Project Reality Forums

I think a vehicle with a bunchload of crates wouldn't work very well. Picture a "mad dash" of a tractor dropping 2 supply crates to a 3 squads around the map. BAM, the other team (specially insurgency) is screwed, bad for gameplay).

Why don't we simply make logi trucks worth, say, 20 tickets? That will encourage convoys and RTBing with it! (To prevent taxi use of it, we could allow so only SLs and crewmen can drive it?).

goguapsy wrote:Why don't we simply make logi trucks worth, say, 20 tickets?

Cause noone cares about tickets.

Mmm, agreed on the tickets thing unfortunately.

How about replacing the logis with a single (or on some larger maps with a couple) tractor (or just keep the logi model anyways) that requires crewman kit and is useable by "regular" people. Still wouldn't stop the ditching entirely, but would surely make a team consider it a valuable asset and contribute to it's decrease and doesn't require the commander to go around pooping crates.

It would stop snipers from grabbing and ditching it

Logy auto recharge one or two crates after 10 or 20 mins?

Wouldn't change much except on 4km maps if the helis are down, you'd still have to check if it's empty or full.

I have an idea to make logistics a bit more complex and interesting. My idea is to break up the omnipotent crate into several with different roles.

1. Crate for building stuff
2. Crate for requesting kits(with a limit to how many kits can be requested off of one, say 5 kits for example)
3. Crate for ammunition

Of course you'd have to ammolink the different types inside the vehicles transporting them so that you cannot drop all 3 types at a time. Perhaps even have different vehicles for different types of crates alltogether(nothing but a small cosmetic outward difference like in Arma) but with very short respawn times so that you always have al types of Logis available.

Now combine that with goguapsy's idea:

goguapsy;1654536Why don't we simply make logi trucks worth, say, 20 tickets? That will encourage convoys and RTBing with it![/QUOTE wrote:
This would make it a bit more necessary to organise logistics. With convoys of 2 or three trucks with escort neccesary to build big FO's with ammunition stocks and kit requests available.

The only problem I see is that this is only feasible as soon as you raise the player count to 150-200 players, as even now front line troops are in short supply.

Interesting ideas regarding the auto-charging Logi and the Crewman Kit Logi.

What if the Logi re-armed but ONLY if it was in the radius of the current cappable flag? (To stop prospective FOB's popping up from single man squads).

Crewman Kit Logi would certainly make a Logi Squad necessary. i'm still not sold on that being a good thing.

What about a Logi Truck respawning at main every time the current ones drop both of their crates? But make them unable to rearm (basically one-use Logi's). I suppose it wouldn't solve the mad dash problem much - it would just mean the Logi only had to go one way (from main to new FOB/Squad).

[R-DEV]Rudd wrote:approved, the problem you describe has been in my thoughts also - perhaps its possible to organise an escort on a 128 server, but on 64 it is indeed the mad dash.

While I think a whole new vehicle is probably not on the cards, a commander only logi truck with extra crates could be an asset to gameplay. Please continue the discussion

Yeah, this however depends how "realistic" you wanna keep PR , by letting the commander enter the field with a big "bullet magnet" like that will just keep him focused at driving and not commanding the actual team.. With an escord though it would be cool^^

I find it a bit unrealistic that these trucks are unarmed at all (IRL I wouldn't be surprised to at least see a CROWS on top, probably no reloads though). For gameplay I suppose.

I think this idea is pretty meh. If you want logistics to be more refined, we should probably have the ability for APCs to do logistics, because if an APC can get somewhere with it's HMG, I would assume a logi can pretty much do the same. An M113's gunner is pretty easily sniped and unless we start putting RWS emplacements as a standard for APCs, you can expect inf to be pretty dangerous to one.

Just another way of making logistics more integrated. Of course, there should be a hefty advantage to using the unarmed logi truck, in this case, repair, and I suppose adding 2-4 more crates to justify having an APC be able to have real crates.

Hmm I would love to see trucks with a .50 on the passenger seat. Too many times I have looked to the hatch on top the MAN truck and wish there was a .50 on it.

I think the question is: do they use the logi trucks to supply friendly troops directly on the battlefield, or do they use them only on friendly controlled territory?

I like the idea of a Tractor with many crates that can only be used by a crewman and reducing the number of logi trucks to balance it. The Tractor would get used because, lets face it, it would be way cooler to drive than a boring old truck. Think of the physiological aspect of adding it. Simply changing the logi trucks around by adding a higher ticket cost, or recharging crates isn't going to take away the boring factor. You could also remove the bridge laying aspect of the logi and give it to the Tractor.

It is probably just my lust for mechanical engineering that is saying this but I would love to drive around in a Tracked engineering vehicle lol.

havoc1482 wrote:I like the idea of a Tractor with many crates that can only be used by a crewman and reducing the number of logi trucks to balance it. The Tractor would get used because, lets face it, it would be way cooler to drive than a boring old truck. Think of the physiological aspect of adding it. Simply changing the logi trucks around by adding a higher ticket cost, or recharging crates isn't going to take away the boring factor. You could also remove the bridge laying aspect of the logi and give it to the Tractor.

It is probably just my lust for mechanical engineering that is saying this but I would love to drive around in a Tracked engineering vehicle lol.

Indeed, however, the problem is getting a model for it.

havoc1482 wrote:Simply changing the logi trucks around by adding a higher ticket cost, or recharging crates isn't going to take away the boring factor.

So let's add some xxx magazines inside to browse while doing this boring driving.

I would like to see a mobile command unit, however not a super supply truck.


Possibly having the ability for troops to spawn on it, stopping (or slowing down) the enemy team from capturing a point, those kind of things would be much better then a super supply truck, essentially

Lugi wrote:Cause noone cares about tickets.

Mikemonster wrote:Mmm, agreed on the tickets thing unfortunately.

goguapsy wrote:(To prevent taxi use of it, we could allow so only SLs and crewmen can drive it?).

I've seen few people hoping in a logi, using it as a taxi THEN requesting a kit... Normally, first it's the kit, THEN the logi.

Being said that, I don't think people ignore tickets. Or wouldn't, if such a fragile thing was worth so many tickets.

Do you guys really think it would be a "party" if only SLs (Officers) and crewmen could operate the logi? I fail to see how in a large sense.

If you are looking for better trucks: http://www.armyrecognition.com/forum/viewtopic.php?t=715

The idea of having crewman driving them could be good, but ones the crate is dropped, other kits are available. But will stop "sniper"- type from rushing at start. He would go for the kit first and loose out on truck. Not really a problem though since admins sort those out usually. But yes to letting trucks have some kind of defense. Armour and/or a weapon.

Mikemonsters original idea is a good start for us here. I like it.

The notion some have that a CO would not be involved in building FOB's is really redundant. The CO in PR doesn't really have a real life counterpart. He commands 31 men (at most) but has full power over deploying UAV, airstrikes and such. Sounds a little spec-ops-ish to me.
So, in PR he is really just the concept of a higher leadership. And as such should be most involved in determing where FOBs are set up and drive his own vehicle. He would need to, with the restrictions with playernrs and the boredom with being a chauffeur for somebody. IRL, in most circumstances, a SL will not get to decide where to build a base anyways, his higher-ups will. SL will hold the shovel though.

IMO, the best way to go is to make the command-apc drivable. A model we have and that is unarmed.
Give that apc zoom and IR. Hey, give it a periscope so he can hide behind hills/(and other) peeking and mark targets etc. Commanding the battlefield! Allowing him to be the most well informed player in the field!

From the apc, he should be able to acess UAV etc. If a zone is to hot for him to peek at himself, he can fall back and deploy UAV instead. CO-APC should, when stationary, be able to deploy a fob on steriods. A big foxhole that the apc can park in. Shielding it from random attacks. A HAT will take out foxhole but not the apc. CO can then RTB sort of safe, unless its a good coordinated assault.
Should that occur, well then, thats the game. CO can still function from mainbase as usuall.
CO-apc respawn in 30 minutes more.

Steriod-fob should have a fixed repstation (like the one dropped from truck) and 1 fixed supplycrate.
So if we have a commander and he has built his little base, why wouldent he be careful with it?
Have a protective detail that also manages mortars for instance. We would finally have a guarded fob that does its job. It's job can also be to supply us players with a good fight on deploy-location.

There can only be one of these at a time and SL should still be able to setup standard fobs, maybe in a diminished capacity then current, and needing CO-approval. If no CO is present on map, only 2 fobs (got that from wicca) can be built.

Him being out with the troops, setting up a secure spawn, getting more intelwork done has to be WIN.

No doubt there is some improvement here. But as a general concept I think its good. Many agree on that a change to CO-role needs to be done. Lets try it from some new angles, it can always be reverted if it fails. And lets try and steer away from "but what if one player does this or that" abusing the system. That will always happen and the rotten few should not have the power to ruin it for the rest of us.

Btw, if anyone has complaints about my english, I'm swedish =)

Cheers

I think its a good idea having a commander only logi. the problem with a logistic squad is that only communication is via text or radio call (impossible if the sq ldr doesnt have a sq kit) where as commander can be talked to through voip or text or radio (my experience direct voip coms are the best since they cant be looked over like texts)

Its an interesting idea, needs some testing out me thinks.

I like it if the com had a armored vehicle with supplies and no weapons(no weapons for obvious reasons) dedicated to pure supplies at times when he's not doing much.

So im for it, might end up good =P