Project Reality Forums

I've started playing PR again recently, and one thing that bothered me about the community are certain artificial rules that are, with barely any opposition, applied on many active servers. I am not talking about rules against griefing, teamkilling and intentional asset wasting - I am talking about rules pertaining to actual gameplay, rules that forbid actions that are part of playing to win.

Players like to use these type of rules to elevate themselves from being outplayed, or outsmarted. It is basically a way to rationalize the sore feeling of defeat by not taking the blame yourself, but blaming the players who defeated them by describing them and their playstyle as 'abusive', 'unhonorable', and similar adjectives, and what is important in this case, 'unrealistic'.
It is this tendency that prevents many 'good' players from becoming actually good.

My main complaint, however, is that these type of rules are actually forced on everyone in PR - at least the servers where the best players and more teamwork exist. The worst part is, no one contests it. The most common rules I've encountered are no attacking uncaps, no roadkilling, no baseraping or ambushing close to main, no incendiaring heavy vehicles (prior to changes) etc.

You will rarely find a PR player who disagrees with banning roadkilling. It's actually not that big of an issue, but it's a symptom of a bigger problem. I also personally find it annoying to not only have to avoid people running in the open just so I don't get reported to the admins, but also because I've seen people drive around me when I was alone, walking on a bridge.

The people who agree with banning this say it's unrealistic to ram people with vehicles. The game's physics simply aren't appropriate enough to simulate how ramming someone would occur in real life. Is there any other example where the game doesn't exactly simulate real life? Many. Would you, for example, ban medics from reviving people that took a shot in the head? Or maybe ban people from climbing towers because a HAT or a tank shot can't blow up towers like in real life?

The only reason roadkilling is banned is because people don't like being owned by road killers, and instead of fighting back, they resort to enforcing rules that restrict a particular use of the vehicle, dumbing the game for everyone involved. Now, roadkilling isn't that important of an aspect, but this type of thinking escalates to other rules. The funny thing is, you can't even argue the ban is important because of balance - it's relatively easy to deal with road killers, unless you're in an open field, in which case you SHOULD be ready to encounter this type of threat, either with a LAT kit, spreading out and shooting back at the car, finding a tree or bump in the terrain (if you're alone), or having some sort of armor or even light vehicle escort.

Another rule that is common is no baseraping. Although the game itself partially restricts this with the DoD, bases usually have some kind of defense (TOWs, MGs and AAs), and I really don't see why you should remove the fighting from this place of the battlefield completely. It is, effectively, taking complexity and fun out of the game. Fun Fact: The NWA Insurgency server allows insurgents to attack the BLUFOR's base, but not vice versa.

Streamlining gameplay like this makes the game more stale and more boring. You want to have as many options as possible when it comes to playing the game and more rather than less ways to defeat your opponents. Rules against baseraping, attacking uncaps and similar lower the number of options and make the game less fun.

I do have to point out that sometimes an artificial rule might be justifiable if a certain action is truly imbalanced, or if the counter to this action or tactic results in tedious gameplay. One example that I'm not 100% sure about is using bomb cars to attack the BLUFOR's main base. The damage dealt with a bomb car to a BLUFOR base can be devastating, especially at the beginning, and the counter to it is having someone with a HAT, or manning a TOW or MG at the main base the whole time. The issue is not so clearcut, though - the biggest damage can be dealt at the beginning when everyone is at the main base and when assets are unmanned, in which case it isn't that hard to assign someone to look out for a bomb car until most of the team mobilizes. Later on, when the team is spread out around the map, it can be quite hard for a bomb car to actually get to a main base, and even then, the risk/reward might not even be worth it compared to targetting enemy FOBs and armor.

TL;DR - I would like to see a server that has very little rules of this type, and enables players to play to win and come up with more varied ways of winning the game. Having a server that removes all of these rules might be a good test to see what is imbalanced, and what can be countered if players would just try to fight back.

There are numerous reasons for the existence of certain rules. For roadkilling, on TG anyway, it's not that we don't allow people driving over one another but rather we don't like people who get in vehicles with the sole intention of using them as weapons. Running a guy over is fine if he happens to bumble into the path of your vehicle - you don't have to avoid him in that case - but circling around with the intention of flattening soldiers under your treads is unrealistic and thus not in the spirit of the game.

As for the mains, we like games to be centered around completing objectives rather than sitting outside main bases racking up easy kills. We also don't feel teams should have to keep what would likely amount to an entire squad at their main simply to protect their assets.

I'm not saying that our opinion is right or your opinion is wrong, but if you want to play on our server - or any server - you should follow the rules or go elsewhere.

Iran used cars as a weapon during riots to run people over gruesome but realistic

I agree with everything in the OP. I'm tired of hearing people constantly whine about "kill chasers" and "unfair" tactics, crying for admins to take action against players who are actually doing well. PR is not a re-enactment simulator, the battles aren't staged, the winners aren't predetermined, so why do so many admins and players feel the need to force a specific formula of play down people's throats? The reason I choose to play PR over BF3, Modern Warfare 20 or even Red Orchesta is because it's not an arcade game. I play it because it doesn't force me down a specific path, because there's more than one way to help your team win and because it truly rewards thinking. The game is not the problem, the players are. The "kill chasers" aren't hurting PR, the "respected community members" and admins who dumb down the game with artificial rules, who take away what's fun and what's great about it just so they'll have an easier time, so they won't have to adapt or get better as players, are the ones who are hurting it. The game is perfect, so don't touch it.

if bullets actually went through the vehicles, and bullet proof glass actually failed, not be bullet proof after hundreds of rounds being shot at it, i dont think people would have a problem with roadkilling

Baseraping has to be the cheapest/no skill required tactic ever.. What better way to take out the enemy right? Take them out at main...

Most of these rules are based on exploits. Take roadkilling for example, you can unload tons of bullets on a ammo techy, yet the guy will run you all over, why? Because the glass is bullet-proof and the engine not damageable.

Most of these rules are based on the Refractor limitations and I agree with them, as they are all exploits and simply lame.

ShockUnitBlack wrote:There are numerous reasons for the existence of certain rules. For roadkilling, on TG anyway, it's not that we don't allow people driving over one another but rather we don't like people who get in vehicles with the sole intention of using them as weapons. Running a guy over is fine if he happens to bumble into the path of your vehicle - you don't have to avoid him in that case - but circling around with the intention of flattening soldiers under your treads is unrealistic and thus not in the spirit of the game.

As for the mains, we like games to be centered around completing objectives rather than sitting outside main bases racking up easy kills. We also don't feel teams should have to keep what would likely amount to an entire squad at their main simply to protect their assets.

I'm not saying that our opinion is right or your opinion is wrong, but if you want to play on our server - or any server - you should follow the rules or go elsewhere.

I agree that kicking people that waste a few jeeps just for trying to roadkill is justifiable since it's a detriment to the team and there's no other way to punish him (it's basically griefing), but if you're driving a technical of any kind it should be legimitate for the driver to try to run people over if he gets a chance to do so without killing himself and the people that he's driving.

As for mains, well... they could become an objective. That's my whole point. Fighting could shift to mains, and this would add a new dynamic to the game. If no one is attacking your base, don't defend it. If it's 1 guy attacking it, have 1 or 2 guys deal with it (people respawn all the time). If it's 4 or more people attacking your main, it might not be so bad to have a squad defending.

karambaitos wrote:if bullets actually went through the vehicles, and bullet proof glass actually failed, not be bullet proof after hundreds of rounds being shot at it, i dont think people would have a problem with roadkilling

I don't find a problem with this at all. Even if you don't kill the driver, you can shoot the car to death easily - not if you're alone, obviously, but if you're alone you're not supposed to win that fight anyway unless you are skilled enough to dodge the car, shoot the driver in the back or side when he drives by (works) or just evade him using terrain. If you're in the open field, well, you're fucked.

Brainlaag wrote:Most of these rules are based on exploits. Take roadkilling for example, you can unload tons of bullets on a ammo techy, yet the guy will run you all over, why? Because the glass is bullet-proof and the engine not damageable.

Most of these rules are based on the Refractor limitations and I agree with them, as they are all exploits and simply lame.

I'm not sure about shooting the ammo techy driver now, but even if he's harder to kill from the side or back (unlike a regular car, for example), it is not that bad because ammo techies are way more valuable and insurgents using it for the sole purpose of ramming are risking this valuable asset from being destroyed by LATs, .50 cals, APCs or simply driving into an obstacle or bump while trying to ram someone. In short, it's dumb to use ammo techies for this purpose, and if someone manages to kill a whole squad with 1 ammo techie, all the power to them. Anyway, maybe it does require some kind of nerf to it's survivability, but I wouldn't apply a general rule to all vehicles because of 1 asset.

I see these rules as more of a dumbass protection for your own team, who the hell wants to be fighting over the active flags, and then pull up your map to see multiple light transport driving all over the map and guys sniping at the enemy main? I come to PR to get away from that ****.

Qadis wrote:The only reason roadkilling is banned is because people don't like being owned by road killers, and instead of fighting back, they resort to enforcing rules that restrict a particular use of the vehicle

A single person in a car can run down an entire squad, they're quite hard to counter unless you know they're coming. LATs are hard to aim at circling cars, deviation goes up when you're turning and they have a minimum range. Cars are largely bullet proof unless you're firing at the right aspect. Basically it ain't fun to be on the receiving end of it, and it's counter to teamwork since one person can pull it off. I'm fine with people running me over if I get caught in the middle of the road, and on servers like NwA I'm pretty sure that's allowed.

Qadis wrote:Another rule that is common is no baseraping. Although the game itself partially restricts this with the DoD, bases usually have some kind of defense (TOWs, MGs and AAs), and I really don't see why you should remove the fighting from this place of the battlefield completely.

The player count doesn't really allow for people defending the base. Generally on larger maps you'll have 2, maybe 3 active squads with the rest in assets, so you don't have enough to reliably defend the base. There's also a problem that on a lot of maps you can tie down the base with a HAT and a supply truck, so again it's very counter to the team-work aspect. A well placed bomb will also flatten their base.

Qadis wrote:Fun Fact: The NWA Insurgency server allows insurgents to attack the BLUFOR's base, but not vice versa.

Actually I think that rule was reverted, and I don't think you're allowed to fire out of main bases either, but I'm not actually sure.

Qadis wrote:Rules against baseraping, attacking uncaps and similar lower the number of options and make the game less fun.

I disagree, I think those rules are a necessity to get around limitations (like not being able to have main-bases further apart) and also to get around the fact that many people will play like tw*ts and completely ignore the teamwork aspect to get a cheap thrill at the detriment of the opposing team. Sometimes they are over the top though, really I wish artificial rules could be enforced through balanced gameplay mechanics where possible.

Qadis wrote:TL;DR - I would like to see a server that has very little rules of this type, and enables players to play to win and come up with more varied ways of winning the game. Having a server that removes all of these rules might be a good test to see what is imbalanced, and what can be countered if players would just try to fight back.

Actually I'd like to see this as well, just to see what affect it has.

Personally I've always thought that elements of teamwork and basic goodwill is something which makes this game great, and I've also felt that the fun should come from the fight; a well placed ambush or a neat maneuver rather than someone sitting outside the opposition main with C4 and a supply truck.

Delfer wrote:If you remove the rules you'll just get a bunch of retards exploiting, camping each others mains, and 1 manning jeeps to road kill. Team play will go out the window because
A) Above strategies can be frustrating and impossible to fight back against (i.e spawn rape)
B) Everyone will want to spawn rape the other team as well(Sounds like fun right)
C) People who came to PR to avoid all the above will leave(i.e team players)

A) Hardly impossible. It might be in favor of the attacker in some cases, depending on the layout of the base. Also take into account that you can't come so close to most main bases cause of the DoD.

B) No they won't. EVERYONE spawnraping the enemy main base would only happen if the enemy team's only spawn point was the main base and if they lost all the flags. At that point it's normal to see one team fighting in the main of another (it happens on Op Barracuda and Iron Eagle)

C) It's funny that you say this, considering removing the above rules would actually increase the need for teamwork.

Given that the vehicle spawns are static and everyone knows them, it'd be easy enough for a good jet pilot to drop bombs on your main base without even being visible to counter attack. Add onto that the set times stuff respawns, and they could easily drop a bomb on the jet just after it spawns. How exactly would a team pull together to remove that threat?

Edit: and please dont just respond with "you should have had a jet in the air" because that's my point kinda, we shouldn't lose all our vehicles in main for the rest of the round, just because our pilot fucked up one time.

AquaticPenguin wrote:A single person in a car can run down an entire squad, they're quite hard to counter unless you know they're coming. LATs are hard to aim at circling cars, deviation goes up when you're turning and they have a minimum range. Cars are largely bullet proof unless you're firing at the right aspect. Basically it ain't fun to be on the receiving end of it, and it's counter to teamwork since one person can pull it off. I'm fine with people running me over if I get caught in the middle of the road, and on servers like NwA I'm pretty sure that's allowed.

It's weird, I seem to be the only one not having such trouble with cars trying to run me or my squad down. Even when I'm alone I mostly manage to at least escape it. Then again, my experience (as well as other peoples') has been quite limited due to these rules being instated almost everywhere.

AquaticPenguin wrote:The player count doesn't really allow for people defending the base. Generally on larger maps you'll have 2, maybe 3 active squads with the rest in assets, so you don't have enough to reliably defend the base. There's also a problem that on a lot of maps you can tie down the base with a HAT and a supply truck, so again it's very counter to the team-work aspect. A well placed bomb will also flatten their base.

You don't need to send a whole squad back. It can't be that hard to have 1 squad send say, 2 guys to deal with a threat like that. I can see the problem of transportation, after some have spawned in main to deal with the threat, but that also depends on the map. It also kinda sucks that the USMC is insulated from any kind of base rape on some maps.

Btw, someone with a HAT and a supply or ammo truck can already do significant damage to supply routes if someone doesn't deal with him.

AquaticPenguin wrote:I disagree, I think those rules are a necessity to get around limitations (like not being able to have main-bases further apart) and also to get around the fact that many people will play like tw*ts and completely ignore the teamwork aspect to get a cheap thrill at the detriment of the opposing team. Sometimes they are over the top though, really I wish artificial rules could be enforced through balanced gameplay mechanics where possible.

The people that aren't very teamwork oriented are prolly already doing lonewolf-ish stuff, to varying degrees of success.

badmojo420 wrote:Given that the vehicle spawns are static and everyone knows them, it'd be easy enough for a good jet pilot to drop bombs on your main base without even being visible to counter attack. Add onto that the set times stuff respawns, and they could easily drop a bomb on the jet just after it spawns. How exactly would a team pull together to remove that threat?

Edit: and please dont just respond with "you should have had a jet in the air" because that's my point kinda, we shouldn't lose all our vehicles in main for the rest of the round, just because our pilot fucked up one time.

You mean he could bomb the main base out of sight of the AA defenses main bases usually have on jet maps ?

I'm not very experienced with CAS, but if using the static and mobile AA at a team's disposal isn't enough to prevent the jet bomb your base at a time you know he might be coming, then that is imbalanced, and it might warrant a rule to ban jets bombing main bases (assuming it wouldn't be addressed by the devs in some way).

Also, you won't lose all of your vehicles in main from 1 bombing unless your team is being shit and not using any assets (as in all of your assets are camped in main).

Speaking of which, AA lock over mainbase might be something to look out for as well, although I think this shouldn't be so hard to deal with in most cases. Thing is, it requires more teamwork.

I'm going to guess you don't use the AA against jets much? I saw enough of what baserape can really be like back in Kashan traning. With unlimited kits & aa turrets at our disposal they can still make quick work of you. The problem is that your position is known, and you have no idea when and which direction they'll come from.

badmojo420 wrote:I'm going to guess you don't use the AA against jets much? I saw enough of what baserape can really be like back in Kashan traning. With unlimited kits & aa turrets at our disposal they can still make quick work of you. The problem is that your position is known, and you have no idea when and which direction they'll come from.

That's true for static defenses, but what about mobile AA ? Can't you find a good spot to cover the main base without it being obvious ? If you position yourself on the SW slopes of the hill that is NE of the MEC main on Kashan Desert, and have 1 guy on the AA in main base, the jet will have to pick 1 of the targets (assuming he even knows about the position of the AAV), and the distance between the AAs should be big enough for the jet to be threatened whatever his approach. This is pure theorycrafting btw, I've never been able to try this stuff out (guess why).

As for the timing of their arrival, you already said they will try to bomb your jet the next time it spawns. If they try to do it some other time, it can be tricky.

Qadis wrote:It's weird, I seem to be the only one not having such trouble with cars trying to run me or my squad down. Even when I'm alone I mostly manage to at least escape it. Then again, my experience (as well as other peoples') has been quite limited due to these rules being instated almost everywhere.

I've had less of an issue with it since the rules seem to be enforced on a lot of server now. The main trouble is that in cities it's hard to anticipate a car coming, and out in the open it's harder to stop are car when they're coming. LAT kits are generally a bad idea on insurgency map since they can be used by the enemy and they'll make a mess of your vehicles if they get hold of it. Another more minor issue is that sometimes players can't be revived on being run over since they often get glitched into statics, which is quite crippling to their squad.

Qadis wrote:You don't need to send a whole squad back. It can't be that hard to have 1 squad send say, 2 guys to deal with a threat like that. I can see the problem of transportation, after some have spawned in main to deal with the threat, but that also depends on the map. It also kinda sucks that the USMC is insulated from any kind of base rape on some maps.

Then you're 2 guys down from your infantry squad, the problem of transportation is especially bad if said camping player has destroyed your chopper/truck.

Qadis wrote:Btw, someone with a HAT and a supply or ammo truck can already do significant damage to supply routes if someone doesn't deal with him.

Very true, however I think it's also easier to counter as you can get outside your base and either maneuver around them, or flank and take them out.

Qadis wrote:The people that aren't very teamwork oriented are prolly already doing lonewolf-ish stuff, to varying degrees of success.

Yes, but without rules they'll probably be more successful because they can then freely HAT your base.

Qadis wrote:That's true for static defenses, but what about mobile AA ? Can't you find a good spot to cover the main base without it being obvious ?

They're coming in for an attack and they know where you are, there's no reason they wouldn't dump flares, and then your chance of locking them is zero. Even if you manage to lock and fire at them from an over-watch outside your base, the aspect you're firing at will reduce the chance that you'll hit the aircraft, let alone destroy it. Even if you destroy them they've likely already released the bombs and your assets are screwed.

How lame is it to take a clowncar and call running down one or two guys "TACTICAL"?
Its probibly the most lame thing I have ever heard for a long time.
Your point is invalid until you can play and win the game by our standards and not your own cowardly little grievy ones.

Fun Fact: The NWA Insurgency server allows insurgents to attack the BLUFOR's base, but not vice versa.

Please get your facts straight Qadis, NWA has removed this rules as people were exploiting it.

If you are going to remove rules gameplay wise, you will wreck the gameplay. You cannot allow people to turn around roadkill someone, make another round and kill another person as the BF2 engine cannot simulate real life circumstances it is very difficult to actually shoot someone out of a moving vehicle.

This is a game and rules are here to balance things up, would you play a map that you know of you are going to lose?


At the end of the day its just a game, we play this for our own fun, rules are here to make gameplay run smooth, why would we remove a rule that makes the job of the admins harder?

On another note Qadis you got TB'd today from NWA insurgency for roadkilling, making circles in a gary and roadkilling 3 people in the process is in my opinion making use of a exploit. Why would we remove the rule not to roadkill so that people can abuse this exploit?

Our goal is for every player to have fun, have a good game and keeping everything in balance.

Rules are good as they are, if you want to start a new server please go ahead.