Project Reality Forums

Arnolduo, that's actually a very interesting way to handle this problem, and one that I can't find any immidiate fault with. New or impatient players will heedlessly cost tickets, but they already do and arguably always will. It could lead to some odd situations like enemy tanks sitting nearly side by side ignoring each other, but it will definately put a near end to choppers going the whole round without doing any cas and endless tank battles on the other side of the map.

Or you can just decrease the number of assets. IE instead of 6 tanks on kashan. have 1.

That way they cant make a hunter teams, and the tank will be worth more.

wicca that dose not fix the problem at all. in fact, that will make tanks stay even further from a fight. now there is only one tank and there are 2 HATs, 2 TOWs, and enemy tank, and 2 Combat engineers to deal with, all of witch have a very high chance of one-shoting you.

I'm quite amused at the idea of loss of tickets for killing enemy assets. Let us apply this to all aspects of pr please. This is surely a great idea because jets/tanks never slug it out away from infantry in real war.

Arnoldio wrote:There is no way to prevent tanks hunting enemy tanks, without being ridicoulous.

Lets say that you completely remove ticket penalty. What happens? Tanks hunt other tanks because if they kill them, enemy team is without tanks for 10 minutes. Still something worth.

Nobody is complainign about what armor does, its what amor does not, supporting inf. That Tanks are armorkiller as well is true but atm thats all they do.

Right now the smart thing to do would be to leave your armor at main and try and take down enemy armor with cas hat and tow instead.

Murphy wrote:I'm quite amused at the idea of loss of tickets for killing enemy assets. Let us apply this to all aspects of pr please. This is surely a great idea because jets/tanks never slug it out away from infantry in real war.

Yes, but once one side has superiority, they don't slink those assets away to lick their wounds and wait for the enemy reinforcements, they move up or out of the way for other assets to support the infantry. And besides, just like there's no rules now against rushing headlong into a 3 versus 1 tank fight and wasting all those tickets, there wouldn't be a hard set rule against destroying similar assets. The idea is to turn the focus back to handling the infantry, who are very capable of defending themselves, with the option to take down the enemy if you've coordinated a breakout.

ChallengerCC wrote:That the point i sad with the hitareas and damage.
The HAT System kills to easy a Tank/APC. It need to be used more wise.
Vehicles cant realy support because the get owned and cant do anything against this.
So there must be a balance. HAT?s can only disable a Tank direct not killing it (only from the back). Disable means he cant shoot and only drive very very slow.
So if the tank is in the front and dont do his supporting role he gets killed. But when he is in back and suports infantry he has very good chance to stay allive.
So then teamwork starts to repair and so on cool stuff for the game.

To Mat: The game has still to mutch action and decreasing tickets for assets would only
increase there careless use of them.
Like faster spawntimes. The same i sad in a other post is with FOB?s the decrease value of a "live" so increasing action gameplay. Limiting the spawns of a FOB and limiting the amount of FOB to max 2 on a map would do a great job i think.
And it cant be that a Tank has a lower value than some Infantry man.

Its hard to say but assets have in a real war scenario a higher value than a mans live. ^^

You can't put a price on a human life.

SuperHornet wrote:You can't put a price on a human life.

while i agree with you that you cant put a dollar value to a human life, the US Treasury isent known for being moral. last i checked it was $150,000.00 per trooper/Sailor/marine/airman (non-specialists).

'Xander[nl wrote:;1720917']Regarding HATs, it might also help to bring it back to the old ammo standards. It's a bit ridiculous that every ammo bag can poop out a (~1,3 even) heavy AT rocket now and it's way too easy to run back and forth getting new ammo to spam HAT missiles.

One HAT kit can devastate the entire enemy team's armor right now (like a USMC HAT at the bridge in Jabal and all MEC apcs will die).

The kit should be a scarecrow to armor, not a weapon of mass destruction. Less ammo and less damage might balance things.

Thats true i found the old ammo system for HAT?s a lot better. This System should be also for every weapon system. So that Granates take more ammo than bullets or so.
And Medikits from normal soldier not form medic should take less ammo begs. (I think now Medics can resupply from 1 ammo beg ther fields or?)
Thats not consistent.

SuperHornet wrote:You can't put a price on a human life.

Man i dont say that this a good behavior.
And no i dont mean antiterror shit.
Infantry is only for beeing a target, spotting, clearing and holding.
For seriours buisness are in modern warfare scenarios Jets, Helis, Tanks and Rockets(final solution).

Cassius wrote:Nobody is complainign about what armor does, its what amor does not, supporting inf. That Tanks are armorkiller as well is true but atm thats all they do.

Right now the smart thing to do would be to leave your armor at main and try and take down enemy armor with cas hat and tow instead.

Well i explained how it could be done to make armor stay away from hunting and focus on INF.

But if we play like that, all im going to say is:

Tanks hunt other tanks and dont help the infantry.
APCs do help infantry, kinda, but dont transport them.
Jets hunt other jets instead of waiting in the main for CAS mission.
Same goes for gunships.
Infantry doesnt cap flags, but rather stay in A1 with their FOB doing absolutely nothing.

See where im going?
The game is quite good, players on the other side, are simply put, fucked in the head.

You can do any modifications to a wheelchair of a tetraplegic, but the guy will not walk. Ever.

Cassius:
"IRL a tank costs way more MONEY than infantery. If a tank is destroyed you lose the tank and 0 to 3 lives. You dont have in addition 5 soldiers summarily executed because a tank is lost. The tank has still to provide support on the field or pursue an objective to actively help the war effort. If a friendly tank merely destroys enemy armor then all it does is nullify enemy armor, the infantery has still to wear down the enemy on their own if the tank stays away and does not support them."

First u get me wrong, i ment 1 tank without crew cost less then 1 soldier couse this are fact for example us faction: 1 soldier 1 miliion $ per year! 1 tank cost 4.3 milions $! So if we jus calculate, for A-stan, 1 soldier 10 milions, 1 tank w/o crew 4.3 milions $! So group of 20 soldiers cost 200 $ milions, grup of 10 tanks with 50 crewman only around 90 milions in afganistan. And there is another problem, for new soldier it takes up at leats 18 years for every new tank only few months!

But anyway we better stay on topic or else we get arse kick by devs!

There is no proof that any of these suggestions would further us towards the goal of having assets fight alongside infantry.

The point I've been trying to make is that the infantry are the ones who ultimately choose to stay near the support or push forward, they are the only ones with ultimate freedom of movement (much like RL wouldn't you say?). Don't blame CAS for not helping inf if they don't throw out a laze/mark enemy positions, don't get mad at armour crews for not wanting to lose their asset because the infantry is incapable of clearing a dangerous position themselves and decides it's better to have an APC peak at the enemy FOB.

We don't need a change of rules we need a change of mentality on the part of infantry as well as asset crews, and as hard as you try to force everyone into a box we will not budge unless it is of our free will. Don't expect anything more then a bunch of randoms in a public server, if you want cohesion and all that happy stuff get into clan matches (PRT was the prime example of what the OP seeks).

If the game turns out to use any of these poorly conceived penalties it will be at the detriment of all players.

mat552 wrote:This is the argument that lead to the current system which has been in place for over a year if I'm not mistaken, and I feel safe in assuming that most people feel the system hasn't worked as intended. Players who don't intend to participate in teamwork still don't, but the best way to "be a team player" is to hunt your counterpart asset exclusively, leaving the infantry to duke it out alone over the flags.

that doesn't make this the wrong argument. it just means we went about dealing with it the wrong way. that argument is correct as far as i'm concerned.

i agree with murphy, infantry is ultimately what decides the movement of all other assets. this is the way it is ingame as well as IRL. Armour WILL NOT move into a city until infantry has cleared it. Mortars, artiller, and CAS WILL NOT fire on a position till infantry call for it and confirm it's targets. These are the proper procedures, there is a reason why they are followed IRL. If the infantry doesn't do their job none of the other assets can.

as i've said before in other threads: Proper drills saves lives. (and assets) dont blame the CAS or the tanks, blame yourselves.

Murphy wrote:There is no proof that any of these suggestions would further us towards the goal of having assets fight alongside infantry.

If the game turns out to use any of these poorly conceived penalties it will be at the detriment of all players.

Very honestly; there's no proof for any of the big shifts the devs have made. No proof for RPs to get gutted, no proof to implement the penalty in the first place. They make the design choices based on gut feelings, and once every few months, a sidelong glance at the suggestion forum. We have nothing to loose if this were implemented and turns out to be an incomperable failure except a few weeks of playtime. You are no more able to know for sure the outcome of a change than I am able to predict the lotto numbers tonight.

We've tried the hickory switch, why not try the willow or birch, assuming no one wants to try the carrot.

Murphy wrote: We don't need a change of rules we need a change of mentality on the part of infantry as well as asset crews, and as hard as you try to force everyone into a box we will not budge unless it is of our free will. Don't expect anything more then a bunch of randoms in a public server, if you want cohesion and all that happy stuff get into clan matches (PRT was the prime example of what the OP seeks).

Stop with this fucking PRT this clan battle that bullshit! We want to change the game so it encourages people to stick to gether ON PUBLIC SERVERS. Not punish, but encourage.
You are saying that PR is completely obsolete because if you wanted a realistic gaming, you would just need vanilla BF2, on a clan level with likeminded people. Well yeah, it would work, but thats not the point. And thats what PR is made for. Or any game really. Show its full potential in the basic public version, clans just make it that 10 percent better.

and making armor free is going to make people on pub servers stick together.... how? personally id just do kamikaze runs against known FOB positions, as long as i wounded even one person, i broke even, and shooting 120mm shells or even 25mm shells, wounding one guy isent exactly hard. personally i have no wish to see this game take a step back towards vanilla.

After reading OP i'm ashamed I was about to shoot it down before I even opened the thread.

Though to be honest, I could care less about what PRT does right or not. I care what is done right and makes my pub trail blazing fun. And if that means my armor isn't being crewed by cowards instead of brute force one minded russians that get the job done then I am not a happy person. I DEMAND A RECALL ON MY CREWS!

Maybe a python code that gives points to armor if they have a squad within 50-100 meters would be better?

actually ppl who dont care about their team will not be affected in any direction if ticketloss will be changed.
but there are ppl who seize risk and ticketvalues before attacks.
give anyone tanks for free and the decision will be much easier to run into enemy lines.