Project Reality Forums

the rules state, the armor to be named the following:

Tank
Tracked APC
Wheeled APC

there are NO other variants, WE KNOW that the scorpian and scimitar are NOT apcs, we know this, again, consolidation is the purpose, they are tracked so let the tracked apc run them.

if the 9 squad restriction could ever be changed, then we would make them like they used to be.

To answer your question, now, since its been months since the change and people dont read the rules, if you name it wrong then you probably are going to lose that asset to the squad that named it right, so, read the rules so you dont get it wrong.

any other questions let us know, thanks.

Yeah thx Super, the confusion for me has come from that on your page the rules still say both naming rules ie.

All heavy assets are squad-specific. The first correctly named squad gets the asset. Acceptable squadnames include but are not limited to: Tank, Jets, CAS Huey, APC (but be specific if multiple APCs are available, for example MBT, MTLB, AAV, BTR etcetera).

And

Tracked Light armor/APC squads can be combined with a minimum of 6 squad members before being locked and must be named TRACKED APC.

Wheeled APC squads require a minimum of 4 squad members b4 they are locked and must be named WHEELED APC.

You might wanna delete the first one.

We'll clear up the rules, thanks for pointing that out, Jevski.

oh, yep, sorry, we need to clean house, sorry bout that and thanks for notifying us!

Mid-tier server in my opinion.. (if taking in account the other servers from the past that always had good gameplay)

Some of the admins don't act as admins but as jerks with double morals.
I witnessed it myself while being in a squad with Taylor/Talon (?)

Sentences that were made up like "they can suck my ****, I don't care about their votes, I want to fly heli's/jets"
Privilige?

Especially the mentality of "only 20+ age in this clan" is somehow funny, a lot of the people in it don't act mature and can not look at this rational or in an objective way.

Atleast it doesn't crash as often as CIA.

And don't come shitting on me and telling it's not feedback.
Of course, I don't expect any improvement, just want to see what people think about it

Careless wrote: Sentences that were made up like "they can suck my ****, I don't care about their votes, I want to fly heli's/jets"
Privilige?

Did he proceed to ignore the outcome of the vote?

Careless wrote:Especially the mentality of "only 20+ age in this clan" is somehow funny, a lot of the people in it don't act mature and can not look at this rational or in an objective way.

Source? Examples?

Careless wrote:And don't come shitting on me and telling it's not feedback.

You having a bit of a rough day there, mate? Nobody has said this and nobody will, we take all feedback, good and bad, into account and see where we can improve. But, feedback can only be valuable if it is written in a rational and objective way, so let me throw that right back at you and see if we can get a more constructive dialogue going.

My warmest regards.

brezmans wrote:Did he proceed to ignore the outcome of the vote?

It's not about the ignoring of the outcome.

It's about the mentality of being an, excuse me for my language, asset-whore.
Giving people "option" to "chose" from maps with heavy assets, which in turn he would prioritize to himself.

Kinda depicts the real-life actions of a certain group of people in this world, but that aside.

brezmans wrote: Source? Examples?

brezmans wrote:You having a bit of a rough day there, mate? Nobody has said this and nobody will, we take all feedback, good and bad, into account and see where we can improve. But, feedback can only be valuable if it is written in a rational and objective way, so let me throw that right back at you and see if we can get a more constructive dialogue going.

My warmest regards.

Now don't accuse me of having a bad day. I can't do anything about the fact that some of your admins are not able to act as an admins, but instead act as selfish tyrants.

How objective does it has to go?

An admin sets maps of his own taste and debates in squad talk (closed squad with his friends) about what map and what lay-out would be the best for their needs to fly DEM JETS.

There's not a lot that I could adjust to my own view, it's just how it is.
For evidence;
watch logs/BR to see
-who flew all the jets and helicopters
-who drove APC's while being in CAS squad

That's was only two matches in the same squad with this person.
And by knowing that he has his own group of friends who he prioritizes, I can judge that this is not the first time.

Careless wrote:It's not about the ignoring of the outcome.

It's about the mentality of being an, excuse me for my language, asset-whore.
Giving people "option" to "chose" from maps with heavy assets, which in turn he would prioritize to himself.

Everyone that knows me, knows that I'm the first to call people out on being asset whores. I'm a straight infantry guy myself. You did not mention in your previous post that these comments were influencing map choices, hence my question as to the outcome.

Careless wrote: Now don't accuse me of having a bad day. I can't do anything about the fact that some of your admins are not able to act as an admins, but instead act as selfish tyrants.

Ok, whatever you say. But has no one never taught you that insulting people won't get you anywhere? Just by the tone of your feedback I'm extremely inclined to disregard everything you're saying. Luckily I don't always follow my instincts but am able to let reason prevail. Let's continue.

Careless wrote:Image of our website and recruiting requirements

I'm quite aware of our recruitment requirements, I wasn't asking for proof or sources of that, I was asking of proof of your quote here:

Careless wrote:Especially the mentality of "only 20+ age in this clan" is somehow funny, a lot of the people in it don't act mature and can not look at this rational or in an objective way.

As someone fairly trained in formal and informal logic, logical fallacies like these always stand out. "A lot of the people" is intentionally vague and is only used to bring your point across that we are bad people and should be publicly shamed. If you bring me proof, I will handle it. It's that simple.

All nitpicking aside, I will take from your feedback the only tangible thing, namely one of our guest admins' behaviour in our server, and I will speak to this person and make sure it doesn't happen again. If you have any more tangible, concrete feedback, please don't hesitate to post here.

hey, yall are both in belgium, why dont yall meet for lunch?

oh, and his posts on NEW's feedback are near identical as this one on ours.

In regards to the track/wheel affair,

This leaves players with a choice of two squad categories, however consolidates assorted vehicles into a group with entirely different concerns, which is damning for coherent comms. Its about as useful as categorising the application of the vehicle by the colour of its camouflage or hight. I can imagine some exceptions, but not enough to justify the tracked/wheeled categorisation.

If HOG were to adopt the acronyms vehicle categories APC and IFV, you would still have the same number of two squad categories, yet the squad would be able to operate better as they are able to share more relevant information, as the same vehicle types have the same concerns. APCs wan't to know who to hide from and IFVs want to know who to kill, both supporting INF in different ways and with different capabilities.

On top of this, Infantry leaders will know which squad to contact if they need transport or armoured vehicle support, because there will be a squad for each of these tasks. I think if you asked most INF SLs if they would prefer tracks or wheels on their IFV, I imagine they'd say that they don't much care for the question, and tell you to hurry up and send a vehicle.

In addition, these acronyms are shorter in characters, allowing for greater detail/customisation in squad names.

Finally, to simplify, Armoured recon(scimitar, BRDM, VN3 etc) /Anti-Tank Armoured vehicles (spandrel, TOW MTLB etc) /Tankettes (Scorpion) should fall into the IFV category (as they are indicated on map briefings on the map-loading screen), because they have more similar concerns/capabilities/roles to IFVs than APCs.


Do you get me?



...mongol...

The battlerecorder is not connected to the prspy just so you know.
Also can i have a link to the battlerecorder files?
EDIT: just finished playing on your server and there were no admins for 6-7 hours, please can you get some more people on.

[R-MOD]Mongolian_dude wrote: If HOG were to adopt the acronyms vehicle categories APC and IFV...

You must realize how many people will mistake IFV and APCs, I see a lot of people calling everything that isn't a truck/car a tank. This makes a lot of sense for more seasoned asset whores, and players who know the difference between the two, but beyond that I fear this may lead to more confusion. Too many people will make APC squad and claim all light armor as their own, at least with the wheels/tracks division anyone with functioning eye balls will be able to discern the difference.

There are still plenty of useless 1 man squads taking up spots an INF squad could use, having 2 squads for the assets with essentially the same role contributes to the problem (joining and asking for the squad will work from time to time). Will there ever be a time when you guys do away with forcing us to make a 2nd squad for APCs?

"Will there ever be a time when you guys do away with forcing us to make a 2nd squad for APCs?"

what u mean? do you mean the difference in wheeled and tracked? if so, that could be. but i guess i would like to see how many maps, like muttrah have a bunch of apcs so theres not a bunch laying around the main. The current rule set was done to test, we are seeing issues and need to make adjustments but we want to make sure doing so is done smartly.

but then again, that may not be such a bad idea. we could then have a squad open for infantry or the infamous IFV's.

as for the admin thing, nothing pains us more than having pubbers suffer thru the wrath of other pubbers with intentions of only causing trouble.
We are not going to just throw any admin in there to abuse the position and then we are here answering to you on that as well.

In the meantime i need names, dates and current map of the offenders and i will handle it from there. use the chat system so it logs the problems.

ALL players are expected to follow rules and standard game play with or without admins on duty. IF we find people abusing the above whether witnessed by us or thru the logs, they will be banned so that it will force them to our forums to explain the situation etc.

=HOG= is trying to make this game play as it was in the old days and we will actively view the logs for abusive and disruptive players.

you can send me a pm here or on our forums for anonymous reporting. i will not share any pm i receive with anyone.

super

oh and here is the battlerecorder link

Index of /

this is only for one server, we are working on the other.

__Super_6__5__ wrote:what u mean? do you mean the difference in wheeled and tracked? if so, that could be. but i guess i would like to see how many maps, like muttrah have a bunch of apcs so theres not a bunch laying around the main. The current rule set was done to test, we are seeing issues and need to make adjustments but we want to make sure doing so is done smartly.

Muttrah might be the only map with this issue, but at the same time MEC can lose a whole lot of tickets really quick thanks to the inability for anyone to try to stem the use, and therefore loss, of assets. Most other maps that have a mix of wheeled and tracked APCs do not have enough assets to merit the use of 2 squads, there are exceptions but 4 crewed APCs should be ample support for infantry.

I'm glad that the HOG admin team is open to criticism and willing to change where change is needed. I hope to see the tracked/wheeled issue sorted soon, it's a point of friction in game even if it makes sense on paper.

I agree with Murphy. The wheeled-tracked differentiation might be useful because it is easy to find out which is which, but it makes coordination of the APCs unnecessary hard, takes away squad-spots and is causing *****-fighting on a regular basis.

I suggest to enforce people to merge into one APC/IFV squad as often as possible, since they can use up to 4 vehicles (which is a lot) at a time. It should be up to the SL or commander on how many vehicles he wants on the field. Having 4 is just a waste of tickets most of the time and leaves you without any vehicles a couple of minutes into the round when all are wasted
... and that again will of course cause in the locked-squad debate, so it really is a vicious circle

I don't really have time to write up a full commentary, but no matter which rules there are, people will *****. If you enforce "the most correctly named squad", people will ***** over MTLB-30, BTR, BTR-60, APC, IFV, etc.

Why is this? Because in the current state of PR, players will always *****. This is why we need rules like this, this is why we needs admins to enforce those rules. Do you know I can't even remember a round when I didn't have to kick someone from the server for disobeying a simple rule?

I dream of a server where we don't need admins. Where people understand teamwork and are level-headed and mature, where they don't ***** and moan if they don't get the asset they want to use, but instead look at the bigger picture and see where they can help out the team.

If anyone would like to help us build that type of server, we'll provide the server, happily. No admins, no nonsense, only teamwork and rational behaviour.

Meanwhile, and this is very hard to say, we have to keep making up stupid rules like this because the majority of the players these days are ********. I see admins and good players getting burnt out on PR because of shit like this and it tears me up to see the game I love go to shit.

/rant

"I dream of a server where we don't need admins. Where people understand teamwork and are level-headed and mature, where they don't ***** and moan if they don't get the asset they want to use, but instead look at the bigger picture and see where they can help out the team.

If anyone would like to help us build that type of server, we'll provide the server, happily. No admins, no nonsense, only teamwork and rational behaviour."

i quoted those 2 sections as there are alot of people in pr that are mixed in with the ones brez speaks of.
We are serious about this and like brez i dream of those days. The server would be locked with a "whitelist" of players that know and love the game on a level that most pubbers dont understand. you could go in there and see a game that would awe the simple pubber. you would be happy that your playing against other intelligent real teamwork oriented people.

pr today is implied teamwork and we want to change that.

let us know......

oh, and murphy and nate, we are looking into the apc issue and it does make sense. stay tuned.