Project Reality Forums

I dont like the idea of the OP.

Why should everyone be able to revive? Its the special ability of the medic, and when you are going down you want to be revived by a medic who knows his job and not by everyone whos passing your position if its not save. And what is left for the medic? Yeah you can heal people, look 15sek at their ***...its like if there would be a shovel kit. Reviveing is kinda fun cause it can be tricky, healing itself is quite boring and why let the "hard" part open to everybody and the boring part to the medic?

downed people should be vulnerable, but not with shots. It should be time consumpting to dead-dead these guys, so you have to save that area. A fast knife stab or a shot on the body would be much to easy and frustating and you dont need a wounded status anymore...

Raic wrote: If you are unable to kill your target that means you are not assaulting their positions.

Assaulting is not required to win a firefight. If you can exchange fire, wound a majority of an enemy squad and kill a number of them you've left them combat ineffective if the punishment for losing the firefight is strict. So far the punishment is you need to patch up your people, and so long as there is hard cover over the corpses you can do this without any work whatsoever other than just staying prone.

At this point winning a firefight means you delay a squad who will be on your heels again in less than a few minutes from the same tactical position.

Winning a firefight without assaulting through the position and fragging corpses then creates a high probability that your opponent will heal up and chase you down with better intel on your movements than if he had to withdraw and heal up for a longer period.

The point is, killing everything isn't a very realistic thing. Few real firefights lead to utter annihilation of an enemy. Mostly it involves wounding and killing enough to force a withdrawal because they have no chance of continuing the fight. Its one thing to have to assault through and clear an enemy on an objective, but its quite another to have to deal with an enemy in a meeting engagement on the way to an objective.

waldov wrote:Also as mentioned by someone else this could make the medic kit quite useless so maybe there needs to be an inclination to be medic still.

You're not getting revived with 100% hp, and you won't be after this change. You will still need somebody to patch you up afterwards. So medic will still be useful.

O_turista_portugues wrote:Don't Agree, I as a squad Leader want my soldiers to fight and only 1-2 guys reviving people. This would make people stop firing just to revive the guy on their right.

Even in the most intense firefight a player can spare 2 seconds to help a downed guy on his right.

O_turista_portugues wrote:Medics should be the only ones to have the magic pen.

I didn't say this "revive" has to be done using magicpen, just give every soldier a slot similar to medic's CPR that allows to pick up a wounded soldier.

O_turista_portugues wrote:Proper damage would be nice but BF2 engine can't handle and pushing the damage can be against game play.
For instance IRL or MilSims you can lean or shoot without aiming to supress, but in PR you can't, the only way to do it is stand up/crouch and try and suppress while a 2nd guy gets an aim shot. While doing this is imperative that the damage allows some hits before going lethal.

It already does allow some hits, as bf2 hit detection sucks. It's pretty common that you see bullets hitting, but nothing happens to the would-be victim.

O_turista_portugues wrote:YES please YES, but I would say to knifes only to simulate the area under control. If we get a distant kill, the wounded man should be reviveble no matter the amount of bullets put on his "corpse".

With these changes a distant kill victim would still be revivable, as this system encourages wounding soldier, not killing him straight away (just like IRL).

Lugi wrote:(...) It is because the wounding a soldier, instead of killing him takes away from fighting not only that individual, but also a couple of others who have to help him, while a dead grunt is the only impairment to his forces. That's why I suggested this fighting incapability for a few minutes after a revive. I wanted people to have the incentive to wound the enemy soldier, and not to pop him as soon as possible.

It is actually better (from the killer's perspective) to wound an enemy, and then try to get the one that came to help as well, instead of wasting only the first guy.

ghostfool84 wrote:Why should everyone be able to revive? Its the special ability of the medic,

Medic already has plenty of special abilities. He has 6 dressings, medibag, magicpen, and also the ability to unstuck a wounded guy. I'd say it's more than enough.

ghostfool84 wrote:(..) and when you are going down you want to be revived by a medic who knows his job and not by everyone whos passing your position if its not save.

Take a look at at paragraph number 3. With that proposed change you'll no longer be perfectly safe when wounded, so there will be no thing as a "bad" revive.

ghostfool84 wrote:its like if there would be a shovel kit.

Yes, right now it's exactly like if there was a shovel kit that was the only one able to build something. But building is a very common task, so one guy would not be able to handle all the construction by himself. So the logical solution to such issue would be to give every grunt the ability to build.

Same thing goes to reviving. Just replace the word "build" in the previous paragraph with "revive", and you will hopefully get the idea of what I would like to achieve with these changes.

Lugi wrote:You're not getting revived with 100% hp, and you won't be after this change. You will still need somebody to patch you up afterwards. So medic will still be useful.

But I don't see how that changes much. The situation remains the same with the added possibility that 7 other guys can revive. Any logical decision would be to revive the medic first. And voila, you get a squad up much faster than if it was only up to one kit.

Frankly if you want a delay of the hit soldier in going back to the firefight, then it would make more sense to suggest a longer healing time for the medic kit. Add U_Turista's suggestion of stabbing wounded enemy soldiers to dead dead them and I think that would be the perfect solution.

Lugi wrote:
Medic already has plenty of special abilities. He has 6 dressings, medibag, magicpen, and also the ability to unstuck a wounded guy. I'd say it's more than enough.


Take a look at at paragraph number 3. With that proposed change you'll no longer be perfectly safe when wounded, so there will be no thing as a "bad" revive.


Yes, right now it's exactly like if there was a shovel kit that was the only one able to build something. But building is a very common task, so one guy would not be able to handle all the construction by himself. So the logical solution to such issue would be to give every grunt the ability to build.

Same thing goes to reviving. Just replace the word "build" in the previous paragraph with "revive", and you will hopefully get the idea of what I would like to achieve with these changes.

Field Dressing are nothing special, he got more than the others but officer and sniper kits too.

Its not about perfect safe, its about to clear an area and secure it. If you are laying on a street while you got shot down by an sniper and every blue guy just thinks "hey lets revive this guy" sniper will shoot again and you dead dead. I think its an really bad idea to allow finishing by shots or from far away btw

My point is not about having something available, its how interesting a class can be. And you take the interesting part away from the medic and leave the boring one. Your medic is just like a rifleman with more fielddressings but without nades, scope and ammo with a boring and time consumption special ability.

If you ask me there is something needed to fisnish wounded, but the general medic is for revive and healing thing is ok for me, they only need somehow to add something that makes an shortly revived soldier less powerful and then we fine.

ghostfool84 wrote:I dont like the idea of the OP.

Why should everyone be able to revive? Its the special ability of the medic, and when you are going down you want to be revived by a medic who knows his job and not by everyone whos passing your position if its not save. And what is left for the medic? Yeah you can heal people, look 15sek at their ***...its like if there would be a shovel kit. Reviveing is kinda fun cause it can be tricky, healing itself is quite boring and why let the "hard" part open to everybody and the boring part to

I completely agree with that

Just my two cents but...

Arcturus_Shielder wrote:But I don't see how that changes much. The situation remains the same with the added possibility that 7 other guys can revive.

I think that this is more realistic as soldiers are taught how to administer first aid. How about instead of saying "reviving" we name it "first aid"? They could also put a cap on the maximum health that a patch could heal. For example, if you get revived, no matter how many patches are thrown at you, your health won't go past 50 unless you're healed by the medic. It also lessens the load that the medic has to bear with all the "MEDIC MEDIC MEDIC" right now.

Arcturus_Shielder wrote:Add U_Turista's suggestion of stabbing wounded enemy soldiers to dead dead them and I think that would be the perfect solution.

Isn't this a war crime, especially if that person can't fight back?

wretchedegg wrote:I think that this is more realistic as soldiers are taught how to administer first aid. How about instead of saying "reviving" we name it "first aid"? They could also put a cap on the maximum health that a patch could heal. For example, if you get revived, no matter how many patches are thrown at you, your health won't go past 50 unless you're healed by the medic. It also lessens the load that the medic has to bear with all the "MEDIC MEDIC MEDIC" right now.

It's all about gameplay balance. And the suggestion does not fight the supposed issue but rather aggravate it. Under this suggestion everyone can be up much faster and back to the firefight even if bleeding.

wretchedegg wrote:Isn't this a war crime, especially if that person can't fight back?

I rather think of it as securing an area. You need to confirm your kills by making a thorough check at very close range. I am not sure if there's still space for an extra slot for every conventional army soldier, but maybe handcuffs could serve for this purpose (in the same way you "arrest" an insurgent).

I don't think this would be going in the right direction.
Now with 1.0 the diversity of kits in one squad became more important (Breacher almost always required, two new kits have been introduced), and this would definitely take away from the most important kit in infantry gameplay.

I also doubt that this is a solution to the issue of completely wiping out out a squad. I think an almost downed squad would be up even faster if everybody could revive. Yes, medical attention would be required for all of them but with the field dressing everybody is carrying, a squad would be up and combat-ready really quickly. Still bleeding of course until the medic treats everybody, but able to shoot back accurately.

The only suggestion that kinda makes sense to me is the third one, make wounded guys more vulnerable. Bullets would be a bad idea imo, but I kinda like the stabbing idea to confirm a kill. Explosives are fine, too. Currently, there is a good chance of ending up "dead dead" if a grenade explodes pretty much on your body when you are in wounded state, maybe the radius could be increased slightly.

Lugi wrote:With the introduction of 100p servers the overall count of medics increased, as the number of these kits per squad doubled, so now every one out of four soldier is a medic. That's a really gamebreaking change for me, as I always considered the medic kit to be very toxic to gameplay and immersion. The changes I propose are That's why I propose these changes to make it less irritating to deal with,

Whoa there, that's a heavy assumption to make. In reality, the amount of medics is nowhere near 25%. Most squads still play with one medic in order to grab another kit such as a LAT, grenadier, machine gunner or just a plain rifleman. In my experience, a second medic is only used if your squad experienced heavy casualties before.

Your solution to something that you see as "toxic to gameplay" is to give these abilities to even more kits? Where's the logic in that?

Keep in mind we're playing PR 1.0 now. In my book, it is too late to completely revamp basic gameplay mechanics, and swap them out for something that is 100% untested and probably even defeats the purpose of its introduction.
Personally, I don't think there is much of an issue with the current medic mechanics.

I'd say leave it as it is. It's not a perfect solution, but a pretty good one. With all the limitations of the game I guess this is as good as it gets, and this is just how Project Reality is. If you're unsatisfied with this, there's always Arma ...

Why not remove epipens and instead make a progress bar on reviving, and then healing?

Squads can be brought back up, but not in the heat of battle with any efficiency.

If you remove the wounded state and make the game deadlier, you remove a significant chunk of the teamwork from an infantry squad. Medics doing their thing is a huge part of what makes playing an Infantry squad actually interesting; communicating with your squad who needs healed, who needs revived, where are they, how important is their squad role, who is safe and who isn't, and prioritising based on any number of these factors.

All of this creates complex and numerous game dynamics within an Infantry fight, and all of these require teamwork, communication, experience and judgement to carry out. This is great, this is what makes PR dynamic and satisfying to play. To essentially remove the wounded state (or alter it as you are suggesting in the OP) would lobotomise a significant part of PRs gameplay; it would not be the same, and it would be a lot less interesting to play.

Arcturus_Shielder wrote:It's all about gameplay balance. And the suggestion does not fight the supposed issue but rather aggravate it. Under this suggestion everyone can be up much faster and back to the firefight even if bleeding.

False.

Lugi wrote:Also the (revived) soldier should be given a small (3-4 minutes) window of blurry screen (suppresion-like), so he won't be fully operational.

Hurricane wrote:Now with 1.0 the diversity of kits in one squad became more important (Breacher almost always required, two new kits have been introduced), and this would definitely take away from the most important kit in infantry gameplay.

With these suggestions medic would still be a mandatory squad asset, just as it is now. No change here. You still need someone to heal you up after being revived.

Hurricane wrote:I think an almost downed squad would be up even faster if everybody could revive. Yes, medical attention would be required for all of them but with the field dressing everybody is carrying, a squad would be up and combat-ready really quickly. Still bleeding of course until the medic treats everybody, but able to shoot back accurately.

Again, false.

Lugi wrote:Also the (revived) soldier should be given a small (3-4 minutes) window of blurry screen (suppresion-like), so he won't be fully operational.

Hurricane wrote:The only suggestion that kinda makes sense to me is the third one, make wounded guys more vulnerable. Bullets would be a bad idea imo, but I kinda like the stabbing idea to confirm a kill.

This could possibly lead to some tragicomic scenarios. Imagine an infantry squad moving onto wiped enemy squad's position. Everybody stabbing dead bodies just to make sure they are really dead. This is not really realistic, nor positively affecting gameplay.

Hurricane wrote:Whoa there, that's a heavy assumption to make. In reality, the amount of medics is nowhere near 25%. Most squads still play with one medic in order to grab another kit such as a LAT, grenadier, machine gunner or just a plain rifleman. In my experience, a second medic is only used if your squad experienced heavy casualties before.

In my experience every 8-man infantry squad I've been in employed two medics. That might depend on the server though. I play on PRTA only.

Hurricane wrote:Your solution to something that you see as "toxic to gameplay" is to give these abilities to even more kits? Where's the logic in that?

The logic is in revamping these abilities. And for some reason you don't take whole suggestion into consideration, only a part of it.

Hurricane wrote:Personally, I don't think there is much of an issue with the current medic mechanics.

And I think there is, and has always been. The introduction of 2 medics per squad only made it worse. And I don't think I'm the only one who think the medic is a bit overpowered kit, as the game devs didn't give medic kit the ACOG scope because of "balance fears".

Web_cole wrote:If you remove the wounded state and make the game deadlier, you remove a significant chunk of the teamwork from an infantry squad.

I never suggested removing wounded state.

Web_cole wrote:Medics doing their thing is a huge part of what makes playing an Infantry squad actually interesting;

I'd say frustrating, not interesting. Right now you want to revive as many people as you can (even in the heat of battle), cause every revived soldier is a fully operational squad asset, and you want to have as many of these as you can. With proposed changes there is almost no use of a revived grunt, so reviving people under enemy fire will lose it's priority over actually dealing with the enemy.

Lugi wrote:I never suggested removing wounded state.




I'd say frustrating, not interesting. Right now you want to revive as many people as you can (even in the heat of battle), cause every revived soldier is a fully operational squad asset, and you want to have as many of these as you can. With proposed changes there is almost no use of a revived grunt, so reviving people under enemy fire will lose it's priority over actually dealing with the enemy.

Part of your suggestion amounts to removing the wounded state, but I probably worded that poorly.

I think we'll have to agree to disagree on that; I find PR firefights constantly fascinating, ever changing and incredibly challenging. You are never not "dealing with the enemy", even attempting to play keep-away so your medic can safely revive is still "dealing with the enemy", and is still challenging and interesting to play out for both sides. It's not like you don't have options to make it more difficult for a squad to revive, and if they do, well the dance goes on. I don't see that as a bad thing.

If the alternative is a game where the role of the medic is drastically reduced, I see that as a game that also has reduced need for squad cohesion, communication and co-operation, and I don't particularly want to play that game.

Sounds really interesting.
The current medic system is basicely still the same as in vanilla, so a change could be good.
And the Medic will still be very important because hes the only one able to heal people effectively.
I am still not sure if 1 hit kills are a good idea, but thats something that needs testing and adjusting.

Web_cole wrote:It's not like you don't have options to make it more difficult for a squad to revive, and if they do, well the dance goes on. I don't see that as a bad thing.

The fact that you might have to kill the same grunt twice in a short fight IS a bad thing for me. Hell if we talk about only wounding him (hitting him once), he might get shot as much as he wants and still carry on fighting if he has a medic nearby to patch him up. That's what I dislike, and I think such nonsense is actually a really bad thing, both for gameplay and immersion.

Web_cole wrote:If the alternative is a game where the role of the medic is drastically reduced, I see that as a game that also has reduced need for squad cohesion, communication and co-operation, and I don't particularly want to play that game.

I see the exact opposite of what you do. The fact that everyone can help a downed friendly means that there will be more teamwork AND communication, as every soldier might be the one to save you from having to die and respawn.

MADsqirrel wrote:The current medic system is basicely still the same as in vanilla, so a change could be good.

Maybe not the same, but pretty close to it.

MADsqirrel wrote:I am still not sure if 1 hit kills are a good idea, but thats something that needs testing and adjusting.

I'm not quite sure as well. You can't really be sure of a suggestion until it's been properly tested.
The logic behind this change is that in reality you can't really continue fighting right after getting shot, and to compensate for the fact that you can get revived by anybody.

I just thought about it, Maybe you can keep the medic still valuable by making it that only his Medkit can heal major wounds.ie. if you get shot you can only be healed back to full by a med kit (bandages only delay bleeding out.)

waldov wrote:I just thought about it, Maybe you can keep the medic still valuable by making it that only his Medkit can heal major wounds.ie. if you get shot you can only be healed back to full by a med kit (bandages only delay bleeding out.)

That's exactly what would happen with these changes. When you get revived during a fight you have to get to the medic to stop bleeding, because the patch only gives you 25% health. But I don't quite get why certain kits except medic have more patches than others (SL, sniper).

I like these ideas. And as a combat medic, adrenaline seems more realistic than epinephrine to me. I see the "combat medics" in-game as more of combat lifesavers. Because when you go down, you are "wounded" which means you can't do much. And CLS do a lot of patching up. Plus combat medics are a platoon asset. Not a squad asset.

Removing all the fun from the medic kit is pure non-sense. According to what you say, we might as well give a LAT to all kits because everyone is in theory able to fire it, or a pistol because everyone is in theory able to fire one, or bla bla bla bla

The reason why I really don't like that suggestion is that you want to nerve the medic kit because of your grudge against it, as you clearly stated in your "medic is the most anti-fun element of the game" thread. Therefor I assume you barely use it, so in my opinion you are not the best placed to try to make it different.

Genius idea.

- If a squad needs to get someone up, and no medic is around, they have to sacrifice their bandages, so their teammate won't bleed out. This is still balanced, since most of the squadmembers loose their bandages and can't heal themselves in a critical situation anymore. So a squadleader has to make a decision: get this squadmate up and give him almost all bandages, or loose people later, because they bleed out faster due to the lack of bandages.

- The medic won't get overwhelmed by a dozen bodies (screaming for a medic...) anymore (..or much less). Usually, members of other squads yell at you (and ask you to get them up), and now the possibility is higher that their squadmates get their buddies up - you don't get cluttered by revive-requests.

This would definitely be a refreshing new gameplay feature.