No rally point feedback thread - PR .874b

[d1sp0sabl3H3r0]

I was privileged to play in an epic round of Fools Road last night. I wish I had the foresight to take screenshots, but I was so wrapped up in the match that it never crossed my mind to do so. Here is a brief AAR to highlight how well this change works, at least in AAS. We were Russia during this round. This is from my squad's POV since I don't have the screens to show the other squads.

Rollout:

Wasn't the smoothest of rollouts as we had some confusion with the BTRs, so I ordered the squad to walk to Dylym while Cougar and I took a logistics truck across the bridge. We constructed a FOB inside the hesco fortress on the east side of the bridge and then moved out on foot to our next objective, Hill 161 (I think that was the hill - it was just NW of Dylym).

After linking up with Rudd's squad and discussing tactics on Mumble, we all moved north toward Helicopter Air Base, which was our next objective. Rudd took the west side of our valley and we covered the east side, above the eastern north-south road. At this point we encountered both spandrels and engaged the lead spandrel with our PKM. The second spandrel engaged and killed our PKM gunner with a TOW shot, so we withdrew to the western side of the ridge to avoid further contact.

Impact on squad due to lack of RP: Our deceased squad member was forced to spawn on a FOB far to our south and walk a considerable distance, alone, to rejoin the squad. We kept pushing north without him. One less gun in the squad and loss of squad cohesion are the main problems here. Add to it the frustration of that lone player if he gets whacked on the way back to rejoin his squad with no hope of being saved.

At this point Rudd had reached the forested hill south of the road in G4 (I think this is right) and was ambushed by an enemy squad. We hurried to his aid and assisted in driving the enemy away. Through the hard work of both Rudd (who had secured a medic kit in the fight) and our own medic, we were able to revive Rudd's squad and reform our platoon.

Impact on game play due to lack of RP: Once defeated, the enemy were not upon us again in 30 seconds as they had to respawn on their FOB, wherever that was. This allowed the medics proper time to revive the fallen and get everyone sorted. There is no way this happens with RPs, and those that went down in the initial contact more than likely would have given up sooner to respawn and get back to the fight. In this case, they valued their lives and probably just as equally dreaded the long walk back to their squad, so they waited to be revived.

Back on our hill we regrouped, with my squad finally back to it's 6 member strength as our fallen comrade managed to rejoin us. At this point Bullseye (shocking, I know) managed to get a crate to our location and we were able to drop a FOB close by. While the FOB was being constructed, we were in contact again with the previously defeated squad and we engaged fire long distance (200m or so) across the road, firing from one hill to another.

Impact on game play due to loss of RP: Suppressing fire actually works!! People were diving for cover and using fire and maneuver with great effect. Mumble helped tremendously as we were able to help the PKM gunners put effective fire onto the enemy.

We repulsed the enemy once again due to the sheer number of guns we had and then gathered for our assault on Helicopter. Rudd's squad was to cross the open terrain to the opposing wooded hill first, just to the south of our objective. To assist him with this, our squad began placing suppressing fire onto the hill that was Rudd's objective to cover his advance.

Impact on game play due to lack of RP: See above - suppressing fire works! Also, with RPs, chances are good that we may have not used this tactic to the level we did. Most of us fired so many rounds between the original fire fight and covering Rudd's crossing that we were down to our last mag or two.

After reloading at our crates for the FOB, we moved across the open road with Rudd covering us. We regrouped on the hill and planned our entry into the Helicopter base. Long story short, we overwhelmed the defenders, took down their FOB and held that position for what seemed like close to an hour before we were eventually driven out.

The Chechen team did a fabulous job of eliminating our armor and pushed us all the way back to Dylym before the round ended, after almost 3 wonderful hours, with a Russian victory of less than 100 tickets.

Lessons learned: Beyond the obvious ones of sticking together, using suppressing fire, not taking stupid chances and keeping a competent medic close by, I think one of the bigger changes is the tendency of players/teams to stretch themselves thin due to their reliance on the RP. Last night we found ourselves 500m away from our nearest FOB at one point and we were really just an apc away from complete disaster. Go fast is usually the rule in AAS, but I think players really need to moderate this against the availability of a spawn point within reach of the objective. RPs gave us this sense of carelessness to advance beyond our "lines", knowing we had an easy fallback. Changing this mindset is still a WIP, at least for me it is, but I would guess it is for a lot of players as well.

[Axis_Sniper]

Great write-up, Dispo. IU was fortunate enough to enjoy the last few minutes of that round and was happy to see it play out so wonderfully.

As well as I am also glad to see suppressing fire actually suppressing instead of making people duck for a second and pop shots back at the gunner, without fear of a bullet to the face.



Qwai yesterday was also a good round I was lucky to be in. Land Bridge was a death trap that I can attest to(read: HAT eating skills.) People were more cautious with advancing units and supplies, and not just ttard rushing because they have a rally nearby. Every move was carefully calculated, and moved with a cautious ease.

[TMan]

I have purposely not read anything in this thread to keep my thoughts clear before posting this….

Some thoughts on the new system:

1. Squad independence – I know some folks want less squad independence. I think that is only truly possible if there is a commander giving orders to coordinate the team. Within the game structure (yes, without mumble) there is no other way to coordinate squads. The game engine should not be designed to depend on outside software that not everyone has or wants to use. With the new setup (no rallys) squads are dependent on wise and cautious fire base placement and maneuver of squads as a coordinated team. Without a commander, that is not ensured or even likely. I think without additional modifications to the engine there is little chance for generic coordination on other servers that are not as lucky as the TG server in the richness of “good” squad leaders. The loss of squad ability to maneuver independently is a huge issue.

2. Commander, where art thou? – I would advocate that this new system should require, yes, require a commander for every round. Firebases are totally key to this new system. Without oversight on the construction of firebases, the game is just a race for the truck, a popularity contest for the SL that is favored to get crates and a free for all for firebase placement. I think the commander should have to approve all FB placements.

3. Regression from Leadership Structure – The removal of rallys further distances players from taking leadership roles. The commander is more irrelevant and the SL is now just a function to place the firebase and a few limited assets. I have found myself placing a firebase and reaching for the autorifle kit as a SL. That is not good. These rules make taking the leadership position more or less a waste of time, unless you just happen to like it. Again, this mod is for everyone, not just TG. Other servers don’t have the leadership we have and the coordination. I think that is 1 drawback of testing this on the TG PR server – we are going to make coordination happen even if the game engine makes that tougher.

4. Medic, the almighty – This makes the medic gold. Capturing a medic kit so you have 2 in your squad is even better. I think the rule change makes the medic too important and unrealistic. If you really want realism, limit revives or the power of the medic and watch the squad cross the open desert without the hope of revive….

5. Maps – Some maps suck for this set of rules. Crossing the desert into open fire is no longer even a remote option. Maybe that is “reality” but it sure makes some of the big maps less fun as infantry. We have a hard enough time getting real and good infantry squads out there as it is. This makes them even less desirable for most.

6. Asset Mongering – Because being infantry is now harder and slower and more painful, most people will just fight harder to not do it. Asset mongering will be on the rise I predict and fights over who gets what are going to become more commonplace. Even the lowly truck is now golden. The fast rise of the 2 man “LOG TRUCK” and “FB BUILD” squads will be upon us. Individual infantry squad leaders will have less and less freedom to move, build and determine their own destiny; therefore making the job less and less fun. When Mr. Firebase 2 man squad truck man with the engineer kit rolls in, places a FB and runs away, the REAL infantry SL will go "WTF" now I have to spawn THERE??? I think that is a really, really bad thing.

My conclusion:

I don’t like it. I think this is a bad idea and I would not personally support this as a permanent change to PR without many additional adjustments that make the infantry SL a desirable and key position on the battlefield. The drift away from filling leadership positions in the play is bad and the apparent reliance on external software to fill the coordination gap is not a good solution.

TMAN

[d1sp0sabl3H3r0]

I have purposely not read anything in this thread to keep my thoughts clear before posting this….

Some thoughts on the new system:

1. Squad independence – I know some folks want less squad independence. I think that is only truly possible if there is a commander giving orders to coordinate the team. Within the game structure (yes, without mumble) there is no other way to coordinate squads. The game engine should not be designed to depend on outside software that not everyone has or wants to use. With the new setup (no rallys) squads are dependent on wise and cautious fire base placement and maneuver of squads as a coordinated team. Without a commander, that is not ensured or even likely. I think without additional modifications to the engine there is little chance for generic coordination on other servers that are not as lucky as the TG server in the richness of “good” squad leaders. The loss of squad ability to maneuver independently is a huge issue.

Prior to Mumble, we used Teamspeak to coordinate squads. There is a need for 3rd party software to play this game because PR requires coordination of squads and BF2 simply does not provide that capability as it was not envisioned to be played as PR is played.

Also, how does this relate to lack of rally points?

2. Commander, where art thou? – I would advocate that this new system should require, yes, require a commander for every round. Firebases are totally key to this new system. Without oversight on the construction of firebases, the game is just a race for the truck, a popularity contest for the SL that is favored to get crates and a free for all for firebase placement. I think the commander should have to approve all FB placements.

Good idea, but a team is completely screwed if no one steps up to CO, or worse yet someone does step up but then decides to grief the server by just ignoring all build requests or by destroying a teams FOBs. This one position has the ability to completely destroy a game for a team if a player intends on doing it.

3. Regression from Leadership Structure – The removal of rallys further distances players from taking leadership roles. The commander is more irrelevant and the SL is now just a function to place the firebase and a few limited assets. I have found myself placing a firebase and reaching for the autorifle kit as a SL. That is not good. These rules make taking the leadership position more or less a waste of time, unless you just happen to like it. Again, this mod is for everyone, not just TG. Other servers don’t have the leadership we have and the coordination. I think that is 1 drawback of testing this on the TG PR server – we are going to make coordination happen even if the game engine makes that tougher.

While I cannot argue that the SL kit itself is diminished somewhat by this change, I can tell you that it is still of importance. You simply cannot perform some of the functions necessary to move your squad or your team forward without it.

4. Medic, the almighty – This makes the medic gold. Capturing a medic kit so you have 2 in your squad is even better. I think the rule change makes the medic too important and unrealistic. If you really want realism, limit revives or the power of the medic and watch the squad cross the open desert without the hope of revive….

This would imply that the medic wasn't important before the change? I have to disagree with this assertion wholeheartedly. I would have to suggest that combat medics are probably the most important support personnel in the field, both in RL as well as in PR.

5. Maps – Some maps suck for this set of rules. Crossing the desert into open fire is no longer even a remote option. Maybe that is “reality” but it sure makes some of the big maps less fun as infantry. We have a hard enough time getting real and good infantry squads out there as it is. This makes them even less desirable for most.

True, and testing will help to point out the deficiencies in each map and where changes to their layout are required to keep them around. However, I would be remiss to point out the fact that this change has actually improved the play of several maps already.

6. Asset Mongering – Because being infantry is now harder and slower and more painful, most people will just fight harder to not do it. Asset mongering will be on the rise I predict and fights over who gets what are going to become more commonplace. Even the lowly truck is now golden. The fast rise of the 2 man “LOG TRUCK” and “FB BUILD” squads will be upon us. Individual infantry squad leaders will have less and less freedom to move, build and determine their own destiny; therefore making the job less and less fun. When Mr. Firebase 2 man squad truck man with the engineer kit rolls in, places a FB and runs away, the REAL infantry SL will go "WTF" now I have to spawn THERE??? I think that is a really, really bad thing.

Why shouldn't a truck be important? We've always complained about players abandoning them on the map once they've used them to take their squads to their initial deployment area. Now there is a darn good reason to return them to the main and keep them around.

How is a change that encourages players to build FOBs that benefit their entire team a bad thing? What about the fact that this change will encourage players to utilize APCs as intended - as transport - instead of just running off with them to play "light tank"?

Lastly, don't we already see fights over assets on a daily basis? It is commonplace not only on this server but also plenty of others and really has nothing to do with this change at all.

My conclusion:

I don’t like it. I think this is a bad idea and I would not personally support this as a permanent change to PR without many additional adjustments that make the infantry SL a desirable and key position on the battlefield. The drift away from filling leadership positions in the play is bad and the apparent reliance on external software to fill the coordination gap is not a good solution.

TMAN

I hope you, as well as many other players, will give it more time than the 3 days we've been exposed to it before you form your final opinion on this change.

[TMan]

Some more thoughts on the modifications.

I am interested to hear the feedback from the community on how the elimination of SL rally capability affects the overall command structure idea that is part of PR and BF2.

The game has some great concepts: Commander, Squad Leader, Soldier – the chain of command. How does the new modification affect that relationship?

Commander was a great job in vanilla BF2! Mortars, killing, commanding…..everyone wanted to do it. They even made it rank relevant so only the best could command (or the worst that played too much). Now commander is a dead position that no one takes until the mortars or JDAM is ready.

Squad Leader was horrible in BF2 vanilla. When I first came to PR, I was amazed and memorized by the power and capability of the SL. I played and played and played because you could take a few rag tag players and form them into a fighting unit and kick ass. I am afraid that will go away with the rally point.

Soldier. The ultimate weapon. The new rules make him the 1 unit on the battlefield that doesn’t really need the other folks, especially if he gets a sniper rifle, a tank or a truck.

What do you think or feel about the move towards less centralized IN GAME (not external communications) effects of the removal of the rally point from the SL?

TMAN

[TMan]

Prior to Mumble, we used Teamspeak to coordinate squads. There is a need for 3rd party software to play this game because PR requires coordination of squads and BF2 simply does not provide that capability as it was not envisioned to be played as PR is played.

Also, how does this relate to lack of rally points?

My point is that this is a game and a mod. It should be self reliant or it shoud incorporate the other elements into the game as part of the game. Developing software or systems that depend on unsupported external resources is not a good thing, especally if we are giving feedback on beta testing a modification to an already sucessful mod. Relying on mumble without consideration to it not being a part of the PR mod is not a good testing platform.

Good idea, but a team is completely screwed if no one steps up to CO, or worse yet someone does step up but then decides to grief the server by just ignoring all build requests or by destroying a teams FOBs. This one position has the ability to completely destroy a game for a team if a player intends on doing it.

That is my point. Removing rally capability from the Squad LEADER makes him become a follower. He needs to retain independent capability to be a leader and molder of the battlefield. We cannot rely on commanders to do that in their current capacity, as no one wants to do the thankless, powerless job of commanding - this rule change makes it more irrelevent.

While I cannot argue that the SL kit itself is diminished somewhat by this change, I can tell you that it is still of importance. You simply cannot perform some of the functions necessary to move your squad or your team forward without it.

Agreed.

This would imply that the medic wasn't important before the change? I have to disagree with this assertion wholeheartedly. I would have to suggest that combat medics are probably the most important support personnel in the field, both in RL as well as in PR.

Agreed again. Although they are more important now for infantry as there is no chance to revive the squad with a rally point away from the fire base.

True, and testing will help to point out the deficiencies in each map and where changes to their layout are required to keep them around. However, I would be remiss to point out the fact that this change has actually improved the play of several maps already.

Agree again. Some maps are better for the change and some are worse.

Why shouldn't a truck be important? We've always complained about players abandoning them on the map once they've used them to take their squads to their initial deployment area. Now there is a darn good reason to return them to the main and keep them around.

Agree. Although I personally don't like LOGI TRUCK squads that I cannot control when I am a SL. This will spawn a new generation of squads dedicated to just running trucks with the aformentioned lack of command structure - i.e. the truck driver determines where and when the supplies are dropped, thus where the battle goes. In real life, the truck driver doesn't determine or shape the battle, the commander does - the one we don't have anymore.

How is a change that encourages players to build FOBs that benefit their entire team a bad thing? What about the fact that this change will encourage players to utilize APCs as intended - as transport - instead of just running off with them to play "light tank"?

Here, at TG, that may not be a big issue. Think of the world community of PR where other servers don't have that kind of play. People will continue to do that and asset monger, I think.

Lastly, don't we already see fights over assets on a daily basis? It is commonplace not only on this server but also plenty of others and really has nothing to do with this change at all.

Agree again. I just mean this will make it worse as it makes infantry harder to do properly and some folks will just say it is easier to drive a tank than be infantry.

I hope you, as well as many other players, will give it more time than the 3 days we've been exposed to it before you form your final opinion on this change.

Yes, agreed. This is awesome to test! I think it is a great idea and the TG community is doing a great thing testing this out. Those were just some observations from a few days playing. I hope this is a great conversation and an open forum - awesome! This is certanly not my final opinion, just a first one on how it has changed my perceptions of PR with the changes.

TMAN

[Mix0lydian]

Both those who approve and disapprove of the RP changes must "give it more time."
As of right now, people are trying harder to role play and play the way the DEVs intended players to act. Over time, people will focus less on roleplaying and more on working around the system to gain the most advantage over opponents-short of exploitations.
Maybe "working around the system" will pleasantly resut in players ultimately play the way the DEVs intended (and the way TG plays all the time). But we don't know yet.

[Taip3n]

I think that savy SL's have become more important, and their SM's who understand why they do it (one pressure at the moment seems to be apoplectic almost to those gamers chomping at the bit for action). To me PR has moved to a game of chess like way. Applying small pressures and dealing with threats in a logical chess-like fashion. For example, in Kashan, the game I played, a USA CAS crew not dealt with, or a HAT crew, or a USA tank holding MEC outpost, as MEC, had severe repercussions.

The 'saviness' then is for players to recognise small pressures or defence against such pressures. Another chess analogy would be that of 'the Dragon'. A play where the bishop, hidden behind its own forces and seemingly redundant by its own forces, comes to play by perhaps just one pawn move - and then its sphere of influence sits right into the enemy area and positions, much influencing power control and the enemy movement. Assets or even single players, in a squad or couple of members, seemingly insignificant, have terrible consequences to the opposing team if not dealt with. I think of this because of assets being used wisely and not all at once but when required. Out of experience to my one game - and yes it's only one game, I'd like to make that clear. From what I observed, as in chess, you may have an overall plan, or desire to do something, but if you ignore a threat or a small pressure, or do not advance one yourself, and yes, make great moves, you are in trouble. The example of my seemingly insignificant sniper that used to be a harassment now becomes huge. So does that tank in MEC outpost. So does that infantry squad preparing to assualt. I also think of this whilst dealing with the aspect of 'asset squads' - it would be a logical fallacy to think the 'tank squad' of two can't spawn, asks for an apc trip to an area where an enemy observation/CAS/sniper squad is, locate and destroy them, and then do something else circumstances dictating, maybe even letting the infantry squad to form an APC for its transport, allowing a couple of members to reform a squad in service for the team.. If they do not, then that sniper, is continually calling out positions, locking on one tank, calling out AA movement for the HAT crew down the road, allowing the Tank and support unit in MEC outpost to understand the situation, adapt and respond.

To me, the chess analogy is significant for one other reason. The pawn. In chess this is your greatest asset. I can look at this as a SM with a rifle, or an SL, or a tank, or sniper crew. But if you ignore the individual then the team falls. Nowadays, from what I see, the hive mentality that listens and responds to individuals, and individuals responding for the hive, is paramount. Ignore individual threats and pressures at your peril. Stick to ridgity and not fluidity at your peril. Do not support the infantry and they will not be able to support you, at your peril.

Finally. I had a dream last night. Bonkersly I was getting guys in some buildings, in PR, to set up an all round defence, whilst I waited for a savy opportunity to respond or reply. We were holing up for the night. All agreed this was best, as we worked together and made suggestions and all looked at the bigger picture, and I felt my apologeticism fall away. This is SLing in its pure form. I found it great and have always loved it in PR.

As a further point, I greatly enjoyed the 'pressure of not doing seemingly anything', in the no-rally game I played. To me a significant part of that dream was this. In game 'the unknown' pressure and you, your squads' and teams' response to it was greatly emphasised. In fact the greatest part was having to hold and not move, the tension was almost sending ripples through the team. I loved it on a squad level and in the game I played, as the team responded and dealt with their own. Each individual is made up for the hive, the hive protected its own, and each individual was key in the hive. This biological analogy could best describe individual actions, responses, threats, great individual leadership and individual play by SMs or the team - all became part of the hive. Another biological aspect on 'pressure' and the ability to not do anything but enjoy it would be of the Polar Bear going round and round to alleviate the pressure in itself, in a cage. In the game I played, and like chess, a great enjoyable part of it was the increased pressure to a profound sense. You could feel it and it took guts to stay put and do what you are doing, to allow the unknown to occur, be that enemy or friendly occurrences and responses. Indeed, walking about is now much more intense and enjoyable, and this does lead to group harmony on a squad - inter-squad, or squad-asset function. Of course this produces aspects such as my dream. Real checking it out and fulfilling your role for the team.

As for TS and mumble, it's not loaded at the moment. I can type. However a comment on people working for the It Crowd, and squads having to fend for themselves, especially in the light on not using 3rd party software, or basically being with public players and concentrating on them. Public players are the It crowd anyway. Besides, there are more bright sparks doing savy things in a game than the so-called- It Crowd. I agree the responsibility of inclusion of other squads and players starts at TG, not the other way round. This could actually then be more eroded here due to the very fact of diversity and fluidity in game is more reasonable than a rigidity and conservatism. So far then, I like it.

[d1sp0sabl3H3r0]

Some more thoughts on the modifications.

I am interested to hear the feedback from the community on how the elimination of SL rally capability affects the overall command structure idea that is part of PR and BF2.

I guess I don't see the RP as the only means a SL has to keep his squad together, so I have to disagree with the arguement you seem to be making regarding the neutering of the SL due to his inability to drop a pile of "magic spawn bags".

As you know, our server has a few things going for it to promote teamwork and a command structure:

• We kick for squadless after 90 seconds. Want to lone-wolf? Not on our server, so we take the first step toward eliminating that problem by making you join a squad.
• The SL retains the ability to remove players from their squad who will not work with them.
• Let me quote:
  
  

  
  11. Orders
  
  All players are required to follow orders. Squad Leaders are required to follow reasonable orders from their Commander, and all players must follow Squad Leader orders.

  This should address the other half of the equation that #1 leaves open: players must work with the their SL and ultimately their team by following orders or face removal from our server.

The one thing that this change does not take away from the SL is his ability to lead. This ability is not anything that the DEVs can neither add nor take away. It boils down to the individuals and how they decide to play this game. Good SLs will still be able to lead their troops regardless of the spawn mechanisms in the game, and as I've mentioned above, we support them in that endeavor by putting rules into place to encourage teamwork and a command structure.

If anything, this change should encourage players to stick together because now, more than ever, those alone on the battlefield will die just that - alone. There is safety in numbers, and without that convenient pile of "magic spawn bags" 50m away from where you went down, you'd better darn well stay with your squad and keep your head down.

My point is that this is a game and a mod. It should be self reliant or it shoud incorporate the other elements into the game as part of the game. Developing software or systems that depend on unsupported external resources is not a good thing, especally if we are giving feedback on beta testing a modification to an already sucessful mod. Relying on mumble without consideration to it not being a part of the PR mod is not a good testing platform.

Again, Mumble or teamspeak have absolutely nothing to do with the impact on this change and throwing them into the conversation about the removal of rallies is not germane to the change at all.

The base game itself provides means of coordinating between squads, be it team chat or through a commander. Project Reality has gone to lengths to provide a means of improved and relevant communication between squads through the game mechanics by providing SLs the ability to request specific forms of transport (APC/Helicopter), reinforcements, a medic or supplies and those requests place nice big yellow markers on the map for the team to see and respond to as appropriate. If for nothing else, the ability to place these icons on the map to request assistance from your team should be reason enough to keep the SL kit.

[bjoffe]

Again, this mod is for everyone, not just TG.

No it isnt for everyone.
It will indeed make the bad servers worse. But i strongly believe it will make the good servers even better. This game isn't being made to suit those individuals who choose to play on servers without teamwork.

[Ivan_the_bad]

So far, i still have no complaints about 'No rally' It has improved gameplay by 100%. Only thing though i have a slight issue with is, Insurgency mode.
There should be no spawning on the caches for the insurgents. They should only be able to spawn on the hide out and the hide out should not be able to be placed withing 200 meters of the caches them self.

This way if all the insurgents are killed while defending the cache the Bluefor can move in and destroy the cache rather than spawn die,spawn die, routine that we had. Also thats what made insurency so spammy and sometimes impossible.

So to sum it up for insurgents

-No spawning on defence positions

-Hide out should only be able to get placed after 200-300 meters from the defence position

[d1sp0sabl3H3r0]

So far, i still have no complaints about 'No rally' It has improved gameplay by 100%. Only thing though i have a slight issue with is, Insurgency mode.
There should be no spawning on the caches for the insurgents. They should only be able to spawn on the hide out and the hide out should not be able to be placed withing 200 meters of the caches them self.

This way if all the insurgents are killed while defending the cache the Bluefor can move in and destroy the cache rather than spawn die,spawn die, routine that we had. Also thats what made insurency so spammy and sometimes impossible.

So to sum it up for insurgents

-No spawning on defence positions

-Hide out should only be able to get placed after 200-300 meters from the defence position

I would tend to agree with this suggestion, although perhaps the spawn capabilities of the cache need to disappear as soon as the BluFor gets intel on the cache, allowing insurgents time to get to a cache and deploy a hideout prior to the arrival of the BluFor. This seems like a good balance considering the spawn mechanic changes and their impact on the BluFor.

Perhaps the number of mapper-placed spawns should also be reduced somewhat, although if an undiscovered cache is overrun due to proximity of BluFor then the insurgents are screwed on that cache.

[Portable.Cougar]

As an SL you are still calling the shots

you still lace the markers

you still assign the kits

you still give the orders

you are still the man n charge, the other 5 should work with you to the death no questions asked.

[Ivan_the_bad]

I would tend to agree with this suggestion, although perhaps the spawn capabilities of the cache need to disappear as soon as the BluFor gets intel on the cache, allowing insurgents time to get to a cache and deploy a hideout prior to the arrival of the BluFor. This seems like a good balance considering the spawn mechanic changes and their impact on the BluFor.

Perhaps the number of mapper-placed spawns should also be reduced somewhat, although if an undiscovered cache is overrun due to proximity of BluFor then the insurgents are screwed on that cache.

Yeah that could possibly work too, Gues there needs to be some testing to see what works best.

If Insurgents spawn at main with caches already on their map they will already have a head start to get up to the caches and defend therefor spawning on the caches them self would not be necessary, unlike bluefor have to gather intel therefor it takes longer for them to find a cache which by then the Insurgents should already be in their defence positions.

Once again though we got to maybe test this in a pubbie session, or password night to see how it works?

[Delta*RandyShugart*]

I will also be posting on the realitymod.com forums but I have yet had the chance to play Kashan, or Barracuda as the US side, so for now my remarks might be somewhat limited.

So far the maps I have had the chance to play are Qinling, Asad, Al Basrah as Insurgent, Jabal as MEC, Fools Road, and Korengal as Talibano.

This one tweak really puts into perspective how and why working as a team is so important and why this mod separates itself from Vanilla BF2.

Prior to hearing about this beta testing I was playing a lot of insurgency as an insurgent so not having a rally point (other than taliban0 forces) option was not something new.

- So far with the maps which I have played, I really have been enjoying it. This addition doesn't allow lone wolfers to operate the way they normally do and those who take logistics trucks as personal transport now are severely hindering their team more than before, especially on maps such as Fools Road, and Qinling.

As others have stated defense is now just as important as offense, which is a nice change, tactically if this addition does make its way into .9 (with hopefully a plethora of maps, not sweaters) we will be able to see a whole new spectrum of tactics and ways of defending as well as attacking which we haven't seen in previous versions.

Normally I shy away from Fools Road, it might have been my jovial mood last night, but the Fools Road round last night was by far the most exciting and fun round I have had yet since the map was released. Squads were working together, at some points forming mini platoons, I had seen this also on Asad, but it was nice to see this put into place on a larger asset filled map.

- The medic kit which IMHO is the most underrated kit in PR, is now really put to the test which it deserves, with being a medic comes patience from the player and the players waiting to be revived. a The medic kit will now have more of an impact on the round being played and as we have seen on previous maps can change the outcome of the round, especially if a fire-base has been overrun, or simply with no rally points.

- More than ever teamwork comes into play, and by teamwork I mean the entire team, as well as 1-2+ squads working together. Overall the entire team working together is now a requirement, which is a good thing.


- Korengal as many of us witnessed last night might need a complete overhaul, and the Insurgent ROE might have to be modified, but I didn't notice that big of a change on the map Al Basrah, I was a insurgent player, and not having rally points comes has already been put into effect. What I saw from the blufor attackers is what I witness when .7 or .75 came out (strykers on ramiel) convoys moving together, etc, though the penetration within the city is going to be tougher, but then again when has it not been tough?

I hope to see fewer 2 man locked squads, even fewer 3 man locked squads with this new addition, Build Squads shouldn't limit themselves to 2-3 players, because as I have witnessed with building comes defense and an extra player can make a difference.

- The one crate FB building option is great, I can see it really being a plus on maps like Kashan and Barracuda and Jabal, because now Blackhawks/Sky Cows/Hueys can insert troops and with those insertions fire bases can be deployed upon landing. - I cannot vouche for this, due to not having the chance to experience this from the US/MEC side, this is purely hypothetical.

- We all have to keep an open mind throughout this testing phase. It is by far the best way to go about playing.

Does not having the option of setting RP's mirror Arma? Yes and no, but dwelling on not having the option to set a RP shouldn't ruin the gaming experience. Will there be an influx of rounds lasting for more than 2 hours, yes and no, some maps now with RP's last close to 3 hours, some last 45mins to an hour, it all depends. Will some assets need to be able to withstand more damage? Most likely yes, but dwelling on it in game is not the place.

So far my experiences have been good, I hope to play some more maps this weekend from different perspectives and see as a whole what this possible change means.


I know that there is scrolling green words that tell the server that TG is beta testing no rally points, but maybe on the starting up screen could that also be added? Many players of PR as I have witnessed don't or haven't checked TG's forum, the other servers offering this beta test or Realitymod.com.



PR isn't for everyone, there are other mods out there.


Not to take away from what TG has put into place but if anyone would also like to try some PR on UKWF's server let me know, since for the most part both servers strive on using the same values in regards to PR.