Project Reality Forums

NO NO NO 32 players too much , 16 should be awesome!... really , if you dont like it dont play it ... go to 64 players room and stfu...

Idk man, I've got no issues with 50 vs 50 on 1km maps.

1km insurgency is absolutely alright, 1km AAS maps shouldn't even exist honestly.

Not_able_to_kill wrote: ...
Adapt or leave, or find or create a server/community that runs a 64 player server.
...

How dare you speak in this way? To a Community that has supported PR for such a long time?

The Project Reality Community is a small group of players.
If you don't like someone personally, then go into his TS and talk to him about it.
Adapt or leave is not an option, since there is no other gameplay that comes close to PR0.9 and PR1.0.

All we can do is try to find the best solution for most of the PR-players.

This is my opinion (and you have to accept that):

64 player maps:
- Asad Khal (1 km)
- Assault on Mestia (1 km)
- Charlie's Point (2 km)
- Hill 488 (1 km)
- Korengal Valley (1 km)
- Operation Ghost Train (1 km)
- Qwai River (2 km)
- Tad See Offensive (1 km)


64-80 player maps:
- Al Basrah (2 km)
- Bijar Canyons (4 km)
- Dragon Fly (2 km)
- Fallujah West (1 km)
- Gaza Beach (1 km)
- Jabal al Burj (2 km)
- Lashkar Valley (2 km)
- Muttrah City (2 km)
- Operation Archer (2 km)
- Operation Barracuda (2 km)
- Vadso City (4 km)

64-100 player maps:
- Battle of Ia Drang (2 km)
- Beirut (2 km)
- Black Gold (4 km)
- Burning Sands (4 km)
- Dovre (2 km)
- Fools Road (2 km)
- Iron Ridge (2 km)
- Karbala (2 km) <-- why are you still on the maplist?
- Kashan Desert (4 km)
- Khamisiyah (4 km)
- Kokan (2 km)
- Kozelsk (2 km)
- Operation Marlin (2 km)
- Pavlosk Bay (4 km)
- Ramiel (2 km)
- Saaremaa (4 km)
- Shija Valley (4 km)
- Silent Eagle (4 km)
- Wanda Shan (4 km)
- Xiangshan (4 km)
- Yamalia (4 km)

Some maps just can't handle too many players.
This has to do with their Objectives, their layouts and their walkable space.

Not_able_to_kill wrote:If he doesn't want that, then why won't he play an RTS game or Dota 2 or something?

This is a tactical action shooter.

Why? Because we were actively playing this game as a clan for about 3 years. Organizing a weekly event on every sunday, with us filling a whole team of 32 players. We were probably one of the very few communites who were exhausting PRs tactical and strategic possbilities to its limit on a regular basis. Strict comms, strict squad assignment, strict leadership without any jokes or bullshiting. Pure MilSim. What you usually only get on special organized events, we accomplished every sunday. I COed all of this for about 1 1/2 years, every week now. We have played every map, and every layout, won and lost on every map. We basically experienced everything you can experience in PR. We were fighting on all objectives, planned and performed every strategic move and combined every asset with every unit you could possibly do in this game. If there is anyone who knows what strategy and tactic is about in PR, then it will be, among others, the guys from QRF. We are not a bunch of l33t skilled pro killers. Alot of us ONLY play on sundays and therefore actually have bad CQB skills and whatnot. But we settled this with the maximum amount of teamwork and strategy you can probably get in PR. It is not everybodies taste, but we love it. We did not always win, but when we did, we knew we deserved it. We did not do any "questionable" tactics like mining mainroads a couple of grids in front of the main. Or let our CAS camp the borders of enemy main and wait for the enemy CAS to return and catch him right before it enters its DOD. We won our rounds honestly with real Combined Arms Power and we can be proud of it.

(this probably sounds very glorifying, but its true and had to be said. Thats why I am totally proud about being part of this bunch of guys.)

Now with 1.0 all of this is getting instable. We already had a hard time with <1.0 since gameplay was already very fast-paced. But it was still manageable. It was very difficult to coordinate a team of 3 full INF squads, a small 3 men recon team, 3 armored vehicles, and trans choppers and CAS. But we did it and it worked. Everything worked fine in 0.98 and for the last couple of years. There is no compareable game where we could repeat what we did in PR. (No ArmA is shit, its COOP and gameplay is way too choppy and complicated).

1.0 is a danger for us and many other communties and individuals who like to play like us in a smaller and not so serious scale. because the fast action based gameplay will not work with our structures anymore. It might sound arrogant like we only think about us and our events. But as said it is not only us but also many many other smaller communties and players I know of who totally agree with our doubts. We are used to the quality gameplay we always got on our events and therefore rounds which might seem cool and organized for you guys, might be just a clusterfuck in my eyes. I know this really sounds arrogant as fuck, but this is the main problem we have here right now I think. You are just used to a different level of gaming.



You are not taking the game as serious as we do. And there is nothing wrong about it. You can play the game the way you want to. Thats totally up to you. No one forces you to like MilSim like we do. Thats what was awesome about PR. There were so many communities with so many different styles of gaming.

You could either play the game extreme MilSim, or totally relaxed trolling around with a 4 men squad, or a mix of both and be just as successful.

3dac, OD-S, F|H, NEW etc. etc. all of them are brilliant communities with an excellent playerbase. Everyone of them has their own style of playing the game and everyone of them is a serious enemy for us who could easily defeat us.

With 1.0, PR is losing the possibilties of MilSim and purposely slow paced gameplay. It is not just one thing that is causing this. But all the changes in almost all parts of the gamemechanics were done in favor of the fast-paced, action-oriented playerbase...kind of leaving us and others out. People keep telling us to keep moving to another game which would fit us better. But there is simply no other game as said above. We basically build all this upon the game and the community of Project Reality. I hope you guys now get a small idea of the problems many have to face.

Not_able_to_kill wrote:If he doesn't want that, then why won't he play an RTS game or Dota 2 or something?

This is a tactical action shooter.

Why don't you just play any of the 150.000.000 action arcade shooters? See how stupid this is? I'm suggesting change for the better, that keeps the game unique, if you want generic shooters, I think you're well situated at the moment with Planetside and whatnot.

Also,



So far nobody did come forth and explained to me what exactly makes 100p more strategic/tactical, so don't mind me sitting here in disbelief as to why you're trying to make yourself believe that PR 1.0 is both more tactical and action heavy at the same time when compared to .98.

And further

The arguments are so nice and sweet i will actual get diabetes.

Legitimately made my day.

Lastly

Adapt or leave, or find or create a server/community that runs a 64 player server.

It's already up. See you guys on QRF 64!

Project Reality isn't even a MilSim, it was never even aiming to be a MilSim

It's just a game that has a much more heavier emphasis on teamwork.

Who cares if you've played 3 years? I've played since 2007-2008 and I don't brag about it.

PR has had a lot of changes and some of them I haven't necessarily agreed with, but most of them are just perfect, like these 100p servers and 8p squads. It has made the game much more fun to play infantry because of the larger squads and the built-in mumble makes it even better.

What the hell makes 64p more tactical? Is it because there are much less players so you can just sneak around everywhere and get in 2 min firefights with some 5-6 dudes and then cap flag and then move to next flag to find out it's been recapped and you do the same thing over and over again.

Now the firefights are much more massive, and you need armor support/mortar support to clear out enemy positions and atleast 2-3 infantry squads to clear out buildings, alleys and so on.

Firefights IRL don't even have any strategy in them, it's spontaneous action, you can't see what's coming and you most likely had no idea this was exactly going to happen.

Wanna play on 64p servers? Go ahead, do it, I'll stick to my 100p servers.

Everybody has their own playstyles and tactics? Then make your own on 100p gameplay, don't expect somebody to do it for you.

You're acting like PR is a fucking closed-community that doesn't accept new players and everything should remain the way it is instead of opening up entirely new gameplay.

Spook wrote:Organizing a weekly event on every sunday, with us filling a whole team of 32 players.

I don't quite get what's your problem here. Can't you just keep organizing your 64p events?

PR was and will always be a closed-community! When was the last time you saw 100000 players online?

Thats actually the most awesome thing about PR. Everyone knows everyone. You jump in the server and randomly meet a bunch of friends from other communties. PR is a like a social network.

And did you actually read my post? I said that PR offers a wide range of different gaming styles, and thats good. I never said we should stop people from creating their own way of playing the game.

Everybody has their own playstyles and tactics? Then make your own on 100p gameplay, don't expect somebody to do it for you.

Thats the point dude. We cannot! The new gamemechanics made our old style of playing the game hard or impossible, be it on our server or on others.

PR was what you wanted it to be. When there were the possibilties for MilSim how can you say it was never aiming for that direction?

Who cares if you've played 3 years? I've played since 2007-2008 and I don't brag about it.

As an individual I am playing PR since 2008 aswell and by you telling me that I am bragging about something I can see that you did not take anytime to get my point I was actually trying to make with the first part of my post..

I don't quite get what's your problem here. Can't you just keep organizing your 64p events?

As said the changes in the gamemechanics make it very hard now, not just because of 100p but also because of other changed features. But thats another topic, forget about those events. I am not talking about them but about the gameplay itself. It does not matter what 100p server you jump on, you are now forced to play the fast-paced action game style. Thats what bugs me. And do not tell me to play just like we did before instead of doing the same as other squads...it simply does not work like that anymore. I have tried it and its almost impossible. We do not have the manpower of seeding our <100 slots server every time, therefore we have to rely to other 64p servers which are not existent yet...thats basically all I ask for. More seeded servers with 64p .

Spook wrote:PR was and will always be a closed-community! When was the last time you saw 100000 players online?

Thats actually the most awesome thing about PR. Everyone knows everyone. You jump in the server and randomly meet a bunch of friends from other communties. PR is a like a social network.

And did you actually read my post? I said that PR offers a wide range of different gaming styles, and thats good. I never said we should stop people from creating their own way of playing the game.



Thats the point dude. We cannot! The new gamemechanics made our old style of playing the game hard or impossible, be it on our server or on others.

PR was what you wanted it to be. When there were the possibilties for MilSim how can you say it was never aiming for that direction?



As said the changes in the gamemechanics make it very hard now, not just because of 100p but also because of other changed features. But thats another topic, forget about those events. I am not only talking about them but about the gameplay itself aswell. It does not matter what 100p server you jump on, you are now forced to play the fast-paced action game style. Thats what bugs me. And do not tell me to play just like we did before instead of doing the same as other squads...it simply does not work like that anymore. I have tried it and its almost impossible. We do not have the manpower of seeding our <100 slots server every time, therefore we have to rely to other 64p servers which are not existent yet...thats basically all I ask for. More seeded servers with 64p .

Do you have any idea how stupid that is? Your kind of players are pretty much everything wrong with this community.

You don't accept new players, you are elitist and close-minded.

What a shame the community has gone down to this.

PR is going to die a very fast death from lack of players if more and more keep thinking like this.

Thats the point dude. We cannot! The new gamemechanics made our old style of playing the game hard or impossible, be it on our server or on others.

Ever heard of evolution? If you don't evolve, you'll go extinct.

elitist and close-minded.

Well well we reached the point where I am linking myself out of here since all my posts above express exactly the opposite thing and you seem to simply reject reading them. I talk about being tolerant and appreciate every kind of gamestyle...yet you start accusing me of being elitist just because I like MilSim, thats hilarious.

Ironically you are telling me that I am close-minded and a disgrace for the community...

Why are you allowed to disapprove the new gameplay style and think it should be rolled back but we can't think yours is outdated and should evolve to the new one?

Argh..I never disapproved the new gameplay style! I said MilSim gameplay style is getting stamped out while everything else gets improved. Thats what I said a bazillion times, now. In the past the action-playerbase and the strategic-playerbase were co-existing peacefully. Now everything tends to go into the direction of arcade and action. Just read, I am starting to get emotional about this, you are really a though guy to discuss with ... I play relaxed aswell. Casually playing around abit, but then I also want to keep being able to play the game very seriously.

//as said too much OT; I am outta here.

Spook wrote:Dude 50% of our members are either complete newbies, or are playing the game for less than a year now. We have trained countless of players in the last years and even in the last few weeks we got so many new recruits which are willing to learn how to play PR from us.



Well well we reached the point where I am linking myself out of here since all my posts above express exactly the opposite thing and you seem to simply reject reading them. That we are tolerant and appreciate every kind of gamestyle...yet you start accusing me of being elitist just because I like MilSim, thats hilarious.

Ironically you are telling me that I am close-minded...

You are complaining about a major gameplay change and you think you can keep on going and going with your old gameplay tactics and you expect the game to roll back completely in favor of your needs?

That's pretty selfish, really.

And I like milsims too, it's just that PR is really far from being one. And I'm not claiming you're fucking elitist for liking MilSims, I'm saying you're elitist for saying PR should be a closed-community with only preapproved players.

And you saying PR is a closed community and that's how it has to be should obviously give you the impression that you don't want any new players.

Why are you allowed to disapprove the new gameplay style and think it should be rolled back but we can't think yours is outdated and should evolve to the new one?

Its not to much, if u have good Squad leaders, and good commander, could be pretty good game. And its not about newbies, i saw a lot of those and they asked if they didnt know, and they did follow as they were commanded! Its about u as SL, to ive them strict orders, and yes they are new, this are big maps, and now even without tags, so somethime they get lost, as i did some 6 years ago! The best thing when u meet some newbies, u should tell tem he/she should join some clan, just to now better the point of tthe game!

But i would reduce server max players, just and only if the servers become more stable! Other way its not important!

And dont blame nuubs, becouse they are lost first time, help them, and they will get better!

Teach them and they will follow!

At last when we get more slots and there is less need to try and join a server for 20 mins there is someone complaining...its less about the no. Of players but more about the player himself. The chaos wasnt avoid able even in 64 players aslong as the player was just doing anything he sees for himself fit..

I just finished several rounds on our 80 slot server and have to say that it worked our very well. A huge difference to 100p...felt almost like 0.98. So relaxing and we were actually able to catch a breath and think things through between the firefights. Really awesome. 80 is probably the perfect number.

If we would get back the old rallypoints and reduce the amount of FOBs everyting would be awesome.

To be honest I feel exactly the opposite of what 100p haters do. I'd like to see more than 100 players, cause the best PR games I've ever played were on 128 and 200 player server. It just felt much more realistic and enjoyable, and after playing there I just couldn't go back to normal 64p servers and that ghost hunting type of gameplay.

Lugi wrote:To be honest I fell exactly the opposite of what 100p haters do. I'd like to see more than 100 players, cause the best PR games I've ever played were on 128 and 200 player server. It just felt much more realistic and enjoyable, and after playing there I just couldn't go back to normal 64p servers and that ghost hunting type of gameplay.

I totally agree. Did not play a lot of PR after the testing servers got shut down. The few times I tried felt like spec ops teams going at each other.

cyberzomby wrote:I totally agree. Did not play a lot of PR after the testing servers got shut down. The few times I tried felt like spec ops teams going at each other.

~10 spec ops dudes running around the map with really bad aiming skills due to deviation.

Honestly, if you use Gamebooster, it helps dramaticly....
If you have a crappy PC, you can get easy 75 FPS on a heavy map (basiclly every map in 1.0 ;P)


LINK TO GAMEBOOSTER: Razer Game Booster - Free download and software reviews - CNET Download.com

Spook wrote: I am thankful for all the work you have done for free. But regarding gameplay, the ones responsible screwed up big time IMO. And I hope they will realize this fast and make some changes before a big part of the tactic oriented playerbase loses interest in this game. And please do not tell me to come, join you and fix it myself. It was working before and now it is not. So whoever destroyed a running system should repair it himself again.

Yes, really good posting !!! I lost the interrest of the game and play other games now, sometimes BF3 . Bf3 feels like PR on 100er servers, no teamplay....not enough squads for 100 people and the 8 person squads dont get all in the chopper to transport ! only 7 people like in NH 90 !
i think lot of people gone if i watch the prspy.more and more people gone from day to day
hope the 64 player server with nametags come quick again...i hate always killed by teammates !

The problem is not the number of players 80, 100, 200. 200k ... the problem is that you need to adapt the gameplay to this numbers in dependency to other thinks like: respawn, mapsize and so on.
And the changes that have bin done dont support 100 players in a tactic way of gameplay.
The changes that have bin done, makes the gameplay even independently from the player numbers faster.

So they go totally in the wrong direction from my perspective. I think the DEVs where aware of this interaction and action increasement. But i hope the tactic guys under the DEVs will do some pressure on the action side, because i think its the core feature of PR. And when it get lost, i think the interest of the playerbase will decrease over time.
And i can already see symptoms of it.

So i totally like more players and i support it from the beginning, but not under this gameplay changes.