Are players used to the 30 seconds of waiting ?

[octo-crab]

Right now FoB are not used and are way to easy to build and kill a FoB should take 10 - 15m to build and a hell of fire power to kill (3-4 C4 charges , apc cannon rounds , tank round , 8/10 termite grenades etc.

To disable the spawn point you should need 3 more attacker's with in 20m of the Fob then Defender's.
just my thoughts.

For the first part, I agree with you, but I feel what your saying is a bit extreme. Let's be honest, I'm not gonna sit there and build a firebase for 15minutes, my finger would get tired. I do feel FB's are too easy to takedown though, one lone soldier can take it out completly. 2 knifes and a thermite=no more FB.

Second part: I agree with this 100%. It will make defending it a bit easier, but 20m is a bit short, it'll make it easy to spawn camp Maybe they could implement something similar to the current rally system, where if a certain number(I'm thinking 6-10?) of players die within a small radius of the FB, it is temporarily down.

[(-AirHav0k-)]

Spawning times are far too low, I agree with much of what the TC said. For just a little bit of that added realism, would 1 minute - 1min 30sec spawn time hurt?

[Rudd]

Could the leaderboard not be sorted by <longest time lived in any life this round>*<sqrt(total points)>/<number of deaths>? Would that not end point-hunting immediately, and get people to want to live longer? Is this worth a thread of its own?

how to win at PR

Go to main, alt tab

[CAS_117]

Spawning times are far too low, I agree with much of what the TC said. For just a little bit of that added realism, would 1 minute - 1min 30sec spawn time hurt?

Can you explain what it is exactly that makes spawn times realistic?

The answer is that nothing about them is realistic. It is purely related to the game aspect. Whether its 30 seconds, 30 minutes, or 30 years, having someone pop out of a bag will always be gamey.

I mean does it matter how long it takes for someone to bend the time space continuum? The idea is that you shouldn't see someone spawn.

If you get within 1-200m of a spawn it needs to shuts off. Either that we're playing "Project Alternate Reality: How M Theory Can be Applied to Modern Battlefields".

[Surround]

sorry for my bad English im not from USA/UK:



I agree, you are 100% right, even more we at U.M.C.S. University Poland have proofed this theory 2 year ago,

"waiting time dont prevents ppl from doing (profitable behaviors -like gaining points)

Loosing live is profitable for greater good -for the win of whole team) so you can give ppl punishment of 999999999999hrs and they will do it again.

What i mean- ppl care in games most about points - because amount of points resolves who is better (who is the winner)-"from games science-ludology"we have resolvd it on on grup of 32 quake 3 players.

And time -its next influential factor ,if player of eany game is subjected to time punishment like hold or cant move or cant spawn (Players are physically losing intrest in the game if pause time is greater than 30-90 sek.)

For 90 % of ppl losing points is fare more worse than waiting 30 or 60 for spawn.-points decide about players place in scoreboard board not the TIME.

So if you wont decently punish players or stop them from doing some thing
,take away some thing what is most valuable for them or for ther team- points


I heard some one talking about zeroing points of player or removing him from final scoreboard -its good idea

Well in PR people usually dont care about points. But I got an good idea about this.

1) if respawn was 15s, every time you die you get +5 to respawn time. So after few deaths you really dont want to die again



2) What people the most hate to lose is the rallypoint. If 5-7 squadmembers dies within 10 min, the RP goes down and cannot be remade for ~30s.

With this, even that the respawn was 10s, they would be careful not to lose the RP. Everybody loves the Rp and dont want to walk from the main.

I wouldn´t want to be the guy who makes a suicide rush and because of that my squad loses RP. Whoa, that would be awful.

[R.J.Travis]

For the first part, I agree with you, but I feel what your saying is a bit extreme. Let's be honest, I'm not gonna sit there and build a firebase for 15minutes, my finger would get tired. I do feel FB's are too easy to takedown though, one lone soldier can take it out completely. 2 knifes and a thermite=no more FB.

Second part: I agree with this 100%. It will make defending it a bit easier, but 20m is a bit short, it'll make it easy to spawn camp Maybe they could implement something similar to the current rally system, where if a certain number(I'm thinking 6-10?) of players die within a small radius of the FB, it is temporarily down.

I am sorry I mean all the defense take 15 min not just the fob like ( all the walls , nets , foxholes , AA etc should take 15m to build it all to its max.

Also you should need to build 3 walls and 3 fox holes at a FoB for minimal defensive spots with out 1 wall and 1 fox hole you should not be able to spawn.

So instead of needing 3 more attacker then defenders that would be exploited in spawn raping it you could do this idea.

Attacking forces must destroy all walls but 1 and also destroy all fox holes but 1 before they are able to knife the FoB this would stop one man from taking out a well built fob he would not have the fire power to kill 1 wall and 1 fox hole.

Only the engineer would have the fire power to take out a fob with his c4 by him self like in real life if no one is defending it.

Once again only my thoughts.

[Alex6714]

Meh, more spawn time just = more get food/browser time.

[Rudd]

more get food

maybe with enough time we'd go get some exercise and come back

[McBumLuv]

maybe with enough time we'd go get some exercise and come back

Have it like the Wii Sports game, where you jump out of a window in frustration (Or does it mean something else? )

[victor_phx]

I was wondering... what if Rally Points are available to be set only in the Forward Outpost surroudings? That way, the team would have an extra stimulus to build assets in the most valuable areas and attacking an enemy position would need a lot more planning and caution!

Any thoughts on that?

[Ace42]

2) What people the most hate to lose is the rallypoint. If 5-7 squadmembers dies within 10 min, the RP goes down and cannot be remade for ~30s.

That's the best idea I've heard in a long time for making "survival" more important to gameplay; although the excellent idea of a "more sophisticated ticket economy" (the CO using tickets to buy assets and effects, such as armour, air-support, sniper kits, area attacks, etc etc) kinda makes this superflous - as lives become intrinsically valuable in that they are the currency that gives the CO the ability to buy you kits and vehicles you need.

[cyberzomby]

ace the part you quoted is already in

[milobr]

So I'm going to give my 2 cents about this.

If anyone of you guys have ever played WWII Online in the old times you'll know what I'm talking about.

Before there were no Mobile Spawns, which is pretty much a similar concept of PR's Rally Points. Before people were more tactical, there were a lot more of teamwork, because there were people who were in charge of transportation and ressuplying while others were in combat. Nobody really wanted to die and have to walk 15 min from one city to another. The large amount of terrain between both teams allowed really awesome firefights that lasted for 10 minutes or more. Plus there were possibility of ambushing reinforcements, which was great. Guarding crossroads was really a big deal.

Then they screwed the game up by adding Mobile Spawns. Things were never the same again.

I understand that in PR we still have some of those elements but really it's not in the same scale that it could be. I believe WWII Online did that because they were losing their player base due to people not wanting boring 15-min walks, it was just too hardcore, even though 90% of the time there were some action going on.

I don't think RP's or MSP's are wrong for most players though. I believe it brings a lot more action and less boringness, even though before it felt like each firefight were unique. As I said, it's just my 2 cents.

S!

[FuzzySquirrel]

Cas is right imo, Longer spawntimes just mean you have more time to look at the internet or do something else. You could make it 5 minutes to "Punish" the player but you can't make them set there while they wait. No matter how long you make spawn times it wont matter. The only thing that could really make someone care about living is giving them a limited number of spawns. I mean in RL they dont have UBER1337 Unlimited reinforcements...

[PFunk]

No more RPs may in fact be the way to go. In the mean time spawn timers seem to make no difference to how people play. They only serve as a means to provide some sort of reward for killing, namely that you no long have as many bad guys in the vicinity.

When did it become understood that annoying bratty rambos were so impatient that 90 seconds was enough to scare them into honest tactical gameplay? These people have computers as capable of alt-tabbing in game as the rest of us. They can fap-fap-fap to porn during respawn as much as you and me.

Has everyone forgotten the most popular online shooter of all time? Counter-Strike uniquely features no respawns. CS is one of the most spammy run'n'gunny games ever and yet these people, these noobtards, suffer through the at least 30 seconds to sometimes 4 or 5 minutes between death and a new round.

No simple fix solves people's behavior. You can however work to find a suitable solution which maybe curb it to a satisfactory extent.

[KSorrow]

I personally see a way of getting this "problem" fixed in following way:
"Make the spawntime on RP's higher and on Main Bases lower."

At least I, and many guys I know, would not have any problems with a higher spawntime at the RPs. That would make the decision of dying or not a little bit more important.

Then you can choose if you want to die and wait a long time to spawn in the fight or if you want to survive and work in a team. Or you die and you wait a shorter time to spawn at the mainbase, that could be some km's away.

(I hope you see the idea behind my post)

Yours,
KSorrow

[CAS_117]

Guy's count to 15. Now count to 15 again.

Now look around.

Are you still alive? Did the seas turn to blood? Probably not.

If you expect the amount of time counting to X to alter players behavior then you are kidding yourself. We've extended spawn times to the breaking point, and I cannot see any difference between PR 0.5 and PR 0.85 as far as behavior is concerned.

Extending spawn times has the opposite effect in fact. As people have stated it is just a chance to stretch, read a book, watch a movie, or anything else (if I have a spawn time over 30 seconds I alt tab and watch LOST). But even if the player sat at the screen and watched it, then once you've snapped them out of the experience, any spawn time is abstract. Each player has their own time of how long it takes for them to be snapped out of the game world. Once this happens no one cares about what goes on in it. For me it takes maybe 15 seconds of blank screen for me to start doing something else at my desk. If I am reading a book while playing a game something has gone terribly wrong.

Remove rally points, remove spawn times, and send players back to main or outposts for the following reasons:

• It keeps the players in the game which helps immersion.
• Its more realistic than players popping out of bags which can be put on a tree or a mailbox.
• It creates a more sensible logistical chain.
• It will create a more coherent front line and battlefield in general just because more players will start from the same place.
• It is not arbitrary as many spawn times can end up being.

[nick20404]

Wait what? 30 seconds? every time I get killed I get at least 40-60 second spawn time. Its especially awesome when your on the crappy insurgent dirtbike and it blows up and you get a 90 second spawn time.

[CAS_117]

Case in point.

[FuzzySquirrel]

Guy's count to 15. Now count to 15 again.

Now look around.

Are you still alive? Did the seas turn to blood? Probably not.

If you expect the amount of time counting to X to alter players behavior then you are kidding yourself. We've extended spawn times to the breaking point, and I cannot see any difference between PR 0.5 and PR 0.85 as far as behavior is concerned.

Extending spawn times has the opposite effect in fact. As people have stated it is just a chance to stretch, read a book, watch a movie, or anything else (if I have a spawn time over 30 seconds I alt tab and watch LOST). But even if the player sat at the screen and watched it, then once you've snapped them out of the experience, any spawn time is abstract. Each player has their own time of how long it takes for them to be snapped out of the game world. Once this happens no one cares about what goes on in it. For me it takes maybe 15 seconds of blank screen for me to start doing something else at my desk. If I am reading a book while playing a game something has gone terribly wrong.

Remove rally points, remove spawn times, and send players back to main or outposts for the following reasons:

• It keeps the players in the game which helps immersion.
• Its more realistic than players popping out of bags which can be put on a tree or a mailbox.
• It creates a more sensible logistical chain.
• It will create a more coherent front line and battlefield in general just because more players will start from the same place.
• It is not arbitrary as many spawn times can end up being.

You win. I agree with everything said here...