Project Reality Forums

I'm sorry but this kind of change shows that the Devs are completly out of touch with the base players.

Devs Have two way to defend this changes :

1) "This is realistic and this how tank in real life work" with shows that some devs have no understanding of Electromechanics and Hydraulic machinery and their evolution since the 60s.

So i have and advice for the devs im not gonna ask u to watch, speak, read, about the capabilities of modern MBTs. But just go to your local construction site or renting compagny and ask them about the handling of modern/old excavator/cranes... And they will tell you that there no insane inertia and lag input.
Because right now ingame if you move the tank turret at full speed and you release your mouse the turret keep moving for +90 degres because of the crazy inertia.

This video is one of many examples of normal handling of heavy machinery.



More links.

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=I6tdV0R0TOY&feature=youtu.be&t=1250

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=A-Bo_SNsEcY

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=5AZKbO5UL7c&feature=youtu.be&t=93

2) They wanted to nerf Armor (Tank/APC) and good job its a sucess.

'[F|H wrote:Zackyx;2103568']
Because right now ingame if you move the tank turret at full speed and you release your mouse the turret keep moving for +90 degres because of the crazy inertia.

That part isn't a feature, that is part of the flaw of working off bf2.

Rabbit wrote:That part isn't a feature, that is part of the flaw of working off bf2.

I understand that. But why implement the new feature if you know this is something that comes along with it? I feel like if armor is too OP, then the buff of AT is sufficient. Maybe even lower ammo capacities of armor. The artificial acceleration/smoothing is very hard to work with. I don't even care about the slow traverse speed. I've tried lowering my DPI and I've practiced way too much on coop. It's just extremely difficult to acquire targets in any amount of time, and in combat situations it results in a lot of dead armor. They aren't even worth their ticket cost now.

Rabbit wrote:That part isn't a feature, that is part of the flaw of working off bf2.

this features is way too costly, its like remove the medic kit because its not realistic because the BF2 engine does not support full medical work like arma does.

'[F|H wrote:Zackyx;2103568'] there no insane inertia and lag input.

No lag in real world zacky get outside more

Ok but jokes aside zacky i think you've missed the point a bit, we're well aware that vehicle turrets irl don't have the inertia that they do in-game, it's a side effect of an attempt to limit the traverse speed of turrets.
When we say "realistic turret traverse" it means the speed of the rotation, not the way it traverses. Because that was what was attempted on a vehicle per vehicle bases, backed up with refs (for all of them, even the impossible to find chinese ones), to give a little more variety to vehicle on vehicle gameplay. ie, a modern mbt would have much faster turret traverse speed than an older tank.

So pros of the attempted new system
-turret traverse speed to better represent their irl vehicle
-variety for vehicles. nerfs for some, buffs for others, make them less of a clone of each other (mbt's were a perfect example of this, they were all quite similar)

Cons
-Annoying momentum that's a ***** to stop.
-lag when you stop inputting mouse movement.

So "we" went with the turret speed limit traverse thing, fh2 did it years ago, why should it be any different with pr? (zomg cos we're totally out of touch with c̶a̶s̶ pr players) But after a while you do get used to the new turret momentum, not after 1 day though.

But yeah, i'm personally not a fan of it in it's current state either, and with the backlash from the community who knows it might be reverted. I would however like to see it return without the momentum if that is at all possible on the bf2 engine.

Chefmoto1 wrote:I understand that. But why implement the new feature if you know this is something that comes along with it? I feel like if armor is too OP, then the buff of AT is sufficient. Maybe even lower ammo capacities of armor. The artificial acceleration/smoothing is very hard to work with. I don't even care about the slow traverse speed. I've tried lowering my DPI and I've practiced way too much on coop. It's just extremely difficult to acquire targets in any amount of time, and in combat situations it results in a lot of dead armor. They aren't even worth their ticket cost now.

Issue with all that is that it doesn't prevent tanks sniping jets out of the air.

[R-CON]camo wrote:No lag in real world zacky get outside more

Ok but jokes aside zacky i think you've missed the point a bit, we're well aware that vehicle turrets irl don't have the inertia that they do in-game, it's a side effect of an attempt to limit the traverse speed of turrets.
When we say "realistic turret traverse" it means the speed of the rotation, not the way it traverses. Because that was what was attempted on a vehicle per vehicle bases, backed up with refs (for all of them, even the impossible to find chinese ones), to give a little more variety to vehicle on vehicle gameplay. ie, a modern mbt would have much faster turret traverse speed than an older tank.

So pros of the attempted new system
-turret traverse speed to better represent their irl vehicle
-variety for vehicles. nerfs for some, buffs for others, make them less of a clone of each other (mbt's were a perfect example of this, they were all quite similar)

Cons
-Annoying momentum that's a ***** to stop.
-lag when you stop inputting mouse movement.

So "we" went with the turret speed limit traverse thing, fh2 did it years ago, why should it be any different with pr? (zomg cos we're totally out of touch with c̶a̶s̶ pr players) But after a while you do get used to the new turret momentum, not after 1 day though.

But yeah, i'm personally not a fan of it in it's current state either, and with the backlash from the community who knows it might be reverted. I would however like to see it return without the momentum if that is at all possible on the bf2 engine.

why not just reduce the turret speed? even players with macro mouses will have trouble to get accuracy if they put the turret speed way to high. just like in the BMP-2

Rabbit wrote:Issue with all that is that it doesn't prevent tanks sniping jets out of the air.

remove the view distance fog and increase jet lock on range on lasers.

Its not realistic, Don't feed me this mate.

For every asset you say has this mouse acceleration, i will supply you a real life crewman of the asset and let him tell you that it couldn't be any less realistic.

For all those saying shit like "asset whore tears are sweet". Its a video game, we arere all allowed to have fun mate.

And for people saying "high dpi is a known tool for asset whores". I gun with 800 dpi, i fly with 800 dpi and my in-game sensitivity is .80 and i turn into a fucking helicopter every time i turn my turret. Some people may use it, but you don't need to be good to use it.

#AskThePlayers #Don'tBreakTheGame

Current system was implemented not get uber leet realistic turrets, we never claimed that anywhere? We implemented realistic turret speeds that can't be influenced by mouse settings. That is what the changelog also says. Speeds, nothing else.

And I think we can all agree that would be a change for the better. vBF2 turret speeds are annoying and with some high DPI you can have stupidly fast turrets. Definitly the opposite of what PR means with realism vs fun gameplay. Stupidly fast turrets don't fit in there at all.
More realistic turret speeds are I think something most of us would like. At least I do But this doesn't mean we claim we made the entire armor gameplay realistic. Just turret speeds.

This comes with a nasty side effect indeed of excessive input being forced even after you stopped moving the mouse looking all laggy. I'm not a coder so that's the best way I can explain this myself

We can't have realistic turret speeds without it. 'Just lower speeds' doesn't work. Yes, once again we'd prefer DICE Source-code to fix this but until that happens we can't have it both ways Either you have fast speeds synced to mouse like vBF2 or we have to use some special code to lock the speed down slower. Again not a coder, can't explain it better.

Anyway, all feedback is appreciated guys! Every input counts. We are discussing this obviously given the fuss it's making.

the old way was perfect --- if you want to stop aircraft shooting with tanks, is there any way to just limit the vertical speeds and leave horizontal as it was?

[R-CON]camo wrote:No lag in real world zacky get outside more




So "we" went with the turret speed limit traverse thing, fh2 did it years ago, why should it be any different with pr? (zomg cos we're totally out of touch with c̶a̶s̶ pr players) But after a while you do get used to the new turret momentum, not after 1 day though.

I just tried to gun with the joystick like [R-DEV]Mats391 sugested and it is much better than with mouse given the actual turrets physics. So CAS whore as we are called are just gonna keep dominating since most of "us" have joystick and experience using them. Nothing new under the sun.

[R-DEV]Mineral wrote:

And I think we can all agree that would be a change for the better. .

Actually i don't agree and i'm sure i'm not alone or maybe i am too selfish and toxic ? Who knows ...

Was only teasing zacky.

kinglespringles wrote: Otherwise, myself and others are done trying to effectively use the coaxial gun like an out-of-control water hose.

man i laughed, it's a bit like pissing your name in the snow huh

@Miniral

I would rather have the only system. I have heard whispers in the back alleys of PR where all the asset whores are, that have figured out a way to stop the mouse acceleration. Not everyone can do it, so we are back to square one of this whole thing....

After playing some Muttrah on MEC, a new effective strategy is to now use the mtlb and other "disposable" assets as a battering ram against damaged enemy vehicles with a higher ticket cost for a guaranteed kill. Their gunners will not be able to track you. Watching the turret of the AAVP wobble around trying to track us spraying grenades and .50 as we collide into a disabled cas chopper it was defending was fun, I'll give it that. Though most of our kills resulted from accidental road kills and collateral from our fiery ramming deaths.

This also is now probably true to insurgents, as any sort of civilian car will be able to out maneuver and dish out some serious ramming damage before the gunner has time to effectively engage.

kinglespringles wrote: This also is now probably true to insurgents, as any sort of civilian car will be able to out maneuver and dish out some serious ramming damage before the gunner has time to effectively engage.

There's a workaround to the turret sliding if you have a sniper mode on your mouse. So essentially it kills their DPI and they can defeat the sliding immediately. Kinda gives an unfair advantage to those with nice mouses. (Mice?)

I'm sure I'm going to catch a lot of flak for this comment. There seems to be an overall slow nerf to each and every aspect of the game that is not infantry, which gets buffed over time. Infantry is of course, a large aspect to Project Reality, that cannot be argued. It is true that there are assets in the game which are present to compliment and oppose infantry, and the other assets. In my eyes, Project Reality is not an infantry vs assets game, it's a melding of infantry, armor, air assets and more in a complex web of this versus that but this overpowers that, etc. game. It is not cut and dry, and this is one of the things that makes Project Reality so enjoyable. Anyways, here is what I have seen recently:

Infantry has become the main focus of PR - all other assets that "overpower" them are being slowly nerfed each update, and I have evidence to back this up. By no means am I calling this a conspiracy (read this as "put on your tinfoil hats"), it's a damned video game for crying out loud, we obviously care about it as we are discussing it on this forum, but I don't think anyone is that bent on changing the game to be "their vision", it's a slow unintended effect that infantry-focused developers are unconsciously changing the core PR mechanics.

Version 1.3

Air

• Transport helicopters were made incredibly slow and the flare count lowered
• Jets less flares
• Air asset initial spawn and respawn made stupidly long
• AA was made uncharacteristically strong, jets and helicopters are much more susceptible to AA that they are in real life
• AA can still lock you and fire before you can see it
• AA is made easier than ever to use

Infantry

• LATs are now virtually unlimited, a big issue for APCs in urban areas
• Warrior's rate of fire lowered incredibly (gameplay vs realism sure, but maybe make it fire faster with less damage would be fine)

Version 1.3.5

Armor

• Almost all tank and APC drivers have their zooming capabilities removed - spotting made almost impossible for long distances, especially to identify friend or foe
• Multiple tanks lose thermals for drivers and zooming for drivers
• APC and tank gunners lose control of precise movement of their turrets, making them ineffective in urban areas
• Spandrel can fire on the move (was already the ultimate anti-tank vehicle before this)
• Civilian car ROE is extremely easy to exploit by the insurgent team, this is definitely a gameplay vs realism component and gameplay needs to be preserved, it isn't practical to spawn 25 civilians cars on a map and expect APC/tank crews to watch every single car instead of blowing them up...

Air

• Hellfires can only be fired at an extremely slow rate. Incredibly convenient is that I just had lunch with the guy who wrote the specificiations for the Hellfire today, and he stated that there is no limit to the amount of Hellfires that can be fired at once (seriously incredibly convenient not making this up, his name is Arthur H.)
• Thermals are removed from several variants of the attack choopers
• Hellfires less maneuverable.

Infantry

• New RPGs warheads make it incredibly easy to kill APCs and other soft/hard targets. I raked in 20 kills with a single kit on Kokan yesterday with extreme ease.
• New dot thingies make it really easy for noobs to whack that pesky APC with an AT4 in record time.

Of course, there is nothing wrong with making infantry the main focus of the game. However, there is something wrong with making infantry the main focus of the game at the expense of the other aspects of Project Reality that make Project Reality so unique. This can't just be swept under the rug because "you feel that it is a pretty good change and don't really wanna go back to how it was before" or "veterans gonna cry because changes no worries, nothing to see here move along" or "inf 4 life get out of here APC whores". There is almost 10+ pages of discussion on this topic in 36 hours, all by bona fide individuals. If that isn't a red flag, than what is?

PricelineNegotiator wrote:I'm sure I'm going to catch a lot of flak for this comment. There seems to be an overall slow nerf to each and every aspect of the game that is not infantry, which gets buffed over time. Infantry is of course, a large aspect to Project Reality, that cannot be argued. It is true that there are assets in the game which are present to compliment and oppose infantry, and the other assets. In my eyes, Project Reality is not an infantry vs assets game, it's a melding of infantry, armor, air assets and more in a complex web of this versus that but this overpowers that, etc. game. It is not cut and dry, and this is one of the things that makes Project Reality so enjoyable. Anyways, here is what I have seen recently:

Infantry has become the main focus of PR - all other assets that "overpower" them are being slowly nerfed each update, and I have evidence to back this up. By no means am I calling this a conspiracy (read this as "put on your tinfoil hats"), it's a damned video game for crying out loud, we obviously care about it as we are discussing it on this forum, but I don't think anyone is that bent on changing the game to be "their vision", it's a slow unintended effect that infantry-focused developers are unconsciously changing the core PR mechanics.

Version 1.3

Air

• Transport helicopters were made incredibly slow and the flare count lowered
• Jets less flares
• Air asset initial spawn and respawn made stupidly long
• AA was made uncharacteristically strong, jets and helicopters are much more susceptible to AA that they are in real life
• AA can still lock you and fire before you can see it
• AA is made easier than ever to use

Infantry

• LATs are now virtually unlimited, a big issue for APCs in urban areas
• Warrior's rate of fire lowered incredibly (gameplay vs realism sure, but maybe make it fire faster with less damage would be fine)

Version 1.3.5

Armor

• Almost all tank and APC drivers have their zooming capabilities removed - spotting made almost impossible for long distances, especially to identify friend or foe
• Multiple tanks lose thermals for drivers and zooming for drivers
• APC and tank gunners lose control of precise movement of their turrets, making them ineffective in urban areas
• Spandrel can fire on the move (was already the ultimate anti-tank vehicle before this)
• Civilian car ROE is extremely easy to exploit by the insurgent team, this is definitely a gameplay vs realism component and gameplay needs to be preserved, it isn't practical to spawn 25 civilians cars on a map and expect APC/tank crews to watch every single car instead of blowing them up...

Air

• Hellfires can only be fired at an extremely slow rate. Incredibly convenient is that I just had lunch with the guy who wrote the specificiations for the Hellfire today, and he stated that there is no limit to the amount of Hellfires that can be fired at once (seriously incredibly convenient not making this up, his name is Arthur H.)
• Thermals are removed from several variants of the attack choopers
• Hellfires less maneuverable.

Infantry

• New RPGs warheads make it incredibly easy to kill APCs and other soft/hard targets. I raked in 20 kills with a single kit on Kokan yesterday with extreme ease.
• New dot thingies make it really easy for noobs to whack that pesky APC with an AT4 in record time.

Of course, there is nothing wrong with making infantry the main focus of the game. Haer, there is something wrong with making infantry the main focus of the game at the expense of the other aspects of Project Reality that make Project Reality so unique. This can't just be swept under the rug because "you feel that it is a pretty good change and don't really wanna go back to how it was before" or "veterans gonna cry because changes no worries, nothing to see here move along" or "inf 4 life get out of here APC whores". There is almost 10+ pages of discussion on this topic in 36 hours, all by bona fide individuals. If that isn't a red flag, than what is?

thats reminds me of the boiling frog metaphor, they are slowing increasing the heat.