Project Reality Forums

@ Chechen to Militia complainers,

This was done so at the request of our mappers. They wanted a more generic team that would allow for a variety of conflicts.

MOD's should probably lock this, since these discussions will end up nowhere.

At the moment some of the maps do all look a bit free-for-all. Would be nice to have some semblance of reality given to the conflicts between the factions in the future. I don't mind US versus China and other ones as there is some back-story but versus the Russians as well? May as well add US versus Israel maps and Insurgent versus Militia maps.
My main opposition to free-for-all over all of PR (I know some are placeholders) is the lack of back-story of why they are fighting (it was explained in some of the old map descriptions).

I will get used to it though Im sure

It's just a different name for the same faction.

I just dont see whats the big deal in changing TWO maps(Kozelsk and Iron ridge) back to Chechens? Just give them the flag back. I think its the way out. I dont get why change all chechens to militia. Bewildered.

i am still waiting for the day where people in forums can talk without thinking about their nationality, comeon guys, can't you just be smart enough, and forget about national politics when posting in this forum, it really could make things easyer

Maxfragg wrote:i am still waiting for the day where people in forums can talk without thinking about their nationality, comeon guys, can't you just be smart enough, and forget about national politics when posting in this forum, it really could make things easyer

It just feels empty with militia, I would feel the same with US and USMC maps if insurgents were changed to militia, dont get me wrong. Thats all.

This is awsome, the new maps looks great and I love that canada will be playable.

My only concern is that the more 4km maps there is the more my computer will lag...

Does this happen at every large release, I've only been playing since .84 so this is my first major update

maps look awesome

alec89 wrote:It just feels empty with militia, I would feel the same with US and USMC maps if insurgents were changed to militia, dont get me wrong. Thats all.

Use your Imagination. Imagine they have the Chechen flag and ride Unicorns into battle and just play this awesome mod we have been provided for free. Not hard at all.

wth about this for free. makes no sense in context.

Bellator wrote:This is a contradiction:

You're absolutely correct, my views contradict those of the PR team in general.

Bellator wrote:I find it funny that the anti-MEC folks always like gripe that the MEC is fictional, which is true, but if PR is about realistic gameplay, not realistic depiction of politics, why care about the fiction of MEC? It doesn't affect gameplay. It improves it, I think, because the MEC is easily the most enjoyable conventional factions in PR, with some of the best weapons and art in the game.

My point is that every other faction in PR is based on an actual army meaning the MEC are a complete contradiction of the general theme of PR. There is another theme in PR, which is that scenarios do not have to be 100% authentic (and by authentic I mean happening currently in RL, which seems to be what many people in this thread want).

Bellator wrote:I, for one, would very much like to see a fourth MEC map included. IMO. The Russians should be removed from the Israeli maps, and be replaced with MEC. Its a complete stretch to have Russians fighting the Israelis when no such war has ever occured. Karbala insurgency, as I suggested in the suggestion box, should become an insurgency map for the MEC since the US army already has Ramiel.

I disagree that it is a stretch to have Russians fighting IDF, as already stated the two factions have clashed in RL and the potential for a storyline explaining the involvment of the two factions is massive. PR officially does not create such background but that does not mean the potential isn't there.

We're also talking about gameplay here and what is best for PR gameplay. In essence therefore we are debating something that we have not yet played and therefore really have no right to comment on until it has been tried. You never know but the IDF v Russia combination could prove to be one of the most enjoyable match ups in the game

During testing for the map one of the developers (I forget who, possibly DB) made the valid and exciting point that Beirut is going to be a fantastic showpiece for PR; an entirely new and unique map being fought over by two completely custom factions that have been designed and created by the community from the base up. I can't think of anything more exciting.

Me personally don't give two flying sheets about name for "Militia faction". In fact, "Chechens" was wrong name because nation of Chechnya was never united against federal armed forces, there was always armed opposition to separatist regime inside chechen republic, thus faction couldn't be called "Chechens".

Plus idea behind "Militia" is to represent different paramilitary groups around the world, not just one group in North Caucasus.

Renaming "Chechens" to "Militia" won't confuse me when I'll be aiming at enemy fighter, for me it still would be "vakhabit".

alec89 wrote:I just dont see whats the big deal in changing TWO maps(Kozelsk and Iron ridge) back to Chechens? Just give them the flag back. I think its the way out. I dont get why change all chechens to militia. Bewildered.

Dont see whats the big deal about it being Milita? Its just a flag colour and name. The faction itself is still exactly the same. First everyone ******* about it being UK vs Chechans, and now that they got rid of them and made it militia which they were to begin with people start bitching instead about it being that again.

'= wrote:H[=ElvishKnight;1241847']Dont see whats the big deal about it being Milita? Its just a flag colour and name. The faction itself is still exactly the same. First everyone ******* about it being UK vs Chechans, and now that they got rid of them and made it militia which they were to begin with people start bitching instead about it being that again.

Fail... I meant only Rus vs Che maps should remain with Chechen rebels being the opfor, and leave the militia for GB. He changed the flag in like couple seconds, why is it so hard to change it back on only two maps?! lol.

Or atleast put a flag that actually exists and means something, like the foreign international mujahedeen flag.
Like here. http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Arab_Mujah ... n_Chechnya

Not fail, no use having two different factions that are in essense the same exact thing with no differences aside from name and flag. At least US Army and USMC have different skins and weapons. Keeping it as Militia makes it more diverse and lets the imagination go on. By all rights it was a chechan militia anyways, not official forces being represented.

w/e..... I give up.

PS:What makes it more diverse is when you add some real life factions. Adding in fictional factions makes less attractive and less immersive.

[R-DEV]Nosferatu wrote: Renaming "Chechens" to "Militia" won't confuse me when I'll be aiming at enemy fighter, for me it still would be "vakhabit".

militia flag reminds ossetian a lot.