Completely Removing the map with friendly positions for infantry

[Zander]

Think it's interesting idea.
Would try it in a way of open testing, to see what gameplay will receive as a result.

[Arab]

Closed Testing, otherwise it's a pain for the developers.

[qubolo]

-cas mindlesly firing on objectives because no friendlies on map

-no i dont think tk will skyrocket as most of you are speculating. well it will happen if you are stupid guy that
wnats to shoot whatever he sees on the screen. I Don't think people are that retarded, to shoot every thing they see
just because they happen to see it. But if you feel that urge to shoot everything maybe its time to switch games, to
prefferably bf3

-it will be more interesting if you will have to confirm your targets as oppose to instantly see the difference
between enemy and friendly. it will definitely bring some new values to the gameplay, and strengthen the feeling of
actual military operations.


-trouble of identifying units that are far away, will bring tactics and strategy more signifficance because you wont
be shooting those previously mentioned 3 pixels if they are not your main objective, and if they are, then i dont
think there will be any problem with identifying it through SL channel

-People will be more afraid of getting friendly fired thus forced to COMMUNICATE MORE, even those who tend to stay
silent will be just forced to do comms. And that is a huge step forward!!!!!!!

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.

Are you trying to say that IRL friendly fires don't happen? what an utter nonsense. And the changes, that the lack
of map would bring, would be just those strategies you are talking about. Just more simple ones.

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.

Remember we are talking PR here not bf3/cod
People don't communicate over SL enough already, I think it's time to change it. And one of the options is to remove
the map to force them to communicate. Comms are not that hard, you just have to speak.

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.

It doesn't have to be reallistic as long as it provides the game with better gameplay and teamplay focused tactics
and that change does both.

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.

Then it's time for all those random people to adapt to those chnges that will make pr alot better game.

I don't think removing icons from a map is a good idea, because now in 1.0 beta you cant see player name above his head and I do see quite a lot teamkills, most of the times, when you go around some corner and you see someone right in front of you, you have to shoot or you have to take your time and identity your target and sometimes thats what get you killed and at long ranges its even harder to identify your targets. Lets say you see friendly and enemy squad fighting together at CQB from further away, how would you identify your targets correctly and quickly? Maybe some squad member try to flank around and gets shoot by friendlies, because he was in a wrong place at the wrong time?

Well reloading your weapon sometimes is what gets you killed, should we remove that feature for the sake of gameplay improvement? The fact that it is not a convenient thing to do, doesn't make it a valid argument for removing it.

And where does it say that identifying targets has to be correct and quick? what makes correct and quick identification more fun than its opposite?

[Arc_Shielder]

What about admins?

Remember that not all reports are tk based. It would be a haven for players that like to cause havoc by destroying friendly FOBs, roadkill, mainbase camping, multiple asset wasting and so on.

In association with nametag removal this will make the experience of admins much harder and our response significantly slower if not impossible in some cases.

I liked the nametag removal. And I find this idea interesting as well, but we have to be pragmatic somewhat and start discussing it from this point of view: unless a solution is found for admins alone to see everyone on the map, this is not feasible.

[doop-de-doo]

Dunno, but one might be able to code up a script to make note of who destroyed what/killed who on friendly teams.

[Vicious302]

Arturus, I've never really seen friendlies destroying FOBs, and I've seen a lot of smack tarding. Sure there is the accidental gary, ied, cas strike, etc. Roadkill should be allowed because it helps make sure people don't walk around on the road without support. Squad screen also shows you who is in cars. Mainbase camping... if it's a sniper then you can still see who has that kit. Asset waste generally isn't a huge problem either, happens, no doubt, but you can still deduce who wasted what if you really need to, who's in the cas squad who's dead, ya know? Commander should still be able to see EVERYONE if need be.

Another solution might be giving everyone the ability to mark friendly locations via left click right click and/or if possible the map could update only once every 2-5 minutes.

[viirusiiseli]

What about admins?

Remember that not all reports are tk based. It would be a haven for players that like to cause havoc by destroying friendly FOBs, roadkill, mainbase camping, multiple asset wasting and so on.

In association with nametag removal this will make the experience of admins much harder and our response significantly slower if not impossible in some cases.

I liked the nametag removal. And I find this idea interesting as well, but we have to be pragmatic somewhat and start discussing it from this point of view: unless a solution is found for admins alone to see everyone on the map, this is not feasible.

I didn't even think of this but now that you've mentioned it I'm gonna support that statement too. If the map is removed and the admins who actually care enough to try to do something to rule breakers can't find out whos doing what it'll be a mayhem without punishments.

It's already a pain to admin and play at the same time sometimes and removing the map would make it nearly impossible to do the job with enough speed and quality.

Dunno, but one might be able to code up a script to make note of who destroyed what/killed who on friendly teams.

Think twice, you'd give all the admins a feed of whats happening on the battlefield that they could abuse to a massive extent in their own playing? And more importantly that same thing could be distributed to normal players. Great idea.

Arturus, I've never really seen friendlies destroying FOBs, and I've seen a lot of smack tarding. Sure there is the accidental gary, ied, cas strike, etc. Roadkill should be allowed because it helps make sure people don't walk around on the road without support. Squad screen also shows you who is in cars. Mainbase camping... if it's a sniper then you can still see who has that kit. Asset waste generally isn't a huge problem either, happens, no doubt, but you can still deduce who wasted what if you really need to, who's in the cas squad who's dead, ya know? Commander should still be able to see EVERYONE if need be.

Another solution might be giving everyone the ability to mark friendly locations via left click right click and/or if possible the map could update only once every 2-5 minutes.

Everything you're saying would make admining from a rather simple and painless responsibility to a game of sherlock holmes and find the clues. Meaning when you start typing in "!r admin someone did this and that to me" you won't get a response because they wont bother finding out stuff like that 9/10 times if the information is not easily accessible. And none of the ways you provided would bring certainty of who did what.

[rPoXoTauJIo]

Then there should be a switch parameter in python configs for passworded events, where you don't have to take care about griefers.

[Vicious302]

Virus give me a situation where someone could be doing something that this would affect. Let's take hit step by step. Someone TKs you there are still tk messages. I don't understand you guys AT ALL.

[viirusiiseli]

Virus give me a situation where someone could be doing something that this would affect. Let's take hit step by step. Someone TKs you there are still tk messages. I don't understand you guys AT ALL.

Someone roadkills, baserapes, rushes or spawns on unknown etc etc. Without the map you can't find out any of these with certainty. If you ever admined you'd know that the information admins go on is very thin, and most often requires a bit of investigation before issuing punishments. This requires the map, a lot.

There's your explanation on why it's a bad idea for admins. Why it's a bad idea for pubbies; check the previous pages.

[doop-de-doo]

Dunno, but one might be able to code up a script to make note of who destroyed what/killed who on friendly teams.

Think twice, you'd give all the admins a feed of whats happening on the battlefield that they could abuse to a massive extent in their own playing? And more importantly that same thing could be distributed to normal players. Great idea.

Wait, wha....?



post edit: I got it. Umm...no. The feed is to register blue-on-blue incidents. We already have TK messages, but no messages for assets being destroyed by friendlies.

What I'm saying is, that as long as no-one is in a friendly vehicle, an evil-doer can destroy it and no message will appear. That's the code I'm talking about. It's not abuse to know who is sabotaging their own team.

Someone roadkills, baserapes, rushes or spawns on unknown etc etc. Without the map you can't find out any of these with certainty. If you ever admined you'd know that the information admins go on is very thin, and most often requires a bit of investigation before issuing punishments. This requires the map, a lot.

There's your explanation on why it's a bad idea for admins. Why it's a bad idea for pubbies; check the previous pages.

I'm with you on that. There is a mode in the CO map interface where he chooses between seeing dots or kits. If the kit icons were left available then admins could find out from there.

[viirusiiseli]

Wait, wha....?

post edit: I got it. Umm...no. The feed is to register blue-on-blue incidents. We already have TK messages, but no messages for assets being destroyed by friendlies.

What I'm saying is, that as long as no-one is in a friendly vehicle, an evil-doer can destroy it and no message will appear. That's the code I'm talking about. It's not abuse to know who is sabotaging their own team.

I'm with you on that. There is a mode in the CO map interface where he chooses between seeing dots or kits. If the kit icons were left available then admins could find out from there.

I guess if it only showed things regarding friendlies it could work for admining... Not a bad idea to give for admins even with a working map to be honest.

But for normal gameplay I think removing the map wouldn't be a good thing, probably would make the teams even more disorganized than they are these days. And people telling everyone "Just communicate and it will be fine" can come back down to earth from the dreamworld they're living in.

People need to understand that good comms don't always happen and even if it does, it makes for a lot of un-needed hassle. It's a video game after all. Atleast I want to concentrate on playing the game instead of turning PR into a voice comms chat room.

[qubolo]

I guess if it only showed things regarding friendlies it could work for admining... Not a bad idea to give for admins even with a working map to be honest.

But for normal gameplay I think removing the map wouldn't be a good thing, probably would make the teams even more disorganized than they are these days. And people telling everyone "Just communicate and it will be fine" can come back down to earth from the dreamworld they're living in.

People need to understand that good comms don't always happen and even if it does, it makes for a lot of un-needed hassle. It's a video game after all. Atleast I want to concentrate on playing the game instead of turning PR into a voice comms chat room.

i agree good comms are sometimes rare, but what makes you think that SL's that can't use comms will be any better with assessing the situation using the map? Map is for sure a bit easier to use, but PR is focused on teamplay and interacting with other players, What is more pleasant, staring at the dots trying to figure out someones intention, or just asking someone and coordinating? Even in very unprofessional way. There are many situations that SL channel is completely silent, IMHO it shouldn't have any place in this game.

Things like this would make it easier to organize defenses and attacks, since you don't know who is attacking and who is defending. Then you just decide with other SL's for couple of seconds and we are done, instead of looking at the map and hoping that this squad or that squad will stay and you can move, or you come back to set up defenses and it turns out that they are already staying there.