Project Reality Forums

I suggest that:

Instead of using the normal grass, which isn't visible on long distances because of the BF2 engine, we use the little bushes that are visible on longer distances. And I mean a LOT.

Far too often has it happened to me that I thought I was safe because I was laying in the grass, hiding from the enemy. Just to remember that he can't see the grass, and is probably wondering why I am just sitting there in the open. This usually ends up in him killing me, because I can't see through the grass, while he doesn't see any grass. I'm pretty sure this has happened before to a all of you.

Shouldn't it be possible to model some sort of "bush" in the form of regular grass that doesn't disappear, just like those other little bushes, and then just cover everything with that instead of the normal grass?

Sanirius

Hmmm i like this idea
If this is possible without causing too much lag due to all the graphics id love to see it happen! Good thought mate!

I think this is a good idea but I could take up to Many statics and cause crashes like in the old op archer, I think this would fall in with why dense forest+big map(which is now almost a requirement) = death

sangin will attempt to get that type of grass.

You are talking about "overgrowth undergrowth", which already exists in PR. Various cropfields as well as grass and wild grass are of the type "overgrowth", but used as "undergrowth".

Operation Archer didn’t crash because of too many statics, the problem was too many networkable objects.

Networkable?

cat wrote:Networkable?

Afaik those are destroyable things like buildings ad walls

supahpingi wrote:Afaik those are destroyable things like buildings ad walls

correct, too many networkable objects, anything more than 255 of them on the server and it will crash, this includes deployable objects.

back on topic, all I have to say is:



but 1/2 happens we will never get 100% rid of the BF2 undergrowth system, its good for "decorative touches" and no so much for concealment.

The nondestroyable versions of the afghan statics are not networkable RIGHT?

cat wrote:The nondestroyable versions of the afghan statics are not networkable RIGHT?

Um yes..?

Also does a destroyable object still count as networkable once destroyed ie. wrecked houses? Because I recall rounds on 0.7 where Basrah or Archer wouldn't crash because most of the map got leveled to the ground.

I also noticed that in 0.8 all deployable objects are destroyed 1 second before round ends, so deployable stuff shouldn't be an issue...? I do still destroy randomly spammed ammo crates if I see them in-game, just in case.

No I mean thee "nondestroyable" versions of the houses. Are they normal statics? Because my newsest map has like 550 of them.

If they are not destroyable they are most likely normal statics. Why wouldnt they be?