Project Reality Forums

dtacs wrote:There is no harm in trying it out with the testing team to see if clients can handle it, IIRC its not that resource intensive as other maps atm.

In comparison to Dragon Fly for example, which has about the same amount of statics but 10x the flora.

Please note that it was decreased for a reason dtacs. Rudd said that he is unaware of any changes that would allow clients to handle longer view distances. That means that when this map had longer VD, the clients could not handle it. Since nothing has changed, if it were to change back, the same problems would be there, and we would have one more insurgency map that nobody could play.

[R-DEV]Rudd wrote:If the clients could handle it, I would increse VD remove 1-2 warriors and add a lynx or merlin, but I'm unaware if there have been any changes that will allow the clients to handle a longer VD on this map since the VD was decreased for a reason.

Gameplay wise, the two indefensible cache spawn locations (the one far north by the river in the two story building by itself and the one in the one in the two story building north of the city in the desert again by itself) and the vast amount of open ground are the biggest problem with the map. When caches spawn anywhere besides in the city (the two indefensible caches notwithstanding) if the British have their armor assets up in any semblance of an intelligent overwatch setup, it is difficult, if not impossible to reinforce outlying cache locations. Infantry and vehicles are slaughtered as they attempt to cross the desert, in effect removing all insurgent pickup kits and vehicle assets from cache defense, other than the four kits that spawn on that cache.

In order to combat this problem, this map needs an adjustment of cache spawn locations and could use a bit more cover in the vast parking lot surrounding the city. I understand that this is a lot of work for the devs, and I do not make this suggestion lightly. To lighten the client side load, it might help to remove some of the destructible structures and go to indestructible statics. The destructible statics are really cool, but often cause more problems than they solve, such as caches being buried in rubble and becoming invisible.

On a separate note, I believe that the British Rifleman Specialist kit needs to be looked at as well. In its current configuration, the shotgun slugs can accurately and lethally engage infantry at ranges of 100-150 meters. Additionally, shotgun slugs are counting as arrests instead of kills, allowing an exploit of the arrest system. I understand the devs' intent that shotguns be allowed to arrest at range, and agree with that sentiment. Without that capability, collaborators would be unbalanced. All other Blufor shotguns that are used for this purpose have an approximate arrest range under 50 meters however. On this map, with this specific weapon system, the British Rifleman Specialist is able to "sniper arrest" insurgents giving the Blufor team an unfair advantage in intelligence points, and putting Insurgent players at a disadvantage in terms of spawn times. I propose that either the shotgun slug system be changed over to not count as an arrest, or the Rifleman Specialist be given an assault rifle as a primary with a shotgun as a secondary, as is the case with every other Blufor Rifleman Specialist kit on every other insurgency map.

Stoickk wrote: On a separate note, I believe that the British Rifleman Specialist kit needs to be looked at as well. In its current configuration, the shotgun slugs can accurately and lethally engage infantry at ranges of 100-150 meters. Additionally, shotgun slugs are counting as arrests instead of kills, allowing an exploit of the arrest system. I understand the devs' intent that shotguns be allowed to arrest at range, and agree with that sentiment. Without that capability, collaborators would be unbalanced. All other Blufor shotguns that are used for this purpose have an approximate arrest range under 50 meters however. On this map, with this specific weapon system, the British Rifleman Specialist is able to "sniper arrest" insurgents giving the Blufor team an unfair advantage in intelligence points, and putting Insurgent players at a disadvantage in terms of spawn times. I propose that either the shotgun slug system be changed over to not count as an arrest, or the Rifleman Specialist be given an assault rifle as a primary with a shotgun as a secondary, as is the case with every other Blufor Rifleman Specialist kit on every other insurgency map.

afaik, 0957 changed so that the shotgun only arrested civis, and killed (+1IP) normal insurgents

I appreciate that information Animal.Mother. That helps somewhat. That still leaves a big loophole in the Collaborator arrest dynamics of this map. In almost all cases in this game, barring ROE violations, as long as Collaborators are doing their job properly and keeping a healthy (>75 meter) cushion between themselves and Blufor forces they can operate as intended as spotters and medics. In the current situation, British Specialists can arrest them from 100-150 meters out, and even farther if certain conditions are right. As previously stated, this gives the British team an unfair advantage in the intelligence gathering game, unfairly hampers collaborator play, and is not in line with other forms of ranged arrest in other insurgency maps.

Never knew the slug was accurate or even able to kill people.. interesting stuff.

Stoickk wrote:Please note that it was decreased for a reason dtacs. Rudd said that he is unaware of any changes that would allow clients to handle longer view distances. That means that when this map had longer VD, the clients could not handle it. Since nothing has changed, if it were to change back, the same problems would be there, and we would have one more insurgency map that nobody could play.

I have never had any issues at all with Basrah, be it FPS or lag wise. Now that I think of it, its one of the most stable maps around.

I have also never heard of any complaints or issues with it, and the testing team is there for a reason. Basrah needs some changes, especially balance ones, meaning there is no harm in editing the map for either public testing or using the Testing Team.

Considering it is now the single oldest map in PR and there were issues back then (some 3 years ago), there have been developments in graphics processing, so a larger view distance could very well be possible.

dtacs, I have done some investigating, I can't find any reason for lag, however it doesnt change the performance reports of the past.

Considering it is now the single oldest map in PR and there were issues back then (some 3 years ago), there have been developments in graphics processing, so a larger view distance could very well be possible.

since then alot of performance intensive assets have also been added

When a map's peformance problem cannot be identified theres not a whole lot one can do except make it smoother on the system.

Yeah I'm just talking ****, a chopper mightn't be necessary when the Mastiff and Jackals are introduced.

well theres unfortunately reason to not put a mastiff or jackal on basrah since the British mission there was before such hardware

anyway, both the jackal and mastiff are hardly in the same niche as a chopper

for now we'll leave it as it is, though I'll be reviewing all the caches for next version

[R-DEV]Rudd wrote:Stealth ask yourself a question

who uses littlebirds?

Deltaforce and other specialist units

are Deltaforce or other specialist units that use littlebirds in PR?

But they're so pretty Maybe add them in more co-op versions (there's one in Karbala but it's BOT locked, hopefully getting fixed on next release)

[R-DEV]Rudd wrote:well theres unfortunately reason to not put a mastiff or jackal on basrah since the British mission there was before such hardware

What about the other bits of Brit kit in PR? ACOGs & Camo etc..? This isn't Project Historical Accuracy remember.

Smeggie wrote:What about the other bits of Brit kit in PR? ACOGs & Camo etc..? This isn't Project Historical Accuracy remember.

We have a plan to fix that in the future

Back to SUSAT's and old kit geos then eh?

Smeggie wrote: This isn't Project Historical Accuracy remember.

It should be, think of the possibilities.



Or just keep it like it is since it seems balance is more important than accuracy.