Project Reality Forums

I'm going to try to be as sincere here as possible to both the supports of the new changes and the DEVs. Long read too, but worth it IMO.

I'm being honest here, but I personally think the whole taking away of RPs is going to push the game back in a major way. Essentially, you are making PR into Counterstrike or Call of Duty, except on a larger scale.

Think about it, one of the major reasons why Battlefield 2 was so revolutionary was because of the SL spawnpoint. Now, that was gamey as we all know and at totally unrealistic in a gameplay sense. If you only play squadleader like me, it forced you to try to hang back and be a personal spawn point too. The next evolution was the APC spawns. I predicted that would be a big failure because it put too much emphasis on "team based" spawning over "squad based spawning." Simply put, you can't really trust people you cannot physically talk to in your squad since you don't know if they speak a foreign language are uncompetent (you can tell this one by first talking to them IMO).





Next, was the RP system. I loved this concept from the beginning. I was a little skeptical about taking away the SL spawn point (I think?), but if I did believe that, I admit I was wrong. This IMO, was the greatest gameplay change to PR.

-First, it essentially raised the amount of players from 29-30 to 36 since every SL could now take part in the fight without having to worry about being the squad's personal spawnpoint (I was so relieved by this). It also increased the spawn's cohesion since I, as a SL, could lead from the front essentially (not literally, but by my squad's side).

-Next, it made "regrouping" possible. It's almost hard to jack this one up with RPs since if squad members die, they are bound to spawn back in a similar timeframe to each other to move out together. There are problems with this system that I will talk about later.

-Last, it made flanking possible. IMO, RPs essentially mimic "flanking" is you can actually get around or behind enemy lines. RPs also created frontlines in a way without actually being "frontlines" ala WW1.





Now, with the RP changes which have essentially eliminated the RP, this happens.

1. Being a SL regresses back to BF2 since you have to stay back and be the squad's "personal spawnpoint." The fact that you have to rechage it means you (SL) are even more valuable again and your team will get pissed if you die. And if you die, you are pretty much back in the rear and have to regroup with them, meaning they are blind without you, especially if a FOB is far away or you are behind enemy lines.

2. Regrouping is dead. What's the reason to wait for your squad now? Not only will you have to wait for them, but you will have to walk ages too. Take into consideration that a lot of the people who don't wait for everyone to spawn at RPs (there are many FYI) will basically get worse, except everyone has a reason to do it now. The optomist who think this new system will force "waiting to regroup" are dilusional because if people aren't willing to wait at RPs (closer to the fight) to respawn and go in, in numbers, whats the reason to wait far back at an FOB? You can still be killed the same in PR and in very stupid ways, i.e. (falling, random guy spots you, poking your head to use cover fire but lag gets you shot, helo pilot, vehicle running you over, random tank, LMGs which everyone has, etc.) That much hasn't changed and never will because of the BF2 engine's gameyness.

3. The Return of Rambo. I'm going to be honest. With this change, I could see myself going Rambo more now that there will probably be FOBs to spawn at. Being "rambo" hasn't changed since the beginning of PR. I've been playing since 0.2-0.3 and I am just as effective as a rambo player as before. If you know what to do, you can get a lot of kills by going rambo. The reason why I choose to play in squads though is because I know they will always be by my side. What happens when they start to figure out that 6 man squads were a thing of the past and realize that many players are so split up, that being rambo maybe a good idea? Honestly, whats the point of squads now that the RP has been nerfed or close to elimination? There will always be rambos, but making this game more based on "teams" to respawn is a recipe for disaster just like the APCs were. At least with RPs you had an alternative to FOBs and if you knew your SL was imcompetent, you could join another and problem solved. You can't join another team, so what do you do to fix this problem?

4. Insurgency. What is going to happen is that the Insurgents will essentially have the RP system we have now since they have many more spawn points and the coalition will not (beta version). That means that the coalition will not only have to defend all 4 FOBs, but they will have to destroy 10 caches heavily guarded by 1/2 to 1/3 of the insurgent team who can get there and defend it twice as fast as they can destroy it. We all know insurgency is spammy, so what will the US do now that they are essentially going into a meatgrinder where the enemy still spawns on the caches and have impossible numbers to defeat with less forces (plenty of forces will be defending the FOBs+main)? I really want an honest answer to this too?

I will tell you the reason why RPs were so successful. They made squads full proof since any idiot could click on it and realize where to spawn or if they clicked on another squad's RP, they get jetisined to our RP. Now those same idiots or newplayers will not know what RP to click on and will likely spawn wherever. What is worse is that if you have no mic (yes, they still exist) and want to know where to spawn, your SL can't even see your typing since you can't see dead player's in squadchat. And to put the topping on the cake, whats the point of staying with a squad if your SL has to "recharge" the RP? Really, what is the incentive to guard him and help him recharge the RP when most players could die, come in, and find the squad before the SL ever recharges. Why wait for a recharge that may never come? I really want someone to answer this one for me.







Some of you maybe saying, "well, I've tried the new system and its worked fine when I've tried it." That maybe somewhat true, but that is primarily based on the server you play in. When I played the last beta, I played in a pretty decent server, so the experience wasn't "that bad", but it wasn't as good as gameplay now. The servers even trying these betas are all in the top 5 servers out now and reinforce teamwork or have a stable playerbase of players that know each other and are competent or veterans. I HATE Tactical Gamer with a passion (partly because they are way too strict and I was perma banned because I didn't agree with that), but even I will admit that they are one of the top 3 servers in PR right now. They reinforce teamwork and a lot of the veterans, forum goers, and friends play there. Compare TG to a server that doesn't even know the Beta exist or read the forums and see how much their gameplay is different from TGs or Tactics and Teamwork or Chicago H/HOG. Now how do you think that gameplay will be with these changes with no admins or people to reinforce it? TERRIBLE.

Like I said, I've been playing since 0.2-0.3 and I've had the same amount of stellar teamwork as I had back then. One of the reasons is (and I am not trying to be cocky) because I try to be a good squadleader and force my squad to use teamwork and stick together, or as much as possible. PR SLs are part of the reason why PR is so good compared to BF2 Vanilla SLs who stay back and don't lead. Not trying to be a brownnoser here, but Fuzzhead has been able to have his squads do crazy things ingame for almost every patch. The second reason is the servers and their admins, as in the case of TG. Back in 0.3 My point is, the teamwork potential ingame is already there and doesn't need to be "FORCED." I played on GloryHoundz with 40 players and I was almost GURANTEED to find a player I played with before and I knew was competent. I was also GURANTEED to have good admins. What happens when neither of these happens in the case of the other 97% of PR servers that are not TG, Tactics and Teamwork, Texas Teamplayers, or Chicago H/HOG?




My suggestion, if the RPs really are going to be changed, are that they have a set time on them or coordination timer so that when everyone in a squad dies, or at least 3 members, they spawn back at the sametime. Keep the RPs the same as they are now in the non-beta, but just improve on this aspect. Three players would be good since that would simulate a fireteam, but 6 at the sametime would be fine too. This would also make RP placement more important since someone is bound to see them spawn in such large numbers. That way, squads would be forced to move out together and it keeps the RP system alive and essentially, the squad system. Besides that, I believe the key to teambased play in PR is Mumble. Don't try to make PR into something it is not (Armed Assault) because the engine wasn't built for that and the players who play it aren't here for that (they would be playing ArmA). And ArmA is probably the most overrated, but subpar game ever. I am confident that PR probably has more players than it too lol. BTW, BOTs don't mind dying. Real players do, so PR will NEVER be ArmA, no matter how drastic you make changes. The system we have now isn't really broke and as another player said, it won MOTD because of that. Just improve on what we have now and fix the maps (another major part in good or bad gameplay). There are no needs for this drastic changes. IMO, experiment with bigger maps and less urban maps (or at least realistic and big urban maps) so that we won't always have to do with spaminess.


Man, that was long. Hope someone reads it lol.

BTW, I know "destroy" is probably a harsh word, but I honestly believe it will be a major step backwards for PR.

They're still in D beta... players didn't deploy fbs before and they can also choose not to deploy them now if they can't be arsed, except now they're screwed for their laziness. I also fail to see how the gameplay was/is/is going to be destroyed, played on TG server running the beta and people pretty much used the same tactics as before except now when a squad go wiped out, they were wiped out instead of wave respawning a pile of bags.

China called, they want their wall back.

Uh, anyway...

Yeah, I agree with most of the things you said there, especially about RP's making Project Reality more accessable to new people.
I can't say I really read the whole thing, (just skimmed the reading, high school style ) but there's some good thoughts there.

[R-CON]Outlawz wrote:They're still in D beta... players didn't deploy fbs before and they can also choose not to deploy them now if they can't be arsed, except now they're screwed for their laziness. I also fail to see how the gameplay was/is/is going to be destroyed, played on TG server running the beta and people pretty much used the same tactics as before except now when a squad go wiped out, they were wiped out instead of wave respawning a pile of bags.

I guess you missed the part where I talked about TG....

And plenty of people deploy FOBs now. If they need to be deployed more, make them only 1 crate, but require a CO to place them.

And I know they are still in beta testing, but as the testing goes on, nothing seems to change, I can only see the gameplay getting worse. Are players here really ready to sacrifice semi-quick gameplay but tactic/squad based gameplay for long walks in order to face 1 or 2 squads gameplay? The latter is what I got from playing the beta, especially on a large map and I can say I wasn't furfilled or anything like that and my squad spent more time trying to regroup than actually fighting together. We encountered a total of 3-4 squads the entire game.

i agree with sidewinder the way things are right now make it more accessible to new players i remember when i first started playing pr back in .6ish i thought the spawn times were way to high when i first started playing. now think i have to walk for like 5 minutes back to the front and wait 40 seconds. your player base will not increase it will probably decrease if you take the spawning on rally's away.

Always being a squad leader, of course you will have the impression that these changes are bad. But as someone who is almost always a squad member, these changes seem good to me.

It's obvious the squad leaders will be the ones most effected by these changes. They will have to take on a more supporting role. Rather than being the front man they are now, squad leaders will have to hang back and survive.

Just out of curiosity, Soldier, are you loyal to your squad first, team second? Or team then squad? If commander told your squad to blindly run in and die for the team, would you do it?

now when a squad go wiped out, they were wiped out instead of wave respawning a pile of bags.

this is the main benefit imo, and it makes for much better and more fluid gameplay.

This will not destroy PR imo.

Yes TG is definately a better server than most, but too many people are willing to accept **** servers these days. If I don't get some teamwork (as opposed to just squad work) within 30mins of playing I leave the server. Too many servers are full of squads working well as a squad, but completely independantly of the rest of the team. When that happens...you might as well be playing in a 6v6. I'd rather see a smaller playerbase who really want to teamwork than a huge playerbase and having to search for gems of teamwork.

i'm with rudd on this one, if you wanted fast paced PR probably wasn't the right choice for you to begin with.


ps. i still dont see why they havent tested requiring 2 sqd members in a radius to the rally before spawn is enabled

ps. i still dont see why they havent tested requiring 2 sqd members in a radius to the rally before spawn is enabled

Maybe that cannot be done server side, would need a client side patch?

badmojo420 wrote:Always being a squad leader, of course you will have the impression that these changes are bad. But as someone who is almost always a squad member, these changes seem good to me.

It's obvious the squad leaders will be the ones most effected by these changes. They will have to take on a more supporting role. Rather than being the front man they are now, squad leaders will have to hang back and survive.

Just out of curiosity, Soldier, are you loyal to your squad first, team second? Or team then squad? If commander told your squad to blindly run in and die for the team, would you do it?

Hence why this beta/implentation is really bad. It goes back to the old vanilla tactic of forcing your SL to hide and having less players on the field. I can be a supporting role without hiding in the corner, but this change forces SLs to go back to vanilla ways. Even then, it makes the SL, and more importantly, squads less important since there is no use for them with no RPs. Do you really think there is a need to be in a squad when you won't even have the benefit of spawning with them 90% of the time? Tell, what is the major advantage to this besides the "hypothetical/what ifs" that are more than likely to not hold true? Squads won't be "forced" to stay together anymore than they are now. The upping of the respawn since time since vanilla didn't really force players to "value their life more", so why would it magically do it now?

As for your question, it makes no sense. How would running in blindly help my team? If we really needed to take a control point, I would tell my squad to keep pushing, but if I feel that we are losing too many tickets, I will tell them to back off, no matter what the Commander says. I always think about both squad and team, but the best way I can help my team is by leading my squad. Face it, individual squads that attack together or coordinate over teamchat are what gets wins in PR, not a whole team that just happens to move together. IMO, the best way you can help your team is by leading your own individual squads or having good individual squads and worrying about your team's tickets. FOBs should be built and are a given.

Bringerof_D wrote:i'm with rudd on this one, if you wanted fast paced PR probably wasn't the right choice for you to begin with.


ps. i still dont see why they havent tested requiring 2 sqd members in a radius to the rally before spawn is enabled

Uhh, I like PR just the way it is right now without the exception of a few things that I agree should be slowed down, so how can you say I shouldn't be playing PR?

This change just doesn't make sense in so many ways, hence why I wrote that long explanation/suggestion. Sure, it slows down gameplay, but it slows it down so much that the game doesn't really become anymore fun, and last time I checked, this game was supposed to be about FUN in the first place. Plus, it totally makes the SL useless and not able to fight anymore and the whole "squad" mentality useless. The squad mentality was built around creating an RP and having to stay together to put another one down if it was overrun. The 1 man RP thing was a negative IMO and should have just been 2, or 3 at most.

I could say the samething to you that if you want slow paced gameplay with few enemy engagements, that you should play Armed Assault or OFP. Its childish to have that "play another game" mentality IMO because if people didn't like PR's faster, but also slower paced gameplay, they would be playing another game.

Dr2B Rudd wrote:this is the main benefit imo, and it makes for much better and more fluid gameplay.

This will not destroy PR imo.

You had the samething when squads used to require 2-3 players to plant. The RP wasn't the fault, it was the change to 1 squadmate to place it that was. Return that and things would be exactly the way you want them.

Face it, not everyone is going to win a firefight. Both sides could have stellar tactics, but one is unfortunately going to have to lose. So why punish them in such a severe way? The RP allowed them a chance to counter attack if the other side didn't advance in time. With the beta, the attackers are screwed if they fail, which is usually the case when the defenders are already dug in with SAWs and LMGs and FOBs. In essence, you win the first firefights, you win the game since you can cover more ground in the time it takes them to respawn back in at their far off FOBs.

Yes TG is definately a better server than most, but too many people are willing to accept **** servers these days. If I don't get some teamwork (as opposed to just squad work) within 30mins of playing I leave the server. Too many servers are full of squads working well as a squad, but completely independantly of the rest of the team. When that happens...you might as well be playing in a 6v6. I'd rather see a smaller playerbase who really want to teamwork than a huge playerbase and having to search for gems of teamwork.

No one here wants to "accept" **** servers, but you need to face reality and realize that admins can't be on 24/7. Some servers are going to have lesser quality, but just because they do don't mean they are bad servers or gameplay suffers. You also have to realize that since there is no inter-squad VOIP, true intersquad tactics are pretty much impossible. This change doesn't fix that in the least. Tell me how it does if it doesn't, and I will show you how that is not true. Mumble is the only solution to that IMO, and even then, its still dependent on individual participation. And there is plenty of teamwork in PR right now. Go play on some US servers besides TG and you will see that. You don't need forced gameplay to have fun or team base teamwork ingame.



Watch. I gurantee you that if this change happens, there will still be poor squadleaders out there (as there are now) and when people wonder why teamwide or squadbased teamwork doesn't happen, they will find a way to nerf something else or blame some other reason for it. There is plenty of teamwork, both squad and team in PR right now, but there are of course always people who don't want to do that. This change won't fix them or turn them away. In fact, it gives them a reason to return (lone wolves) since FOBs will be in much more supply now. I also gurantee, GURANTEE you that FOBs will still be made by 1 man, 2 man, or individual squads over teambased. This change does nothing to fix that problem, so expect plenty of Logistic trucks scattered still.

You had the samething when squads used to require 2-3 players to plant. The RP wasn't the fault, it was the change to 1 squadmate to place it that was. Return that and things would be exactly the way you want them.

no actually in the old days I could sit inside a building, survive one attack then teleport men to my position.

new way, men who don't get revived are going to die, they are going to have to spawn somewhere a minute or two away. (unless ofc I still have my rally point, however this will be seen far less)

This also has a bonus that often other teammates will be near the firebase, or spawning on it also. Which is conducive to squads working together rather than, this squad goes here, that squad goes there and we'll keep doing that until the round ends.

Dr2B Rudd wrote:no actually in the old days I could sit inside a building, survive one attack then teleport men to my position.
new way, men who don't get revived are going to die, they are going to have to spawn somewhere a minute or two away. (unless ofc I still have my rally point, however this will be seen far less)

This also has a bonus that often other teammates will be near the firebase, or spawning on it also. Which is conducive to squads working together rather than, this squad goes here, that squad goes there and we'll keep doing that until the round ends.

No, I am not talking about those days, I am talking about the days when the RP system was the way it is now, except it required 3 people to place and still disappeared if enemies were within 50M. That is the perfect system IMO. That was only a couple of patches ago too.


And don't you see that the "bonus" you speak of is also a negative? Or the fact that its been tried before? Now most individuals will run off together, whether in a squad or not and have no way of communication. What is forcing those squads to wait for the other squads to spawn? What is forcing those individual squad members to wait even for his own squad? Nothing. Its the same optimist view that hasn't worked before. This is not going to change the players guys, you will have the same running off as before. At least RPs forced squadmembers to spawn together in a way.



And if this happens (waiting for other squads), then its because you were playing on TG, where this kind of thing is basically enforced.

I have some concerns.

. This is not going to change the players guys

exactly, nothing is going to change the basic attitudes of players so we might as well go for the most realistic choice.

im little worried just how new players get into the game?
my friend just started playing this and first questions was,is there rank system?,what spawn system is there...?

i think that rallypoint system WAS that point what i liked and continued playing.
so there should be some other gamemode with rallys,what new players can start to play this.
i know that theres alot bad rounds in game.walking,dying,choppers crash,squadleader is idiot and kill your squad all the time.lets add there no rallys,take away maybe scorelist...NEWPLAYER HAS MOVED TO PLAY TOMB RAIDER.
i think that this changes to rallypoint system gonna destroy newgamers opportunity to love the game-
but there are hardcore players who are just bored cods,socoms,mohs,etc and they maybe find away love the game.

I wouldn't be that bothered about the newbies. This would kinda work as a filter to drop out all the unwanted vbf2 players that would just mess things up exactly as you stated

bad rounds in game.walking,dying,choppers crash,squadleader is idiot and kill your squad all the time

But I'd like to see a test where you could spawn into RP only if theres 1-2 squaddies inside a zone around it, like 50m or so. And if there's even one enemy in it too, it wouldn't work.

Dr2B Rudd wrote:exactly, nothing is going to change the basic attitudes of players so we might as well go for the most realistic choice.

What LOL?

So should we make people ingame sit around for hours on end waiting for information on the enemy to come down before going out into the field? Because that's how real life is.

Realistic doesn't always equal fun or good gameplay.

I didn't say force players to stay somewhere before some kind of intel system tells them to go.

I said the most realistic choice, I should have added 'in the context of spawning ingame'.

I didn't realise that you wouldn't have picked that up in a thread about rally points.

McCree wrote:I wouldn't be that bothered about the newbies. This would kinda work as a filter to drop out all the unwanted vbf2 players that would just mess things up exactly as you stated

But I'd like to see a test where you could spawn into RP only if theres 1-2 squaddies inside a zone around it, like 50m or so. And if there's even one enemy in it too, it wouldn't work.

yeah,i like also that filter.
but i just watched in a past when i started playing.
i liked rallys and also i liked that when i shotted,enemy actually went down.
but theres now plan to take away rallys,no rank system,maybe scorelist needs to removed,and theres also that deviation what i still sometimes forget and i amazed that i missed.
i think that theres alot of good players who comes and tryes this came.they dont read the manuals cos they wanna first check the game,is it **** or good.
so first touch in game is maybe alot walking,you shot the enemy and miss and all the hassle,so i think that first touch is most of the cases bad.
and this is just if you try the game alone.