Project Reality Forums

An interesting point was brought up in the TG forums earlier, and I'll quote it:

|TG-Irr|Nixon wrote:The whole idea around this post is to try to find a way to make the game more unpredictable and more realistic. Troops in Iraq or Afghanistan don't capture flags, they try to control vital routes to get re-supplied and strategic grounds to deny the enemy resources.

Thus, I propose a game-mode similar to CnC or perhaps to replace CnC: Annihilation.

Players should decide what areas are strategic enough to assault, defend, build, and control. Teams would likely start with only 200-250 tickets to reduce play-time, and the goal would be quite simply to completely annihilate the opposing force. Assets would have higher spawntimes to encourage more infantry play but not completely exclude assets from the battlefield and the amount of deployable assets would be increased as well (to, perhaps, 8 FOBs).

so youre just suggesting to rework cnc with less tickets and higher asset spawn times???

but the idea would be to destroy the teams ability to defend itself?

have massive amounts of assets spawn, but no respawn.=ahnilalation?

"Your forces will not have reinforcments, u either destroy the enemy, or be destroyed!"

No -- I'm suggesting creating an entirely different game-mode where the goal is purely to annihilate the enemy team.

No -- It would be like normal AAS where the players decide where the battlegrounds are. I can see an ideal map for this being Qwai River.

I thought about the "massive amounts of assets spawn but don't respawn" option but decided against suggesting it because this would basically make it another Vehicle Warfare mode, and that's not the point -- the point is to have, basically, freeform AAS.

Well then, due to the nature of PR, and how CnC is structred as a freeform battle, are you saying that flags would show up on the map where the "concentration" of units are? (blufor main blob, opfor main blob)

or will it be 100% observation based like on CnC?

I know I am asking a lot of questions, but I am just trying to clarify.

So you want a TDM game mode?

What's the incentive to assault anything where you can sit back and camp a place that's easy to defend to ensure you have a high K/D ratio and people are not going to assault that because they know they will die which will = boredom because there will be no fighting.

You need to give players a reason to attack otherwise the only thing that will happen is defend other than the odd player getting so board of defending (with nothing attacking) that they will assault and then die.

This sounds an awful lot like the gaming staple known as "Team Deathmatch".

Edit: Dang Rhino beat me to the punch

Continuing to use Qwai as an example, with the current AAS mode there isn't much incentive to attack either. You can say that about just about ANY game-mode other than insurgency that's currently in PR. That's also why there would be less tickets and longer asset spawntimes, to keep the game from dragging out too long.

But, yes, essentially TDM. We're going for realism here, right? It's about area control and not flag capturing.

Team Deathmatch is not based on area control.

Chess is......

Startrekern wrote:Continuing to use Qwai as an example, with the current AAS mode there isn't much incentive to attack either. You can say that about just about ANY game-mode other than insurgency that's currently in PR. That's also why there would be less tickets and longer asset spawntimes, to keep the game from dragging out too long.

You would be surprised by just how much a flag being there on its own is more than enough reason to attack the flag, w/e it gives or doesn't give

If you take the flags off the map and give them nothing else to do other than "kill the enemy", you will just see the players wondering about like sheep without a cause and then players will just end up defending places with a high k/d ratio and nothing more


You need to give them something to do more than just kill the enemy.

Startrekern wrote: But, yes, essentially TDM. We're going for realism here, right? It's about area control and not flag capturing.

Flags represent an area how else would you symbolize an area capture put a flag or flag like thing in the middle of it

karambaitos wrote:Flags represent an area how else would you symbolize an area capture put a flag or flag like thing in the middle of it

The flaw in this is the size of the flags and the issue with them having to be big circles.

AAS express?

The flag would go to the team who has erected a fob at the flag (instacap)

Erm...?

I am just throwing out my opinion as I have selected this thread to read during work.

*f5*

But, I think that using a fob to designate a capture would quicken AAS, while the objective would be to secure an area by destroying the occupying enemy fob

[R-DEV]Rhino wrote:You would be surprised by just how much a flag being there on its own is more than enough reason to attack the flag, w/e it gives or doesn't give

In .874 people still tried to cap Kyong Ni and Sunset City's flags even though they did absolutely nothing for example

Startrekern wrote:The flaw in this is the size of the flags and the issue with them having to be big circles.

The large size keeps the enemy from knowing exactly where they need to clear the enemy from. With PR weapons having a smaller cap zone means they are grenade/SAW bait just like in vBF2 where you have to stand right next to the flag.

The Mestia flag style was way too big, but I don't think any are that large anymore without large open areas.

Dynamic objectives, if it's possible, could make this work.
X Enemy players in Y radius for Z seconds = Objective marker
For killing/taking 'objectives', your team gets twice the points than for defending one.

You know, something like that, where there is an incentive to attack.




Static end-flags would encourage setting up positions beforehand as well (IE If it's Qwai, you would keep both team's "Outpost" flags, so that if a team does not establish a defense somewhere, the enemy could immediately attack the outpost).

okay how about this, you are allowed a max of 5 FO's on map for both teams
once a team gets 5 FO's and holds them forlets say 10-15 mins then they win or reduce the opposing forces tickets to zero???

That's basically old cnc mode. This discussion is not about cnc.