Project Reality Forums

I was hoping for a dense construction complex with lots of very small cap zones on different floors in different buildings.

Don't build any new assets. Just pile them all over each other.



Sorta unrelated: only pistols, rocks and fists allowed.

Most important bump of all. Dont make us lose ww2 pop quicker than needed pls just because fallujah outseeds everything at all times ty

Load of possible seeder maps are already in-game. Gaza AAS/ins inf, Goose Green, Shithaha Skirmish.

Not convinced this idea would beat Fallujah.

2nd: The fact that insurgency games last way longer than skirmish games.

So if INS > Skirmish, why don't people seed on Al Basrah, Marlin, Black Gold or Dragon Fly?

Is it really INS or is it map itself?

If it was the map itself then fallujah skirmish would be an option but it isnt.

To answer your question: its both. But the factor you quoted is the biggest influence still. I even gave an explanation and arguments but apparently these things dont mean anything anymore in 2019, anywhere.

To answer your examples:
2k bad for seeding
2k bad for seeding
4k bad for seeding
2k bad for seeding

Remember that skirmish maps are always smaller. So the size argument only goes for ins.

And it cant be the gamemode as literally every server forbids destroying caches. So what really is left to argue about?

In that case I have a solution: add AAS to Fallujah with tons of tickets and no assets. No caches to destroy, no tank to roll over dozen players. Sound good?

I really dont know if you are tolling or joking or idk. And I also dont know why

But what you are suggesting is basically a small map, AAS, tons of tickets... Sounds exactly like what I am suggesting here. The exception being ofc that I want the map to be even smaller (skirmish sizes) and that I want to see other maps being able to be used in seeding.

But what you are suggesting would basically replace Fallujah Ins already.

Well good, then we have the same idea and agree.

Bump.

This would improve the idleness of seeding and have the community engaging at a totally different level before server fills up. The implementation of this kind of map/mode/layer is long overdue!

No SAF love I see.

Outlawz7 wrote:

If this is the kind of response you get on viable suggestions then you should seriously close this sub forum.
Yes this would get people off of ins, but the point is to get people away from Fallujah and increase map variety. But for some reason you had to go low in your arguments.

EDIT: Alright someone told me that you are actually serious. If so, then Im sorry. Re-read the topic again. The goal is to get rid of Fallujah Ins only. Not Ins only. If you reread the thread you can also see why this 9999T suggestion looked more like a provokation to me.

I have been reading.

chrisweb89 wrote:Pretty good idea, a new skirmish layer with tons of tickets, and lots of small flags to fight over creating basically an infinitely long fight, that keeps people engaged and shooting. I love skirmish maps, but even at 150 tickets, and especially with a possible cap out they end too quick when seeding slowly.

CAS_ual_TY wrote:A ticket increase would improve the overall seeding-situation a lot. Halving the respawn time would be really great as well (if its possible, considering the respawn time is also connected with config files and it might be 1 single value for all modes).

The current skirmish is good for serious 8v8 fights, but we need something aas-like to seed on.

Wing Walker wrote:Skirmish maps are ok, they just don't allow any room for much tactical maneuvering. Which is what makes PR fun. Some are better than others, Kokan is the worst though.

Fallujia would be fun if it were just AAS. I really think people get sick of it because it is INS and on ALL the time.

CAS_ual_TY wrote:If it was the map itself then fallujah skirmish would be an option but it isnt.

To answer your question: its both. But the factor you quoted is the biggest influence still. I even gave an explanation and arguments but apparently these things dont mean anything anymore in 2019, anywhere.

To answer your examples:
2k bad for seeding
2k bad for seeding
4k bad for seeding
2k bad for seeding

Remember that skirmish maps are always smaller. So the size argument only goes for ins.

And it cant be the gamemode as literally every server forbids destroying caches. So what really is left to argue about?

CAS_ual_TY wrote:I really dont know if you are tolling or joking or idk. And I also dont know why

But what you are suggesting is basically a small map, AAS, tons of tickets... Sounds exactly like what I am suggesting here. The exception being ofc that I want the map to be even smaller (skirmish sizes) and that I want to see other maps being able to be used in seeding.

But what you are suggesting would basically replace Fallujah Ins already.

And I gathered from this 'more tickets' and 'cant be 2k or 4k'.

Creating a second gamemode as per your OP is less feasible than what I'm doing here because 1. I can't do it because I don't know how to create gamemodes, 2. the devs who do got better things to do.

Yes, 9999 tickets sounds absurd but my reasoning behind it was to prevent the round from ending during seeing period because as you stated servers lose players on map switch. The idea was that the few people playing are unlikely to end the round by playing (whereas people blowing up caches do end it) and the round will last the full 4 hours or until an admin comes on to set next and run it.

I do suppose turning this into a regular AAS layer with reasonable ticket amount and bleed flags would be better.

Alright, so you're sick of Fallujah. But you stated that 2km and 4km maps aren't viable for seeding so besides Fallujah what's stopping you or other server admins from seeding on 1km AAS maps?

We could discuss changing Skirmish tickets from 150v150 to something else in general, not just a 'skirmish large' or allow custom amounts again.

Outlawz7 wrote: We could discuss changing Skirmish tickets from 150v150 to something else in general, not just a 'skirmish large' or allow custom amounts again.

Creating skirmish lrg layout with 500 tickets is enough to make the server PLAYABLE while seeding.

The funny thing is that this thing was done with AAS lrg before (without anyone asking for it) and servers never ran AAS lrg because it had sooo many tickets that made the gameplay very boring after 1:30h~2H of same things happening on a balanced round.

Playing on a AAS/INS 1KM map with 5v5 is "VERY IMPOSSIBLE". You will walk 10 minutes just to find someone and get shot/killed and repeat it all again, which make players to leave the server because it is boring/retarded.

ONLY need to add more tickets, nothing more. How it is today, is fine and playable with 20v20 without problems, just ends very quick.

(OpenReality community tried to add tickets only for skirmish maps, so we could have fun while seeding but management said no).

Clicked to edit and it got duplicated :'(

Are we allowed to increase the amount of hours a round lasts instead?

Think everyone is solving for the wrong thing. Solve for how to increase close quarters combat so a server with lower population, can have x fights/minute without having to search a whole map and go places to find entertainment. Size & tickets don't matter. If people are tired of a map, set a new one... if people like a map because they are more familiar with it, tough cookies, change that behavior and set a new one...

lespyd wrote: Solve for how to increase close quarters combat so a server with lower population, can have x fights/minute without having to search a whole map and go places to find entertainment.

We did, it's called Skirmish...?

Right, so I don't understand the point of Skirmish Large. People seem to be tired of Fallujah, so set different maps, set skirmish for instance. The map run, is a very small variable, and probably not even causation towards whether or server or not is seeded, if that's the concern. Fallujah just seems to be a de_dust2. Stop setting it is a solve.

I mean, at this point we could just send the developers a suggested GPO change to one of the maps and test it on public... Right?