search It? Drag it? Pick it up? Rotate it? Dissasemble it? Load it? Bandage it? This common sense intuitive approach combined with vanilla ArmaII's "Default action" key and personal inventory makes many aspects of the game so easy to approach use. Building can be done by any player with minor restrictions on FOB placement. Static defenses can be moved tweaked and perfected. A good squad can unfurl and set up a full firebase with TOW, wire, sandbags and MG's in under 90 seconds.


Vehicles

PR:BF2 - Numerous, great variety. So many have been beautifully modeled over the years of development. Most of them are easy to maneuver and responsive. Lots of vehicle to vehicle combat maps, tankwars ftw.

PR:a2 - I'd say less than two dozen total so far. All of them seem to need their power steering fluid checked. Forget pulling off a clean 3 point turn. Logi trucks are notoriously hard to see out of. Individual components being damaged is pretty cool however. Changing a tire while taking fire is pretty harrowing. Disabling a parked enemy vehicle is fun.


Aircraft

PR:BF2 - Helicopters have always been way too finicky, give a little and get a lot. Way too easy to spill and don't really rudder or handle like aircraft. Jets feel pretty nice and smooth with a joystick, dogfighting is pretty rad. Their only setback is even on the largest map sizes they cover distances so quickly they can feel hemmed in with the AWOL boundary.

PR:a2 - Helis feel much more realistic. They hover easier at rest and bank with inertia and soar like an actual flying machine. There are as of yet no jets in this mod.


Factions

PR:BF2 - 16

PR:a2 - 3? So far, but the mod is brand new.



Ballistics & Deviation

PR:BF2 - Probably the most passion inspiring and debated aspect of this mod over the years. The .9 generation of releases seemed to find the best balance of realism and playability within the limitations of the BF2 engine. The player reaction to the current deviation settings have been largely positive.

PR:a2 - Physics driven and realistic rifles at short to mid ranges just point and shoot. At longer ranges watching bullet drop of outgoing .50 cal tracers off over a valley is nothing short of spectacular. Same with watching a heli doorgunner put some "Kentucky windage" on on his shots.



Maps

PR:BF2 - Great variety of maps to match the varied factions from urban to woodland to taiga to desert. Some of the maps are as iconic as the mod itself. Time and weather settings are static, no night combat. Engine limitations can be a headache particularly when dealing with climbing and inclines. The majority of buildings cannot be entered.

PR:a2 - Rediculously massive rugged landscapes, lots of terrain to navigate. Most buildings seem to be occupiable. Great vistas and visibility with graphics settings at high. Sun slowly sets as the day drags on.



Immersion

PR:BF2 - Makes great use of environmental sounds and real time weapon SFX fading over distance. Maps are decorated with burned out statics and vehicles. Certainly gets the most mileage of the old engine to make the player feel like they are part of something bigger. Suffers from a few sound bugs, like hearing choppers all over the map etc.

PR:a2 - This is another category where the new engine is already shining brightly. Hearing heavy ordinance rumble and echo across a valley will turn hairs on your neck. Fires light up the night and are reflected across bodies of water. Dust and particle effects linger and hang so thick you can almost taste it. Played a round in a night thunderstorm last night on TacticalGamer. Without NVG's you couldn't see your hand in front of your face. Lightning would crackle and illuminate the whole surroundings for a second. It reminded me of Jurassic Park. :shock:



Coms

PR:BF2 - In game voip is easy to use. There is also an in game channel for Squadleaders to talk to the commander. Intersquad real time communication can only be facilitated with third party chat programs that have to be installed and set up separately. Players largely all have their preference whether they be Ventrilo, Teamspeak or Mumble. Spotting on screen icons are certainly easier to follow and use, squad sizes are smaller and easier to keep cohesive.

PR:a2 - In game VON is multilayered and facilitates any kind of communication necessary. No need for any third party apps. There is a built in positional direct com similar to mumble allowing you to talk to an individual near you without bothering others. Unfortunately a lot of the playerbase is still learning when to use each com level and there is currently a lot of confusion and annoying radio spam. Squads can be any size and can be subdivided into Fireteams. There are no on screen attack or BF2 equivalent icons, everything is shared via the map screen.

--

That's all I could think of for now. :D
160thSOAR
Posts: 4
Joined: 2011-09-22 01:30

Re: BF2:PR vs ArmA2 Questions

Post by 160thSOAR »

The strange thing is that I have 8 gigs of RAM and an i7 processor and ArmA2 still lags. Could a Radeon graphics card be the culprit?

I can't seem to get PR to launch properly. The ArmA2-style "-mod=@pr" code is not working.
ShockUnitBlack
Posts: 2100
Joined: 2010-01-27 20:59

Re: BF2:PR vs ArmA2 Questions

Post by ShockUnitBlack »

Your perception of lag could just be based off other players warping, a better test would be how well your computer performs in singleplayer when no or very few bots are present. Spend some time tweaking your video settings also; it's paid big dividends for me.
"I Want To Spend The Rest Of My Life With You Tonight."
Spec
Retired PR Developer
Posts: 8439
Joined: 2007-09-01 22:42

Re: BF2:PR vs ArmA2 Questions

Post by Spec »


I can't seem to get PR to launch properly. The ArmA2-style "-mod=@pr" code is not working.
Just to avoid confusion, we're speaking of PR:A2 now, right?
Image
--- currently reduced activity ---
Thanks to [R-MOD]IINoddyII for the signature!
_____________________________
Propriety is an adequate basis for behavior towards strangers, honesty is the only respectful way to treat friends.
160thSOAR
Posts: 4
Joined: 2011-09-22 01:30

Re: BF2:PR vs ArmA2 Questions

Post by 160thSOAR »

No, I was trying to launch it through Steam and thought, "Oh, it's a mod, I'll just launch it like ACE." Well, as you might have guessed, fail. It's much easier to use than ArmA2 mods in that way. You just have to click a button, and it starts for you. Having to search through my Set Launch protocols got annoying with ArmA2. I miss that game....

FYI with the computer problems:

ArmA2 lags in Single Player on my computer though, even when I'm just doing the Boot Camp missions. The lag varies from a lag spike about every 30 seconds to completely unplayable, and I have no idea why. My computer handles BF2 and Bad Company 2 with no trouble. My old computer, which had half the RAM of this one, ran ArmA2 fine on low settings, the same settings I have ArmA2 set to on my new one. What the hell though....
Post Reply

Return to “PR:BF2 General Discussion”