Project Reality Forums

I agree that medic bags should be removed from civilians but I think they should get a ton of bandages. I doubt a civilian in Iraq would know the necessary medical treatments to handle most medical situations like a NATO Medic would but I would assume that they would know how to wrap a wound and bandage it.

Demonic wrote:I agree that medic bags should be removed from civilians but I think they should get a ton of bandages. I doubt a civilian in Iraq would know the necessary medical treatments to handle most medical situations like a NATO Medic would but I would assume that they would know how to wrap a wound and bandage it.

Awesome!Nice!Great! That idea is good!

Demonic wrote:I doubt a civilian in Iraq would know the necessary medical treatments to handle most medical situations like a NATO Medic would but I would assume that they would know how to wrap a wound and bandage it.

Before the war Iraq had one of the best medical treatment systems in the middle-east. Although the hospitals have been variously bombed, inundated, looted and had their power cut off, it's unrealistic to think that there aren't any brave civilian doctors (and nurses, etc) with medical bags who'd possibly risk their life (even though by law coalition troops are not allowed to shoot them) to ease the suffering of their friends, family, and assorted countrymen.

TBH the arguments for removing the medical bag seem to all be "We don't want to have to use skill and tactics to arrest or bean-bag medics, so we want to make them even MORE handicapped than they are already."

Compare what a civ can do vs what a corpsman can do and then tell me about balance. Seriously, go online now, and play a few rounds as a dedicated civ medic and tell me how effective it is and how fun it is; THEN tell me how much better it'll be without the medical pack.

Ace42 wrote:Before the war Iraq had one of the best medical treatment systems in the middle-east. Although the hospitals have been variously bombed, inundated, looted and had their power cut off, it's unrealistic to think that there aren't any brave civilian doctors (and nurses, etc) with medical bags who'd possibly risk their life (even though by law coalition troops are not allowed to shoot them) to ease the suffering of their friends, family, and assorted countrymen.

TBH the arguments for removing the medical bag seem to all be "We don't want to have to use skill and tactics to arrest or bean-bag medics, so we want to make them even MORE handicapped than they are already."

Compare what a civ can do vs what a corpsman can do and then tell me about balance. Seriously, go online now, and play a few rounds as a dedicated civ medic and tell me how effective it is and how fun it is; THEN tell me how much better it'll be without the medical pack.

Unrealistic? Civilian Doctors don't tag along the Insurgents to take care of there wounds. They wait for the wounded to come to them in the proper facilities where they can actually do there jobs better and have the right tools to do so. Show me a video of a civilian doctor running through the heat of fire to treat insurgent wounds and I will reverse that statement.

No my argument is not to remove the use of skill and tactics to arrest. You still have to do that for intel. However its nice of you to make assumtions about peoples statements. I am simply making a suggestion in a topic in 'PR Suggestions'. As the only medical treatment the insurgents will normally get in real-life is by a caring civilian who lives near where the battle is taking place or by a NATO medic. Unless of course he gets lucky and a doctor just happens to be strolling around with his tools and supplies when the fight breaks out. However I think we both know the possibilities of that actually happening. Therefor the best bet they can get in for a civilian to bandage them up.

I don't know if you have ever played the Insurgency mode but they are not handicapped. They get unlimited spawn points. They get rallies all over the map. All they have to do is put a good defense and defend the cache. Infact majority of the Insurgency games I have played the Insurgent team usually wins 65%-70% of the time.

Secondly regarding your last statement, all I ever do is play Insurgency. Infact I haven't played AAS in a month. The Civ medic is fun but last time I checked this was Project Reality not Project Fun and in real-life you don't just happen to have professional doctors with there medical kits walking by assisting the insurgents while there is a gun fire going on. The best they would get is some caring citizens willing to bandage them up and in earlier patches PR had given them bandages before and not medic bags and it works out just the same.

What's the difference between having to walk on a bandage to heal rather than having to sit there while the civ with the medic bag heals you? They both will get you healed enough for action in time and infact the bandages I believe even heal you faster and tell me how that effects the balance and game-play?

Demonic wrote:Unrealistic? Civilian Doctors don't tag along the Insurgents to take care of there wounds.

And medics don't heal fatal bullet wounds with epi-pens. However, there's no reason to believe that doctors and other people with medical training wouldn't collaborate with the insurgency. Do you assume civilian collaborators consist solely of disgruntled taxi-drivers or something?

I don't know if you have ever played the Insurgency mode but they are not handicapped.

Clearly you haven't, then. Otherwise you'd've enjoyed the five minutes wasted walking around desperately trying to get shot-up because there's no way to stop bleeding out because there's no-one playing civvy. "Oh, I've been wounded, must try to get myself killed so I can respawn", really realistic.

The Civ medic is fun but last time I checked this was Project Reality not Project Fun

Civ collaborator isn't fun, which is why if you check any INS server you'll find 0 of them, maybe one person will do it for 5 mins before getting fed up of the massive spawns and quitting. And fun beats realism hands down every time, if you don't have that one squared away, re-read the forums and see what the conclusions of the realism vs fun debates are every single time.

and in real-life you don't just happen to have professional doctors with there medical kits walking by assisting the insurgents while there is a gun fire going on. The best they would get is some caring citizens willing to bandage them up and in earlier patches PR had given them bandages before and not medic bags and it works out just the same.

That's an argument for removing medic bags from corpsmen, why do both still have medic-bags? Gameplay reasons. Civs are already nerfed by being denied a weapon, and by massive spawn times. When the "bug" gets fixed, they'll be further nerfed by being killable when performing their ONLY real duty. Your great solution to this imbalance is to nerf them further? Ingenious.

What's the difference between having to walk on a bandage to heal rather than having to sit there while the civ with the medic bag heals you? They both will get you healed enough for action in time and infact the bandages I believe even heal you faster and tell me how that effects the balance and game-play?

What do you think the medic bag represents? It's not SUPPOSED to represent a magic token you wave at someone and they're perfectly fine; it's supposed to represent typical medical paraphenalia that a corpsman / civ might have on them; IE field dressings, etc. When a civ / corpsman is using the medic bag, the NOISES YOU HEAR should give you the clue that they are APPLYING FIELD DRESSINGS, ETC.

Your suggestion is "replace the field dressings and medical care provided by a civ who may well have a degree of medical training IRL; with a limited number of individually packed field dressings to be applied by Abdul the Jihadist." As you point out, the only difference is that with the former the civs are useful as something other than a dispensor, and they don't have to constantly lead coalition forces directly to a cache running forwards and backwards dodging bullets to do so.

Civs are already totally gimped, making them even MORE handicapped is hardly a wise suggestion.

This has nothing with the topic to do,Daemonic has right.

You have your opinion and I have mine, I am sticking to my suggestion but I am not going to debate and argue over it on somebody elses topic.

However one quick reminder to you. "Civs are already nerfed by being denied a weapon, and by massive spawn times.". Civs don't have weapons for the simple fact they are civilians. Otherwise they would be combatants. They have big spawn times because in earlier patches the kit was abuses and the civilians would sit infront of there teammates so if a NATO soldier took a shot at them they would kill the civilian first. It was a big mess for game-play that was fixed when civilians had to think twice about doing all that BS because of having to wait that long.

Demonic wrote:You have your opinion and I have mine, I am sticking to my suggestion but I am not going to debate and argue over it on somebody elses topic.

Oh, sorry, I didn't realise that forums weren't for debating issues. Next time someone fails to consider the ramifications of the post, let's all wait for it to get coded and people to get irritated before pointing out the obvious short-comings, yah?

Ace42 wrote:Oh, sorry, I didn't realise that forums weren't for debating issues. Next time someone fails to consider the ramifications of the post, let's all wait for it to get coded and people to get irritated before pointing out the obvious short-comings, yah?

Forums are for debating issues, you just can't start debates all over the place however. That's why we have a debate section. Secondly I made a suggestion, that was it. I am suppose to predict that some guy is going to come in the topic and start arguments based off of it? No I expect that people would realize it's just a suggestion and it's nothing to get ones panties in a twist over.

I think they should keep the medic-bag, lower spawn time, and raise punishment for Coalition troops. How sad is it that you whine about it being unfair when you have an assortment of scoped rifles, top-of-the-line military gear, helicopters, APC's, and whatnot? Aside from being realistic it is also simply fair to let the INS have their own medics. Hell, I don't think they should be killable for even using a medic bag. Geneva Convention stands, and we are playing Project REALITY. So Travis, you can stuff it with the "ignore that, it's no fair! US needs more!" tirade you unleash everywhere. I recall you saying you never play INS because it was against your morals (so much for just being a video-game), so of course you'd never understand the point of view of players stuck as the insurgents. I usually play INS, but simply because at the beginning of every server everyone switches to coalition. After playing both sides enough, however, I've found that as long as the US wasn't totally retarded they'd win, or at the very least do tons of damage to INS and come close to victory. So if you think insurgents being healed is unfair, you've never experienced the American zombie squads of people you just mowed down with a PKM. So I say keep the status quo for the most part, just make being civi less of a total sacrifice for that player. Not fair to lose all gaming fun for the team's sake considering how many BLUFors got an itchy trigger-finger.

Rais punishment! Not agree
Shorter spawn-time!Agree
Medic bag!Agree if they can heal US/Brit too.

Adetter wrote:This has nothing with the topic to do,Daemonic has right.

Actually Ace42 has hit the hammer on the head, if you were a doctor in iraq and didnt like isaf forces in your country you would go help the insurgents. It is very on topic.

why not have a automatic healing place at insurgent main like coalition does....and also if we could figure a way to put a ROE (rules of engagement) on cars and vehicles it would do tons for realism....could ferry the wounded back to the healing spot at main to get back to full health...instead of just bleeding out for the lack of a civi on the map or the fact that he just goes off on his own with out a care in the world.

Cheditor wrote:Actually Ace42 has hit the hammer on the head, if you were a doctor in iraq and didnt like isaf forces in your country you would go help the insurgents. It is very on topic.

Cheditor, you good at math? Calculate the chances of a doctor just happening to stumble upon a fire fight and just happening to have all the med supplies he needs to treat all the wounded insurgent soldiers. The only chance that would happen if there was a hospital near-by with working doctors. They could just gather the supplies needed and get to the wounded but unlike most countries most of there hospitals have been destroyed, there supplies looted, etc.

Hresvelgr wrote:I think they should keep the medic-bag, lower spawn time, and raise punishment for Coalition troops. How sad is it that you whine about it being unfair when you have an assortment of scoped rifles, top-of-the-line military gear, helicopters, APC's, and whatnot? Aside from being realistic it is also simply fair to let the INS have their own medics. Hell, I don't think they should be killable for even using a medic bag. Geneva Convention stands, and we are playing Project REALITY. So Travis, you can stuff it with the "ignore that, it's no fair! US needs more!" tirade you unleash everywhere. I recall you saying you never play INS because it was against your morals (so much for just being a video-game), so of course you'd never understand the point of view of players stuck as the insurgents. I usually play INS, but simply because at the beginning of every server everyone switches to coalition. After playing both sides enough, however, I've found that as long as the US wasn't totally retarded they'd win, or at the very least do tons of damage to INS and come close to victory. So if you think insurgents being healed is unfair, you've never experienced the American zombie squads of people you just mowed down with a PKM. So I say keep the status quo for the most part, just make being civi less of a total sacrifice for that player. Not fair to lose all gaming fun for the team's sake considering how many BLUFors got an itchy trigger-finger.

You must not read much of my post?

I wanted to give very class on the Insurgent side a field pack that healed for 10% less then a coalition one.

I also wanted to give the Insurgents a type of self built spawn point witch they got (I did not make the idea but I agreed with it.)

I also think the Insurgents should hold a small upper hand at all times on any map this is done by well placed cache locations and allowing the Insurgents to have time to place defenses before the coalition show's up.

The coalition may have scope but I for one use iron site / red dot because scopes in Insurgence don't work because your moving into Close quoter combat to kill the cache.

I believe Game Play over reality.

If others did not believe this you think there would be a MEC faction or USA vs PLA?

I stand strong against giving the Insurgents more Rpg7 and any anti Inf rpg war Head.

I also Do not want to see the Unarmed Insurgent to be a life treating enemy (rocks)

They should not be shot, but there should be a roe that allows them to be shot if they are relivable, Keep the medic bag remove the revive pin don't allow them to be shot.

You can't say allowing a unarmed insurgent healing and reviving insurgents that where not allowed by the Roe to kill is just not OP?

Demonic wrote:Cheditor, you good at math? Calculate the chances of a doctor just happening to stumble upon a fire fight and just happening to have all the med supplies he needs to treat all the wounded insurgent soldiers. The only chance that would happen if there was a hospital near-by with working doctors. They could just gather the supplies needed and get to the wounded but unlike most countries most of there hospitals have been destroyed, there supplies looted, etc.

And what are the chances a US medic could save someone near death so they can keep fighting? Sure, they can stabalize someone if they were hit, but if it was bad (bad enough so they can't move, fire, or even look around), then they need a medevac or else that soldier WILL die. However, the game engine has it so the medic can heal any injury as long as the guy isn't completely dead.

Simply, what is wrong about the medic bag? You got APC's, Heli's, and a shorter spawn time than civies. How about you act like US soldiers over there and only fire at those firing at you? If the INS knew you were coming, there would be tons of civilians all over the place. They would be throwing rocks at you, laughing at you, everything short of actually shooting at you. But it doesn't matter. Your goal is to complete your OBJ and defend against ARMED resistance, if there is any. This doesn't mean you can go on a killing spree and shoot those civies throwing a few rocks mocking you....it means your ignore it and focus on your OBJ. In this game, it's finding those caches and taking out armed resistance in your way.

Demonic wrote:Calculate the chances of a doctor just happening to stumble upon a fire fight and just happening to have all the med supplies he needs to treat all the wounded insurgent soldiers.

They are civilian COLLABORATORS. They aren't "stumbling" across everything; they are sympathisers who are co-operating with the Insurgency. That's why they're in the game.

"This guy here's a doctor"
"Great, we could use a doctor in our ranks, those westerns shoot pretty good for a bunch of decadent sinners!"
"Yah, but rather than putting a load of these bandages that all our cell-leaders have into one big bag for him to carry around near our troops, we thought it best to just give him a handful and have him toss them at mortally wounded people he coincidentally walks into as he runs around the streets aimlessly"
"Yes, this truly is a tactic worthy of our God!"

<eyeroll>

The main thing we need remember is this is first and foremost a game, a game no matter how realistically you try to make it has to be balanced in some way. Just beacause in real life chances of a doctor appearing arent high doesnt mean it cant happen. Note insurgency happens in towns, there is bound to be 1 or 2 doctors in the area.

R.J.Travis wrote:You must not read much of my post?

I wanted to give very class on the Insurgent side a field pack that healed for 10% less then a coalition one.

Why? Are their first aid kits inherently inferior for some reason now? But other than the 10% part, I'd rather have this than civies with medic bag too because nobody plays as them anymore and the ones who do can't do anything for the longest time if they get shot, which happens all the time. Hell, before they were given medic bags I wanted all INS to get at least one field dressing instead.

The coalition may have scope but I for one use iron site / red dot because scopes in Insurgence don't work because your moving into Close quoter combat to kill the cache.

I think that it is better to make sure they're dead from a distance, toss nades, then move in with 3-round-burst ready, no sights really necessary. But that is just personal opinion.

I believe Game Play over reality.

Unfortunately this is Project Reality.

If others did not believe this you think there would be a MEC faction or USA vs PLA?

Firstly, the reality part goes for gameplay, and the MEC and PLA are in there because they were in vBF2. No sense in throwing away most factions and all conventional warfare.

I also Do not want to see the Unarmed Insurgent to be a life treating enemy (rocks)

Rocks aren't threatening. Especially in this version, you'd be lucky if you even hit someone, much less injured him. I've only seen rocks severely injure/kill in way earlier versions, and even then it was fair because it could only happen when one guy went off on his own and met a civi mob.

You can't say allowing a unarmed insurgent healing and reviving insurgents that where not allowed by the Roe to kill is just not OP?

It'd be a neat and interesting, and somewhat more realistic, gameplay feature to have the INS have functional but non-lethal medics that you can't kill.

R.J.Travis wrote: You can't say allowing a unarmed insurgent healing and reviving insurgents that where not allowed by the Roe to kill is just not OP?

Donkey-punch them or bean-bag them. Problem solved.