Project Reality Forums

[R-DEV]bosco wrote:Then why don't you just go try it out instead of relying on the opinion of others...?

I was very skeptic after reading the changes too, but after playing some good hours, I changed my mind.

Being one of the few older players in PR, I like the excitement of release day when it comes to a new version of PR. Just for that one moment, I feel like a kid on Christmas. I don't want to spoil that with a little peek.

'= wrote:H[=COEMAN;1210900']I for one, have yet to play on a .87D beta server and I will not until the new version is released, so I really don't know the impact on gameplay that the new RP system will have. But after reading soldier of fortune's essay (yes I read it all), he makes some very good points. I have played PR off and on since the early days, but I started playing PR religiously since .7 and I must say that between .7 and .87 the realism and teamwork has been outstanding. Why fix something that isn't broken when it comes to gameplay and concentrate more on maps, weapons and vehicles? I have to say that teamwork has excelled with .85 & .87 in my opinion, so again why change the gameplay when the noobs have finally graduated to be real PR players and are working/playing together as a team in .87 What I have read to date about the new RP system, I most say, the throught of it scares the hell out of me.

"Why fix something that isn't broken when it comes to gameplay and concentrate more on maps, weapons and vehicles?" - I agree with this.

foob wrote:has that ever been suggested??? because its probably the best solution to the rp problem (id shorten it to 300-400ish personally).. lionrock get out ther and get ur post count up so u can suggest it in the suggestion thread!

commander ineffectivity is a different story though (lol i had a rant on that topic not to long ago actually .......)

Hehee well I only post on forums when I have something useful to say but I hope someone gets the idea from here if it hasn't been suggested already. Yes, maybe 300-400m is better to avoid spamming enemy flanks from RP. But to me, this sounds the most logical solution. When you're trying to deploy RP on enemy territory it just says squad not in supply get closer to firebase to receive reinforcements. This would be pretty easy to understand.

What's not good in this idea is it's harder to take firebases down, you'd need to secure the whole area before proceeding to destroy FOB. And I understand the dislike towards RP system when it comes to wiping out whole squads.
I still personally like the beta and consider rallypoints unrealistic, but this solution might be a good compromise and maybe worth trying?

LionRock wrote:Hehee well I only post on forums when I have something useful to say but I hope someone gets the idea from here if it hasn't been suggested already. Yes, maybe 300-400m is better to avoid spamming enemy flanks from RP. But to me, this sounds the most logical solution. When you're trying to deploy RP on enemy territory it just says squad not in supply get closer to firebase to receive reinforcements. This would be pretty easy to understand.

What's not good in this idea is it's harder to take firebases down, you'd need to secure the whole area before proceeding to destroy FOB. And I understand the dislike towards RP system when it comes to wiping out whole squads.
I still personally like the beta and consider rallypoints unrealistic, but this solution might be a good compromise and maybe worth trying?

I hate the fact that FOBs are still way too easy to take down. If enemies are in the area, they get overrun way too easily without even seeing them.

guys im gettin a new computer soon, and i was wonderin wat kinda spec i need to play this game with graphics up high, can anyone help.?

hornedviper wrote:guys im gettin a new computer soon, and i was wonderin wat kinda spec i need to play this game with graphics up high, can anyone help.?

Not the right thread to post to but a computer that can run BF2 on high should do fine. Sorry for not having the exact system requirements

the only thing i find is that my squad are alwasy all over the map i liked the normal version better.

myles wrote:the only thing i find is that my squad are alwasy all over the map i liked the normal version better.

then your in the wrong squads, plain and simple.

SAVE THE RALLY POINT!

Save the game.

I speak for many of you

SAVE THE RALLY POINT!
Save the game.
I speak for many of you

No need for rally point.
Improve the game
I speak for many of you.



But still i thing the Outposts need to be overworked, aktuall its to easy to destroy them.
Muttra as USA.
only 2 or 3 skilled men needet.
1 men make the Commander and spotts ALL outposts of mec.
1 Men fly with Atack helo in and destroy them.
If neccessary a FOB who cannot reached by Helo can be destroyed by APC´s
From these moment on the Usa has only to destroy all trucks, Mec has not a chance to reinforce.

The must of forward bases debalance the maps for the benefit of Helicopter owning fractions.
(and no that one side has now 6 instead of 4 AA´s make not the big deifference, look during game how often all 4 AA´s are manned, and now look how often all 6 AA´s are manned.
The same to Fob´s and defence teams.

6 AA´s
6 men Fob defending Squad
6 men Flag defending Squad
6 men as pilots, driver ....
3 men sniper suqad
3 men AT squad
1 Commander
3 men Build Squad
= 34 of 32 Player

but still needet
6 Defender of the Fob a bit ago
6 Defender of the fob near the enemy flag
12 Attacker

Sorry the system needs a overhaul

12 Atacker
6 Defender
6 Support
1 Commander
1 3 men AT/AA Squad
1 3 men Spotter sniper squad


actuall Fob´s cant be hidden and must be defendet
actuall Fob´s cant be build to near to Flags because its to easy for enemy to destroy the fob.
actuall we have the system for the battlefield 4 engine with 64 against 64 players

I'm going to try to be as sincere here as possible to both the supports of the new changes and the DEVs.


0.874D > ALL

Two points that really need to be realized. The first is directed at players, the second at the devs.

1) Every time a major change is made to a game, mod or whatever, the majority of the gaming population naturally and invariably feels it is a horrible decision that will ruin the game and they will never play it ever again, and that there is some "set way" the game should be and that changing that, or anything, amounts to a betrayal. Newsflash: PR is a mod of BF2. I've played PR since the very first release of PRMM (remember that?!). Over the years there were good changes and bad. Generally I enjoyed PR more in its versions of about 1-2 years ago, and believe me a LOT has changed. By saying "this will ruin it, I will never play again" you're either a) a moron/hypocrite, because you've likely played earlier versions of PR that were a hell of a lot different and you played it then and still play it now; b) you picked up PR only in its current state and haven't been playing it for very long, in which face you're a noob and can eff off.

2) Non-commercial developers seriously need to learn how to "let go". Unlike commercial developments which have more-or-less strict release timetables, impatient hawkish publishers and etc, indy mod/dev projects like PR pretty much have no timetable whatsoever, and therefore no end. And for many developers, work on a project becomes a part of their life, and they really don't know what to do with themselves and their free time when something is "done". As a result, you have a team of developers (often individuals will stop and break off into other areas while new guys are brought in) who after awhile are creating a game simply to create. They have no real image of how a final product will look, no preliminary date set for when they will stop working and let history take its course, and an underlying urge to be constantly creating new content or modding old content if only to avoid being labeled as stagnant. And to make everything worse, through the very popular system of repeated beta-releasing (as PR is currently in v0.87, technically it is still a beta) developers are inundated with the often completely uneducated ramblings of their early playerbase, guilt-tripping them with their incessant whining into constantly changing things. Commercial developers don't have this issue; the only time a commercial product gets into the hands of a non-developers is during its QA stages, and generally QAs don't make subjective issue reports about "I think the RPG is a bit too weak" -- and as a paid employee they can just be fired for being dunces. I was (and still am) a developer on a project that has been in the works since 2001 and it took me years and years to finally realize that I had ended up working on this project for no other reason than to work on this project. That was what I did, and it took a lot of effort to force myself to stop doing it, to accept that the game I helped design was never going to satisfy everyone, and that I'd already put a hell of a lot of time into it, and there was little point in spending another few years trying to "fix" everything and "add more", and that I should just leave it as is and let people play it if they want or don't if they don't want, and just close that chapter of my life.

All of this combines into what we see before us: a development team making abrupt, sometimes uncalled for changes out of their assumed need to satisfy a tumultuous playerbase and constantly create new content and change old content because they feel it's the only way they can keep people's interest and keep from becoming stagnant and abandoned; and whiny, short-sighted players who gawk and moan at every change as if it was their god-damned creation being unfairly tampered with.

TL;DR

Players: Stop your whining, we all know you'll keep playing PR, and if you don't, then you didn't matter anyway.

Devs: Stop obsessing over the need to continue development to repeatedly reinvigorate your project and settle on a damned final release and move on.

Doedel wrote:Devs: Stop obsessing over the need to continue development to repeatedly reinvigorate your project and settle on a damned final release and move on.

Most of the changes are attempts to fit an overall goal. In the case of rallies they have been reduced in quantity over time because they are not realistic, and were kept out of necessity or added as attempts to work around the limitations.

Flag spawns and squad leader spawns were removed for play reasons.
Rallies were actually added to replace the removal of flag and SL spawns. Kind of funny you are complaining that they are removing something they added.
Vehicle spawns were removed because people were parking vehicles in ditches to spawn from like a mobile flag spawn.
The most recent beta removed rallies completely on one version, but it hurt squad cohesion.

There is an ultimate goal for PR spawning (this is not the official one, but the apparent overall goal). It involves requiring coordination for forces to advance and attempts to avoid spawning in view of the enemy. That is why spawns get overrun, why one of the beta versions removed the completely and why maps have some kind of transport to the front lines. they are attempting to have some kind of realistic behavior by players instead of gaming the system as much as possible. The last beta kept rallies as single use but resuppliable items so that squad cohesion could be kept without allowing hidden places for players to magically come from behind enemy lines repeatedly.

It isn't making changes for the sake of making changes. It is often being able to implement something they wanted to do previously.

SoldierofFortune

you've written more in this post than I have in my entire life lol...

Doedel wrote:Two points that really need to be realized. The first is directed at players, the second at the devs.

1) Every time a major change is made to a game, mod or whatever, the majority of the gaming population naturally and invariably feels it is a horrible decision that will ruin the game and they will never play it ever again, and that there is some "set way" the game should be and that changing that, or anything, amounts to a betrayal. Newsflash: PR is a mod of BF2. I've played PR since the very first release of PRMM (remember that?!). Over the years there were good changes and bad. Generally I enjoyed PR more in its versions of about 1-2 years ago, and believe me a LOT has changed. By saying "this will ruin it, I will never play again" you're either a) a moron/hypocrite, because you've likely played earlier versions of PR that were a hell of a lot different and you played it then and still play it now; b) you picked up PR only in its current state and haven't been playing it for very long, in which face you're a noob and can eff off.

So I guess everyone that hates the game is a noob then right? Wrong, most of us who are against this change have been playing from the beginning and have witnessed the good and bad changes to the game. Before you start calling us "noobs", have you been through all the patches?

I think you have it a little wrong. Not everyone is against every change. I've been for and against changes, but I am against major changes which effect parts of the game that are already established and hold the game together. For example, I think if you took out the minimap completely, it would be terrible for this game because every player would be completely blind. The supporters, like you are with this Beta change, will say "well, its to make it more realistic or its for the better" or something like that. But the fact is, the minimap is a fundamental part of this game which makes up for a lack of situational awareness that the player naturally does not have in a game. The RP I argue, is the same way. Its a way to keep squads together and allow them to move with each other 90% of the time because in most instances, players will not naturally spawn with their squad (for a number of reasons).

And lets face it, the RPs were probably the best thing to happen to this game. The FOBs improved on it, but they weren't revolutionary like the RPs have been. The only problem with RPs came when they only required 1 player to place in the last patch. The RPs are basically like the SL spawn, except less gamey and require you to place them correctly. Its a system that works because it is based on a system that vanilla BF2 already built (SL spawn). Making FOBs the only spawn would be like trying to implement squads in Counterstrike. That engine wasn't really designed for that just like the BF2 engine wasn't built around the "1 life system" that would essentially come from the Beta.

RAZAEREO wrote:SoldierofFortune

you've written more in this post than I have in my entire life lol...

You've never been to college or high school yet lol? Thanks though.

I don't see why gameplay should be sacrificed in this situation. Spawning is part of the game so occasionally you will see someone spawn, why fight it? Removing rally points just so you don't see people spawn as much is not a good enough reason. Rally points make this game more fun and help promote teamwork.

Maybe Forward Outposts and other buildables should require less shoveling so it's not as much of a time burden. That way people can do more FPSing; isn't that what this game is based on? And how can it be that it takes about fifty shovels to build, but one knife stab takes the whole thing down???

ok, i read most of the first page, and these are my thoughts.

i do think this will destroy pr.i mean yes, its unrealistic to spawn on bags, but spawning on bags FORCE teamplay, not just squad play if you want to win,
example

You are squad leader, and your set up in a line / arrowhead shape to defend a flag. You have your rally back a little, and a fb close by. it is just your squad, with w/e assets inf could have. (50 mg nest, at, so on) and there is an e squad. all they have is a rallypoint hidden out in the fields.

They try and attack you, you win, not to bad, one casualty, must respawn at firebase, the e squad is regruping out of sight, and your still holding, but you inform your team about the engament. Now you get hit a second time, they have a ar behind a tree, and they know your aprox location know, now they attack and kill 3 of you, before they retreat to regrup, but they leave there ar to pin you down.

You tell your team about this, and ask a squad to come and flank them, help take them down, and at the same time, you send out a 2-3 man recon team from those who died to go look for the eneme (refered to as E for the rest of the story) squad, you find there rally point, and take it out, and the battle ends.

a few minutes later, the same squad comes up from a diffrent angle now, set up a rally point near the old location, and a fob on the other side. they also have reinforcements from one apc.

You still belive that they are attacking from the same side, but really, they post there apc near the rally to pin you down, and they attack, you kill them, losing 3 peaple agian, but you also lose your firebase.
Now you have the oppertunity to place your squad in a better hiding spot (atleast those 3) and hold the flag untill reinforcments can make it to you. If you did not have that, you would have to walk back from main base, making the game WAY to slow.
the e would take the flag, and would have the oppertunity to win the game fast, becuase your team who was fighting at a diffrent flag doing a simmaler operation would have to turn arround to try to caputre the point you recently lost, while the e squad that attacked you keeps moving, awith more e reinforcements, while they also leave one squad to defend the flag, from your team comming from any direction.

They will use your own hmg nests for cover, and will just use the envirnment as needed. without rally points, you could not have these intense battles of that everybody loves having in pr without them. they are your last lifeline, when you die, you dont want to spawn in an open fortified position thats 10 minutes from teh fighting, you want to spawn out 1 minute away, where you can get to cover and help save the rest of your squad as you try to hold out the attackers.

i feel, with the remove of rally points, the mod will become like some of the other mods like poe.. still played, but not very much anymore.

chuckMFd wrote:I don't see why gameplay should be sacrificed in this situation. Spawning is part of the game so occasionally you will see someone spawn, why fight it? Removing rally points just so you don't see people spawn as much is not a good enough reason. Rally points make this game more fun and help promote teamwork.

Maybe Forward Outposts and other buildables should require less shoveling so it's not as much of a time burden. That way people can do more FPSing; isn't that what this game is based on? And how can it be that it takes about fifty shovels to build, but one knife stab takes the whole thing down???

I agree. The only way I could see FOBs replacing RPs is if they were allowed to be placed in buildings so they wouldn't be more noticable and weren't overrun so easily, but even that would pose problems. Right now and even in the Beta, it takes way too much to build a FOB and way too little to take it out.

I'm not going to lie, I don't play that much PR and would like to see several things changed (less recoil on intermediate caliber assault rifles for example), but this just seems plain stupid to me.

Why fix what isn't broken? I see FOBs being deployed in the games I do play so I don't buy the "they aren't being used enough" argument.