Project Reality Forums

drs79 wrote:My only caveat with this is that rounds would go a lot quicker (much quicker ticket bleed), and with vehicles already costing a few tickets, it would take away from what PR was originally created as.

Now, and I am not being rude, but if PR were to change to a RPG, I could see kits being worth tickets, but as it stands now, I say that leave the kits as they are, I like how x squad is only allowed x amount of kits, and that there is a limited amount of special kits avail to the team at any given time.

The new idea wouldn't change how many kits squads are allowed, and it would remove tickets from 'key' vehicles (Tanks, Helis, Jets, APCs) and swap the ticket values over to the kits, so that players are more likely to want to stay alive. Jeeps and trucks would remain the same, so that 'normal' player kits can use them and if they're destroyed, the team still loses tickets.

I like this idea
+1

rescuing pilots and crewman sounds like a much needed element to this game
although whats to stop a crewman and/or pilot from dropping said kit when they survive the initial crash?

Bluedrake42 wrote:I like this idea
+1

rescuing pilots and crewman sounds like a much needed element to this game
although whats to stop a crewman and/or pilot from dropping said kit when they survive the initial crash?

Make kit cost points when it disappears.

ComradeHX wrote:Make kit cost points when it disappears.

that doesn't sound like a good solution, what happens when you accidentally request the wrong kit?

Bluedrake42 wrote:I like this idea
+1

rescuing pilots and crewman sounds like a much needed element to this game
although whats to stop a crewman and/or pilot from dropping said kit when they survive the initial crash?

We already dont have enough players on the frontline. You really wanna do a rescue mission on kashan desert?

IMO kit shouldnt cost tickets, imagine a full heli on muttrah getting shot down. Thats 5 for the chopper 7 for the player and arround 35 for the kits! (if they dont change the numbers for the helicopter)
You would have to rebalance the ticket numbers (trial and error style) and, if you ask yourself honestly, you do know more then enough people who dont care about the ticket loss. The "Kits-cost-Tickets" will mostly punish attackers (possible to lose all men in the attack, without the chance to get the kits back, leading to loss of many tickets)
so it would change gameplay like this:
-Officers hide somewhere and lead WW1 style (cant afford to lose the kit)
-You will defend all the time and hardly ever attack (as said above)
-rescue missions for the "important" downd pilots or crewmen drawing more men from the fight
-wasting tanks and other assets now "OK" as long as the crew survives (really not good)


To be honest its fine as it is now
A tank with 2 man crew is worth 12-14 tickets (10 tank, 2 crews death,+2 if the crew jumps out and gets killed then)
While a normal inf sq of 6 people costs also 12 tickets (if all get wounded first)
So, staying alive is already helping the team (for the tank you can save at last 2 tickets).
Just my 2 cents here

To re-iterate again, if this idea were to be implemented, it would remove the idea of tickets from vehicles! Instead of the vehicle losing tickets when it's destroyed, the kits of the crew members in the vehicle would lose the tickets instead - there is no compound effect!!!

But to address the issue of when the kit costs tickets, someone mentioned that you could assign a variable to the player, so it would end up in a similar way to how it is now. If for example, an officer kit is set to be 20 (again, don't take this literally, it's an EXAMPLE!) it would cost 1 ticket when the officer is wounded which is refunded if that player is revived, and the other 19 when the player goes 'dead-dead' (i.e. black screen, text says 'Dead' or 'Mortally Wounded')

The variable that determines how many tickets are lost when the player is killed (kit value -1) is re-assigned every time the player requests a kit or spawns in with a kit. And as Bluedrake mentioned to stop people simply requesting an unarmed kit, the unarmed kit is worth the same value as the previous kit that the player requested or spawned with (in coding terms, NewKitTickets = KitTickets, in stead of NewKitTickets = 20 or another value for an officer)

This would mean that the overall team ticket values would need to be adjusted slightly to compensate for the increased player value, but by removing the vehicle value, the adjustment would not need to be massive.

MrTomRobs wrote: But to address the issue of when the kit costs tickets, someone mentioned that you could assign a variable to the player, so it would end up in a similar way to how it is now. If for example, an officer kit is set to be 20 (again, don't take this literally, it's an EXAMPLE!) it would cost 1 ticket when the officer is wounded which is refunded if that player is revived, and the other 19 when the player goes 'dead-dead' (i.e. black screen, text says 'Dead' or 'Mortally Wounded')

If dead-dead means to loose a lot tickets, you have the problem of people in vehicles.
I get your idea with tanks (example tank worth 1 ticket only while crewman worth 7 ->leading to 15 tickets if the tank gets destroyed with crew and only 1 if the crew escapes)
But, imagine youre with your squad in, for example, a humvee and get blown up by a HAT.
ATM you will lose 1 ticket for the humvee and 6 tickets for the soldiers inside making 7 tickets lost.
With your new system, taking (only for example) sql 10, medic 5, and every rifleman 1 you will loose 20 tickets (humvee+officer+medic+4*rifleman)
IMO this will lead to 2 things:
-People afraid to use any vehicles for transport (no chance in getting revived there if killed)
-People just play as always and losing way more tickets then before
(Officer: Charge the HMG!)

I think assets should always cost more tickets, IRL according to the situation you wouldnt kill the disembarking crew (low threat) while there still are enemy tanks, but in PR you would force the player to slaugter the crew, because it is more important to kill them than the tank.

You should keep in mind that players are hardcoded and youre system would encourage body camping (to deny access to the kit or the officer from getting revived)

Bluedrake42 wrote:that doesn't sound like a good solution, what happens when you accidentally request the wrong kit?

How often do you request the wrong kit?

Can you say you die with correct kits less often than select wrong kit?

Giving kit ticket reduction when disappeared from world = making special equipment more important.
It makes people try to keep user alive more and more likely to retrieve it if user ends up dead; and makes it decision of requesting special kit much more significant(cannot just request HAT kit to snipe infantry, then needlessly drop/die with it).

IRL you would want to retrieve the more powerful equipment from field to prevent it from falling into enemy hands, no?(of course in PR rule does not allow enemies to use most of those kits; but rifleman AT can still be taken).

MADsqirrel wrote:If dead-dead means to loose a lot tickets, you have the problem of people in vehicles.
I get your idea with tanks (example tank worth 1 ticket only while crewman worth 7 ->leading to 15 tickets if the tank gets destroyed with crew and only 1 if the crew escapes)
But, imagine youre with your squad in, for example, a humvee and get blown up by a HAT.
ATM you will lose 1 ticket for the humvee and 6 tickets for the soldiers inside making 7 tickets lost.
With your new system, taking (only for example) sql 10, medic 5, and every rifleman 1 you will loose 20 tickets (humvee+officer+medic+4*rifleman)
IMO this will lead to 2 things:
-People afraid to use any vehicles for transport (no chance in getting revived there if killed)
-People just play as always and losing way more tickets then before
(Officer: Charge the HMG!)

I think assets should always cost more tickets, IRL according to the situation you wouldnt kill the disembarking crew (low threat) while there still are enemy tanks, but in PR you would force the player to slaugter the crew, because it is more important to kill them than the tank.

You should keep in mind that players are hardcoded and youre system would encourage body camping (to deny access to the kit or the officer from getting revived)

10 tickets is just for example.
Maybe make regular rifleman kits to not cost any ticket and only officer and other limited kits cost tickets(but not that much). Maybe 2 for officer/Rifleman AT/AP and 3-4 for other more important ones. You are trying to make kits worth something; not make it worth too much.

It would make people do the smart thing: to dismount and cover a dangerous area(for vehicles) with infantry instead of derping into ambush zone while everyone is in vehicle and gets blown up together inside.
That is good and realistic behaviour.

ComradeHX wrote:How often do you request the wrong kit?

Can you say you die with correct kits less often than select wrong kit?

Giving kit ticket reduction when disappeared from world = making special equipment more important.
It makes people try to keep user alive more and more likely to retrieve it if user ends up dead; and makes it decision of requesting special kit much more significant(cannot just request HAT kit to snipe infantry, then needlessly drop/die with it).

IRL you would want to retrieve the more powerful equipment from field to prevent it from falling into enemy hands, no?(of course in PR rule does not allow enemies to use most of those kits; but rifleman AT can still be taken).



10 tickets is just for example.
Maybe make regular rifleman kits to not cost any ticket and only officer and other limited kits cost tickets(but not that much). Maybe 2 for officer/Rifleman AT/AP and 3-4 for other more important ones. You are trying to make kits worth something; not make it worth too much.

It would make people do the smart thing: to dismount and cover a dangerous area(for vehicles) with infantry instead of derping into ambush zone while everyone is in vehicle and gets blown up together inside.
That is good and realistic behaviour.

Today it is more difficult to get passengers to stay inside a vehicle than making them leave it unless if ordered to. This would be another nail in the metal coffin and walking mile after mile leaving all vehicles at base would be the smart idea.
When playing PR there is never a "safe zone" outside your main-base so where ever you go your taking a huge risk when using a vehicle. I don't see how you think that people would protect a vehicle more this way? The way BF2/PR works it will require a lot more resources (manpower) to cover just a single vehicle, that a few ambushes could mess up easy. Your a high profile, your noisy your exposed from every angle since there is no front line or safe zones, if 1 guy fail his job a lot of people can die from a single enemy. It looks cool though, but it is not tactically a smart move.

Another thing if crewmen/drivers are not required to stay inside the vehicle driver seat for the gunner to operate you would see drivers constantly staying out of there own vehicle to cut the ticket loss in half. Why risk all when you can get a discount . This would happen with apc's a lot and less with tanks where it is tricky to re-enter.

The more I read about this suggestion the worse it sounds. I don't think kit ticket cost will give the intended effect, instead it will make a lot of awkward behavior.

If vehicles where improved to survive longer after being critical hit by rpg or tow so the passengers would survive it would remove some of the many dis-advantages of using vehicles.

Gracler wrote:but it is not tactically a smart move.

Smarter than everyone blown up at same time in same vehicle due to some lucky RPG hit when driver and gunner are looking the wrong way; or accidentally driving over a mine that was mistaken for a rock.

Leaving vehicle in main is worst idea; it would result in failure most of time due to lack of long range firepower(two HAT kits do not count for much against combined infantry and vehicles of another team) and fast-ish troop deployment(speed can be used both offensively and defensively; infantry on foot has very little of it).

As for tanks; people already do plenty of exiting vehicle to shut off engine while attempting to spot more with binos.

A crewman kit would be 1-2 points at most. Not enough to risk having immobile vehicle when needed.

Vehicles already survive long enough for crewmen to get out most of time. Even if you are not in vehicle with it blew up; you are alone in enemy territory and without support(which most likely is the reason for apc to be blown up in first place)...you would die anyway, it is only a matter of time.

It is not going to be any more awkward because these days(especially muttrah), APC is already used like a tank instead of carrying/supporting troops. Which results in high rate of casualty for APC as anyone with a LAT will be able to take down APC while it is distracted with shooting rest of the squad.

People can walk all day and finally realize how terrible the idea is when there are available vehicle transports. And vehicles that do not carry infantry soon realize lack of support makes it vulnerable(after getting blown up by hidden RPG guy around a corner for the nth time).

Properly played vehicles/crew will be almost unaffected by this; and it only punishes bad play which is what PR should do instead of nerfing to below real life ability(see deviation pre 0.90).

It will be especially good for trucks; one does not simply take unarmoured trucks into frontline combat like some do with PR. Current troop carrying trucks needed this nerf; if they do not dismount before entering combat area, they should be heavily punished for driving unarmoured vehicle, loaded with passenger, into dangerous areas(and get blown up to lose all valuable equipment inside along with vehicle). Not that they are not already losing a ton of tickets; but prospect of losing more should cause people to pay attention to how to use vehicles.

ComradeHX wrote:Smarter than everyone blown up at same time in same vehicle due to some lucky RPG hit when driver and gunner are looking the wrong way.

As for tanks; people already do plenty of exiting vehicle to shut off engine while attempting to spot more with binos.

A crewman kit would be 1-2 point at most. Not enough to risk having immobile vehicle when needed.

Vehicles already survive much longer than they should; I have shot a canadian APC from behind with RPG-26 and it smoked and got away.

It is not going to be any more awkward because these days(especially muttrah), APC is already used like a tank instead of carrying/supporting troops. Which results in high rate of casualty for APC as anyone with a LAT will be able to take down APC while it is distracted with shooting rest of the squad.

Try hitting the wheels next time, most APC's & IFV's receive the same damage no-matter where you hit it except for the tracks/wheels.

Other things I agree on.... but I don't see how using the kit cost would help anything. It seems like a decrease in ticket cost on vehicles would give the same effect.




The enemy adapts to the situation so if they know that a vehicle with people inside is a positional slap in the face of the enemy's tickets they would make tandem RPG groups (like they already do) and fire 2 rpg's at the same time so that your sure the vehicle blow up before people get a chance to escape.

Gracler wrote: The enemy adapts to the situation so if they know that a vehicle with people inside is a positional slap in the face of the enemy's tickets they would make tandem RPG groups (like they already do) and fire 2 rpg's at the same time so that your sure the vehicle blow up before people get a chance to escape.

Like I said, punish bad plays. Good tactics should be rewarded with dealing more damage to enemy total ticket count.

Main point of giving kits ticket value(not all kits need them; just the limited ones) is so they are worth more to protect; so proper squad would have rifleman with 0 cost(or 1) kit take point instead of having everyone run all over the place with zero formation.

Adding destruction of valuable kits inside vehicle is just a side effect that punishes bad play and rewards good ones.

People should, and most likely will, use vehicle as intended if they wish to win. If they do not want to lose tickets on kits; they could go all rifleman in vehicle and retrieve kits from apc after dismounting(thus giving APC a little more edge in transporting squads versus plain transport trucks which has no armor, no gun, and no kit request ability; hopefully apc will be more properly used than having fully loaded armourless truck attempt to charge to frontline safely).

I am not sure if kit dropped in certain places(such as on top of fob or in repair station in main) can be coded to not deal ticket damage upon disappearance; but that would be good to have. So retrieving a useful kit is actually helpful to team.

ComradeHX wrote: People should, and most likely will, use vehicle as intended if they wish to win. If they do not want to lose tickets on kits; they could go all rifleman in vehicle and retrieve kits from apc after dismounting(thus giving APC a little more edge in transporting squads versus plain transport trucks which has no armor, no gun, and no kit request ability; hopefully apc will be more properly used than having fully loaded armourless truck attempt to charge to frontline safely).

Already today kit's like HAT are very valuable to a team but how often do you think a squad-leader will start by saying.... " don't request the HAT kit until we land" when standing on a carrier with about 25 other players that will steal the kit out of the pool of 2. It never happens..... people take it from the carrier and the Huey gets blown to bits..... and everyone cry even more because that kit cost tickets.

It all sounds good on paper but in reality you should know that people won't be tactical individually.... at-least not all 32 players on the team, and it only takes 1 or 2 players to mess up this idea, and for that you want to punish the entire team? not very "team-play" oriented.

The only way you get more team-play is by limiting single players from doing damage to there own and enemy team and enhancing the potential of a group of people doing more damage and progress than they could have done individually.

Gracler wrote:Already today kit's like HAT are very valuable to a team but how often do you think a squad-leader will start by saying.... " don't request the HAT kit until we land" when standing on a carrier with about 25 other players that will steal the kit out of the pool of 2. It never happens..... people take it from the carrier and the Huey gets blown to bits..... and everyone cry even more because that kit cost tickets.

It all sounds good on paper but in reality you should know that people won't be tactical individually.... at-least not all 32 players on the team, and it only takes 1 or 2 players to mess up this idea, and for that you want to punish the entire team? not very "team-play" oriented.

The only way you get more team-play is by limiting single players from doing damage to there own and enemy team and enhancing the potential of a group of people doing more damage and progress than they could have done individually.

I quite like it, the team should be punished when a squad dies inside transport before getting out. They just lost an element that could do much on the battlefield, it should reflect in their ticket pool. This should encourage trans choppers into landing on safe(ish) landzones, and troops in ground transport to get out before entering objective areas.

Only problem i can see with this is that it could lead to more main base camping; that could be diminished by better map design (more exit routes from mainbases), and server rules.

On account of drivers exiting vehicles to keep the ticket cost down, what happens now is they only exit the driver seat so as to shut the engine off. They stay in passanger seats or crouched on the MG gunner position in tanks. you seldom see them wandering about with their binos on. They know why, when the driver is outside, he can easily get killed by a sniper or a lucky MG burst, rendering the tank useless. I dont think this would change much if this suggestion would pass.
Having said that, i would divide the ticket cost of a tank into thirds, one third for each crewman and one for the vehicle itslef. To be fair, these things cost quite a bit of money to put together and get on the front

Gracler wrote:Already today kit's like HAT are very valuable to a team but how often do you think a squad-leader will start by saying.... " don't request the HAT kit until we land" when standing on a carrier with about 25 other players that will steal the kit out of the pool of 2. It never happens..... people take it from the carrier and the Huey gets blown to bits..... and everyone cry even more because that kit cost tickets.

It all sounds good on paper but in reality you should know that people won't be tactical individually.... at-least not all 32 players on the team, and it only takes 1 or 2 players to mess up this idea, and for that you want to punish the entire team? not very "team-play" oriented.

The only way you get more team-play is by limiting single players from doing damage to there own and enemy team and enhancing the potential of a group of people doing more damage and progress than they could have done individually.

A single player failing intentionally, most likely in a squad, will be dealt with.

When they lose due to losing ticket on every limited kit; perhaps then they will learn that playing recklessly with expensive equipment is not such a good idea.

As far as I know, ticket count can be adjusted; just need to find a decent relative value of each kit to one life...etc.

Gracler wrote:The only way you get more team-play is by limiting single players from doing damage to there own and enemy team and enhancing the potential of a group of people doing more damage and progress than they could have done individually.

BING!

edit: Brilliant mate. This cuts to the heart of my argument. The team should not be penalized because of a few ridiculous players. Either make the player pay in their own negative points for their actions e.g suicide/vehicle loss and or the squad gets negative points who have a better opportunity to correct misbehavior. Weighted heavier on individual points instead of the teams points.

Perhaps at -400 individual points they get script kicked from the server. After a while you draw the attention of the administrator that you are either severely stupid or griefing the server.

Stop punishing the team because of unintentional beginners and or intentional griefers. It's a huge drag on morale and does NOTHING to correct the problem.

Now would you still be able to pick up kits off of the other side?
If you die while using the enemy kit, does the other side lose another ticket or does your team lose the ticket?

Assets like Armor, helo's, jets etc should be worth tickets, making kits worth tickets won't curb the amount of people who automatically make themselves un-revivable.

drs79 wrote:Now would you still be able to pick up kits off of the other side?
If you die while using the enemy kit, does the other side lose another ticket or does your team lose the ticket?

If you get blown up in a vehicle or die in water with enemy kit; it is considered to be destroyed. Therefore enemy still lost those resources. Catch is obviously your kit needs to be held by someone or your stuff will be lost and count as loss of resource.

What about like I suggested to not make the kit itself cost tickets rather the soldier role upon wounded or death.

Gracler wrote:So if only pilot or crewman kit's cost tickets and they last for 5 min if that person die you want a squad to move in and recover that kit (one squad-member pick up the crewman kit) and make it back to base and hand it to the dedicated crewman, as if he was a VIP... interesting...but a bit odd.

does a modern military not recover it's dead or take actions to ensure the complete destruction or recovery of assets so as not to allow them to be taken and used by the enemy? i dont think it's odd from a realism stand point but i suppose it might be from a gameplay stand point.

in Insurgency this could open up a whole new area of play for the INS team as well. If the system works and players do put effort into recovering kits, the INS team could set up traps and/or an ambush around killed crewmen/pilots and take out the recovery teams. that said a smart insurgent would simply take the kit and go hide it elsewhere, but a recovery team could still potentially come in to check.