Suggestions for making PR more Realistic without sacrificing Gameplay

[BlackwaterEddie]

Although I’ve been playing since the .4 release there are things that still annoy me, the following suggestions would not only improve team play but would also greatly enhance the “reality” view that the mod needs.

The current AAS system works great, but the one thing I don’t like is the fact that theres no emphasis on taking over the surrounding area, its just a line going straight down the middle, id like to see some changes to this.

1. Asset Cap Points
The asset cap points would be docks, tank factories, munitions dumps etc, they can be captured by any side and would offer (in the case of docks) boats, in the case of tank factories they would offer…have a guess. Not only would these cap points add more to the game play and team play but after taking an asset cap point you are also in a position to bring more armour or firepower to the fight (plus if they are set off to the side an excellent flanking opportunity)

2. Respawn Points
Keep the current AAS points but also offer the players a chance to cap spawn points that are not needed to win the game but to allow them more places to respawn from, offering the team to strike from different angles.

3. Rally Points
I never did like the rally point idea, to me it doesn’t add to game play but it does annoy the piss out of me when someone puts a rally point in a wall. If this mod wants to be a reality mod then rally points will have to go.

4. Minimap
The minimap needs to go, I propose it be swapped for a simple compass, that way squads moving as a team will be able to go “contact north” if they come under fire and all team members will know exactly where there squad mates are being attacked from.

5. Vehicles
The amount of vehicles in each map make it difficult for squads to stay together, say 5 teams spawn at USMC base on EJOD, two full squads take the humvees, two full squads take the APCs and that leaves two full squads picking their arses, id like to see a light skinned vehicle (capable of holding 6 people) on each map, my team currently does not have a pilot which we can rely on, so we have to rely on other pilots, this seems fine to me but if we only have access to helicopters then we become unstuck, it would be nice to have the option of taking land or air based vehicles.

6. Kits
To be perfectly honest, half of the kits don’t need to be there, take the Spec-Ops character out of the game altogether, it’s only used due to the full auto function. It was (although isn’t so unrealistic nowadays) unrealistic for special forces to be working alongside standard military units in advancing on the military, if people do not want to live without their special forces, then maybe the mod could incorporate two levels of maps, AAS maps for conventional military units and S&D (Search and Destroy) missions which involve one team of special forces and the other team conventional forces in defensive positions.

If some of these issues have been rectified in .6 then I apologise, if these changes cant be made due to hard coding problems, then I again apologise.

Thank you for reading,
Eddie

[Expendable Grunt]

How about we merge a few ideas...

"Secondary Objective Zones": These are points that don't need to be captured but they give you something out of capturing them. For instance let's say there is in an urban map a civilian airfield. If a team captures it, they get to use it as a spawn (flat area for dropping off reinforcements) as well as some light vehicles (humvees). If the opposing force is insurgent, they get nothing, as it's useless to them.

[gazzthompson]

rally points even tho r unrealistc i think r great towards game play of squads , and SF not working along side normal millitary , happends all the time in iraq , i saw 1 documentary when US SF troops were patroling the streets in hummers, but thats a hole nother argument.

[Darkpowder]

tank factories generate armour resources..... realistic... you are joking right?
This isn't stalingrad when they were rolling them out of the factory straight into the battle.

The other points you make are deserving of consideration, but the idea that special forces don't work with regular military elements really isn't true. They do. perhaps not -right- next to them but in the same theatre and even locale.

the problem with 0.6 SF is the Laser-Gun feel of the M4 again like 0.4

there perhaps is a -slight- lack of vehicles.. But i -despise- the BF2142 BS where there are more vehicles than players.

[mammikoura]

I agree on all points except the rally point one. While it isn't realistic it does improve gameplay. If we can increase the amount of spawn points (maybe a few more apc's, maybe even some vehicles which have only like a .50 mg as a defence and you can spawn on them + suggestion #2) then maybe we could look into removing the rally points.

[jerkzilla]

In the beta at least, a lot of squads don't even use the rally points so there is no point in considering to remove them. Wasn't the wall glitching issued fixed in the beta anyway?
The answer to the vehicle problem lies in the requestable vehicles thread made some time ago. The rally points are also meant to help here.
The answer to point nr. 2 are actually the rallypoints you suggested removing.
I personally think the maps are too small to accommodate tactical objectives as suggested in point nr.1. I agree with agree with Darkpowder.
As far as the Special Forces are concerned, it should be a limited kit in my honest opinion. You know there are a lot of threads discussing this but none of them have reached any conclusion. I think a DEV said it's the "noob accommodation kit" or something similar, can't remember right now.
I agree with the minimap replacement suggestion.

[Lange]

6. Kits
To be perfectly honest, half of the kits don’t need to be there, take the Spec-Ops character out of the game altogether, it’s only used due to the full auto function. It was (although isn’t so unrealistic nowadays) unrealistic for special forces to be working alongside standard military units in advancing on the military, if people do not want to live without their special forces, then maybe the mod could incorporate two levels of maps, AAS maps for conventional military units and S&D (Search and Destroy) missions which involve one team of special forces and the other team conventional forces in defensive positions.

If some of these issues have been rectified in .6 then I apologise, if these changes cant be made due to hard coding problems, then I again apologise.

Thank you for reading,
Eddie

I agree that having the special forces is kind of unrealistic but with the PLA and MEC SF they work different than US forces. While US SP usually operate on their own they sometimes do work it other conventional fighting units but not usually. However having PLA and MEC SF kits is probably realistic because their SF system is different from the US system likely (looking on middle eastern military forces in real life comparing to mec). To solve this I suggest keeping SF kits for PLA and MEC but instead giving the USMC a Recon kit. The Marines corps force reconnaissance http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/U.S._Marin ... nnaissance is considered the "special forces" of the Marines corps making it more realistic that way than the current spec ops kit. Just a additional idea.

[Blackhawk 5]

5. A vehicle that can hold 6 would probally be another humvee, or if used the TOW model would be 5 people. Unless modeling a deuce and a half that can fit 8. Keep in mind that mabye a squad size would stay at the uncap on a full server (AFK, commander, vehicle campers, etc.)

[eggman]

#1 already there. the maps in PR are far too small to have tank factories. on larger maps obvious military installations have heavy assets available at them so capturing them gives benefit in the form of access to those assets. On medium maps, there are transport vehicles available at soem forward CPs. Otherwise all heavy assets come from the main base CPs. Given the size of most maps that is our "standard" we are moving toward.

When I say larger maps I really only mean Kashan Desert at this stage as that is the new definition of larger maps in PR and many aspects of the mod are being geared toward that as being the new upper size threshold.

#2 probably not going to see the return of fixed spawn locaitons in PR. Between Rally Points, APCs and other player controlled spawn vehicles, Squad Leaders, Commander Bunkers & Firebases there are copious *player controlled* spawn locations and that is the direction the mod is headed. Fixed spawns only at mains and some use of team specific spawns in the form of expiring and non expiring mapper set rally points is, for now, the extent of the spawn location toolkit in PR and we will ne regress to incorporate the use of fixed spawn locations.

#3 rally points are staying and represent the squad element of our player controlled spawn system. glitching is resolved in v0.6. new rule that requires 4 members within 20m radius to set a rally point helps leash them. No current plans for further leashing and no plans to remove them, tho we are evaluating ways of making "needle in the haystack" hunts for rally points less annoying.

#4 most people who want to remove the minimap dont think through the game play implications of doing so. Until we evaluate that and make a determination about removing it, the minimap is staying.

#5 I dont really understand the issue / point / suggestion. When maps have too many transport options this seems to promote poor teamwork. If maps don't have enough transport, it's a relatively minor issue to fix. Most large maps have vehicle drops enabled on a 10 minute respawn timer, so this helps to make up for any lack of transport. If the reason for a lack of transport is people driving off in an APC with 3 people in it, or a heavy jeep with 4 people in it... that's a player issue not a mod or level design issue. We're pretty adamant about designing the mod to FORCE teamwork as much as possible.


#6 You say half the kits dont need to be there, then mention one kit (of about 16 iirc). Then you use a past tense to state an error in a future tense game. That kind of hyperbole taints the credibility of your suggestions and degrades the utility of the discussion. Again most people don't think through class system changes and design issues. There are 4 base classes in v0.6 of which one is SF. The SF class is "organically" balanced to some degree (in that it's not the most attractive class to play). It's the "lonewolf / vBF2 recruit / jack of all trades & master of none" class. I don't really have much of a problem with the game play impacts the v0.6 Spec Ops has within the v0.6 class system. Most people who dont want them in the base cass list make the suggestion based on v0.4 and v0.5 issues and on some anal perception that it being in the base class list is not realistic without evaluating how much actual impact they have on game play and on how many of them are fielded at any given time.

The new "uber kit" is the Rifleman class imo and frankly that's how it should be. Most conventional armeis consist of Rifleman grunts as the largest portion of their infantry forces. The only major problem with the Rifleman class in v0.6 is their omnipotent resupply capability and resulting unlimited ammo. Hopefully we'll figure out some way around that.


All of my response is in the context of v0.6 because I haven't played v0.5 in a long time and it sucks just as much as v0.4 did when we were in the final stages of v0.5 development

[Teek]

play the 0.6 OB
eggman gots it down pat.

[Deadmonkiefart]

What I think is more important than any of those would be realistic bullet penetration on all objects, depending on the caliber of the bullet.

[Outlawz7]

Well, I cant play 0.5 anymore, always get the spawn screen bug, when I join. 0.6 is fne, though...

[L3adCannon]

I got one suggestion
Bring back AT kits for Insurgency (beta), they made Basrah fun.

[Outlawz7]

RPGs have been made way better, and having people spawn in default with those would be a nightmare...not to mention, you just need to take a 30 sec walk to an ammo dump to get one...geez