Project Reality Forums

Lothrian wrote:Its only over quickly because the old fad of seeing someone, spamming teh prone position, and shooting before your body hits the floor and getting a head shot! Much longer animations between weapon switching, positions (crouch/prone etc), forced lighting settings etc would all slow things down.

Those slowed animations kill gameplay, IMO. It feels like you're fighting in gravy.

If someone is shooting at me, I'm pretty sure I can drop quick. Or get up quick to runaway. Stuff like AA feels as if I'm all doped up, trying to escape the enemy like in a bad dream.

One major difference between BF2 and real life is the engagement ranges of a firefight. The things you see on the news are fire fights taking place over some distance. 400, 600, 800 meters out sometimes. It takes a while not only to get a fix on your enemy while you suppress them but also to actually hit them. In which case, the fire fight isn't over till the gunfire has stopped on both sides.. either because they're trying to trick you or you killed them.

In either case, with up to 1000km view-distances being made available in the coming versions of PR. Certain maps will have much more involved tactics and as well, fire fights.

what about makng it so you cant spawn on your SL, and therefore must respawn on your RP? unless it is hard-coded

If you watch some videos on Military Channel of the marines securing areas, it'll be a 2-3 hour "firefight" with no enemy. Just tanks and vehicles engaging buildings while troops move in to secure. If you play it smart, it's a slow process.

vanity wrote: If someone is shooting at me, I'm pretty sure I can drop quick. Or get up quick to runaway

Do it, Go outside, onto a concrete path with a gunish weapon (liek a watergun, airsoft rifle etc) facing a sign about the size of a mans head. Now, stand, and jump forward making sure your belly hits the floor first (just like the animation), holding the gun with both hands and then hit the sign.

You know the science as well as I do ... you cant do it. The diaphram will instantly contract on the shock and wind you. If you use your hands and knees like RL, you will take at least 3 or 4 seconds longer, excluding the ouch factor if your elbows hit first and dislocate.

Was a USMC squad leader on Al Basrah with a full VOIP squad. Our team couldn't even get close to the Facility so once I made the squad and it filled in I said that we can't have any casualties and nobody runs off alone without someone covering them.

It was one of the best teamwork games I've ever plaid. We moved through the city streets slowly with people taking turns taking point at corners, watching roof tops and windows and we also had a great medic who patched us up after each engagement. Whenever someone wandered off I told them to get back or seek cover ASAP and hold until the whole squad moved in to their position.

It was very tense because there was very little room for error, insurgents were taking shots at us from every hole and corner so everyone really had to watch each other's backs to stay alive. I think at that point people really became scared of dying. If you die, so does the person whose back you're covering and the whole squad would go down eventually. I think that made people a lot more cautious. That and the fact that 6 people relied on you not rushing out and getting yourself killed.

We managed to retake the Facility at least 3 times and would have gone to the Mosque if only we had some support from the rest of the team. Unfortunately whenever we captured the flag, the battles turned into 6 people vs. entire insurgent team.

Suggestion - original BF2 had a "training" voice the first time you would launch the game, telling you where everything was. Could something like this be done for the first time a person becomes a squad leader?

Lothrian wrote:Do it, Go outside, onto a concrete path with a gunish weapon (liek a watergun, airsoft rifle etc) facing a sign about the size of a mans head. Now, stand, and jump forward making sure your belly hits the floor first (just like the animation), holding the gun with both hands and then hit the sign.

You know the science as well as I do ... you cant do it. The diaphram will instantly contract on the shock and wind you. If you use your hands and knees like RL, you will take at least 3 or 4 seconds longer, excluding the ouch factor if your elbows hit first and dislocate.

I meant the way the player moves, not shoots. In AA he drops to the ground like I drop to the floor to watch television. Slowly and lazily. The character also gets up in the same manor.

Most people, especially soldiers, can dive onto their knees/elbows and slide into a lying position really quick. I'm not trying to debate with you but if you have to get down fast, poeple can do it.

I know it's probably blasphemy to say and sure it would not be ideal, but lowering weapon acuracy is probably the most realistic solution.
Now before the over reaction here is why it will help slow things down,...

1. Ammo- more inacurate, more ammo spent, better pick a high percentage shot or use covering fire so someone else can advanceand take a better shot.

2. Wounding- if it takes 2-5 rounds to get a good hit to wound someone and another 2-5 to finish them off shot selection again is important.

3. exposure time- Knowing that it will take a second longer to get a good hit you will have to maximize your cover and minimize your exposure, now fire fights often end before they start as accurate and powerful as the weapons are.

4. No return fire- often you get gunned down without having a chance to react the least little bit, I know it is realistic for this to happen, but with the limited field of periffial vision you have and the massive view distances they are going to have limiting accuracy may help.

5. See farther- now with view distances going up you will be able to see the enemy move at a greater distance, if the engagements move out to greater distances too we could be spending allot of time firing at a corner of a building in hopes the enemy looks arouond the corner as our bullet gets there. With a little less weapon accuracy you can see the enemy in the distance then use movement to counter and ambush the enemy and force a fire fight in a more realistic enviroment.


Just a few thoughts,.......not looking to argue so please don't waste your time rebutting, just offer better sugestions, its obvious about 80% of the community polled so far feels the fire fights could be better. (thats just an observation based on statistics)

gazzthompson wrote:is it me or do firefights end to quick ? i mean i see on news and documentaries firefights going on for hours and like 4/5 people killed or wounded yet on PR firefights r over in seconds with like 6 ppl or more dead ? and in like a hour battle 150/200 on one team! depending on the lvl , now i dont know how to slow this down or if there is a need i just wanted to see if u feel the same ? and if so mabye we could think some ideas up.

discuss please .


i know the speed of the people has been discussed but dont think the actull firefights have.

I agree with you. It just seems that everyone dies so fast and easily. Maybe it's the inadequate situational awareness? I love the amount of bullets it takes to kill someone (i actually would like it to be a little more) so that is not the problem. It's tactics and awareness. And people tend to not value their lives too much in-game.

Maybe increase spawn times? Or have a wave system?

We also need more scary effects so players are afraid of dying. For example much LOUDER bullet wizzes, piffs, and hit effects. Scare the shit out of players just like real soldiers.

com_kieffer wrote:IRL engagements take place at much longer ranges than in PR plus in pr weapons are very stable so you can easily get your shots off at an enemy nearly instantly after you see him. and IRL you don't get noobs running forwards blindly only to get killed seconds after, chopper pilots don't drop you inthe middle of street whilst under fire,...
you could find thousands of reasons for why PR firefights are ended quickly even ARMA hasn't recreated that.

how much longer? I've seen some engagements in PR and it seemed pretty damn far... Any further than that it would be little specs of people.

$kelet0r wrote:I've had moments like that on Fallujah and on Helmand where there have been far more realistic firefights. The problem is the BF2 engine
No weapon sway, no leaning, no dynamic interpretation of cover. In any firefight a huge amount of your body is exposed even when using cover whereas in reality all you would see is the head above the nose and the weapon which at 100+m would be a difficult shot to hit accurately compared to centre mass.

And PRM has RPGs and grenades by the billion, so a firefight is like wandering through a cluster bomb explosion

good points

Armand61685 wrote:how much longer? I've seen some engagements in PR and it seemed pretty damn far... Any further than that it would be little specs of people.

Well over 300 metres unless in urban combat, so very tiny specs of people. Almost like looking at the borrowers.

Attack Helis even more, normally at a range of between 3 and 6 miles (depending on weaponry)
Fighter Planes ... 10-50+miles easy

Long long distances.

here is an engagement of the iran-iraq war. It really shows a long-range battle with not the most accurate AKs. The point of view of those in the video is of Iranians.

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=K6z3jpIDH48

I remember always thinking this ingame.

$kelet0r wrote:1. Force squads to stick together ALL the time as opposed to the voluntary current situation (infantry allowed to move no further than 20m from squad leaders - visual and audio warning prompt when they do)
2. When there is a casualty, the squad must retreat to a rally point and the squad leader must request the player then respawn to simulate carrying the injured to safety and evacuation. Otherwise the dead player must respawn at main base.

That imo would go a long way to changing the manic run-run, gun-gun mentality in the game. Hence not going to be popular at all.

Unrealistic.

Make it so you wait 20 minutes to respawn and THEN people will be conservative with their lives.

jerkzilla wrote:One reason for the low duration of firefights is the poor usage of cover. What I mean by that is that to fire your gun, you have to expose more than half of your body, while in real life, you can just lean but that, I believe, is not possible to code.
Why do people jump out of cover? Well people respawn in the game, while in real life, single player run and gun shooters, you can kill most of the enemy from a distance. So in most cases, when you're forced into a bottleneck or have to few teammates to flank, you have to take the chance and either overrun the enemy or advance to new positions to get the job done. Most times, it ends in failure due to bad timing.
I know a way to stop this from happening: when you die, the game plants a worm on your computer or closes the game and starts defraggin'

Exactly. Cover is too sparse and there needs to be more of it. Also, once the grenadier/Light AT problem is fixed, fire fights should last longer. Also, having larger maps will pretty much solve the fire fight problem because it will take flanking maneuvers and skill to get kills that far away while popping up.

Guerra wrote:Unrealistic.

explain? How is unrealistic for soldiers to remain with their unit at all times and for a squad to retreat when they take casualties?

If only every game had the cover system of Rainbow Six Vegas, where you can take cover against anything. Leaning from cover, blindfiring around corners forcing others to take cover. I could only image what this kind of system would do for Battlefield 2.







“You see things; and you say, 'Why?' But I dream things that never were; and I say, 'Why not?'”

Remember when Rainbow Six was an intelligent, tactical shooter? Like Ghost Recon?

They turned them both into garbage.