Further incorporation of logistics

[=]H[=CubCadet1972]

Good Idea.

[Tannhauser]

It would need some serious thought and tweaking.


Imagine the current Jabal for example. The US blows the bridge near Jabal, and suddenly it's impossible for the MEC to spawn south of the river because the truck can't get there.

Solution : Jabal 2

Solution for other maps : uh.. Same

[Zrix]

Solution : Jabal 2

Solution for other maps : uh.. Same

Yea of course. And like you said it goes for other maps as well.
So implementing this would require some heavy testing and map reworks/remakes - so it's a huge workload to take on if it's decided to implement this into PR.

[Arnoldio]

Yea of course. And like you said it goes for other maps as well.
So implementing this would require some heavy testing and map reworks/remakes - so it's a huge workload to take on if it's decided to implement this into PR.

Or, the bridge needs to be defended in some way.

Wich gets players from the battlefield wich is :/.

[killonsight95]

It would need some serious thought and tweaking.


Imagine the current Jabal for example. The US blows the bridge near Jabal, and suddenly it's impossible for the MEC to spawn south of the river because the truck can't get there.

Jabal 2 will be in the next ver this fixes that problem, but other maps yes this may be a problem on other maps, remember heli's can also drop crates

[Murkey]

A very interesting idea.

Although thought would have to be put into how to prevent crate spamming. I remember reading that the number of supply crates is limited to so many per vehicle to prevent server crashes (something like that (I may have been out drinking earlier)).

[killonsight95]

A very interesting idea.

Although thought would have to be put into how to prevent crate spamming. I remember reading that the number of supply crates is limited to so many per vehicle to prevent server crashes (something like that (I may have been out drinking earlier)).

possibly if not that can be introduced also increase the reload time of crates
also:

It would need some serious thought and tweaking.


Imagine the current Jabal for example. The US blows the bridge near Jabal, and suddenly it's impossible for the MEC to spawn south of the river because the truck can't get there.

you can, theres the DAM, also just make the birdge undamagable or repairble

[HAAN4]

Not a bad idea at all...but the REAL question is whether it's possible with the engine?

it's possible, spawn and suply are both cocepts that DEV domain, so i guess they are alerdy ninja in this stuff.

I Suport this sugestion. it will make the game real sirius about suply assets, but it is where the PR is going. a REAL SIRIUS RTS/ESTRATEGI game.

[Beowulf2525]

Great idea, as mentioned numerous times before, it would really increase teamwork and make FOB's more realistic.

[Rudd]

I'm really not sure about this, sounds convoluted tbh.

I'd worry about the amount of attention taken from the front line, both in supply providers and in people trying to kill supply providers.

its always annoying when your trying to get a 50cal position up that someone accidentally destroyed an ammo crate preventing you

I'd much rather make supply more important by giving bonuses rather than penalties to the current system, but I feel I receive that already by just being able to pump ammo at the enemy without having to worry in the short term.

To make supply more important its quite simple imo, require 4 (2 logi trucks/4helis) crates for a TOW/AA, 3 (2 logi trucks/3helis) Crates for 50cals and 2 crates for all teh rest.

[Tartantyco]

I'm really not sure about this, sounds convoluted tbh.

I'm not sure how it's convoluted.

I'd worry about the amount of attention taken from the front line, both in supply providers and in people trying to kill supply providers.

1. This wouldn't take any more attention from the "front line" than what logistics does right now, it would just make logistics a more important role and add dependencies. I'm also not sure how trying to kill supply providers is any different from trying to kill FOBs, or ambushing armor behind enemy lines, or any of the other things that happen in the game already. You're describing things that already happen in-game and then treating them as if they would suddenly become an issue if this were implemented.

its always annoying when your trying to get a 50cal position up that someone accidentally destroyed an ammo crate preventing you

This is in no way unique to the proposal, it can happen already.

I'd much rather make supply more important by giving bonuses rather than penalties to the current system, but I feel I receive that already by just being able to pump ammo at the enemy without having to worry in the short term.

It's about adding dependencies, not penalizing or rewarding. Dependencies can be targeted on the map and so they become strategic and tactical assets, as opposed to flags that simply force strategic value to something that doesn't really have it. You're giving the players ability to decide the value of something, as opposed to it being enforced by the game(Another example of this would be firebases themselves. The player is given the choice of where spawns are placed and other assets along with them, as opposed to spawns being on specific positions, which limits the game.). It means games will be more varied.

To make supply more important its quite simple imo, require 4 (2 logi trucks/4helis) crates for a TOW/AA, 3 (2 logi trucks/3helis) Crates for 50cals and 2 crates for all teh rest.

That would be my example of an annoyance. It doesn't make it important, it simply increases its frequency. A time sink.

[Tartantyco]

It would need some serious thought and tweaking.


Imagine the current Jabal for example. The US blows the bridge near Jabal, and suddenly it's impossible for the MEC to spawn south of the river because the truck can't get there.

You can still get up on the west hills and that bridge should seriously be indestructible, but yes. Serious thought and tweaking should probably be required for everything .

[Haji with a Handgun]

I fully support this idea 250%.

[dtacs]

Jabal 2 will be in the next ver

Source on this?

[Ford_Jam]

Dtacs: https://www.realitymod.com/forum/f354-community-maps/68894-map-jabal-2-4km-wip.html

[dtacs]

Dtacs: https://www.realitymod.com/forum/f354-c ... m-wip.html

Where does it say its confirmed for being in the next version? I thought it was just a community map?

[Teek]

Where does it say its confirmed for being in the next version? I thought it was just a community map?

How about the fact that was publicly beta tested by on the R-DEV killhouse? And it's not like the next version is a few weeks away

[killonsight95]

anyway jabal 2 an;'t the main topic of convo here, i really do support this idea, i hate it when a firebase get popped up in the middle of nowhere.

[myles]

anyway jabal 2 an;'t the main topic of convo here, i really do support this idea, i hate it when a firebase get popped up in the middle of nowhere.

whats so bad about an FOB in the middle of nowhere and how will it solve not being in the middle of nowhere?

[gaurd502]

IT can be in the middle of no were, but if you put it somewhere you cant reach easily there's no way to keep it supplied. You cant just get to the top of a mountain once, drop crates then forget about it.