Project Reality Forums

I wanted to suggest you consider some form of control over how many players can take the same weapon. For example its common when a tank arrives on the scene to see every dead player suddenly spawn with a rocket launcher and wipe that tank out. Then you get players all wanting to be snipers etc

My point is there dosn't seem to be enough common soldiers in any of the previous games, the fact people can customise their kit to the situation is good per map but not for situations within the map. If someone is in a tank you need to call in your tanks or air support of rely on a few rpg guys. It shouldn't be a case of dying then switching kits to compensate thats just unrealistic. If the required player is killed another player can simply take their kit.

Along the same train of thought everybody whores certain vehicles for example aircraft and helicopters are always the first vehicles to be taken by whoever gets to them first rather then the best person for the job its simply the quickest off the mark wether they are capable or not.

What you really need is to have some kind of pre determined system that allows the commander to decide who uses what kits and vehicles. This of course does limit flexibility but at the same time encourages players to work together because they can't deal with situations simply by dying and chosing another kit.

I don't know how it will work in BF2 but some kind of ranking based system or experience via flight time or kills in a vehicle or kit should be a method of measuring who is good at what.

Or it could be simply down to a ratio of 2 snipers, 4 rocket guys, 4 special ops & 4 support/medic for every 10 riflemen. Although this dosn't stop players vehicle stealing.

FrostPaw wrote:I wanted to suggest you consider some form of control over how many players can take the same weapon. For example its common when a tank arrives on the scene to see every dead player suddenly spawn with a rocket launcher and wipe that tank out. Then you get players all wanting to be snipers etc

The main idea is pretty good but there is one really big negatif point: TK. People are going to teamkill their teammates only to be able to get that weapon

Then they will get punished.

The calss limitation is good, but on all armour maps you need to allow for more AT/Enineer. SH did this in their mod I think, the problem being it never changes, so Im assuming they must set it up for a 64 player server, but what if its only 32 people? With BF:2 maybe you could link it to the way the map changes, that way with different player counts comes both smaller/larger maps and smaller/larger class allowances.

Why not just have bases that are under attack, with a player inside the flag radius un spawnable so you don't get people spawning with whatever weapon suits the situation. So instead they would have to spawn at the closest flag and make it to the flag under attack before their teamates trying to hold off whoevers attacking it.

Ugly Duck wrote:The calss limitation is good, but on all armour maps you need to allow for more AT/Enineer. SH did this in their mod I think, the problem being it never changes, so Im assuming they must set it up for a 64 player server, but what if its only 32 people? With BF:2 maybe you could link it to the way the map changes, that way with different player counts comes both smaller/larger maps and smaller/larger class allowances.

This is an excellent Idea. IMO. Map Scaled Class limitation. Because, IRL those classes only make up a small portion compared to rifleman/basic infantryman. We only have 3-5 SMAW teams per company, 3-5 240Gs and at the company level there are no snipers. They can be assigned by the Bn Commander to a company, but normally just 1 Scout/Sniper and 1 spotter. Compare those #s to a company of over 150 men. Of course u don't have to go that drastic. And the problem arrises of: how will everyone get a chance to play the class they want? Enter the class Whores.

I am refering to the USMC here. I am not sure what other forces do.

Shrapnel wrote:Why not just have bases that are under attack, with a player inside the flag radius un spawnable so you don't get people spawning with whatever weapon suits the situation. So instead they would have to spawn at the closest flag and make it to the flag under attack before their teamates trying to hold off whoevers attacking it.

that seems like a good idea but just one person, i think it would have to be like 3 or more to instantly neutralise the base but the cap time would remain the same.

Archangel wrote:

Shrapnel wrote:Why not just have bases that are under attack, with a player inside the flag radius un spawnable so you don't get people spawning with whatever weapon suits the situation. So instead they would have to spawn at the closest flag and make it to the flag under attack before their teamates trying to hold off whoevers attacking it.

that seems like a good idea but just one person, i think it would have to be like 3 or more to instantly neutralise the base but the cap time would remain the same.

I am not sure that 1 person should stop reinforcements if there are still friendlies, but if no friendlies are in said base/spawn, then the base should be automatically unspawnable and then taken over normally by that enemy units. I just don't see why reinforcements would stage at a base with no friendlies and that has enemy forces in it.

In other words...If your team isn't in the base and the enemy is, then it really isn't your base, it's his.

More (or the same) on this topic, here : --> http://reality.dc-nc.com/forum/viewtopic.php?t=457

Thanks for pointing that out, BlakeJr. Sorry for the repost of mostly the same stuff.

This topic seems to be a big deal to alot of people. I think it directly effects gameplay in a major way. Are there any confirmations or ideas on the system that will be used, from Dev members? I for one am very interested. Thanks.