My Opinon; Kit Limits/Forced Squads

Troels · Post by **Troels** » 2006-01-08 16:18

F.N.G. wrote:What happens when the squad A is Full of medics and SAW gunners when there are no tanks and the squad just anhialates everyone?

What happens is that squad A from the other team is full of snipers and quickly kills off the medics. This, combined with the longer respawn times of prmm, should include enough time to finish off the SAW-gunners.

DangChang · Post by **DangChang** » 2006-01-08 16:50

Troels wrote:What happens is that squad A from the other team is full of snipers and quickly kills off the medics. This, combined with the longer respawn times of prmm, should include enough time to finish off the SAW-gunners.

You forget that sniper rifles are gimped, and that medics can revive each other very quickly while the SAW gunners quickly snipe the snipers.

visaya · Post by **visaya** » 2006-01-08 19:16

Doesn't matter if they would die if they were unconscious - I was wrong.The truth is if anyone was shot and bleeding and needed a defib - they wouldn't be in good enough condition to jump up and take out a couple squads then run the full map 10 times over. They would be put back into a dying state, still living but not combat effective and for purposes of the game - dead unless you wish request coding for half alive soldiers with reduced speed and accuracy which wouldn't be worth having in the first place.
Stop using little faults in my words to discredit me when the truth is you only play PRMM to sit by yourself and snipe with your n3w 1mpr0v3d 1337 5n1p3r "o/\/\g4h |1k3 175 50 much b3774h 7h3n v4n1||4 bf2. Time after time in the pubs, you just snipe and don't even help the squad out. I tell other squads to stop rushing in and defend instead of wasting tickets when the other team has a defense perimeter set up around our base - then you mock and bark at me on voip like I said something totally uncalled for. Then you have the audacity to say I had a lesser amount of kills than you did! Well when the round restarted - who had a higher amount of but didn't say anything?

And in response to nikovk.
It is much easier to launch personal attacks and ask why to everything I say, but it doesn't mean you win an argument. The fact is that everything I mentioned is realistic instead of creating a world that you think is realistic by suggesting all these ideas - do just a little research. The answers are in real life - not in nikovk's head. You use enders game as an example of adaptation but the division of forces has parabolic efficiency. When you have large forces moving together in a close area you are prone to ambush and not covering enough ground , so you divide your forces into smaller and smaller squads that are able to function in conjunction with other smaller squads to get objectives done. But if you split them even more - you are getting closer to loneman squads and in fact losing efficiency again. Instead of guessing how marines improvise taking out tanks - ask them. With todays warfare and technology you cannot compare to improvisations of world war 2 because they no longer apply. Example - we all saw saving private ryan when they improvised "sticky bombs" to take out tanks and in COD (not sure if it was in SPR too) when they climb up on tanks, open the hatch and toss grenades in. But now, dont you think they would have enough training to know that tanks should be covered in their blind spots by infantry, and if infantry wasn't available - they wouldnt go into hot zones of close quarter battles? And with advanced armor plating grenades don't even dent heavily armored tanks and for purposes of this game - you would NEED AT missles or C4, but I doubt everyone deployed in iraq has some c4 in their backpacks or would sometime in the next 10 years. It is simple logic. And maybe in 60 something years they would've thought to put some kind of lock on the hatch to a tank! You say the germans took soviet machine guns, this is realistic - thats why we are able to pick up the little kit packs on the ground. BUt you can't pick up an AT bag from nowhere unless someone had it before. That is why squads should be deployed with a fixed AT role, instead of having ppl suicide and respawn as AT's therefore creating a weapon that didn't exist in that part of the map making armored vehicles almost useless when they are the exact opposite. -That itself is unrealistic.

You are actually suggesting things that are half-assed realism which goes against the principles of the mod. An example would be adaptive squads - you provide examples of what you call adaptation to battle. But the fact is if you deploy a 14 man squad in real life with NO AT's and then run into a tank - you cannot replace members of your squad and have them teleport to you with the AT you were lacking beforehand. And secondly, Snipers do not function with squads - see http://realitymod.com/forum/t3156-p2-sniper-rifles.html posts by maj.boobz. Thirdly, there are too many suggestions that only meet realism half-way that I cannot combat. By not cutting corners the game will require teamwork to get the objectives done - unlike how it is now.

Dethleffs · Post by **Dethleffs** » 2006-01-08 20:42

good post nikovk, great ideas!

Post by **NikovK** » 2006-01-08 20:57

Realism Heretic - Gameplay and creativity?
It is much easier to launch personal attacks...

Visaya, please stop insulting me in your signature. You're plainly very passionate about realism, and I think you could make a good officer in a realism clan. Inside your own heirarchy and player base, you could acheive a near-simulator gameplay experience.

Troels, Dangchang, the problem of all snipers, medics or SAWs has been addressed in the second post and the current imbalances in the kits should be labled as such to prevent any confusion.

I thank all of you for your excellent feedback. After some four hours writing it, I'm glad it has gained approval by the majority of the vocal players.

visaya · Post by **visaya** » 2006-01-08 21:04

I guess meeting something halfway annoys you as it annoys me.

Eden · Post by **Eden** » 2006-01-08 21:28

visaya you have to take into consideration that this is not AA. The goal of PR is not to create a pure realistic mod if it was they would not have used the BF2 engine.

The goal of PR is to create a more realistic game then the current BF2 and to find a balance between realism and fun.

Materialising at your squad leader isn't realistic, healing someone from a gunshot wound and there suddenly in full health isn't realistic, magic unlimited ammo bags isn't realistic.

But that's not going to change in this mod if they were removed games would last ten minutes. Now that's all good and well for a game like AA where you have only one goal but for BF2/PR this isn't possible.

NikovK has in my opinion found a effective, realistic layout for squads and class roles, it may not be 100% realistic but as I have already mentioned that is not the goal of PR and it also just isn't possible with this engine.

visaya · Post by **visaya** » 2006-01-08 21:53

http://realitymod.com/forum/showpost.ph ... stcount=21

Post by **NikovK** » 2006-01-08 22:49

I beleive its been said that this is mod is not going to be a simulator. Please correct me if I am wrong.

visaya · Post by **visaya** » 2006-01-08 22:53

"Project Reality is a modification for the soon to be released Battlefield 2 engine. The developer's aims are to rework the original game engine developed by Digital Illusions of Sweden (Dice) to recreate a realistic combat environment. This includes adjusting the game's various elements that include physics, visual effects and gameplay. Along with changes to how the game handles, the PR team intends to include additional factions such as the British Military, and add to or alter existing factions so that they resemble real life military elements found within their respective environments.

The name 'Project Reality' is not solely for the purpose of throwing around a catchy title. Project Reality's team has a group of dedicated individuals, several of whom have backgrounds in armed services. Whose sole task it is to provide researched findings and statistical information to the developers tasked with creating the mod itself. If you are looking for a fact based FPS shooter from the perspective of a Soldier, Project Reality will be there to cater to those needs."

I put research before I say things that I want in this mod. Forcing all snipers to move slow is just plain out there. Just like the soul/life giving defibs.

A realistic combat environment would have ratios of scaled down platoons while factoring in if an nation(s) would be able to supply different weaponry to their forces, as I have suggested. But wouldn't go as far as to make this a round based game given the map sizes. But also prevents tank drivers from having to kill off a full squad then having to reface them all with AT guns. Just like in real life - vehicles own, but they are vulnerable because of their blind spots and they are such huge targets.

Post by **NikovK** » 2006-01-08 23:02

"Project Reality is a modification for the soon to be released Battlefield 2 engine. The developer's aims are to rework the original game engine developed by Digital Illusions of Sweden (Dice) to recreate a realistic combat environment. This includes adjusting the game's various elements that include physics, visual effects and gameplay. Along with changes to how the game handles, the PR team intends to include additional factions such as the British Military, and add to or alter existing factions so that they resemble real life military elements found within their respective environments.

The name 'Project Reality' is not solely for the purpose of throwing around a catchy title. Project Reality's team has a group of dedicated individuals, several of whom have backgrounds in armed services. Whose sole task it is to provide researched findings and statistical information to the developers tasked with creating the mod itself. If you are looking for a fact based FPS shooter from the perspective of a Soldier, Project Reality will be there to cater to those needs."

I don't see simulate, mimic, duplicate, or fanatically enforce in that statement. I see adjust, based, resemble, and references to gameplay.

Post by **NikovK** » 2006-01-08 23:02

Enough of this, I'm finishing my map.

visaya · Post by **visaya** » 2006-01-08 23:12

Selective reading is a great tool to get what you want.

Project Reality is a modification for the soon to be released Battlefield 2 engine. The developer's aims are to rework the original game engine developed by Digital Illusions of Sweden (Dice) to recreate a realistic combat environment. This includes adjusting the game's various elements that include physics, visual effects and gameplay.(relating back to realistic combat environment) Along with changes to how the game handles, the PR team intends to include additional factions such as the British Military, and add to or alter existing factions so that they resemble real life military elements(relates to the editing of existing factions to make them more realistic) found within their respective environments.

The name 'Project Reality' is not solely for the purpose of throwing around a catchy title. Project Reality's team has a group of dedicated individuals, several of whom have backgrounds in armed services. Whose sole task it is to provide researched findings and statistical information to the developers tasked with creating the mod itself. If you are looking for a fact based FPS shooter from the perspective of a Soldier, Project Reality will be there to cater to those needs.(I fail how to see how this sides with your argument, making snipers move slower because they are snipers is unrealistic. And so is adjusting the ratio of your squad members kits to complete an objective when the equipment just isn't available to that faction)

Post by **NikovK** » 2006-01-08 23:30

Enough of this. You've already stated you will not compromise and this arguement is fruitless. Stop insulting me in your signature, please. I hope that Project Reality is a successful, long-lived mod and that you come to find the realism-centered gameplay you so passionately seek.

visaya · Post by **visaya** » 2006-01-08 23:48

I'm done when you're done. Arguing only helps bring clarity to where I am coming from, and I want to share it with the community.

Post by **NikovK** » 2006-01-08 23:51

So should I rename my account "Realism Heretic", or are you going to stop insulting me in your sig?

visaya · Post by **visaya** » 2006-01-08 23:56

Done and Done.
http://realitymod.com/forum/t3215-p5-what-a-quotsquadquot-should-be-.html

Post by **NikovK** » 2006-01-09 12:15

Please, feel free to discuss any imbalances you perceive in my suggestion that may require further review. And as a side note... General Purpose Machine Guns (you know, the big belt-fed, crew-operated ones) could be simulated with a Machine Gunner with an M240 or such gun. It would have no extra magazines, just 50 or so rounds dangling from a belt. Firing at fully automatic, it would quickly become a useless weapon except for the rifleman holding his ammo pack right beside the gunner, automatically reloading the gun while it fires just like a soldier feeding belts into the weapon! Carefully tuned, we could have crew-served heavy machine guns capable of sustained full automatic fire BUT requiring two players acting in tandem and either's death silencing the gun.

dawdler · Post by **dawdler** » 2006-01-09 12:20

NikovK wrote:Please, feel free to discuss any imbalances you perceive in my suggestion that may require further review. And as a side note... General Purpose Machine Guns (you know, the big belt-fed, crew-operated ones) could be simulated with a Machine Gunner with an M240 or such gun. It would have no extra magazines, just 50 or so rounds dangling from a belt. Firing at fully automatic, it would quickly become a useless weapon except for the rifleman holding his ammo pack right beside the gunner, automatically reloading the gun while it fires just like a soldier feeding belts into the weapon! Carefully tuned, we could have crew-served heavy machine guns capable of sustained full automatic fire BUT requiring two players acting in tandem and either's death silencing the gun.

As I'm bound to have said before, that's what I've been wanting ever since the early days of BF1942

Then of course it was a MG42 that I dreamed of, but the M240 is close enough

Or what about a .50 cal? That would be so brutal... A fun sort of class, only carrying a pistol and a couple of nades to use when moving. But when he plops down a tripod .50 and a support guy is closeby... Oh boy, you wouldnt want to be near him!

Post by **NikovK** » 2006-01-09 12:41

.50's seem far too much firepower for mere mortals, and to be certain everyone doesn't play GPMG I wouldn't give him a pistol, much less a grenade. It might be a possible unlocked weapon for the Support (soon to be Auto Rifleman, I hope), in which case a player could unlock his faction's GPMG and then lay on with it. For that matter, it wouldn't be too tricky to give Javelins out to the Anti-Tank class in such a way as a one-shot weapon that demands a reloader.