Project Reality Forums

I think it should be historically accurate for certain battles. Such as fallujah which actually happened. Also, they should have briefings mentioned for both sides, showing both viewpoints. e.g.

Fallujah Insurgents
The Americans have come to destroy our cause. The imperial soldiers think they can out number us and destroy us but they are wrong. We fight to the death for Allah. Death for our faith. Defend our weapons caches as those are the swords we have been given to fight with. Help your fellow brother, kill these capitalist evil doers.

US Army
The Insurgents of Iraq are once again taking control of cities and forcing people into their rule. Strict Islamic judgement and violent force rules the city of Fallujah. Destroy the fighting force and their weapons caches to achieve victory. The insurgents are heavily armed. Do not engage civilians that are not assisting the enemy. Good luck soldiers.

Something like that but longer and better written ^_^

I've voted yes. Project reality is all about making the gaming as realistic as possible, and briefings will always happen no matter what. So I think it would be a quality addition to the game.

As far as briefings do you want a story or an actual briefing giving you a SITREP?

In the situation of an actual briefing rather then a story.

It usually consists of a few things like

A) Friendly Forces

B) Enemy Forces

C) Terrain

D) Intel

E) Mission

F) Execution

and a couple other things.

You know...consist of a few things that you already know?

A) look at overview
B) look at overview
C) Look at minimap, is the word 'mountainous' going to change the round?
D) Intel...asset layout maybe - overview
E) Mission - The game mode....
F) Execution - However you see fit <- the whole point of not having briefings is for you to make the strategy. Having a briefing won't control the strategy ingame anyway.

PR is too freeform for briefings

I think it would be good to have breifings on the maps, but they should probably be limited to a more political disposition rather than a tactical one.
It would be nice, for example, to know why Canada has invaded Russia and the Russians are invading Lebanon, and then fighting the IDF...

I remember the old PR breifings, and while they didn't effect the course of the battle, they were certainly fun to read and explained some of the logic behind why the engagements were taking place.

My opinion is that briefing would be very nice. Just a little background to why the fight is happening here, whats at stake, and maybe the general outcome of the battle. (2142's briefings were like this. I liked it.)

Why not turn it into a little contest if the DEVs are feeling a little creatively challenged? People can write in their own briefings, and the DEVs can choose the best one/we can vote on them?

Still want briefings, still willing to write them, still able to.

The briefings would probably be pitched at the operational or theatre level, not at the specific mission, to set context not to specify tasks and detailed execution for the specific map.

I'm sure there are plenty in the Dev team who could too.......

PR has no story so briefings would have to be like:

"The PR Devs decided to put these two factions on this map and that's why they're fighting here, the end."

No story would explain why teams of respawning, super-soldiers are battling each other over and over in an artificial arena anyway.

By the way "No" and "I like the way it is now" should be the same option as no briefings is exactly the way it is now. I wonder if they were deliberately separated to split up the negative vote, not that it would of made much difference.

Even if you combine them, 4 out of every 5 people still want briefings...

Was just outlining the actual briefing Rudd, but good Counter, I commend you.

a short story about the mission is not a briefing for me

I like the immersion that these bring to the missions, albeit some can be misconstrued as a little far fetched, it does help.

What exactly is the difference between "no" and "i like the way it is now"?

Chaos 508 wrote:I think it should be historically accurate for certain battles. Such as fallujah which actually happened. Also, they should have briefings mentioned for both sides, showing both viewpoints. e.g.

This is an awesome idea. I'd love to see a few sentences, maybe a paragraph as a briefing for each side on each map.

Apart from briefing, some more detailed information about game mode and assets would be fine.

Arcturus_Shielder wrote:What exactly is the difference between "no" and "i like the way it is now"?

LOL
One thing is one thing ... another thing is another thing... rsrsr... are similar!

But I think there should be small text (history and tatics) on the map!

Still willing.

I think it would set the mood for the battle. A story line could be awesome, too. Something like: Our intel and our informant has given us enough evidence to show the Iraqi Insurgents have weapons caches in the area. Marines are to destroy all known weapons caches in the city. Or if it could be told from a soldier's point of view: Today we're going to invade the city. I'm really pumped. So yes, I want briefings on maps.

As said before, I think it would create a good mood for the map, although I'm sure many won't care, I think it'd give some 'history' to our beloved battlefields

I'm all for the Soldiers point of view idea. Read a diary of a US marine once from vietnam. Was pretty intense as well as interesting.