Jump to content

Recommended Posts

Considering the size & terrain complexity of the bigger maps like for example the inclusion of Skorpo it'd be nice if the logistics truck got a power and supply capacity buff.

 

For example, the trip from the American base on the one RAAS layer going the back road up to the tunnels to push into Russian territory literally takes 10 minutes with portions if the road where the truck is going at a snails pace hunting for first gear etc. For people like myself that have been playing for awhile we've become accustomed to such things but most folks have little patience for such mundane monotony.

 

Please give the logistics truck an overall 20% power buff and increase the capacity to 10,000 points.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I agree with the buff on power, since it's pretty much common knowledge that all vehicles unde-rperform in that regard. I would disagree with the increased carrying capacity though, because it has the potential to seriously unbalance smaller maps.

 

For example, i could just load half and half, slap a mortar/emplacement fob down near the middle of the map, then make a single logi run with all 10k ammo, for a total of 15000 ammo. Then, just keep spamming mortars and ATGMs all over the map for the entire duration of the match, without having to ever resupply, cutting off the enemy team completely from advancing past the middle flag.

 

The way you could easily solve resupply issues for big maps without unbalancing smaller ones is to just have more vehicles spawning at main in bigger maps. I remember a 4x4 km map in Project Reality where one team had 3-4 humvees, 4 transport trucks, 3-4 logis and 2 choppers.

 

You could also have vehicles that would spawn with a delay (same as tanks do in various maps in Squad), but the most interesting one was that on that map we also had a logi that didn't respawn.

 

The idea was to help players at the start of the round and easily get them out of main and into the field, but then you had to be slightly more careful and the pacing was slower, because some the assets only had 1 "life".

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Posted (edited)

Hillclimbing has been an ongoing problem since they added physmat.

I remember that on Kohat, on a US layer where the main is right top of the map on a hill, they actually had to add a repair station at the base of the hill, since no vehicle could make it back up. (except in reverse...) Extended the main base radius there so you could drop a vehicle there, but didn't fix the problem when you wanted that vehicle at the base of the hill and you could only spawn on top xD.

 

I understand why they added physmat because rivers were just highways, but now you cannot climb anything and techies are skidding all over the place.

Edited by oTec

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

In Kohat they put a permanent resupply point at the bottom of the hill for both sides.

 

Techies are a pain to drive now. Best to stay on the grass even if it is a steep slope.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
5 hours ago, Burningbeard80 said:

Then, just keep spamming mortars and ATGMs all over the map for the entire duration of the match, without having to ever resupply, cutting off the enemy team completely from advancing past the middle flag.

I would politely disagree. First of all, the mortars are still woefully lacking in lethality despite supposedly being buffed awhile back. As recently as Sunday I had them literally falling all around me on Mestia with zero effect. Same with the ATGM's, they're seriously lacking in power against anything but a Logistics Truck. Add to that the fact that the ATGM's have been nerfed to half their real range and you're not really cutting off anyone.

 

Secondly, the minute you start shooting mortars from a remote base you've got what I've calculated to be 7-8 minutes of firing before someone runs over and shoots you off the mortar. On some smaller maps even less time. So that means you need a full squad of MilSim LARPers just to protect your mortarmen which then means basically your team is going to lose the match because you have 9 guys off the flag. I've seen it time and time again an entire squad building this elaborate pillow fort around their mortar pits and pretending like they're actually being useful as the action leaves them out of range.

 

There is always a balance in this game. The only really good use for a mortar at this point in the game is basically close to medium range fire-and-forget of smoke rounds on the next objective your team is advancing on and thats pretty much it. Maybe some HE rounds do give the illusion of suppression to folks on the other team who don't realize the mortars are heavily nerfed.

 

What 10,000 points would allow me and one more person to do is stealthily get behind enemy lines and drop around 3-4 fully stocked FOB's.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

HE and ATGMs are indeed a bit light on lethality. The range on ATGMs though is a gameplay/balance thing. Same as Project Reality with air assets, most of those had air to ground missiles but their range was nowhere near to real, otherwise an attack chopper would be able to shoot from one end of the map to the other without ever leaving main.

 

Still, it's a bad practice when trying to balance things out to make changes that affect more than one different thing. This doesn't go for gaming only, it's a computer programming axiom more or less. Ideally, each change should be isolated to affect one aspect of the final software and if that's not possible, you go for the change that affects the least amount of things (unless you know how it will affect them, they are similar in nature, and the change is desirable). The more different aspect it affects, the harder it is to test and the more likely to break something else down the line.

 

In any case, i wouldn't expect them to buff logi capacity with helicopters around the corner, because that would make them obsolete before even getting introduced. The way it usually worked is that they had comparable capacities, with logis being the choice for sneaking around with less chance of detection, while helicopters were for doing things fast. If one of the two has a lot of capacity than the other, then it automatically becomes the preferred method of deployment, and it's even heavier of a blow for team to lose one.

 

They just have to adjust vehicle performance and add some more transportation options spawning at main on big maps really. It's been tried and tested before and it works well, no need to reinvent the wheel and spend 2-3 patch cycles refining and fine tuning it.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
14 minutes ago, Burningbeard80 said:

HE and ATGMs are indeed a bit light on lethality. The range on ATGMs though is a gameplay/balance thing. Same as Project Reality with air assets, most of those had air to ground missiles but their range was nowhere near to real, otherwise an attack chopper would be able to shoot from one end of the map to the other without ever leaving main.

 

Still, it's a bad practice when trying to balance things out to make changes that affect more than one different thing. This doesn't go for gaming only, it's a computer programming axiom more or less. Ideally, each change should be isolated to affect one aspect of the final software and if that's not possible, you go for the change that affects the least amount of things (unless you know how it will affect them, they are similar in nature, and the change is desirable). The more different aspect it affects, the harder it is to test and the more likely to break something else down the line.

 

In any case, i wouldn't expect them to buff logi capacity with helicopters around the corner, because that would make them obsolete before even getting introduced. The way it usually worked is that they had comparable capacities, with logis being the choice for sneaking around with less chance of detection, while helicopters were for doing things fast. If one of the two has a lot of capacity than the other, then it automatically becomes the preferred method of deployment, and it's even heavier of a blow for team to lose one.

 

They just have to adjust vehicle performance and add some more transportation options spawning at main on big maps really. It's been tried and tested before and it works well, no need to reinvent the wheel and spend 2-3 patch cycles refining and fine tuning it.

 

giphy.gif?cid=790b76115d2591e751434c4173

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
1 hour ago, Burningbeard80 said:

HE and ATGMs are indeed a bit light on lethality. The range on ATGMs though is a gameplay/balance thing. Same as Project Reality with air assets, most of those had air to ground missiles but their range was nowhere near to real, otherwise an attack chopper would be able to shoot from one end of the map to the other without ever leaving main.

 

Still, it's a bad practice when trying to balance things out to make changes that affect more than one different thing. This doesn't go for gaming only, it's a computer programming axiom more or less. Ideally, each change should be isolated to affect one aspect of the final software and if that's not possible, you go for the change that affects the least amount of things (unless you know how it will affect them, they are similar in nature, and the change is desirable). The more different aspect it affects, the harder it is to test and the more likely to break something else down the line.

 

In any case, i wouldn't expect them to buff logi capacity with helicopters around the corner, because that would make them obsolete before even getting introduced. The way it usually worked is that they had comparable capacities, with logis being the choice for sneaking around with less chance of detection, while helicopters were for doing things fast. If one of the two has a lot of capacity than the other, then it automatically becomes the preferred method of deployment, and it's even heavier of a blow for team to lose one.

 

They just have to adjust vehicle performance and add some more transportation options spawning at main on big maps really. It's been tried and tested before and it works well, no need to reinvent the wheel and spend 2-3 patch cycles refining and fine tuning it.

Right now noob xxxDingusMcgillicuddyxxx in the space of 90 seconds while nobody is noticing can make a squad, jump in a Logi, jam down the hill at Kohat, flip it, press respawn, leave the squad and join another and it's like it never happened. Or the same knucklehead can have good intentions, carefully make it down the hill, drop supplies and then gets bored because there's no action he can't make it back up the hill on Skorpo so he just leaves it.

 

So yeah, making a certain facet of the game so unpleasant, mundane and monotonous that the average player either chooses to avoid doing it or does it but then subsequently does something negative that degrades ticket counts means it needs to be tweaked.

 

On one hand since v10 we've seen certain attributes of the game increase in realism and then on the other hand many other parameters have decreased in realism to accommodate the low skill player.

 

Buffing the power and increasing the capacity won't keep careless folks from flipping a Logi down a ravine but what it might do is make that same low skill player go back to main and try hard at getting better and make it more enjoyable.

 

Every role, weapon or vehicle in the game should have something unique about it that makes it appealing. Right now there is nothing appealing about driving a Logi for anyone, it's simply a boring conveyance.

 

 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Posted (edited)

It's a multi-faceted problem to be honest. I would say "helicopters will solve this" and to a large extent they might, but it needs people to commit. Some people will need to learn to fly, do it consistently and help teach others. Some other people will need to realize that you can't just take any high value asset for your mainly infantry squad, and leave the choppers to the guys who know how to fly. And some other people will have to enforce all that through server rules and administration.

 

But honestly, we never had this problem in Project Reality because we didn't need constant logi runs ever. What usually happened was that we got a logi at the start of the round, built a FOB and leave the logi there. The FOB was not on the actual capture point but somewhere you could more or less hide it, so most of the times we didn't have abandoned logis in hard to reach places either. Need a logi after a squad wipe? Tell your fellow SLs "hey, i need the logi by the FOB in that grid", spawn there and take it, it's done.

 

The more visible kind of FOBs that attracted attention were the mortar/superfobs to provide overwatch on a crucial part of the map. In that case you knew you'd be discovered and you would just fight it out and defend it, because maintaining presence on that part of the map and denying movement to the enemy was important (as a side note, yes, there was often enough tactical benefit to defend some place outside an objective). Also, people knew not to all spawn there and waste time, only the squad manning the emplacements would use that FOB and provide covering fire to the rest of the team so they could advance to the objectives.

 

So, FOBs were either hidden/sneaky ones some distance away from the flags to help the team spawn and push (this was the majority of cases), or mortar/emplacement FOBs (0-2 per match, depending on the map). In the first case, you left the logi there until you needed it again to make another FOB. In the second case, you might have a logi doing the occasional run but most of the time FOBs with weapon emplacements were supplied by air. In both cases, a lot of the times the FOBs were also initially created via airdrops (take a chopper to a place, drop supplies, build FOB, move out, chopper will resupply as needed).

 

The people doing the resupplying were doing that same thing for the entire round without complaints, not only because flying is fun and you get useful stuff done for the team. It was also because they could count on the rest of the team to not have a random infantry squad take their chopper if they went down and had to wait for it to respawn, plus nobody would complain at them to "play the damn objective" when they sat idle at main for 5 minutes waiting for it to respawn. And if assets were taken, the admins were on the case.

 

What this little description might tell you is that it's not just a case of adjusting game mechanics. Players need to adapt and actually cooperate in a way that makes sense for the overall objective of the round. If the average Joe who flips the currently underpowered logis with 3000 supplies, wants to do his own thing and only perceives the game as his own personal playground with no regard for the fun of others doesn't change his mentality, he'll still be a problem even after we get improved vehicle mechanics, unflippable logis with 10000 supplies and helicopters. He will still be able to take a logi solo and rush the middle flag only to lose it or do the same with a chopper, there will still be SLs that will approve vehicles for him and there will still be servers with casual asset rules. And no amount of buffing logistics will fix that, but it will seriously unbalance gameplay whenever you get a team that operates closer to the paradigm i described above (ie, they will steamroll the opposition), because a guy who doesn't understand the importance of positioning and logistics is still a liability to the team, regardless of the amount of supplies carried (if you die, it doesn't matter if your logi carries 3k or 10k, you delivered zero in both cases). But a guy who knows those things is getting a huge advantage, because he used to be able to move 3k of supplies and he can now consistently move 10k per run.

 

Mind you, i'm not saying "this is the one true way to play the game, all should conform to my vision", let server owners decide what kind of communities and players they want to attract and decide their own rules. All i'm saying is that playing a certain way manifests certain symptoms of frustration sometimes, and people should be prepared to deal with the consequences of their choices. We can play with somewhat stricter rules and in return have the benefit of better organization, or we can play casually and have the occasional frustration as the tradeoff for being able to do our own thing pretty much every round. But we can't have it both ways in the same round.

Edited by Burningbeard80

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Create an account or sign in to comment

You need to be a member in order to leave a comment

Create an account

Sign up for a new account in our community. It's easy!

Register a new account

Sign in

Already have an account? Sign in here.

Sign In Now

×