Project Reality Forums

Posted: **2012-02-18 15:44**

*NwA*Orford wrote:"My main complaint, however, is that these type of rules are actually forced on everyone in PR - at least the servers where the best players and more teamwork exist. The worst part is, no one contests it. The most common rules I've encountered are no attacking uncaps, no roadkilling, no baseraping or ambushing close to main, no incendiaring heavy vehicles (prior to changes) etc."

To answer your own point THATS WHY THE BEST TEAM WORK AND BEST PLAYERS PLAY THERE., Because of such rules you are contesting.

Well, the best teamwork and best players in PR aren't on that high of a level. I wasn't referring to the very best of players, but the players that regularly play that are also decent at the game and don't completely ignore the rest of their team. Their authority is questionable, as seen by their full support for these type of rules.

[quote=""'="]H[= EasyAlpha;1734261']
Teamwork and cooperation dont depend on ridiculous server rules, its the players themselves that choose to come together and work as a team, you can't force people to.
[/quote]

Indeed, most people don't seem to realize this. Besides, some of the stuff I mentioned requires more teamwork to counter or to use. Rushing flags can be risky, and if you don't coordinate with other squads and have them cap at least some of the first flags, you might end up with a big disadvantage. Roadkilling is best prevented when infantry moves with armor (other than the common sense ways I've mentioned before...) if you need to cross open ground. Hell, regardless of roadkilling, you want some escort because of techies or bomb cars, unless you're going for a stealthy approach.

saxoni wrote:As many already have stated; killing a roadkiller is nearly impossible, and I guess that's the main reason why it's prohibited on most servers. Servers that doesn't have this rule fail to see how PR is supposed to be played.

It's not nearly impossible :/
It's not even that hard, except for ammo techies (it would be nice to make them weaker). And there are other ways of dealing with roadkilling that I've mentioned before.

saxoni wrote:Attacking the opposing team's main base is nothing but unnecessary. You've got several flags/caches to fight for, and the players on each team are limited. There are maximum 32 players on each team (excluding the 128-server), and these 32 men needs to be out on the battlefield, either defending or attacking flags/caches. Having a squad defending main base because of the fear of being attacked in main shouldn't be necessary at all.
The main base is where the whole team's assets are, and without those assets there will be neither teamwork nor a good game.

You don't need a squad defending the main base all the time. There's usually some kind of traffic going on in main, just have the people that are currently in main defend it if necessary. If there's a heavier attack going on, THEN you would need a squad defending, in which case it's not a big loss for your team since the other team is using manpower to attack your main anyway.
Also, you can attack their main. Attacking main bases is an indirect way of fighting for flags/caches.

[quote="Jevski""]Dont forget to mention motars. If baserape was allowed. I would just build motars in DOD, and shell the hell out of enemy main. Hell I would even know where and when certain assets magically would appear out of thin air in their main, and have shell in the air even before they spawned, so that they landed the exact moment they appeared.[/quote]

They could do the same, and if baserape was allowed, you would probably be targetted pretty fast by infantry. Problem is, the DoD on some maps might be too big or the map geography might protect you from people shooting at your main from further away, in which case it would suck. Removing the DoD would fix it tbh

As far as targetting certain assets goes, I assume you're mostly talking about attack helis, since they are the ones that never spawn in hangars and their respawn times are the easiest to track. Even if you're right and having to position your mortars close enough to the enemy main, while not losing your logi or being found by enemies in the process (all of this is tricky on big maps that have attack helis), is easy enough, this would only warrant a ban on mortaring mains, and only on some maps, it wouldn't be justified to completely ban baseraping solely based on this.

When I think about it, Karbala would be problematic in this way. But that map is pretty bad in other ways already

Web_cole wrote:To bring it back around, things like repetitive road killing being banned are that way because the community feels it is enough of an exploit that it actually shouldn't be allowed (for reasons stated by others.) It may feel somewhat arbitrary although in that case I happen to agree with it. In certain other cases I might feel you have a point, but for the most part not the ones you mentioned in your OP.

Where do you feel I might have a point and why ?

'Xander[nl wrote:;1734847']Because that, unlike rules like baserape and roadkilling, is something purely gameplay wise and it is only up to the admins to decide what to do with it.

On NwA, we want teamwork to prevail and we want people to experience fun over winning. Rushing the first flag and winning the round like that might be totally awesum suyper leet ninja for your squad, but it leaves 32 people on the other team unhappy and the rest of your team (especially heavy asset squads) will also have a crappy round.

It's the same shit, they are all 'gameplay wise'. Baserape might give you some more reward for less effort than rushing flags, but it's available to both sides and banning it across the board (for all maps) isn't the best way to go about it.

Basically what you're saying in the 2nd paragraph I quoted is, people want the game to be easy and predictable enough so they don't get owned too hard, and people that do things out of the ordinary should get punished for playing to win. Here's the thing: if you get owned by one squad because they rushed a flag, it is your fault and the LACK of teamwork on your side that caused the potential defeat, not the fault of the 'power' of the strategy your opponents are using.

Posted: **2012-02-18 16:26**

Not often i'm so crass to be honest, but this thread is ridiculous.

The rules exist to stop people exploiting the limitations of the game engine whilst making the fight fair and fun for both sides, all in the spirit of making a battle that comes close[r] to reality.

If you didn't have such rules PR would just be vBF2 with deviation. Kamikaze planes, C4 vehicles, people with HAT kits being dropped off by heli to camp the enemy main.. The list goes on.

Honestly, try it though. See what happens.

Posted: **2012-02-18 16:48**

Qadis wrote: - sip -

One thing that annoys me is stating that PR players aren't that much of a high level, and I've seen this claimed by so many people that I'm starting to wonder if they're representative of at least half of the PR population.
Which is funny, because it seems to me that you're all criticizing each others without being aware of such.

Also stating that "you should of done that or this" is probably one of the most cringe worthy arguments that I sometimes face in this community. It's like you already know that all variables are aligned with the stars to bring up this perfect scenario that you imagined in your mind, yet you weren't there to begin with nor know half the story.
In this case though, you mix several scenarios in your mind making some of your suggested rules to be...well, they're not even rules. Actually you're not even suggesting anything as constructive alternatives other than your wish to baserape, roadkill and rush the first uncappable flag.

For the first and latter, I will answer DoD and AAS. PR team included them for a reason so it's not like the community felt like it was meant to be played that way. It is meant to be played that way and always has been.

Roadkilling is a different matter but there are several reasons to why it was taken out. As far as I know, the best servers don't mind a roadkill or two when it's in your line of action. But to drive around in circles and waste an asset for your team, is undoubtedly detrimental. The injured enemy ones will be revived and you had your fun at the expense of another transport wasted for your team - if not a more valuable vehicle.
What about this perspective for a change instead of just referring the annoyed players?
You're wasting an asset for giggles, there's no excuse for that.

All these things are common sense, how you're even debating them just amazes me.

Posted: **2012-02-18 18:27**

LieutenantNessie wrote:That's obviously because the enemy pilot didn't know how to win. As soon as you get a lock, spam all the AA missiles, one of them will hit it, if not, the HUGE splash damage will kill it.

E: Never have failed me, it's just if you want to be a tactic00l r3alistic pilot who wants to act like in a "real dogfight"

That's a pretty new tactic to me, however locks are not always possible and that's what I was talking about. Also sometimes when you're in the air, you can spam all your rockets, and still miss.

The discussion I created is off-topic, so I'll stop it here with we're both right in our own sense.

Posted: **2012-02-18 19:28**

Mikemonster wrote:Not often i'm so crass to be honest, but this thread is ridiculous.

The rules exist to stop people exploiting the limitations of the game engine whilst making the fight fair and fun for both sides, all in the spirit of making a battle that comes close[r] to reality.

If you didn't have such rules PR would just be vBF2 with deviation. Kamikaze planes, C4 vehicles, people with HAT kits being dropped off by heli to camp the enemy main.. The list goes on.

Honestly, try it though. See what happens.

Engine allows you to make cars so that if you shoot to the selected part of the engine it will stop the car. Vbf2 has deviation it is just smaller than in pr.

However i agree that since bf2pr has this old engine as it is, i think this game is not up for that kind of effort.

Posted: **2012-02-18 19:30**

For the record, NWA's reasoning is that the bluefor would have a fairly extensive, well known main base, whereas in real life the insurgents would not be deploying from a single, static, known point.

I agree with you on roadkilling, but that's about it. For me, the bottom line is that the game was meant to be played a certain way, and these techniques deviate gameplay from how it was intended. You also have to keep in mind that these rules are being made by the people paying for the server. You have a certain obligation to follow them.

In regards to roadkilling, very few *actually* enforce it, and even fewer believe it is wrong.

Posted: **2012-02-18 20:20**

I find that people enforce it when it is reported, and people only report road killing when they have run over like 5 guys, swerving to kill them, that doesn't happen often.

the game is not meant for road killing as IRL if you hit 1 guy with a car even a humvee i'm sure you'd do a lot of damage to it and at least slow it down quite a bit. Trucks etc. not so much but in PR it's to hard to shoot through windows due to deviation etc.

Posted: **2012-02-18 20:59**

The rules came about when a lot of the old PR players left and new ones came. Most of the old servers didn't have these ridiculously boring rules which made the game play more intense and fun. TBA for example. Every other round you'd see bomb cars coming into your main as your getting ready to head out or just getting in to regroup. Kept you on your toes, people don't like losing all their assets when they can't protect them. What people also don't like is using their brains they like insurgency pretty much dumbed down. The old insurgency from around 0.75-0.8 was the best kind and required some strategy/skill. Now everyone would rather have the watered down one so thy can win and feel better.

Posted: **2012-02-18 21:50**

The problem is that the DEV's actually made it very hard for the insurgents to bomb car mains anyway without server rules, it was a general community complaint if i remember correctly.

However the problem comes when IED's are placed at the entrance of gates and enterances, there is no way to get rid of them unles you sacrifice soemtihng, which is tottally wrong, it requires no teamwork or stratagey from the side of the insurgent, nor is it fair on the blufor.
IRL the main base would normally be miles away and protected by gaurds 24/7.
Defending a main is boring, it really is and no one likes to do it, all your doing is defending against cheap noobs who can't think further than putting IED's at an enterance, this game is about the objectives of flags and caches, the mains should be an issuehere, all they should be is a place for vehicles and spawning, it isn't a flag, it isn't a place the mapper has designed to be under attack or to repel one!

Posted: **2012-02-18 22:24**

Qadis wrote:You don't need a squad defending the main base all the time. There's usually some kind of traffic going on in main, just have the people that are currently in main defend it if necessary.

That might work in a game like BF3 or vbf2, but in PR everything counts. We can't afford to have our tank out of commission for 20 more minutes because it got hit by a HAT while nobody was watching the main. A loss like that could cost a team the game. Or if you're more ticket minded, a fully loaded transport chopper gets hit by a HAT just before take off, that's about 10 tickets gone & 1/4 of the team raging about the shitty design of the main base.(Hills overlooking the pads, ineffective hesco placement, low walls, etc) Most of the mains were not designed for combat.

Posted: **2012-02-18 22:26**

'Xander[nl wrote:;1734847']
We had this rule mainly to prevent Blufor from camping within the safety of their Hesco barriers and fire away at insurgents with their superior firepower. But the rule got abused by some INS players, using techies to raid the bases and kill the assets (choppers on the pads mostly) and it has now been changed. In view of gameplay, so that both teams can have proper fun, it is now forbidden to attack Blufor main bases.

I was not aware of this, I apologise and will edit my post.

Thanks for keeping us updated

Posted: **2012-02-18 22:38**

Dev1200;1734842 wrote: Fun Fact: The NWA Insurgency server allows insurgents to attack the BLUFOR's base, but not vice versa.

QUOTE]

WRONG, I got banned from there the other day for shooting the Kiowa with the techincal. Mind you they had stryker's in the main that could easily outpower a teknical. Also the rules stated you could but they are changing it.

So I agree with other posts regarding killing Insurgents abilities. OPFOR is completely outgunned and shooting small arms into main should be allowed if not encouraged as it simulates real life engagements. On AAS I agree it should be banned but certainly not Insurgency.

Also think about Korengal Valley, BLUFOR always camp their main and shoot outside of it but as soon as you start shooting back you get warned for baserape.

Posted: **2012-02-18 22:43**

Scared_420 wrote:
Dev1200;1734842 wrote: Fun Fact: The NWA Insurgency server allows insurgents to attack the BLUFOR's base, but not vice versa.

QUOTE]

WRONG, I got banned from there the other day for shooting the Kiowa with the techincal. Mind you they had stryker's in the main that could easily outpower a teknical. Also the rules stated you could but they are changing it.

So I agree with other posts regarding killing Insurgents abilities. OPFOR is completely outgunned and shooting small arms into main should be allowed if not encouraged as it simulates real life engagements. On AAS I agree it should be banned but certainly not Insurgency.

Also think about Korengal Valley, BLUFOR always camp their main and shoot outside of it but as soon as you start shooting back you get warned for baserape.
The rule got changed a couple of days ago, so bad luck mate.

Posted: **2012-02-19 06:51**

my two cents..

insurgents attacking main....let them. assign a sqd to defend and enjoy free & fast intel points

bluefor attacking insurgent main...low blow, with all the vehicles and firepower superiority, i think it is sad...but go with server rules not matter how shitty you think they are.

roadkills....think twice before running over open field, listen to car engines, make sure you are aware of terrain, it can save you. totally OK with it. if a team player takes the vehicles to do roadkill runs on purpose and loosing them in the process, than that team should report the member to sever admins for wasting valuable assets hence hindering his own team. on most if not all servers, admins will help/address the player.

AAS main protect rule... makes perfect sense due to game mode being Attack and Secure and the game is giving you objectives to follow, otherwise game turns to be a skirmish type slugfest...go to vanilla

i may have some other thoughts but forgot all teh details from the OP

kill as many as you can and don't forget to rape, burn and pillage
=]H[=DamnRed

Posted: **2012-02-19 08:59**

zmaj4791 wrote:my two cents..

insurgents attacking main....let them. assign a sqd to defend and enjoy free & fast intel points

=]H[=DamnRed

i think that no one wants to sit on main alltime.

Blufor mainbase should be guarded with radar what shows enemys near by on map.
https://www.realitymod.com/forum/f18-pr ... stion.html

Posted: **2012-02-19 10:33**

I do have to say, there is the odd map where it can be quite fun to get trapped in the main base and have to defend it. Korengal would be the best example of this, followed by Lashkar. Although i have lost more rounds on both these maps than won, I always have a great time. But, i have never had fun being stuck in the main of an AAS map, so i think base attacks are rightly banned there

Attacking the main (blufor in particular) makes insurgency a lot more fun, but on AAS it detracts heavily from the gaming experience of both teams.

Posted: **2012-02-19 12:41**

zmaj4791 wrote:
insurgents attacking main....let them. assign a sqd to defend and enjoy free & fast intel points
Not going to happen, no-one wants to defend main, and when the insurgents realise that the main is defended they could just mortar/RPG/Gary it and game over. I agree thatt he ticket count for getting a cache should be lowered, and small arms ONLY from hand rifles/gun should be allowed to be shot into the main, not including snipers

bluefor attacking insurgent main...low blow, with all the vehicles and firepower superiority, i think it is sad...but go with server rules not matter how shitty you think they are.
insurgent mains aren't designed to be attacked at all, mcuh less so than the Blufor mains which aren't designed to be attacked either

roadkills....think twice before running over open field Your more likely to get shot than run over, also sometimes unavoidable listen to car enginesyou can only hear them at like 5 meters away unless it's like an apc, make sure you are aware of terrainwell yes the same as what i said before, it can save you. totally OK with it. if a team player takes the vehicles to do roadkill runs on purpose They should be banned for this and this alone anyway and loosing them in the process, then that team should report the member to sever admins for wasting valuable assets hence hindering his own team. on most if not all servers, admins will help/address the player.

AAS main protect rule... makes perfect sense due to game mode being Attack and Secure and the game is giving you objectives to follow, otherwise game turns to be a skirmish type slugfest...go to vanilla

i may have some other thoughts but forgot all teh details from the OP

=]H[=DamnRed

Comments in red

Posted: **2012-02-19 16:20**

Road Killing- In PR:ArmA is certainly possible but almost always frowned upon as unrealistic. This is even with the ability to shoot out passengers/tires/engines really really easily. Fact of the matter? No army gets into their gun equipped, platoon controlled, rover and says.... yeah lets just run them over. No, you use the gun on the top. Insurgents are different though. I disagree with that nub that gets into an M113-L with the intention of only roadkilling.

That kind of gameplay is against the spirit of the vehicle, is against teamwork, and over all is just something I'd rather you do on BF3.

Camping Main- Seriously? It has got to be the cheapest thing to do, just picking people off as they have no situational awareness.

Ambushing exits out of main- Fine by me.

Incendiary Grenades- A result of buggy code, cheap and and unfair, and gave every soldier a good and reasonable AT option. In real life the grenade must be placed properly to work, good luck doing that. Glad the mods made it only 'drop-able' .

My take.

I play PR for the teamplay not for cheap tricks that are both unintentional and unrealistic.

Posted: **2012-02-19 16:48**

saXoni wrote:LMFAO v2.0

LMFAO v3.0

its easy to kill roadkillers. guess you sucked at bf2 if you couldn't.

if anything it takes more teamwork to defeat these tricks. your view on more rules = more teamwork is false.

@ ytman - if you have no situational awareness in main thats nobody else's fault but your own. there should be a server rule to ban people for killing those who spawn on fobs or rallys.

Posted: **2012-02-19 17:29**

it is not easy to kill roadkillers esspecially in PR, unless you have a lot of prior notice to them going for you you won't know untill they are 1 meter away from you. It is compeltely unrealistic

Project Reality Forums

The ridicilousness of some artificial in-game rules

Re: The ridicilousness of some artificial in-game rules

Re: The ridicilousness of some artificial in-game rules

Re: The ridicilousness of some artificial in-game rules

Re: The ridicilousness of some artificial in-game rules

Re: The ridicilousness of some artificial in-game rules

Re: The ridicilousness of some artificial in-game rules

Re: The ridicilousness of some artificial in-game rules

Re: The ridicilousness of some artificial in-game rules

Re: The ridicilousness of some artificial in-game rules

Re: The ridicilousness of some artificial in-game rules

Re: The ridicilousness of some artificial in-game rules

Re: The ridicilousness of some artificial in-game rules

Re: The ridicilousness of some artificial in-game rules

Re: The ridicilousness of some artificial in-game rules

Re: The ridicilousness of some artificial in-game rules

Re: The ridicilousness of some artificial in-game rules

Re: The ridicilousness of some artificial in-game rules

Re: The ridicilousness of some artificial in-game rules

Re: The ridicilousness of some artificial in-game rules

Re: The ridicilousness of some artificial in-game rules