Project Reality Forums

Who said that MMad? Who in this thread said "We don't care about Africa just this conflict going on."
Come up with a better idea and stop being so god damn critical, I expect better from community members who give nothing back to the mod yet seem to find the time to criticize every little thing they come across.

MMard does make a point tho.

However, I think it's better to let go with one big MEClike faction first, then in the future make more precise factions for different regions of africa.

Still, I think the ARF should go with a sort of localized-regional approach like the OGG, at least for its conventional portion. In the meanwhile the militia portion of the ARF could indeed be a sort of rebel movement sprouting a bit everywhere around africa.

Just my two cents

i think the LAT kit should also get 1 anti-inf rocket which has an AOE!

I'd love to see something to do with Somali pirates, with bluFOR starting on a carrier and advancing inland. It would be pretty cool on insurgency XD

ChiefRyza wrote:Who said that MMad? Who in this thread said "We don't care about Africa just this conflict going on."
Come up with a better idea and stop being so god damn critical, I expect better from community members who give nothing back to the mod yet seem to find the time to criticize every little thing they come across.

I did maybe phrase myself somewhat harshly, was a little upset about unrelated stuff. I apologize for this. ops: But I stand by my points: that I find the ARF concept completely unbelievable, that I see very little reason to settle for an unbelievable fictional faction when one might with little extra effort create one or more believable factions (real or fictional). And this thread was created for feedback.

But for some constructive ideas, I would have much less problems with a generic rebel faction simply called "Rebels". That way you wouldn't necessarily be saying it's the same group in maps set in Somalia, the DRC and Nigeria. Tiny difference maybe, but it's the different between being vague and being wrong, IMO.

For the conventional army part I feel the French faction devs' original idea of going with a fictional regional alliance to be much more believable. If you want several of these for different parts of Africa, sure you'd probably need some more content, but not necessarily a crazy amount. You could probably get far with a couple of re-skinned vehicles and kits and switching a couple of weapons, think the current Taliban compared to the Insurgents.

Anyway, I think it's pretty clear in what ways people reason and argue about this point. And I really do think how much you know about Africa and care about plausibility plays a large part. For example, obviously many people know/care enough about the US to want to have both the Army and the USMC depicted in an accurate and realistic manner. Personally I care a lot about the backstory and the realism of conflicts, and I know enough about Africa and it's history to find the ARF concept completely unbelievable.

But with all this said - of course I realize it's just a game, and in the end I'll trust the judgment of the devs on this. They of course know much about the production side that I don't, and if they feel this approach is the best for the mod I'll trust them on that one.

Just giving my honest feedback.

Tannhauser wrote: However, I think it's better to let go with one big MEClike faction first, then in the future make more precise factions for different regions of africa.

Still, I think the ARF should go with a sort of localized-regional approach like the OGG, at least for its conventional portion. In the meanwhile the militia portion of the ARF could indeed be a sort of rebel movement sprouting a bit everywhere around africa.

Yeah, that'd make sense to me.

Alright mate, just came off a little harsh and so naturally I replied quite defensive. I see your point but the DEV's do have their reasons. Imagine modeling every single vehicle/soldier for every single army in the Middle East, then do the corresponding voices!

MMad wrote:I did maybe phrase myself somewhat harshly, was a little upset about unrelated stuff. I apologize for this. ops: But I stand by my points: that I find the ARF concept completely unbelievable, that I see very little reason to settle for an unbelievable fictional faction when one might with little extra effort create one or more believable factions (real or fictional). And this thread was created for feedback.

But for some constructive ideas, I would have much less problems with a generic rebel faction simply called "Rebels". That way you wouldn't necessarily be saying it's the same group in maps set in Somalia, the DRC and Nigeria. Tiny difference maybe, but it's the different between being vague and being wrong, IMO.

For the conventional army part I feel the French faction devs' original idea of going with a fictional regional alliance to be much more believable. If you want several of these for different parts of Africa, sure you'd probably need some more content, but not necessarily a crazy amount. You could probably get far with a couple of re-skinned vehicles and kits and switching a couple of weapons, think the current Taliban compared to the Insurgents.

Anyway, I think it's pretty clear in what ways people reason and argue about this point. And I really do think how much you know about Africa and care about plausibility plays a large part. For example, obviously many people know/care enough about the US to want to have both the Army and the USMC depicted in an accurate and realistic manner. Personally I care a lot about the backstory and the realism of conflicts, and I know enough about Africa and it's history to find the ARF concept completely unbelievable.

But with all this said - of course I realize it's just a game, and in the end I'll trust the judgment of the devs on this. They of course know much about the production side that I don't, and if they feel this approach is the best for the mod I'll trust them on that one.

Just giving my honest feedback.

I think they should still be called African Rebels, and could also (eventually) be pitted against different governments or something, because there sued to be a Rebel Faction, so calling it African Rebels (Because they are in Africa!) would make there be less confusion.

The MEC is basically Iran/Saudi Arabia (I think EA meant it to be Iran, without trying to make a political statement) which has managed to form an empire in the middle east, maybe even invading Iran/Saudi Arabia and battering it until it agrees to form a coalition, because Iran/Saudi Arabia doesn't want to mess around with silly rebellions when it could be waging war with the Evil West (I admit Saudi Arabia as a country is friendly towards the west somewhat, but many of it's people aren't.).

Well, in the depths of my crazed twisted mind anyway.

Herbiie wrote:I think they should still be called African Rebels, and could also (eventually) be pitted against different governments or something, because there sued to be a Rebel Faction, so calling it African Rebels (Because they are in Africa!) would make there be less confusion.

The MEC is basically Iran/Saudi Arabia (I think EA meant it to be Iran, without trying to make a political statement) which has managed to form an empire in the middle east, maybe even invading Iran/Saudi Arabia and battering it until it agrees to form a coalition, because Iran/Saudi Arabia doesn't want to mess around with silly rebellions when it could be waging war with the Evil West (I admit Saudi Arabia as a country is friendly towards the west somewhat, but many of it's people aren't.).

Well, in the depths of my crazed twisted mind anyway.

You forgot Iranians (@persians@shia-muslims) don't get along with arabs(@suni-muslims) at all, and they don't speak the same language either, neither do they believe in the same branch of islam (wich often opposes them religious conflicts). So both EA and you are wrong with MEC=Iran. It's like a NATO-CATA coalition, unreal.

MEC=/=Iran, it's been overstated IMO.

And I don't see why it would WANT to wage war with the west, seeing the current and past events, it's more the west involving itself in middle-east affairs than the opposite. It's a bit like africa, they're pitted in regional quarrels but most of us seem to stereotyping them as one unique axis of evil warmonging barbarians, wich is wrong IMO.

And sorry for offtopicness ??:

I meant that they did something to provoke war with the West, which is realistic as it's already almost happened.

Oh god ... I had a dream. How would it be if you all forget about goddamn politics for a second? It's a game. Not a goddamn political simulation. I can only write it again and again. I'm totally aware of the unrealistic factors of an unified Africa (because I also know quite a few things about the African history and I'm also not an infant, I just manage to keep RL and the game separated) but still I don't care about it as PR is not meant to be a political simulator.

If you are so shocked about the fact that there is an unified Africa ingame how do you think about UK and US attacking China? Thats a very unrealistic thing from a political point of view. Still we all love the scenarios (at least I do). The only limitation is in our heads.

This was my last statement on the topic about the Name and the plausibility of the faction. I will however discuss all other topics with you guys except that one since this decision was made - for several already stated reasons - and because this faction is not the OGG which you should bare in mind.

Imagine if PR was just...reality....It would just be about 5 maps all insurgency, that would get boring very quickly. PR's fun comes from it not limiting itself to things happening around the world but a believable possibility of all these conflicts that bring the whole world into one game.

I hope you all can have the drive and manpower to realise all this..

[R-COM]162eRI wrote:... 2/3 of the vehicles and weapons exist ...

What exactly does that mean? Are they UV Mapped, skinned and exported too or just modeled?

Well thats kinda not the real main job a community faction has to do. It meant to create new stuff them-self basically however it's totally fine if lets say PR has a T-62 and BTR-60 (just an example) already done to use it but the main effort should not be borrowing stuff from BSS but creating stuff on your own.

Which the french faction does quite well, bao does a great job modeling all stuff.

What is the interest to recreate an existing moddel ?!

Finding new talented guys who maybe can contribute more to PR in the future.

Hence it's called "Community Modding" and not "Community Borrowing".

Looks like me ?! (LOL)

No, i don't understand the remark (it's the good word ?) about Bao, it's logical to see the FF create their own models, because they don't exist...

But, for example, what is the interest to makes the Gazelle, if OPK has it ?



Ps : And so, it's OUR BAO ! DON'T TOUCH HIM, or i gonna to kick your *** !