Project Reality Forums

I posted in a similar thread a while ago.... Its going work and play find on TG. Its not on a lot of other servers.

00SoldierofFortune00 wrote:Hence why this beta/implentation is really bad. It goes back to the old vanilla tactic of forcing your SL to hide and having less players on the field. I can be a supporting role without hiding in the corner, but this change forces SLs to go back to vanilla ways. Even then, it makes the SL, and more importantly, squads less important since there is no use for them with no RPs. Do you really think there is a need to be in a squad when you won't even have the benefit of spawning with them 90% of the time? Tell, what is the major advantage to this besides the "hypothetical/what ifs" that are more than likely to not hold true? Squads won't be "forced" to stay together anymore than they are now. The upping of the respawn since time since vanilla didn't really force players to "value their life more", so why would it magically do it now?

I cannot comment too much on the beta changes, as I've only played the very first beta that completely removed the rallypoint. But, it seems like they're trying to make it so if the majority of your squad(including SL) stays alive, they can fall back and when they dead members are ready to spawn, they set a point and go from there. Forcing the leader to put his life above those of his squad members. Isn't that how it's done in real life? Protect the leaders?

And at a team level, squads would have to rely on maintaining FOBs. Which really helps the supporting squads. Sniper/spotter teams, AT teams, recon, logistics, etc all can make use of these forward spawn points. In the current version, they're forced to spawn at main and move from their, as it is not always feasible to have a squad leader kit, or work closely with your squad mates. I know, it's hard to understand these things being good gameplay and teamwork, but outside of typical infantry squads, crazy things can happen.

00SoldierofFortune00 wrote:As for your question, it makes no sense. How would running in blindly help my team? If we really needed to take a control point, I would tell my squad to keep pushing, but if I feel that we are losing too many tickets, I will tell them to back off, no matter what the Commander says. I always think about both squad and team, but the best way I can help my team is by leading my squad. Face it, individual squads that attack together or coordinate over teamchat are what gets wins in PR, not a whole team that just happens to move together. IMO, the best way you can help your team is by leading your own individual squads or having good individual squads and worrying about your team's tickets. FOBs should be built and are a given.

Taking a control point is not always the best way to win an overall battle. If you cannot hold that point and move ahead, sometimes it's the worst thing you could do.

An example of how a squad rushing at an enemy would benefit the overall team, would be if the team was also attempting to flank, or sabotage the supply line, or take out a key asset, etc. The assaulting squad would draw attention away from the real target.

I just dislike this idea you have of PR, a bunch of individual squads working towards a common goal. I would rather it be a game where teamwork is the key to a strong team, supporting each other like they do in the real world.

I guess we have different visions for the future of PR.

Dr2B Rudd wrote:this is the main benefit imo, and it makes for much better and more fluid gameplay.

This will not destroy PR imo.

Yes TG is definately a better server than most, but too many people are willing to accept **** servers these days. If I don't get some teamwork (as opposed to just squad work) within 30mins of playing I leave the server. Too many servers are full of squads working well as a squad, but completely independantly of the rest of the team. When that happens...you might as well be playing in a 6v6. I'd rather see a smaller playerbase who really want to teamwork than a huge playerbase and having to search for gems of teamwork.

Im with Rudd here, the rounds I played on the tactical gamer server with the beta patch were just awesome.

One thing that the RP change brings is the greater fear of dying. Now you really have to be carefull, really have to be tactical and stealthy. I am also a SL allot of the time, and I gotta say I like this change.

In my opinion MUMBLE + 8740D = WIN!

I could live with no rallies on AAS in some cases its fun to try and sneak around without being shot but other times it just gets annoying having to walk a mile every time you die. On insurgency though no rallies is horrible. FOBs are static caches are not. Having to build a new FOB every single time a cache spawns is pretty lame plus you have to wast manpower defending that fob and the insurgents will most likely assault the FOB making it impossible to leave.

In my opinion MUMBLE + 8740D = WIN!

Good point there, mumble helps create impromptu teamwork, when you've spawned on a FB you can link up with a friendly squad thats heading your way sometimes this creates the best teamwork I've ever seen as players really enjoy having say...a 9 man squad instead of 6 Alot of fun. It might be why I think the beta is so much fun, as I never play without mumble.

Though I think alot of players really enjoy RP gameplay, this isn't necessarily a bad thing though I wish to play without them. Since this is a server side change...I really don't see a huge problem in having a Hardcore/Non-Hardcore division in PR. I wonder if we could use the ranked/unranked server setting to differentiate the servers in the server list. That way everyone is happy, the hardcore playerbase have their gameplay, the more casual gamers have their gameplay, and sometimes I'm sure each will cross over for their dose of variety.

If we're lucky, it will just destroy the bad servers.
I think the changes has made the game better.

Nimise wrote:I could live with no rallies on AAS in some cases its fun to try and sneak around without being shot but other times it just gets annoying having to walk a mile every time you die. On insurgency though no rallies is horrible. FOBs are static caches are not. Having to build a new FOB every single time a cache spawns is pretty lame plus you have to wast manpower defending that fob and the insurgents will most likely assault the FOB making it impossible to leave.

i think that insurgency is hmm,****.some maps are bad and its very rare that when you playing at ins side,theres teamwork.i dont call that tactics that your team throws those mines,trap almost everywhere that whole map is filled those redmarkers.and after all what i have played US side insurgency,thats almost like this.
take supplytruck,drive it 100 meters away from the city...then just endlessly run in to city and kill/die and maybe little bit search caches.

I have posted this message obviously in the wrong thread (Public Testing Feedback Forums) lol. I'll paste it.

"You can have 25 different tests (to 0.874Z lol) to suit the players gamestyle but I think it is the opposite, the players should fit to the current gamestyle.

A lot of people argue how these changes kill the game and its gameplay but it is because they are playing the same way they have been playing for a long time (relying too much on RP's).
The issue is not on the side of the server, the beta tests (no RP, more FOB, etc.). It is on the side of the players who have to adapt themselves, find new startegy or just find a new gamestyle.

Don't you think a game (or anything else) gets boring if it is always the same thing, again and again and again and again....

You can't disagree with me when I say that this doesn't bring new colors along with vivid discussions."

Rudd ftw!
Forest maps like fools road or qwai with rallies make me puke, u never feel like u won cuz ppl keep coming to the same place knowing where u are about 90 seconds after u keel them. It becomes too repetitive, just like spawn-rush-kill&die-repeat in vBF2 Inf Karkand.
0.874B was teh best, and I'd like to see less people instead of many vBF2 LMG/Sniper whores.

Statement by OP:The rallypoint changes will lead to troubles for newbies

Answer: Your wrong. No rallies is newbie friendly, not the other way around. Just click on the spawnpoint (fob) and you spawn there. Whats so difficult about it? When i first joined a training server it was the rallies I didnt figure out at first, why cant I spawn at squads 3 rally etc. Now that rallies are drastically reduced (beta D), that confusion is almost gone. All this stuff will be in the manual anyway, so you have gotten the issue around the back of your foot (swedish expression; basically your statement is wrong.).

Ps. FOBs are everywhere in the BETA so the amount of walking will not increase that much.

As i said, and i believe this is true...

Bad rounds are bad with or without RPs, epic ones are so much better with no RPs.

Its has their pros and cons for me. I dont agree with rallies mimicking flanking maneuvers etc, they mimmic total randomeness depending on where the rallypoints are deployed.

In fact I think the game feels more realistic to me.

What I do like about the rallies, the help to simulate that a sizeable force is involved. If you have an engagement you do not clear a position killing 2-5 guys either, but hopefully as player rely on firebases more, they will simulate that part.

Actually without rallies I feel the need to be more careful and that slows down the gameplay which makes the game more fun to play. Removing RP's won't destroy PR, it will only force players to be more careful and think about their decisions before they go into a firefight. Also it makes logistics way more important.

i think it improves game play. i love it.

Seriously exaggerating the issue here, nothing is going to 'destroy PR'.

Don't you think, just hypothetically, that if some change was so awful it destroyed the game and made everyone leave, that they might just reverse said change?

I'm sorry, but that title is idiotic to unimaginable proportions.

I disagree with everything you have said. It's a whine thread done clearly by a CSS bunny-hopper insta spawn rambo.

I was never really drawn to PR until the RP's were put up, i loved the system, but i agree, the only people staying will be the hardcore military sim enthusiasts, where as the ones who play for fun will move on. Don't they have Arma II, i never really heard anything about that realistic sim, shouldn't it be doing awesome?

I liked it when I played it. But could you give the server an option? Then the people who want RPs can join those and people who don't join the ones who have them set to the new settings.

gaurd502 wrote:I liked it when I played it. But could you give the server an option? Then the people who want RPs can join those and people who don't join the ones who have them set to the new settings.

i dont like at all serverside option.there should be some other gamemode what uses rallypoint system.

im with soldieroffortune on this topic,, especially in insurgency mode, i can foree the future being about defending fob's not hunting caches,, insurgents simply have to destroy an fob and they know the blufor will be coming outa their main and set ambush upon ambush,,, i didnt really mind having a rp up for 1 min but the fact it needs to be recharged is ridiculous. dont call me selfish for saying this but wtf is the point of waiting who knows how long jus so ur SL can recharge and put a rally down and u all spawn in in the name of teamwork,how frustrating is it going to be when u wait this long then right when hes about to put it down he gets shot , people r going to be going rambo and either lonewolfing or jus staying at fob to defend until rp is recharged ? i really despise this new system and hope it gets thrown in the garbage,, the current rp system is near perfect and encourages teamwork in the squad,, the only suggestion i could give to use more teamwork with rally points is to not make them deployable say 300-500m away from nearest FOB