Project Reality Forums

No, no, no, no, no. How many times do people have to say this in this thread before this overly vocal minority gets the point? This is an objectively bad idea. It will cause no small degree of teamkills, and it will turn this game into an aggravating mess and give everyone eye strain from trying to figure if those 3 pixels 100m away from them are friendly or enemy.

Sure, realism-wise having maps showing friendly positions aren't accurate. But as everyone else has repeated ad nauseum, in real life you don't have squads of 6-8 guys moving randomly through an area crossing each others paths constantly. Real war is a lot more coordinated than PR can ever, ever hope to be without giving everyone 6 months of formal basic training before allowing them to play.

Anyone who wants this to happen is an unaware masochist.

DDS wrote:I think it's time for this change to occur. Squad leader/Pilot (in cockpit) and Commander should only be the ones with maps. It's coming eventually I think. The community is ready for this as we have adapted often times ahead of the game itself. We need the teamwork aspect pushed up to the forefront. Squad leaders and Commanders put into their proper place in PR.

I remember when the radar map (upper right) was removed back in what was it 0.6? There was a lot of rage but we all adapted and here we are. I think it is at least worth a test to see it's effects.

I agree. I'm ready to boost up the realism meter making it so that a commander is essential for the success of a team. The team that does not have a commander... lose.

I would even say that the pilots should not be able to see friendly's on the map. CAS would then be targeting vehicles, grids from SL's, landmarks etc. instead of just firing mindlessly onto a flag that is being lost just because no friendly's are near it on the map.

To take it one step further and also make insurgent commanders important....they should be the only ones who can see the cache locations (of-course then the cache spawn would have to be remade), then people swapping at game start wouldn't be able to sneak-peak on the unknowns.

A few other things that would be prevented is to have friends on the other team reporting enemy locations. This of course shouldn't happen but how can you tell that it isn't happening when it is so easy to accomplish and so difficult to track?


Tk would sky-rocket in the beginning probably.... but eventually people would be less trigger happy when they start to get warning of being kicked.
I use the map more than i use my trigger-finger when im infantry so I would have to get used to it.... but I'm sure ill adapt soon enough. It would feel more natural and you won't lower your guard with a map in your face all the time.

SnakeTheFox wrote:It will cause no small degree of teamkills, and it will turn this game into an aggravating mess and give everyone eye strain from trying to figure if those 3 pixels 100m away from them are friendly or enemy.

...................

Anyone who wants this to happen is an unaware masochist.

if the enemy/friendly is 3 pixels and you don't have the means to identify him.... don't shoot. It is quite simple really. Avoid him or move closer to investigate.

Squad-leaders number should be one that a SL would be able to place as a "static" on the map so that his squad and other squads had a general idea of where he is the same way that he can place markers where the enemy is.

lone wolfs would be hunted geese of-course... but they don't belong in PR anyway

There is plenty of dooms-day preachers that has come and said something every time a big change has occurred....but PR just keeps on making it's stand that is far far away from other combat fps games, and that keeps it going.



Vehicles and kit's cannot be used by the enemy..............OMG OMG what???

Medics cannot heal themselves (bug fix).................................NOOOOOOOOO!!!!!

Tags are removed...................... WTF!!!!1

SnakeTheFox wrote:No, no, no, no, no. How many times do people have to say this in this thread before this overly vocal minority gets the point? This is an objectively bad idea. It will cause no small degree of teamkills, and it will turn this game into an aggravating mess and give everyone eye strain from trying to figure if those 3 pixels 100m away from them are friendly or enemy.

Perhaps we should be able to spot enemy so they get little red triangles over their heads for our teammates to shoot and follow into bushes. That would reduce TKs and the enemy will have nowhere to hide! *sarcasm*

Seriously. One step at a time. We probably need hardcore/vanilla versions of PR.

Would be very interesting if there was both modes which one would be populated the most.

Gracler wrote:if the enemy/friendly is 3 pixels and you don't have the means to identify him.... don't shoot. It is quite simple really. Avoid him or move closer to investigate.

You beat me to it Gracler. I laughed hard on his statement.
White knuckled fear and loathing at the prospect of having to identify the enemy and formulate objectives/tactics. If squad lead had map you could just ask him to help identify. Or you could just shoot at it and see!

I think removing map would improve both teamplay and realism.

What I'd like to see:
-grunt - black map with a grid only (for reference when spawning)
-SL - topographic map without friendly positions
-commander - fully functional map as it is now

This change should make people much more reliable on their SLs (no more lonewolfing when you have no clue where to go). Also having a commander would be mandatory, as in this case he is the only way to ensure coordination of a "blind" team, just like IRL.

Although I do not think it would help much with the mod's popularity I would love to see this change to further increase the importance of communication within the team.

Anything that makes SLs talk to each other and makes the CO important is good for me, as long as it isn't construed.

The point people seem to be deliberately missing with their selective cognitive dissonance, is that in real life you don't have errant squads of 6-8 people running around willy nilly in a forest. The gameplay of PR is inherently incompatible with this change, and to squeeze it in there are a million smaller things that must go along with it. In real life using formations and complex far-reaching strategy nullifies most problems that would be encountered in PR such as friendly fire.

The problem is that there is no way to get random players on the internet to react and communicate with the same degree of ruthless efficiency that military personnel are literally trained and drilled over a great many months for. Mistakes will constantly be made, errors and miscommunications will be absolutely rife, and it will bog the game down far too heavily. I've played with numerous realism-oriented groups in other games like Red Orchestra and ArmA 2 that attempt to have this form of realism, and play solely private matches against similarly practiced opponents, have mandatory training and familiarization of command structure, and even they are frequently over-encumbered and inarticulate in execution. To expect the same from random players in a public setting? That's insane.

My point, and you're free to brush this off and "laugh at it" if that makes you feel better, is that you cannot selectively pick and choose realistic components to integrate simply on the fact that they're realistic, because there are certain factors in this game that will never be realistic and these need to be taken into consideration and concessions must be made in the favor of functional gameplay.

There are certain necessary unrealisms that must be permitted to compensate for the fact that certain things are simply not within the scope of a video game, no matter how hard it may try. In this case in particular, the realism/necessary unrealism clash comes from the fact that random players in a video game cannot be expected to act with the same degree of constant communication and incredible efficiency in movement/formation as trained officers in a military setting, who work within a rigid and nonfluctuating chain of command, and this would be a necessary thing if we want to avoid the numerous friendly fire incidents that would come about as a result of this change.

You're free to say otherwise and to disagree, but there's a reason places like West Point exist, and it isn't to teach people how to make better coffee.

Agreed with FireFox. You guys seem to forget all the stuff that comes with the fact that this is a video game.

Bugs
Crashes (losing SL)
Ping
People's mood
Language

Imagine how much of an hassle it would be....

Pvt.LHeureux wrote:Agreed with FireFox. You guys seem to forget all the stuff that comes with the fact that this is a video game.

Bugs
Crashes (losing SL)
Ping
People's mood
Language

Imagine how much of an hassle it would be....

Losing the SL mostly render a Squad useless as it is today since there is so few that can/want to lead.

Language is only a problem for very few people.... English is spoken by almost everyone, it is another matter that some refuse to use English

People's mood... well I could imagine that my mood would be sometimes to have the map enabled.... so a toggle server feature bottom could be nice.

Bugs and Crashes.... I'm more worried about exploits/hacks tbh. Bugs I can live with. Yesterday I spotted a guy going 250km/h in a logitruck on the beta server....wtf.



A test is what this idea needs to see if it as bad as a lot seems to fear. Like 1 week with no maps... the awesomeness of the new PR launcher/updater could make that happen.

If you remove the minimap (or at least the icon of the players) then this mod will need ALOT of changes, I mean, I like how it is right now, but removing the icons from the minimap will just be like Arma.

I don't think it is a bad idea, but I don't support it, it is a Battlefield 2 mod, I don't think this mod will be good if it is made like arma, it's just two different things.

Pvt.LHeureux wrote:Agreed with FireFox. You guys seem to forget all the stuff that comes with the fact that this is a video game.

Bugs
Crashes (losing SL)
Ping
People's mood
Language

Imagine how much of an hassle it would be....

I couldn't understand any of what Firefox said.. Sorry. But I appreciate your opinion. Your points are relevant only if certain things are locked in. Were talking about trying these things out first (alpha, beta) to see how and if it could work. Most of those issues could be worked out. Squad lead wouldn't necessarily need officers kit for use of the map. Ping, Language are issues regardless of any change.

Lugi wrote:I think removing map would improve both teamplay and realism.

What I'd like to see:
-grunt - black map with a grid only (for reference when spawning)
-SL - topographic map without friendly positions
-commander - fully functional map as it is now

This change should make people much more reliable on their SLs (no more lonewolfing when you have no clue where to go). Also having a commander would be mandatory, as in this case he is the only way to ensure coordination of a "blind" team, just like IRL.

I like this as a starting point. But with squad leader having a more functional map. I've already got used to no binoculars and rely heavily now on my squad leader. Squad leaders. You'll need to step up your game BIG TIME.

The point people seem to be deliberately missing with their selective cognitive dissonance, is that in real life you don't have errant squads of 6-8 people running around willy nilly in a forest.

Maybe they're running around in a forest willy nilly BECAUSE of the decreased danger due to being visible on the map? Maybe squads will cooperate and communicate more if everyone's location isn't immediately available.

The problem is that there is no way to get random players on the internet to react and communicate with the same degree of ruthless efficiency that military personnel are literally trained and drilled over a great many months for.

People are perfectly capable of communicating at an acceptable level for the kind of teamwork this mod requires. Again, maybe this isn't happening very often in the game BECAUSE it gives them the tools to operate individually with little fear of being teamkilled. There is no incentive to cooperate at this level, hence there is no cooperation on that level.

Achieving a higher level of organization, communication, and teamwork in PR is easily accomplished, but there have to be incentives for that to happen. If people can lonewolf they will lonewolf.

Things like removing friendly positions expands the gameplay options available to players in PR as recon becomes more important, as inter-squad communication becomes more important, as local communication becomes more important.

The way the updates are applied... I say it's worth trying. If only for testing.

no no no no no no no no no no NO

Terrible idea. It has been raised countless times too.

Minimap= awareness. This isn't real life, you aren't already briefed on where to go, you don't have communication with other squads or fireteams, and you are not moving in a large formation such as a platoon. How are you supposed to know what and who is around you when moving? Even if your squad saw everyone in your squad, what about if they wanted to heal someone or were told to help out with another squad or something? There are too many opportunities for this to backfire because most players lack awareness already.

The minimap is even more important for when you have no commander. Face it, no one likes going Commander anymore, and even if people do, you can't place the outcome of a game solely on 1 person.

When I am SL and want to coordinate with other squads, how do I do it? Check my minimap and tell my squad to form up with another squad so we can move together. If all I see as a SL is just another SL, how am I to know he even has a squad there with him or if they are scattered across the map????

THIS!

how am I to know he even has a squad there with him or if they are scattered across the map????

You could always try asking him...

This is what I mean, we forego the need for communication and teamwork on these basic levels and as a consequence it does not carry over to the rest of the game. All the issues people bring up here are easily solved through more teamwork, more cooperation, more organization. That, in turn, improves the gameplay as a whole.

SnakeTheFox wrote:It will cause no small degree of teamkills, and it will turn this game into an aggravating mess and give everyone eye strain from trying to figure if those 3 pixels 100m away from them are friendly or enemy.

You'd have to do it the way it's always been done. Call someone to take a better look, or ask your SL to talk to other SLs about their areas of operation. Confirm enemy, then take them out.

Sure, realism-wise having maps showing friendly positions aren't accurate. But as everyone else has repeated ad nauseum, in real life you don't have squads of 6-8 guys moving randomly through an area crossing each others paths constantly.

PR is sized down. Can't help that. Treat a squad as a platoon, just reduced in size (two-man fireteams = a squad IRL). Sorry, that is just the way it is, unless you want to only play skirmish mode with infantry.

Real war is a lot more coordinated than PR can ever, ever hope to be without giving everyone 6 months of formal basic training before allowing them to play.

Hopefully those with experience can take on responsible roles (CO, SL) and make the team work as it should.

Okay this would create a shitload of small annoying scenarios. Imagine this :

You join a server, join a squad. Your mumble is derping, so you can't communicate with your squad untill you spawn, but you can't see them on the map, so you don't know where they are. You spawn at some random place, communicate with your squad now that mumble is synching and they say they're in G3 when you spawned in A4.. Suicide time yeaaaa.

Imagine playing medic lol.

^^ This happens all the time already without any changes yet. Nothing to see here.