Project Reality Forums

Oh yes, the marvellous troll card which automatically invallidates anything a certain user has said or will say. How mature.

Listen, you might not be aware of it, but the fact that your replies are always diverging from the subject of the thread is somewhat trolling.

Because in the end, it is useless and only feed your ''large amount of boredom'' wich is what define troll. Seeking for the reaction of others with their outrageous attitude. You can't dismiss that. And you can't make me forgive all your bad messages with 1 respectful reply.

Stop doing that please. I have provided argument when you posted respectful negative come back. When you are plainly arrogant, you are not going to receive something consistent in return.

And no. This topic attracted more people than just me and you debating on personnal matters.

Some are probably avoiding this thread actually because you started to spread your bad explosive behaviors.




Now, I expect you to reply here. do NOT post more of your emotions and personnal views of my ideology and how the planet turn please. Beat it.

If you have more questions or constructive comment on the actual topic wich is, implementing a new game-mode, you are welcome.

Anything else will be considered as disrespect towards me.

'' This is bullshit, This is annoying, no one want this '' are not valuable arguments, keep them for yourself.

The only difference being that I'm not looking to provoke hatred or other negative emotions, nor am I explicitly harassing you as this is a public domain open to anybody to use and abuse.

And please, tell me how would a normal round of your concept of hostage rescue play out in a round, for people who might not have seen the update, and are now playing your brain child for the first time, how would you explain to them what the entire objective is without writing an entire paragraph in the team chat.

Also on your "sabotage" (which is basically just insurgency with a fancy name), it already exists as any map of insurgency has bluefor attacking said caches, and even if it was 2 army factions instead of a army faction against a insurgent faction, it's already been done. Khamisiyah already has a alternate layout for insurgency which has the MEC (be it with some outdated equipment) defending caches from the US forces.

And how large would you envision the headquarters terain to be, how would you make a area in a game where grappling hooks are tools for climbing buildings constrict the players to 2 chokepoints with doors which can apparantly be locked, but then their breacher disconnects, and suddenly you have a entire squad sitting on their *** because they can't blow the door in the enemy main base. The spawnkilling and asset destruction argument is coming back here as they need to get to the main base somehow, and that will either be boat or helicopter.

If your AA defenses work, then the helicopter is ruled out, which makes the boat the only option which is quite slow. And what stops the defending squad locked in their room invulnerable, and unable to leave, if you can blow up other doors (which "manually close") then why can't this room be cleared and be used to cut the enemy off from their own? Would that give them too much of an advantage against the turrets and doors they already had, or does it simply not exist in any real life base to have a couple of people control doors and turrets if it's not a top secret military installation.

There, now happy? Didn't insult anybody and laid my own incoherent constructive criticism on the drawing board on the idea's mentioned in this thread. Will this now be disrespectful to you as it's no longer part of the criticism? Also a nice question to start off with to explain.

Saobh, can you keep this guy from polluting my thread?

This guy keep coming back with questions that have already been answered.


Apart from these questions--

Rescue hostage,
Green message on-top of screen just like Insurgency, would be displaying
'' Find hostage and carry them to extraction point '' ,
with a green zone written '' extraction point '' on it. (Seriously your retarded)

next one,
Grappling hook can be disabled for this game mode. And if not, the defend zone can be underground, up-hill or even on-sea. (Such as defending a petrol station)

Players need to start enjoying diversity. Playing with ground asset only is fun too. No need to use choppers, trucks can do the job, slow advance with APC support is good enough and can even be funnier.

I don't understand the last question... Enemies cannot use opponent vehicule/assets...

All other unanswered questions were answered previously.

On an other note, your boredom is cancerous

W.Darwin wrote:Saobh, can you keep this guy from polluting my thread?

This guy keep coming back with questions that have already been answered.


Apart from these questions--

Rescue hostage,
Green message on-top of screen just like Insurgency, would be displaying
'' Find hostage and carry them to extraction point '' ,
with a green zone written '' extraction point '' on it. (Seriously your retarded)

next one,
Grappling hook can be disabled for this game mode. And if not, the defend zone can be underground, up-hill or even on-sea. (Such as defending a petrol station)

Players need to start enjoying diversity. Playing with ground asset only is fun too. No need to use choppers, trucks can do the job, slow advance with APC support is good enough and can even be funnier.

I don't understand the last question... Enemies cannot use opponent vehicule/assets...

All other unanswered questions were answered previously.

On an other note, your boredom is cancerous

Players already enjoy the game in its current state. Yet there are a lot of maps, every round is different. The other main game mode which Insurgency already needs to be worked on. So there's no point making a suggestion as you do.
Also the words "slow" and "fun" don't really work together on PR. As I said in one of my previous post, if you want to do epic hostages/sabotages scenarios, I suggest you buy Arma 3 and join an awesome milsim clan.
Your scenario thingy requires way too much time and way too much coordination, and will only work during organized events such as PRT.
It would be exactly like Insurgency: camp,wait for area attack, try to push on objective,die,respawn,camp....
And for OPFOR: Shoot,get shot,respawn,shoot,get shot,respawn...
Do you even imagine the work needed to make your scenarios? It requires too much time for what it gives.
So please,stop. There is no way it is going to be implemented, because you're the only one here who wants it,the rest just play PR and enjoy it as it is.

SkyEmperor wrote:Players already enjoy the game in its current state. Yet there are a lot of maps, every round is different. The other main game mode which Insurgency already needs to be worked on. So there's no point making a suggestion as you do.
Also the words "slow" and "fun" don't really work together on PR. As I said in one of my previous post, if you want to do epic hostages/sabotages scenarios, I suggest you buy Arma 3 and join an awesome milsim clan.
Your scenario thingy requires way too much time and way too much coordination, and will only work during organized events such as PRT.
It would be exactly like Insurgency: camp,wait for area attack, try to push on objective,die,respawn,camp....
And for OPFOR: Shoot,get shot,respawn,shoot,get shot,respawn...
Do you even imagine the work needed to make your scenarios? It requires too much time for what it gives.
So please,stop. There is no way it is going to be implemented, because you're the only one here who wants it,the rest just play PR and enjoy it as it is.

from top to bottom,

1-'' "slow" and "fun" don't really work together on PR''
- Well, you are clearly wrong. PR is probably the only game who can claim to provide
fun in its slow pace gameplay.

2-'' Your scenario thingy requires way too much time and way too much coordination ''
- If done properly, ALL game-mode require alot of time and coordination. Sabotage
and hostage doesnt contrast on this point.

3- '' It would be exactly like Insurgency: camp,wait for area attack, try to push on
objective,die,respawn,camp....''
- Insurgency never been like this for me?? When I am on Blufor the tactics always
changes, I believe it is simply the way you play the game.. Wich seriously looks
boring.
(Btw, the way you see INS tactics could also apply to AAS.. Camp, Airstike the flag, push, die, camp.. U make no valuable point.)

4- ''Do you even imagine the work needed to make your scenarios? It requires too much
time for what it gives.''
- Please go play Battlefield 4

5-, and none the less, ''because you're the only one here who wants it,''
- Again, stop thinking your simple individual thoughts on something represent a whole
community, narrow minded french.

W.Darwin wrote:(Seriously your retarded)

On an other note, your boredom is cancerous

Yes really discussing the subject here.

So your concept is to make a huge tunnel, with only ground vehicles, that is wasting the entire concept of free movement that PR usually has with it?s expansive 4km by 4km maps. For a skirmish map sure. But to have an entire round with 2 sides head on in 1 or 2 interconnected tunnels seeing who has the most firepower really doesn?t seem like a good idea to me (e.g. the operation metro for battlefield 4), it also doesn't really fit in with the rest of PR, where you have every option available for entry, assault you name it. And suddenly you're stuck with 1 or 2 ways of approach with maybe a APC at your back with a high chance of friendly fire due to confined space.


"Well, you are clearly wrong."
Yes a quality argument, just like this is bullshit, or it can't work.

How does thinking of the workload for the devs have anything to do with him playing Battlefield 4? I thought it was about your brain idea's not about the people criticising it.

Suggestions are all good and well, but the devs themselves also came from the community, so possibly you could try making these concepts work before you desire them in the game, after all their time is also probably better spent on the things they already have planned and half the community has requested and is excited about than your ideas out of the blue.

Oh and yes, ofcourse something as simple as "find hostage, retrieve hostage" is going to make people understand what they're doing. For example how are they to know that the hostage is supposed to be a kit on the ground instead of a physical player or bot? And these green zones, how far would these be from the hostage location? Would you need humvees for transport of support to enter en retrieve quickly, what would happen if somebody "killed a hostage" or attempts to use the kit as a "human shield"? What kind of penalty would that give? And to whom, the shooter or the guy with the kit?

And what is supposed to be so different about your sabotage compared to a good ol' fashioned round of Insurgency? Is it the factions? Cause that is easy to do and already has been done, but if it's supposed to be something else then please enlighten us.

W.Darwin wrote:from top to bottom,

1-'' "slow" and "fun" don't really work together on PR''
- Well, you are clearly wrong. PR is probably the only game who can claim to provide
fun in its slow pace gameplay.

2-'' Your scenario thingy requires way too much time and way too much coordination ''
- If done properly, ALL game-mode require alot of time and coordination. Sabotage
and hostage doesnt contrast on this point.

3- '' It would be exactly like Insurgency: camp,wait for area attack, try to push on
objective,die,respawn,camp....''
- Insurgency never been like this for me?? When I am on Blufor the tactics always
changes, I believe it is simply the way you play the game.. Wich seriously looks
boring.
(Btw, the way you see INS tactics could also apply to AAS.. Camp, Airstike the flag, push, die, camp.. U make no valuable point.)

4- ''Do you even imagine the work needed to make your scenarios? It requires too much
time for what it gives.''
- Please go play Battlefield 4

5-, and none the less, ''because you're the only one here who wants it,''
- Again, stop thinking your simple individual thoughts on something represent a whole
community, narrow minded french.

Ok, time to end this stupid thread made by a salty guy who keeps insulting people.

You keep reply with insults or bullshit instead of arguments.
"Please go play Battlefield 4"
I just told you that your whole epic stuff is just the same as Insurgency, again, no arguments.
And PR is clearly not a slow paced game when you play it the right way.
PR is not awesometacticalteamworkmilsim game you want it to be. As I said many times, Insurgency still needs some balance fixes no point to make another gamemode.

"Again, stop thinking your simple individual thoughts on something represent a whole
community, narrow minded french."

What about you then? "narrow minded french" I won't even comment on it, but this is really disrespectful to French people, not only me, watch yourself.

If a moderator can lock the thread please that would be nice. This guy has no arguments and keep insulting people + wrong subforum.

First thing, Liam, your post starts to be more constructive, thanks for the effort.

so, first paragraph,

''So your concept is to make a huge tunnel''

As for underground scenario, the objective of the attacking team is to reach the bunker.
In order to do so, they must buid FOB and defense around it. And during this process, they might encounter enemy force trying to ruin their tactitc.

I would say, 50% of the round would happen outside the compound, being a game of hide and seek, and 50% of the game would be inside the compound. (It could be a big nuclear silo base with big roadway for APC to even drive inside)

''Yes a quality argument, just like this is bullshit, or it can't work.''

The actual argument was '' PR is probably the only game who can claim to provide
fun in its slow pace gameplay. ''

And I still think its a valuable argument. Of all game of this kind. maybe like Arma, PR has a mid-paced ( I say mid paced because its sometimes Slow, sometimes Fast) based action gameplay. And is just rolling fine. These new mode suggestion would'nt be any slower or faster paced. Its all about how the player plays.

''Suggestions are all good and well, but the devs *snip* ''

Yes, did I mention any dead line? It could be implemented in 2018 for all I care.

''how are they to know that the hostage is supposed to be blah-blah''

They can simply type in the teamchat '' How do I pick the hostage''
And for now.. I thought the hostages would be invincible since you probably cannot kill kits.
Unless they die in a car then it would make the team loose 25 tickets, or 50 depending on how many hostages there are. (I thought there could be up to 16 hostages in different location spawning like caches)


''And what is supposed to be so different about your sabotage''

The main difference is, in the beginning of the round, you have all your objective displaying on the map. its not a ''hide-and-seek'' If you need to destroy a bunch of Aircraft in a airfield, then you know what u got to do. They could also make destroyable carriers with the objective of assaulting them and sinking them. (Maybe they could even make a pearl harbor campaign map! )

------------------------------------------------------------------






Now, c'est ton tour, Skyemperor.

''stupid thread made by a salty guy ''
Who is insulting who here? And, I don't think I am salty buddy.

'' Like when you posted about tripping, I almost laughed.''
''he doesn't agree with his dankmilsimnavyseal campaign mode and then speak about freedom of speech lol what a joke.''

I believe you have been arrogant with these 2 posts, wich were before I even started to have a slight amount of sarcasm or arrogance toward you.

So you first came in my thread with a negative attitude. Face it man, you deserve my behavior.

'' stuff is just the same as Insurgency''
I'll try to be gentle and write polite arguments.

Not insurgency for those reasons

- Find hostages take them to safe zone

-/- Find cache destroy it



- Have a map with 1 to 4 different highly protected objectives to destroy and already displaying on the map with 2 military factions

-/- Have a blank map where you need to seek for poorly defended weapon cache, fighting an improvised military faction

Is that enough for you?

''What about you then? "narrow minded french" I won't even comment on it, but this is really disrespectful to French people, not only me, watch yourself.''

Lol are you dumb? I'm not targetting the whole french nation. I just pointed that YOU are french. I like french as a language, don't misunderstand me. I did not write '' Narrow minded frenchs '' Learn proper english.

And what about me. Did I ever talked for anyone else than myself? No.. I don't think so.
And by the way, you did comment on it.



On the last note, I have been looking on the other pages. And a balanced amount of members posted either in favor of the idea, either disapproving it.

So no. This is not a ''stupid thread made by a salty guy who keeps insulting people.'' People looks into it.

And if your behavior was not so bad, maybe some of the people who follow the thread would post their opinion (1000+ views)

















-----
Edit:

The ''hostages'' Could be called '' War prisonners '' .. If that suits more the theme of PR.

So yes, it's pretty much same as Insurgency, need to find an objective, except you don't destroy it, but you pick it up instead, and unless Opfor have death ray I don't think they can intercept the chopper quickly going away.
+ Few people want to fight in a bunker while the map is 100 times bigger.
I see you don't want to admit that you insulted French people, if not why did you point out that I was French, who cares?
Have you ever played INS mode? 80% of the time it's a massive clusterfuck and OPFOR usually wins.

You're definitely salty because few people agree with your suggestion and the rest doesn't care.
And I might have come with a negative attitude, but your milsim suggestion are becoming really annoying and quite pointless. You think I'm narrow minded but you're not very friendly towards negative comments,and you usually don't care about other arguments, even if they are coming from players who have been there for a while, and so,have a better experience of the game than you.

So yes, it's pretty much same as Insurgency, need to find an objective, except you don't destroy it, but you pick it up instead

So yeah... Its totally different. The logistic needed to Carry something to point-A to point-B is totally different than simple destroying point-A .

This means a evacuation route must be created to safely take out the targets. Totally different than INS.

You are totally blind if you can't imagine how different a round would be.

''intercept the chopper quickly going away.''

This is an other proof that you imagine only the worst scenario. wich make you a biased person.
Who tells you there would be any chopper? If this breaks the gameplay. ?!

'' Few people want to fight in a bunker while the map is 100 times bigger.''

For the 10 time, im starting to get annoyed by your points.. I might stop to be polite pretty soon!!!
for the tenth time, not all of the round would be inside bunkers. There could even be an outside part of the objective, and as i wrote to Liam:

W.Darwin wrote:As for underground scenario, the objective of the attacking team is to reach the bunker.
In order to do so, they must buid FOB and defense around it. And during this process, they might encounter enemy force trying to ruin their tactitc.

I would say, 50% of the round would happen outside the compound, being a game of hide and seek, and 50% of the game would be inside the compound. (It could be a big nuclear silo base with big roadway for APC to even drive inside)

the main base of OPfor would not be the bunker. They would also have asset and some part of the gameplay would happen outide, in the open.

The main goal for opfor would be to counter Blufor attempt to make FOB's near the Objective, and also defend this same objective. You are really getting annoying man.... LIKE REALLY ANNOYING...

But i'll keep going.

''why did you point out that I was French, who cares?''

That's what I thought.. But apparently you got offended!

''80% of the time it's a massive clusterfuck and OPFOR usually wins.''

You are probably one of those who don't enjoy INS in first place.
This ''clusterfuck'' phenomenon only appears once every while.
I would say most of the INS round I play, people are quite well dispatched in the map.

I have no other answer to give you.. I never experienced such things in insurgency.

Not obvious enough to estimate ''80%'' of all insurgency round... Maybe more like 30% to me...

And, what I understand by clusterfuck is a large amount of players in a small zone.

Wich is something I like, it make really intense firefight.

I have no idea what you are complaining about...


''You're definitely salty''

You definetely have no clue what ''salty'' mean.

''few people agree with your suggestion and the rest doesn't care.''

I believe this is hate right there. If you are not interested, leave this thread buddy. You make yourself sounds like an immature prick.

''you're not very friendly towards negative comments''

What you call negative is arrogance. I do like constructive comments.
You can say you disagree with the Idea. Yet, As far as I seen, the reasons why you disagree are all futile because your mind process innacurate product of what would be the suggestions that I make, you simply assume every worst case scenario without having a perscpective on what interesting point it could be.

All in all, the way i perceive your comments on MY thread are '' I don't give a shit about you and your opinion, this is all bullshit ''

Yet, you keep coming back in here.. Why don't you just stop posting? i'm curious because it leads you no where. You enjoy hating me?

''you usually don't care about other arguments''

So now we're getting personnal.. I guess you just know me?
You have nothing to back-up what you just said. And I take time to answer all the replies. Your mind is getting narrow and shallow now.

''even if they are coming from players who have been there for a while''

I guess being here since June 2015 is a while.. heh..

( I just looked the thread and actually,
all the older members that posted here were interested by this suggestions...
Only you and Liam got mad. )



As a conclusion. I think i try to remain objective when you come at me.

But of course if your only argument is '' This is annoying, this is boring, you are bullshit, i don't like it ''

I don't have much to reply to you...


This said. Take a breath, relax, and stay mature.
Have a good day

Dude, I even suggested things and 50% agreed with your suggestion, until you started to be really toxic.
Yes, I'm not a vet myself, I've been playing since April 2015. Trust me, back in the days I would have completely agree with you, but I quickly figured out that PR is not the right game for this kind of stuff. And I'm fairly sure Liam is experienced and btw there are not many people posting on your thread so this argument is invalid

Gonna lock this until the RMODs can take a look again. Doesn't seem like the message got through.

'[R-MOD wrote:Saobh;2117755']Guys debate the arguments and not the person otherwise infractions will be given out.