[Official] Rally Point Feedback

[Navo]

The RP's have been removed for the ARF.

How does this make any sense? Any sense at all? Who makes this decisions? I would like to hear his reasoning.

Today the US just kept swarming the cache from the rally points while the ARF had to run from their hide outs. The hide outs were put in to give insurgents an ADVANTAGE by giving them an easier way to make spawnpoints, now they are at a disadvantage when it comes to spawnpoints.

Just now on Saaremaa random russians kept attack CPs from the rear just because they had a random rally point in the woods somewhere, impossible to find. No FOBs were built, squads fully relied on their RPs. There were no transport runs by Huey's at all. This change has effectively removed one playing role that many players enjoyed. GG

[DaViking]

I think having a temporary RP on a timer, like it used to be, would be nice. People, for the most part, are relying completely on RPs. Hardly anyone seems to be building FBs. The logistics role is unneeded at the moment, but I think it should be required to be successful. Also, RPs, as they are now, currently favor the attacking team.


On a related subject, FBs need to be able to be overrun with 2 people or able to be knocked down with .50cal or higher. It is possible that this is already the case, but I have seen apcs camping FBs a few times now (maybe kill farming).

[K4on]

APCs can easily kill the Firebase. There is no difference to 0.98

[|TG-69th|Wookie]

.98 RP system....

Don't fix it if it aint broken...

[DavviZ]

I've played 1.0 for a couple of days now and I have to say that I dislike the new RP system.
The permanent rallies combined with nerfed medic (longer heal time) and deadlier weapons hurts the gameplay quite a bit. If you die you can easy just spawn on your Sq rally close by and reinforce your squad instantly. I don't mind the weapons (they are much better)

For example. A firefight starts between two squads. One squad wipes and respawns at the rally. While the winning squad revives and starts to move away the wiped squad has already started engaging the squad who won the firefight. Since the losing squad now is at full streangth and freashly spawned they should wipe the rest of the squad out. Then the procedure repeats over and over again. And that might be over a objective.

Ramiel AAS really feels like coop. Everyone just running in a straight line to the objective and respawning on their rallies.
In the old system you actually gained some ground when you won a firefight or fought of a attack. If you are defending with the current system you'll simply get a big rush and eventually your squad wipes and you loose the objective.
In the old system attacking was much more of a challenge and it required a good communicative squad/squads.

Im up for testing different kinds of rallies (we have a great launcher now btw its awesome). But I think the old system will work the best.

I love what you've done with the rest of 1.0, looking forward to play the full realese

[Gracler]

The more I play with these Rally's the more I hate it.

On Ramiel a Big Red blows up the entire squad of 8 men. The medic is told to use the nearby rally and he comes and clean up the mess quickly and efficiently. There was not a single fob made at that time. So that resulted in 1 death in what should have been a disaster for the team. Unfair for the ARF to say the least.

Another example is for apc squads running 2 vehicles together . Park yourself on a hill like with 2 AAV's jump out... get an officer kit.... place a rally behind the vehicle or somewhere safe, and you no longer have to be afraid of getting killed as a driver/SL. You can just start spotting around and listen for any incoming threats. Quite easy to get 100/0 KD as US vs ARF on ramiel.

Again I do NOT like the idea of squad-leaders Resurrecting themselves from there own rally.

I bet it is not technically possible but I could probably allow if a rally stays permanent until the SL is confirmed dead....then it vanishes instantly. But im afriad it would be a set-back to how many Squad-leaders like to lead.... being at the front-line, not hiding tactically in a bush and letting the grunts do the work.

Revert to 0.981 for the win.

And to all of those that hate 0.981.... don't forget that a commander can set a permanent rally for you.......and it vanishes if the commander leave the rally or die.........

[PLODDITHANLEY]

The perm rallies give the game a quick run gun respawn feel, so people don't feel so inclined to be patient to flank, build or co ordinate or even communicate.

[Bluedrake42]

just read the new changelog... interested to try it out. Still not particularly fond of perm rallies, but should be interesting to see how longer spawn times and mandatory wounded times effect the gameplay

[cyberzomby]

Where can you see the new changelog?

[Navo]

PR:BF2 v1.0 Open Beta Changelog

[007.SirBond]

If we are keeping permenant rallies, they should rely on nearby fobs. Well not too near, but the team should have to build at least a fob before placing rallies!

[cyberzomby]

I think thats a good step forward. Might play out like a battleplan unfolding. Fob here, from there, one squad goes there and the other one goes here, etc.

[ChallengerCC]

Here are some numbers for the devs and the community. I take some time and counted the posts (not double ones).

I did this because of an discourse with K4on this night about the new Version. And he sad that a lot of people like the new RP. And i don't believed his argument at all.

Here are the facts.
(I don't guaranty for some miscounts but the big difference between the numbers talk for them self's)


Contra: 70
Pro: 23
Neutral: 28

I heard that some surveys was started ingame and a lot of player counted for the new RP-System. I don't know how representative this is surveys ingame are, but i know that a lot of players like action but if this new ones or casual PR gamer represents PR i dont know. The devs need to decide if they want a bigger action like community or a smaler faithfuly one. More player will come to PR with action thats for sure, if its a good decission i dont think so. They will not stay for so long i think.
The devs and the community should proselytize and show this action gamers that teamwork and a high value of life can make a hell of fun and adrenaline.






For me will this be the last thing i will add to this action versus tactic point (RP related). It makes no fun any more to fight against this constantly action movement. It realy sucks and take me a lot of time. 99% of all games out there are nothing else then pure action.
Game play like in PR don't exists out there and when go over to that 99% PR is nothing else than this other titles.
So why this peoples who like action dont take one of this 99% and play it.
We the tactic guys cant do this, because they don't exist and ArmA without a game play and a big played mod is not a option. Its a coop and closed community game.

All was sad. I am out now from this discusssion.

[Pvt.LHeureux]

The best would be a poll, ChallengerCC.

Some of the first posts are too old, and do not include the new updates to the rallies and maybe those players changed their mind, so the best would be a poll after the BETA's end.

[ChallengerCC]

The best would be a poll, ChallengerCC.

Some of the first posts are too old, and do not include the new updates to the rallies and maybe those players changed their mind, so the best would be a poll after the BETA's end.

Democracy can have its risk also.
I would prefer 2 settings for a server, so that everyone can play how he want to play. Depending on its actual time and game play stile he preferred:

Server settings:
Action like
Tactic/Realism like

Or a other game mode:
AAS
Frontlines

something like that.

So now i am realy out here.

[ghostfool84]

I dont understand why it was changed from 0.98 in this way. There are all these changes that promote more Teamwork, more Tactics, more Communitcation, the new supply System, new FOB destroying mechanics and more - and then these rallye points that are going in a completly different direction.

I did like the idea "ok the enemy has a FoB out there, we have to destroy it, otherwise capping the flag will be hard" And then you attacked the FoB or send CAS or Tanks to do it and it was a tactical win. This Fob was away and they have to organize a new Truck or transport Heli to build a new one. So i really liked the changes with the crates so you really have a supply line. But with these new rallyes is it not needed that much, so why the changes. And what i hate about the rallyes is that you do not know if you have overrun a rallye, it doesnt go down like a Hideout or a FoB and you only realize its down because you know you searched the whole area and there are no new enemys.

Also the advantage of insurgents is not that big anymore, US could respawn even more flexible than Ins.

Suggestion:

Whats about the Idea that the rallye is going down after 2minutes when no small supply crate is near? That would allow to use the rallye to reorganize your squad and respawn Dead Dead or new people but it would be harder to use it as permanent respawn because you need some kinds of logistics. MAybe Trans Truck could carry a Small crate.... any opinions on this?

[Quentin(GER)]

I dont understand why it was changed from 0.98 in this way. There are all these changes that promote more Teamwork, more Tactics, more Communitcation, the new supply System, new FOB destroying mechanics and more - and then these rallye points that are going in a completly different direction.

I did like the idea "ok the enemy has a FoB out there, we have to destroy it, otherwise capping the flag will be hard" And then you attacked the FoB or send CAS or Tanks to do it and it was a tactical win. This Fob was away and they have to organize a new Truck or transport Heli to build a new one. So i really liked the changes with the crates so you really have a supply line. But with these new rallyes is it not needed that much, so why the changes. And what i hate about the rallyes is that you do not know if you have overrun a rallye, it doesnt go down like a Hideout or a FoB and you only realize its down because you know you searched the whole area and there are no new enemys.

Also the advantage of insurgents is not that big anymore, US could respawn even more flexible than Ins.

Suggestion:


Whats about the Idea that the rallye is going down after 2minutes when no small supply crate is near? That would allow to use the rallye to reorganize your squad and respawn Dead Dead or new people but it would be harder to use it as permanent respawn because you need some kinds of logistics. MAybe Trans Truck could carry a Small crate.... any opinions on this?

I would appreciate your suggestion. It's such a pitty, that the logistics are almost useless at the moment.

[BloodyDeed]

Can you explain that graph to me? It's missing axis labels and a scale for me. I've no idea what you wanna say with it.

Without leaving a personal opinion on the rallypoint business, counting posts isn't how forums work:
Visit a phone forum and count how many people have some problem with their phone. I'm sure it will be about 50% of the users. But that doesn't mean 50% of the phones are broken.
People who are happy with the current state won't visit the forum and tell that, it's mostly the people that don't like it who show up.

Anyway, the current rallypoint implementation is a test and it's still work in progress. We're receiving your feedback and are well aware of the issues and the arguments for and against it.

[Cpt.Future]

BloodyDeed;1912199']Can you explain that graph to me? It's missing axis labels and a scale for me. I've no idea what you wanna say with it.

Without leaving a personal opinion on the rallypoint business, counting posts isn't how forums work:
Visit a phone forum and count how many people have some problem with their phone. I'm sure it will be about 50% of the users. But that doesn't mean 50% of the phones are broken.
People who are happy with the current state won't visit the forum and tell that, it's mostly the people that don't like it who show up.

Anyway, the current rallypoint implementation is a test and it's still work in progress. We're receiving your feedback and are well aware of the issues and the arguments for and against it.

The "Intensity" axis is his subjective perception of how intense the game is at a certain moment (lots of firefights etc vs calm gameplay without enemy contacts, ...).

What he says, is that a more action oriented game (due to constant respawns at RPs) keeps the player busy with shooting and running. But it can't be as exciting as a slower game with only a few engagements (that feel more intense) with phases when you can organize your squad, prepare for battle, anticipate contact etc.

If there is too much action, the firefights that happen are less exciting because there are too many and your value of life is reduced.

Or something like that.

I agree that dividing the servers into realism and more action-oriented ones could work.
PR has a very mixed community, unlike ArmA.

[Spook]

The only solution for me personally is going back to 0.98 RP system or even go further and remove them completely. Everything more powerful than in 0.98 is not providing anything good to the gameplay IMO.

The core feature of PR was tactics and what challenger posted:



It are those action peaks that were always the reason why I played PR. Constant action causes the game to get boring after an hour...just as any other action shooter. Thats a fact. If bullets and rockets keep buzzing by your ear, at some point it will just be meh. Unlike it was in PR before, where every enemy contact was something special and you were like WOW, that was an awesome firefight or a nice combined arms assault. The breaks between contacts are necessary to clear your mind, prepare for the next fight and keep up the tension ingame. And they contribute ALOT to the game experience and immersion. Nothing more awesome than deploying with a truck, chopper, APC or march through the awesome PR maps scenery. Sometimes I play PR for 4 or more hours without a break. I could not do that in BF3. In BF3 I get bored after 1-2 hours and usually got enough of the game for a whole week. But PR can be played everyday for several hours and always something new happens.

So DEVs please tell me, why on earth would you even get the idea to abandon your core feature and try to attract more casuals?

Do you even realize how your mod was able to be so populated over so many years? I do not know any other mod that survived for so long. It is not because you made the game faster and with more pew pew. It is because you build a game that was the perfect mix between arcade and simulation. All the people that were seeking for a game unlike CoD but also not that complicated as ArmA. They found PR and stayed. If I remember correctly most players came with the 0.8 releases. Didn't you remove perm rallies back then and increased deviation? People got interested in this game just because of those very few realism core features that made the mod unique.

At first I thought you would never keep the RPs with such a shitstorm hailing down on you, but now I get the feeling that you really try everything to stick to this idea. Even though you say its WIP and in test phase, still I think you really want to make the game faster and more action-based than before. And this scares the shit out of me.

PR is the best game I have ever played and is the only game that I could keep playing for years. What Am I gonna play if you screw up 1.0? There is nothing out there compareable to PR. Ill have to stick to mainstream shooters and keep buying their new titles and DLCs to stay entertained...and still gameplay experience will only be meh.

All the work you guys did...and now throw it all away just to get more causuals in the game. What do you want with them? YOu want them to vote for your mod so you get mod of the year once again? Ingame, votes between 1.0 and 0.98 RPs always end with a 1:2 vote ratio for the 1.0 version...now who the hell are those guys voting for 1.0 if the forums are full with hate against it? Must be all the new players, or other casuals which usually play skirmish all day long or hang around on those russian cracked servers. They do not feel the need to register here and participate in feedbacks and contribute something to the mod at all. They just want a little action and then stick to BF3 again.

Now you prefer the opinion of those guys instead of all the loyal players that were always helping you out everywhere they could. The opinions of all the big communities organizing events and keeping the mod alive seem to not matter aslong as some random publics are pleased. Its like stabbing us in the back.

You realize that alot of players will stop actively playing your mod and alot of communites will vanish if you focus on action instead of realism in 1.0? Sure people will keep playing it for a while, but never with the dedication and the seriousness as in the pervious versions.

Basically you are destroying your base with those massive gameplay changes. Well I am getting tired of the discussions about RPs, deviation and everything. If you want to get rid of your loyal, committed and supportive playerbase and welcome new action-based causual players, then go for it. But do not complain in a year, when all those new players return to BF4 since they get the same experience there, just with better graphics and realize that your mod is dead.

Its your mod, you build it and its also your right to burn it into the ground again. Its a sad thing for me and most of the players but we cannot force you do to anything since it was always for free.

Do not get me wrong, you might consider all this as hate and flame...but the only thing I and many other want to achieve, is to preserve PR as it was and is supposed to be. We just want to continue having fun, nothing else.

Think straight DEVs and pick your decision carefully.