Project Reality Forums

Yea I was under the impression it was just one of those days but I dont know. Just wanted to talk about it here. At least thank you and Hero for a response. And like Cole said, from the quick glance I took it showed there where around 7 inhouse squad people on.

I understand very well that it can be a problem. (the teamstacking issue) But I was not aware you guys where dealing with it so hard. Because like I said earlier, usually its: We're the admins and we do as we please.

Why not make a server message that tries promoting teambalancing? Because right now theres a lot of things working against you if you're aware the teams unbalanced.
Theres the general idea that switching teams is bad 'cause you got all the intel, theres the 31 vs 31 teams locked issue, theres the issue of abandoning your squad (I almost exclusively play Medic) and theres the issue of having to check when theres a spot to switch. Would you like me to ask the admins to switch me and some friends around? Usually when theres to much chat you and some other server admins (from other communitys) go: sssshhhh!

I'm not trying to talk right of our actions or attitude, all I'm saying is, that in my oppinion, if people had the right mind and attitude, theres a bigger barrier than just: meh, I'd rather stick on this side. I think what I'm trying to say is: Is there a way we can improve this?

I'm not here to take swipes or stroke egos, but I truly wish that other admins on other servers could be as sincere and dignified as Wickens and many others on TG. It's really the administration that makes the difference with a game so heavily dependent on realism and teamwork like PR.

I feel like TG is the tip of the spear in showing the rest of the community how to run a server like adults, keep it up guys.

edit: Just to balance that with some criticism, I WANT MOAR ARCHER, LASHKAR, AND KORENGAL!!!

^archer was played alot in mid summmer on time, korengal is pretty much a laggfest even it's a good map. but i wanna see more gaza!

cyberzomby wrote:
...

Theres the general idea that switching teams is bad 'cause you got all the intel, theres the 31 vs 31 teams locked issue, theres the issue of abandoning your squad (I almost exclusively play Medic) and theres the issue of having to check when theres a spot to switch. Would you like me to ask the admins to switch me and some friends around? Usually when theres to much chat you and some other server admins (from other communitys) go: sssshhhh!

...

Agreed on these points. We've made it pretty clear through various posts on this topic on our forums that the admins in no way expect people to change teams in the middle of the round. This is unfair to the player who has just invested X amount of time working with his squad and his team. No one should expect others to do this. Instead, we just ask that when players see an imbalance (and it's like porn - you know it when you see it) that they volunteer to switch sides between rounds. This is the easiest approach and simply the fairest to everyone. To those that are willing to do this without being prompted by the admins - THANK YOU! TG likes to promote itself as the premier community for mature gamers, and I can't think of any better way to demonstrate that maturity than to voluntarily switch over to a team that has had it's *** handed to it 2 or 3 rounds in a row to help them out.

We, the admins, do try our best to keep things even. It does get tiresome to continuously have to combat this when we think it would be so easy for players just to take it upon themselves without intervention, but sadly it's the "someone else will do it" mentality that is so prevalent that causes a lot of admin frustration.

Anyway, we're playing Burning Sands (16 layer - infantry slugfest in the city) during password night today so come join us. The password is available in our rules post which is sticky-ed at the top of our PR forums. Here's the linky.

Cool man! Thanks for the invite but got movie night planned I'll try to keep a look out when I play and help out the balance. I agree with you there that TG is one of the most mature community's so evening out the playing field so everyone can enjoy a good fight is something we should try to achieve. Thanks again for the time and effort with the posts here and the server obviously

What an epic game on Burning Sands.

Agreed. Very good game even though the brits lost it was well played and the teams were well balanced.

very balanced, well played by both sides pw night.
I enjoyed it (of course i got pwned a lot )

Great server, I played one game last night.

While everyone is nice and VERY coordinated and skilled, I had a problem with the massive team stacking on Barracuda which ultimately spelled the China team's demise. USMC was composed of mostly TG members who were professionally coordinated, while the Chinese team was made up of pubbers and the usual noobs.

One thing that I've noticed on TG is how there is a massive amount of teamwork which is often fruitless in the case of taking an objective. I've seen round after round, each team set up defenses and get ready for assaults and whatnot, but they end up not materializing or simply fizzling out, or in the screenshot below, happening but for a pretty much useless place.



Basically we had 2 infantry squads comprised of db and Foxlion (and a LAV crewed by Ludicrous), which were tasked by fuzz to take the supply fort as there were reports of enemies being there. We successfully took it, but I was left at the end thinking how futile it was taking this spot as the task at hand was Swamp objective, over 400m away.

Now don't get me wrong, this is great to see this much teamwork, but honestly for the most part it was quite useless as we just used it as a staging ground to make an assault on Swamp. The assault on swamp was successful, but it could have been done a good 5 minutes earlier should we have not bothered with supply fort.

Either way, it was an excellent game with the US winning with 13 tickets to spare.

Well, that plateau dominates the map. It's a key position to take for either team as it is the perfect staging point to attack any objective on the map. By controlling it, you can effectively cut off half the map for the opposing team.

To me it still didn't seem necessary to use that much manpower on it. We had the entire right flank of swamp to take (when the whole team was at beach fort) and noone capitalized on that opportunity even when we had a fob some 200m away. I guess you're right though.

You definitely need to deny the PLA that point. Its an easy place for a fob to steam troops down to the swamp. Although sending too many guys there can be more of a hindrance for your team.

Thats the thing, there wasn't a firebase there, only a handful of about 5 or 6 infantry who were subsequently raped by the APC.

The enemy firebase was to the south of Swamp up against the big hill there.

dtacs wrote:Thats the thing, there wasn't a firebase there, only a handful of about 5 or 6 infantry who were subsequently raped by the APC.

The enemy firebase was to the south of Swamp up against the big hill there.

Once you establish a strong point/FB in the fort, which denies the enemy supplies to the West side of the map, you can move out infantry to assault the flags from the high ground. Moving against Swamp objective straight from North Rock is fairly fruitless against an enemy that has a decent defense plus at least one FB.

Basically we had 2 infantry squads comprised of db and Foxlion (and a LAV crewed by Ludicrous), which were tasked by fuzz to take the supply fort as there were reports of enemies being there. We successfully took it, but I was left at the end thinking how futile it was taking this spot as the task at hand was Swamp objective, over 400m away.

a good chinese squad can completely destroy any assault from beach fort to swamp from the supply base, though if I hadn't disconnected the plan had been to advance under the view of the supply base, and rely on the APC to suppress any targets up there while we moved. (I think you heard that conversation?)

supply base is a great objective to hold on the map for strategic purposes though

That was the plan, but I think fuzzhead got caught up in having too many obedient toys at his fingertips to play with at which point the plan changed to tackle supply

Honestly its not that big of a deal as 100% of the time TG is teamwork based (totally worth the all-nighter)

supply base is a great objective to hold on the map for strategic purposes though

At the start or when we hadn't capped airfield/beachfort, sure, but this late in the game when swamp could open up their main it just seemed like a waste of resources for me, but so many think otherwise so I'm obviously wrong.

dtacs wrote:At the start or when we hadn't capped airfield/beachfort, sure, but this late in the game when swamp could open up their main it just seemed like a waste of resources for me, but so many think otherwise so I'm obviously wrong.

I think it still comes down the the relative urgency that we have dtacs, due to our 2 hour round time mentality. There's historically not much good in taking these 'advantageous' positions on bigD because once you've done it, you've then sacrificed too much time to effectively take the position. On your screenshot your team still has over 3 hours to go, which is 50% more time than we start with on bigD... so there's no sense of urgency to win. This means that even if someone might see it as a 'waste of time', if it helps them accomplish the goal through the loss of fewer tickets, then it is a valid strat.