Project Reality Forums

'[USF wrote:Doc.Pock;1796921']false. at more than 4km the terrain starts morphing unbeliveably, so it has to be made as a static, but then its impossibru to have nice undergrowght on it.

Like what you see on maps like Kashan? Not quite sure I'm understanding what you're saying there.

https://www.realitymod.com/forum/f189-m ... s-2km.html

just that even more morphed and streched so it basically doesnt even look like the original, AFAIK but rhino knows this way better

You can change how terrain levels of detail work in con files rather easily. Terrain morphing is a not an issue for larger maps, and if it is it's the fault of the map-maker for not properly modifying them to fit the fog distance.

SShadowFox wrote:BF2142 uses the same engine as BF2 but with some modifications...

All that is possible in BF2142, is possible to do in BF2, just take a look at the Alpha Project...

only with source code...

which will probably never happen cause EA

I don't remember exactly but isn't it that BF2 was from the closed DICE canada studio and BF2142 was made from DICE sweden and there are some license problems too?

'[USF wrote:Doc.Pock;1796921']false. at more than 4km the terrain starts morphing unbeliveably, so it has to be made as a static, but then its impossibru to have nice undergrowght on it.

Unless there was something since the last time I read what Rhino said on the subject, you're wrong.

I remember him stating that beyond 4km was possible, but it had to be mostly water or the editor would crash.

That is why we don't get bigger maps from what I recall.

Looks cool.

[R-DEV]AncientMan wrote:



.

I have been around for a while and I know exactly what that means.

Can't wait for 1.0.

SGT.Ice wrote:Unless there was something since the last time I read what Rhino said on the subject, you're wrong.

I remember him stating that beyond 4km was possible, but it had to be mostly water or the editor would crash.

That is why we don't get bigger maps from what I recall.

Combined Arms had a naval map with wake island type deal at the center, I believe it was something like 8 km and there weren't many issues with it.

That was almost all water though. Take a look at test airfield's terrain beyond the 4km border and you'll see some pretty nutty terrain. The further you go out, the weirder sounds get and everything starts to look funky due to rounding errors adding up.

Hunt3r wrote:Combined Arms had a naval map with wake island type deal at the center, I believe it was something like 8 km and there weren't many issues with it.

That was almost all water though. Take a look at test airfield's terrain beyond the 4km border and you'll see some pretty nutty terrain. The further you go out, the weirder sounds get and everything starts to look funky due to rounding errors adding up.

Never played test airfield yet, Combined Arms?

I'm just going off what I saw last time someone asked why we don't have maps bigger than 4km & Rhinos replies to it since he is the head mapper, to my limited knowledge of the engine he never found a solution. Unless it's been under wraps.

SGT.Ice wrote:Unless there was something since the last time I read what Rhino said on the subject, you're wrong.

I remember him stating that beyond 4km was possible, but it had to be mostly water or the editor would crash.

That is why we don't get bigger maps from what I recall.

If the last time you read something on that subject was in 2011, then you are right.

Certainly interesting to know that 1.0 will feature even larger maps - but I hope that also comes with the 100 player severs being adopted completely. Maps larger than 4km with 64 players would feel very empty.

PR Falklands is bigger than 4K.

Solver wrote:Certainly interesting to know that 1.0 will feature even larger maps - but I hope that also comes with the 100 player severs being adopted completely. Maps larger than 4km with 64 players would feel very empty.

Proof or no dil.

SGT.Ice wrote:Never played test airfield yet, Combined Arms?

I'm just going off what I saw last time someone asked why we don't have maps bigger than 4km & Rhinos replies to it since he is the head mapper, to my limited knowledge of the engine he never found a solution. Unless it's been under wraps.

Test Airfield is a PR map, Combined Arms was a mod for Project Reality back in the day that showed off a lot of cool stuff.

I'm aware of what Test Airfield is, I just don't bother to download it. Sounds like the F2P to me.

What's really frustrating is that the Refractor 2 Engine's slopes are complete garbage! You have to jump your way, crouch, prone up some hills and it drains all your stamina! It's really annoying!

Also on the list:
-Break-lights for Humvees like in Battlefield Alpha mod, and indicators to prevent friendly collisions
-A reworked arab voice pack to make the Taliban, Insurgents voice more accurate
-Easter Eggs?
-Suicide Bombers have been implanted in cars since both the bomb-cars and the bomb-trucks use the airplane bomb dropping ability since it can be deployed from the bottom, and it has a large damage splash, which reflects the real-life explosions. I found out while mucking around with a player when he detonated Gary hanging from the bridge, and I saw a huge missile coming from the truck.

I like the idea of a fully functional carrier, and I obviously would like fastropes.

One other thing should be done is that you only have to load the weapon once, and when you draw it, you simply take it off the safety like in real-life. I don't know if python coders can achieve that. It sounds like it's hard-coded, but I think it could be possible animations wise. Only have the weapon draw out when there's a loaded kit.

It's annoying that you have to **** the weapon after you already draw it. In a close-combat situation, you would pray that the enemy doesn't come first and you finish. Not only do you have to wait for it, you have to take deviation into effect.

The reason why there's less pr players is because of that.

SGT.Ice wrote:I'm aware of what Test Airfield is, I just don't bother to download it. Sounds like the F2P to me.

Sounds like the F2P? Wut?

It's basically a training map, a lot like the .87 training mode.

Hunt3r wrote:Sounds like the F2P? Wut?

It's basically a training map, a lot like the .87 training mode.

I'm aware of what it is, probably should of split that into two lines.

Combat Arms sounds like the F2P.



Arab those are suggestions outside the suggestion thread. It's annoying & kept me from playing at first due to the fact I should not have to prep my weapon after I had it out just 10 seconds ago as well.

Arab wrote:What's really frustrating is that the Refractor 2 Engine's slopes are complete garbage! You have to jump your way, crouch, prone up some hills and it drains all your stamina! It's really annoying!

Good point, the guys really have big troubles making a 15 cm step. But seriously, show me some (good and/or even younger) games that don't suffer from "stuff like this". In ArmA it is the general jerkiness, in BF3 you could die from falling small heights, in all those generic 3rd person action games you can't even jump at all and are bound to use a certain path, etc. I have yet to see the "100% perfect fps" but when I look around BF2 or better PR has no reason to hide behind all those AAA games coming out lately. If anything it is the other way around.

Also I always at least TRY to see it as another layer of tactical improvement. You lose all stamina while leaving the enclosed compound with a 2m wall? It should be a bit more hastle than just bunny hop over the wall and run away like a madman. Get over and get in cover, take a deep breath and then start running to your objective. All good.

Arab wrote:...
It's annoying that you have to **** the weapon after you already draw it.
...
The reason why there's less pr players is because of that.

Not 100% sure if you take all the points that you stated or just this single one but I can not concur with that conclusion.
Sure irl you don't need to do that but you can't climb a ladder in full battle rattle, take the gun of your shoulder and shoot right away either.
When you see videos of .50s mounted on humvees, engaging targets, they are busy with all sorts of stuff before they even fire the first round. It takes much longer to climb down into the car, unstrap the ammo crates and then reload the thing as it does in PR.
An APC gunner would NEVER just leave his stryker to blow sth. up but if you would have no warm up time on those guns you would see a lot of people doing stupid stuff like that in game....believe me.

What is the most problematic situation in game that the gun needs to be cocked all the time? Probably while nading/room clearing. But then again, you shouldn't be doing it alone and the time is short enough so you can shoot really short after the explosion. What is the problem exactly?

In general I am very glad it is like that and I see it as "simulating various factors" that DICE originally never even thought of.

And btw...what do people expect from fast ropes? I really don't get that at all. It would add NOTHING to the gameplay imo. In any game this is probably the most overrated feature. Especially PR consists of so much more than not having these...idk.