Project Reality Forums

NO, i dont like it .

OiSkout wrote:And you will find that those without spawn on the SL will have a significantly lower population. Unless there are only one or two servers which do that.

well not necessarily, if we take the vote as a sort of "exit vote" as they do for the u.s. elections (probably others too, im only exposed to u.s. though), we can apply that to server population -- the "realism" servers would be occupied by various people like wolfe and others that dont want the sl spawn (roughly 1/3 of the community) while the other 2/3 would be represented in the lack of sl spawn servers. to be honest, in the end it will probably just result in different styles of play.

in my opinion, what i suggested might be the best option. for one thing, it can probably be achieved with a server side mod, and for another thing we can see how it works before we SPECULATE about which will result in more teamwork (which is basically what we are doing now).

well it seems the DEVS like it , and they don't make the mod for the masses .

milobr wrote:A lot of people here miss the point of this mod. The point of this game is REALITY and SL spawn is HUGELY unrealistic.

That's only partly true.

Try this definition, I think you'll find it better represents what this mod is trying to achieve:

'[DVB wrote:Neo.US']"Many of the mechanics of the game are "metaphors" or abbreviated representations of real-life processes."

To my knowledge, PR is not trying to become a military simulator, period. Here is the rest of Neo's post concerning SL spawning:

"Imagine everyone dying in an engagement except for the squad leader on Kashan Desert, all of the vehicles are either destroyed or used, and you're on foot.

Squad leader: "Guys, I'll meet you back here at my position in 15 or 20 minutes....er....just wake me up when you get here."

Imagine everyone surviving except for your squad leader:

Squad leader: "Guys, I'm spawning in 20 seconds. I'll try to catch up to you as soon as possible"

Squad Member: "SL, what do you want us to do in the meantime?"

Squad Leader: "I have no freakin' idea what's going on there right now. I'm 5 miles away on foot climbing a mountain between main base and the objective."

If "realism" is the reason for not wanting to spawn on a squad leader, consider the fact that soldiers do not magically appear in APCs, rally points, commander supply trucks, or firebases in real life either. If it is realism that you want, you spawn once and get killed once. In real life, you live once and die once.

Many of the mechanics of the game are "metaphors" or abbreviated representations of real-life processes. For instance, building a bunker requires more tools and materials than a shovel. Firing a rifle and maintaining that rifle to be dependable and not jam requires that it is cleaned and taken care of. Does anyone ever have their PR rifle jam? Does anyone ever clean their rifle in PR? Has anyone gone to a formal Tank Training program? No. You press "E" to enter, use the directional keys to move around, aim with your mouse and left click to fire. Again, this is not reality. It is an abreviated representation of a real life process.

The act of squad members spawning on a squad leader is a metaphor for "unity". It is the squad leader stating that alone, he is nothing without the members of his squad. The alternative is a SL rushing in alone as Rambo would and being killed. Instead, the squad leader uses enough discipline and forethought to hold-back, realize the importance of his members presence, allowing his squad to reunite, and give it another shot. If this "metaphor" of unity is removed, then so will what I enjoy about being a squad leader in PR. Just my opinion though.

Neo"

indigo|blade wrote:
To my knowledge, PR is not trying to become a military simulator, period

maybe not , but that's because of the limitations of the bf2 engine , they are trying to make it as realistic as possible , within the limitations of the engine , i think.

gazzthompson wrote:maybe not , but that's because of the limitations of the bf2 engine , they are trying to make it as realistic as possible , within the limitations of the engine , i think.

roger all

indigo|blade

Ok, mate. I read what you've written there but still I don't agree. Maybe the PR team is trying to compensate in some aspects but I'm only going foward into it if the changes they make don't start ruining tactical gameplay. And SL spawn ruins it.
Also, if everything in a team is destroyed but one SL, then the team has lost the battle anyways. So why care?
IMO, the fact you can respawn in the game simulates the fact your team is receiving reinforcements. So, by this view this line:

"If it is realism that you want, you spawn once and get killed once. In real life, you live once and die once."

is meaning less.

You see, this is one argument I don't agree with not because it does not reflect reality, as it does, but because it's an argument that is just used by anyone who is defending himself against hardcore reality gamers. It's just wrong. It's even stupid. It's radical, made by someone who's not trying to discuss about the question.

You see, I don't want this game to be a total realism game. I want to be able to employ at least some tactics in combat. I want this to be as close as possible to simulate, at least, the combat itself.

I'm sorry about my spelling mistakes. I couldn't find the right words to express myself there as english isn't my first language. Hope you can understand my point, though.

gazzthompson wrote:maybe not , but that's because of the limitations of the bf2 engine , they are trying to make it as realistic as possible , within the limitations of the engine , i think.

sure ,thats why we have every tank with the same damage/life points/ammo or every chopper with the same type of weapons ...

77SiCaRiO77 wrote:sure ,thats why we have every tank with equal damage/life points/ammo or every chopper with the same type of weapons ...

what ?

all the heavy vehicles in PR are exactly the same for each faction .

77SiCaRiO77 wrote:all the heavy vehicles in PR are exactly the same for each faction .

well that's balance , which is nothing to do with the squad leader spawn because every 1 will have it

i know , i was just saying that devs arent exactly focusing in reality as you said

77SiCaRiO77 wrote:all the heavy vehicles in PR are exactly the same for each faction .

Remember PR is VERY much a WIP, the Dev's only have so much time to focus on each other. Vehicle(speed, armor, weapons) specialization etc is a thought that I know some of the Devs are looking at...but for now we have what we have. Just because it's not in the game does not mean its outside of their philosophy of the game.

77SiCaRiO77 wrote:i know , i was just saying that devs arent exactly focusing in reality as you said

well they are , but some things you just cant do making 1 team alot more powerful is one of them, like i said , as realistic as possible within the bf2 engine .

all these people saying "its only a game" "i cant be assed to walk 15 seconds" , personally i think that's the wrong attitude for this mod.

I didn't read the rest of this thread, but Gazz from iGi asked me to re-post this here (something I posted in the tester forums) I wasn't going to post it here because I'm not interested in getting into arguments with tons of people, so, forward your arguments to Gazz

---

How could that be good though. As it is now, it's easier to get 4 people together to set a spawn *because* people spawn on the SL. They spawn, stay with him, and he sets the rally.

If he wasn't a spawn point (and don't forget, APC's won't be spawns soon right?), then any given squad's game will go about like this:

Game starts, anyone who isn't in a squad of 4 or more has to wait around till they are because not being in a squad of 4 would mean basically there's no point playing (which is tricky, because you're always going to have odd numbers of people on a server at any given moment).

Squads of 4 or more will travel to their first rally point location and set the rally. Either they will have to set them WAY back to be safe (which guarantees more walking and less playing than what we have in 0.6) or they will set them closer to their objective.

The squad will move out from the RP towards the objective, and if anyone dies they will be broken off from the squad because they can't spawn on the SL. Now they can either trickle in 1 by 1 to catch up to the squad (not very squad-like) or they can all wait back at the rally point till everyone is dead (also not very squad like really). At least in 0.6 if the SL dies his squad can stick together till they die and when they do they can immediately regroup by spawning on him.

Basically in 0.6 a squad strikes out and makes an attack (or defend, whatever) on a flag, and they can sustain that attack until the SL dies, or if they have a nearby rally. With no spawning on the SL, attacks won't be very sustained at all, and squads will be broken up a lot of the time. And if they set the RP close, well, the closer it is the higher the likely hood of it being destroyed, which means starting back at the main base.

Which is the other problem, with this system there will be a lot more of starting back at the main base, because in 0.6 if your rally got destroyed, there was a 50/50 chance your SL was still alive and you could respawn on him and set a new rally.

Also, some of 16p maps which have very close together flags (like 7 gates) would suffer by this because you can barely set rally points on these maps, or at least it's not so easy to, so that would mean spawning at main every time. (You *could* set them off to the sides, but you couldn't sort of "cap a flag, move up, set a rally, repeat", but that's OK I guess.)

I just prefer a game that is Fight Fight Fight! over one that is Walk Walk Fight!

'[T wrote:BludShoT;454600']I just prefer a game that is Fight Fight Fight! over one that is Walk Walk Fight!

That is EXACTLY what is wrong with the current style of game.

Vanilla = constant fighting
PoE = constant fighting + realistic weapons
PR = realistic fighting + realistic weapons (should be, imo)

Let me illustrate this another way, with pictures instead of words: Would you rather have the first image or the second image?

First image - Current style of spawning:

• can spawn on enemy/neutral flags
• can spawn behind enemy lines
• can spawn regardless of what bases are taken

Second image - Structured spawn method:

• no sl spawning
• rally points must be within base radius, but cannot be near enemy or neutral bases (bases you don't control).
• reinforcements are tied to base control
• squads NEED bases, therefore they will be doing everything possible to help the commander build bases, defend them, and move them when necessary. TOTAL TEAMWORK.
• lines of engagement are much more defined

I think this type of spawn system is FAR better than the current "spawn anywhere" system. It's much more realistic in terms of reinforcements, teamwork, lines of engagement, and flanking tactics.

To flank effectively, you can't just lay down a lazy rally point then spawn spawn spawn. You have to move undetected, then execute an attack with good squad communication. You're behind enemy lines, so stay alive. This makes flanking much more fun if not only from the nervous intensity of knowing you're behind enemy lines and not wanting to die there.

This also forces tanks into the city. For example, since Team 1 has a good defense in east city, team 2 may not be able to take it alone. With tanks moving in behind infantry support, they have a much better chance.

All of these things promote focus to battles, and enhance real strategy, not just everyone spawning on top of each other then pressing the spray n pray button.

^^ Well said, all this is being looked at by the Dev's so rest assured they will be altering things. I think people consider the way they play the game now and think...well if we remove this or that, it wont work...when actually it might work just fine but you'd have to change the way you play. Right now guys do put down a rally and just attack attack. This allows us to breakoff from the team like 6 SF guys and go make a move on a village somewhere. I'd rather we had to kind of stick together as a team but flexibly. Also the solution to the problem greatly differs depending on what map you play. Imagine playing kashan and attacking south village without a rally? Usually two squads attack while everyone else defends the bunkers until its down. So if rallys were tied to friendly flags...how would that work? The commander would have to put a firebase out there to tie the Rally too maybe...I dunno. Its a seriously complex issue with no easy fix. I do not prefer the spawn mechanics as of now though. Sometimes they work fine...others they don't.

quality post right there

So sometimes when I think of PR, I'm like...well it might be cool if once in a while I could play on a server where when you die...you die. Something less forgiving. Wolfe's outline would add this element to attacking. When you are moving on a area...shit you better not die or else your out of the attack and back at the rally. It'd definitely give me a dose of what I'm looking for, and make my in-game life way more valuable to me....I wouldn't be out in the open running through town trying to find a bad guy. I'd be sneaking with my squad, trying to cover all the angles...trying to stay alive. Right now...there isn't a whole lot of "trying to stay alive" suspense. In a realistic game that element should be one of its strong points. Having a less forgiviing spawn system would surely be an improvement to that.

^^^
Exactly. Realistic tactics.

VipersGhost wrote:Imagine playing kashan and attacking south village without a rally?

The bottom line is here that a spawn method should be decided upon first, THEN design maps around that method. Otherwise what works for one map is a disaster for another.

Using a structured spawn method, maps would be designed around a "push" style, where the majority of forces are coming from the same general direction, and moving towards the same general direction. The two armies meet somewhere in the middle, and the battle ensues.

Kashan is a good example where the flag capture order would need to be altered to make this work. But then again, Kashan needs to be altered anyway even with the current system; you still have to travel for days to lay down a rally, that is, if you don't get owned by a tank or jet while in route. Either way, maps like Kashan need changes regardless of which spawn method is used.