Project Reality Forums

dtacs wrote:one medic per squad and 2 AR's is fine.

I was medic for a pro squad on a Muttrah 8man squad test - it was too much, it was not a bad squad - getting shot more than normal, IMHO the choice to have two medics would be good with 8+ SMs.

IMO in open maps maybe 1 would suffice, but in urban or dense jungle maps would be overwhelmed.

Very true, unfortunately thats due to the fact that there is no fear of injury or death in PR, rushing and popping out into enemy fire is frequent.

8 is looking at the best number, if that is decided then finally giving the Medic (and Specialist for that matter) a scope might be a wise idea. That way the Medic/Specialist could also operate as a standard rifleman just as they do in regular infantry units.

SL
Auto Rifleman
Medic
Medic
Specialist
Rifleman
Rifleman
Rifleman

In my opinion though it just seems weird that the Riflemen don't outweigh the rest of the squad.

Hmmm not that old medic/scope debate again pleeeeease.

It is all map and role dependant, defensive two ARs one medic, open map GL, anti armour capabilities, need a rope?

More stress for those poor SL's....

-snipped-

PLODDITHANLEY wrote:Hmmm not that old medic/scope debate again pleeeeease.

It is all map and role dependant, defensive two ARs one medic, open map GL, anti armour capabilities, need a rope?

More stress for those poor SL's....

I think the SLs can get over it, especially if mumble gets used more and improved in the future, which eases the squad coms.

Ugh, two medics in one squad... I hope not. Squads aren't supposed to be invincible.

Sgt. Mahi wrote:Ugh, two medics in one squad... I hope not. Squads aren't supposed to be invincible.

I don't think 8 men squads would become invincible with 2 medics. It's like two cooperaiting 4-men squads atm.

I wouldn't worry about coms in 8 men squads. Having experience from other games where you use coms with 8 people or more, it's quite easy.

I didn't play at the 128 players event tests, but from what I read, I suggest for the next test to make it passworded.

=Romagnolo= wrote:I didn't play at the 128 players event tests, but from what I read, I suggest for the next test to make it passworded.

Agreed. Easy enough to get the password, cuts out some of the random passerby trolls, helps with communicating and enforcing rules.

Errrr yea, lets cut out 80% of the PR community and well have a test with will come closest to the real deal!

The password would probably be distributed through the forums. But I'm not one to say how that would work. Nevertheless, 80% out is still not as high a percentage as 99.0% out, which seems the norm.

Putting the tag problems, crashes and logistics/squad organization stuff aside, i reckon its a very positive thing.

It actually feels like warzone now. Many pople said that its non stop action like COD, well yes, everybody wanted to shoot all the people on the other side, ofcourse its gonna be loud. But with some time, things will iron out and it will be even more epic when you will "hear" complete silence. Its the thing that PR always lacked, the infantry being there with all the assets, full scale assaults and little recon missions, it has everything with 128 players. Ofcourse smaller maps are more hecticc, but in insurgency thats cool, as some of the guys can stay back at the main and defend/fire from there.

In other words, and i think it just sums it up.
Bigger is always better!

flying transport was a dream. needs twice as many transport choppers, though.

hiberNative wrote:flying transport was a dream. needs twice as many transport choppers, though.

More choppers = more pilots = less of a dream. They just need to respawn more quickly. We love logistics in PR, but in 4km maps it gets a little ridiculous that much of the team is dedicated to logistics, while only a squad or two on each side actually fights. Also, having vehicles respawn more quickly cuts down on the amount of vehicles in play, which makes vehicles more powerful (relative to other players), but infantry less hindered by mass amounts of vehicles (which makes most people happy).

If you have 64 players on one side, someone is more than likely bound to build a fob. Which might make our "arguments" worth 0. Since they can also have TOWs AAs and 50s. That makes up for a less than well oiled machine.

// Wicca out

A couple of observations:

The vehicle to infantry ratio seemed much more balanced. Vehicles didn't play as much as a central role as they do now on say, Kashan. Many more people went infantry which lead to more exciting firefights that were more balanced in comparison to infantry vs. tank or something.

With 128 players, it seemed that everyone's inclination to be teamworky was heightened. This could've arisen from the lack of arrogant players or the lack of less teamwork inclinced players who don't read the forum, or it could've arisen from the sense of unity developed as a community trying to test something new. Regardless of what caused it, it was present.
Example:
On Kashan, a "mob" of infantry (about 12 men) were moving through the bunkers and passed in front of one of the bunkers. An enemy, in one of the bunker windows, opened fire. Almost immediately, the 12 guys started shooting at the enemy and the window which he was situated at. At the same time, two guys moved forward to start to assault and flush out the infantry. All of this was done without communication between any of the 12 guys (at least from my point of view). This situation was exceptional in many ways. The fact that people actually surpressed instead of waiting for the uberleet headshot and the unspoken teamwork between the mob.

One final observation I had was on the nametag situation. The lack of nametags on half the players seemed to force players to actually check if the person running in front of them was an enemy based on kit geo/face. I feel that this isn't necessarily a negative feature although it's implementation would lead to a very rough transition. Nonetheless, there is a reasonable realistic situation that can be applied to the half nametag half not nametag situation (knowing some but not all people on your team)

[R-DEV]Katarn wrote:More choppers = more pilots = less of a dream. They just need to respawn more quickly. We love logistics in PR, but in 4km maps it gets a little ridiculous that much of the team is dedicated to logistics, while only a squad or two on each side actually fights. Also, having vehicles respawn more quickly cuts down on the amount of vehicles in play, which makes vehicles more powerful (relative to other players), but infantry less hindered by mass amounts of vehicles (which makes most people happy).

I see the logic in this... only concern about fast respawning time is situations like this:

You get killed in your vehicle-> you respawn -> the tank respawns -> you drive directly to the location where you got shot the last time, only you know exactly where the enemy is now so now you have the upper hand which is pretty unfair and very "vanilla BF2 gameplay".

The respawn times could be shortend a little for ex. the Cobra instead of 20min spawn time make it 10min. But it might need to very by asset and map. Like with the Cobra if the map normally has 1 re spawning every 20min maybe make it 2 spawning every 20min. But for BTR a shortend spawn-time would be better instead of 2x the amount of them.

Balancing a knife on your finger is easier.