Let's discuss the trend towards less and less assets in maps.

[unrealalex]

Think about this one: Kashan Desert is now pretty much the only map in PR with planes, and half of the time it's the helicopter version. Battle for Quinling is played once in a blue moon for some odd reason so that's out.

There's a developing or existing trend here that assets are taken away from maps with every update.

Look at how many maps lost attack helicopters, now they're losing transport helicopters. Look at how many maps lost Vodniks and Humvees.

The assets currently assigned to maps are way unrealistic short of a few maps like Kashan and Karbala and Basrah.

What maps still have tanks? Kashan, Basrah has one tank, and Kozelsk. I can't think of any others. What happened to awesome tank vs tank gameplay?

It seems there's a trend to reduce everything down to infantry, and even infantry is being simplified.

The truth is, I don't always want to be infantry and I'm being forced to pretty much with the way current map trends are going.

PS: Battle for Qinling needs to be played more. The map is so great. It has CAS, and tanks, and apcs. Some of my best moments in PR were on that map. The tank battles were so fun!

[masterceo]

i still remember EJOD with tanks on both sides. damn, there were some epic tank battles on the hills and in the city

[Alex6714]

Well you are going to love it soon then.

I totally agree.

[[uBp]Irish]

yep. i'm personally not really happy that most maps have moved towards the whole "omg apc's".

Insurgency maps don't have attack helo's because we don't like the idea of one vehicle owning caches that could spawn randomly.

Steel Thunder and Kashan were pretty much "the" tanks maps, but with steel thunder gone, we can only play Kashan and even then, that's been so played that many people have stopped playing it (however, it's probably my favorite map of all time so far)

Let's just hope that the new maps will actually have something besides an apc and infantry.

[FuzzySquirrel]

I agree, I dont really know why. Even when they had the .866 public thing I noticed Al Basrah Didnt have a helicopter! COME ON. As said in the .86 thread, Kashan is going to be Humvees vs BDRMS at this rate....

[sakils2]

As a infantry whore, I hope HEAVY ARMOR SHALL BE REMOVED FOR EVER! APC's/IFV's + infantry FTW!


P.S. Aircraft for the WIN too, *without tanks*

[EgoTrippin]

Irish;1024968']yep. i'm personally not really happy that most maps have moved towards the whole "omg apc's".

Insurgency maps don't have attack helo's because we don't like the idea of one vehicle owning caches that could spawn randomly.

Steel Thunder and Kashan were pretty much "the" tanks maps, but with steel thunder gone, we can only play Kashan and even then, that's been so played that many people have stopped playing it (however, it's probably my favorite map of all time so far)

Let's just hope that the new maps will actually have something besides an apc and infantry.

personally Kashan is my least favorite map. the reason is there are not enough players to play such maps as they should be played with armor and panes/helos as support for the infantry.
just today i played on Kashan with a pretty bad team - there were maybe 4 armor squads, a helo squad, an airplane squad and a sniper squad - and maybe 1.5 infantry squads - no need to say that our team lost badly because most people wanted to use the assets and hardly anyone cared for the infantry part which still is needed to capture and defend flags and this is often the case.

[Alex6714]

This is what I don´t understand....

You do know that there are at least 4 different layers available for each map right?

So there can be layers with everything, layers with only infantry etc...

I really can´t understand the total hate for vehicles and variation at the moment.

[daranz]

People hate Qinling for some reason. It empties servers. I never really got it. It's the Kashan equivalent, but with trees.

[fuzzhead]

Well its not exactly a "trend". PR never had many jet maps to begin with.

The problem with large assets is all about maps. When you make the systems in large assets more realistic, they require a more realistic range in which to fit in. IE: sticking a bunch of large assets in 1km maps is not allowing for realistic use of the vehicle.

Anyways, I agree with you there is currently not many good armor maps. But adding armor to maps with low view distance / bad terrain for tanks is not a good answer.

Thankfully we have over 10 (!!) 4km maps in developement, and these are the maps you will likely see large assets present.


So lets look at the current maps and what they offer:

1km Maps (unreasonable to put heavy assets due to extremely small fighting area)
7 Gates
Asad Khal
Assault on Mestia
Bi Ming
Fallujah West
Korengal Valley
Operation Ghost Train
Road to Kyongan Ni
Tad Sae

2km Maps
Al Kufrah Oilfield - yes could be converted back to tanks, but this map is prety "bowl" like and although has a good view distance, is relatively small map. This one I agree could be put back with tanks but it is the only map that features IFV vs IFV combat (for better or worse).

Al Basrah - has armor, recon and apcs supported by light vehicles.

EJOD Desert - has an asymmetrical loadout with armor vs TOW. map has a good view distance but most of the combat area is unused, making the map very small for large assets.

Fools Road - asymmetrical loadout with armor vs ATGM. armor most time has to use the roads as per the maps original design (for better or worse).

Jabal - asymmetrical loadout with apc/transport heli (and now CAS and AAV). I think the map is good but small view distance and alot of the combat area is underused.

Karbala - light vehicles with CAS. mediocre insurgency map, view distance is decent but really cant see heavy assets working here

Kozelsk - asymmetrical loadout with armor vs ATGM. Decent view distance and many opportunities for combined arms.

Muttrah City 2 - asymmetrical loadout with APCs/trans heli/CAS. Dont see adding any more assets here would help.

Operation Barracuda - asymmetrical loadout with CAS/trans heli vs light vehicles. The terrain of the island would not work too well with APCs, and the island is prety small to warrant their use on here, dont see adding assets here would help.

Operation Archer - trans heli/light vehicles. Insurgency map, think the assets here working great, dont see any reason to add heavy assets considering its going to Canadian faction that use light vehicles primarily in Afghanistan.

Qwai River - the map that sparks all this controversy New setup still has armor (light and medium APCs) versus light strykers and humvees and a TOW. Wait and see how it plays before judging what the loss of the tanks and little birds does to the map.

Ramiel - light APC/light vehicles/trans heli. Dont see adding any more assets here would help.

Sunset City - light vehicles. Very small combat area, more than 75% of the map is never used. Vanilla feeling map, sure you could add some heavy assets but they would be used simular to vanilla.

4km Maps

Battle for Qinling - full assortment of vehicles.

Kashan Desert - full assortment of vehicles.

Code: Select all

[size=175][b]Current maps in development for v0.9+[/b][/size]

[list=1]
[*]Map Name: n/a
Map Creator(s): [R-DEV]Rhino
Map Description: n/a
Map Size: 4KM
Map Factions: UK vs MEC

[*]Map Name: Arzan Kar Region (Ambush)
Map Creator(s): [R-CON]marcoelnk
Map Description: Afghanistan open country
Map Size: 1KM
Map Factions: GERMANY vs TALIBAN

[*]Map Name: Codename Silent Eagle (Airborne)
Map Creator(s): [R-CON]marcoelnk
Map Description: Eastern European forested countryside with central town and airbases
Map Size: 4KM
Map Factions: GERMANY vs RUSSIA

[*]Map Name: Devils Tower
Map Creator(s): [R-DEV]Paramedic
Map Description: Mid east open country
Map Size: 4KM
Map Factions: CF vs TALIBAN

[*]Map Name: Dili - Timor
Map Creator(s): [R-DEV]CodeRedFox
Map Description: Dili Timor, Indonesia with City, Forest, Hills/Mountains.
Map Size: 4KM
Map Factions: BLUFOR vs. Insurgents

[*]Map Name: Dragonfly
Map Creator(s): [R-DEV]Irontaxi & [R-DEV]nickbond
Map Description: Russian urban / rural
Map Size: 2KM
Map Factions: RUSSIA vs CHECHEN

[*]Map Name: Feyzabad
Map Creator(s): [R-DEV]coderedfox
Map Description: Afghanistan river valley
Map Size: 4KM
Map Factions: US ARMY vs TALIBAN

[*]Map Name: Gaza Beach
Map Creator(s): [R-CON]Hfett 
Map Description: Tight urban combat
Map Size: 1KM
Map Factions: IDF vs HAMAS

[*]Map Name: n/a
Map Creator(s): [R-DEV]Rhino
Map Description: n/a
Map Size: 4KM
Map Factions: BLUFOR vs PLA

[*]Map Name: Iron Ridge
Map Creator(s): [R-DEV]~KILL~Pirate 
Map Description: rural
Map Size: 4KM
Map Factions: ??? vs ???

[*]Map Name: Kandahar Region
Map Creator(s): [R-DEV]Hans Martin Slayer
Map Description: Afghanistan rural/urban
Map Size: 4KM
Map Factions: ??? vs TALIBAN

[*]Map Name: Lashkar Valley
Map Creator(s): [R-DEV]Hans Martin Slayer
Map Description: Afghanistan rural in river valley
Map Size: 2KM
Map Factions: GERMANY vs TALIBAN

[*]Map Name: Marsh (WIP Name)
Map Creator(s): [R-DEV]Deer
Map Description: rural swamp
Map Size: 4KM
Map Factions: RUSSIA vs ???

[*]Map Name: Monchegorsk
Map Creator(s): [R-CON]space
Map Description: rural forest with military complexes
Map Size: 4KM
Map Factions: ??? vs ???

[*]Map Name: Sangin
Map Creator(s): [R-DEV]Dr Rank
Map Description: Afghanistan rural combat
Map Size: 4KM
Map Factions: UK vs TALIBAN

[*]Map Name: Siege at Ochamachira
Map Creator(s): [R-DEV]IronTaxi
Map Description: industrial defense
Map Size: 2KM
Map Factions: RUSSIA vs CHECHEN

[*]Map Name: Sosnovyy Bor
Map Creator(s): [R-CON]9cookie_monster
Map Description: industrial and woodland
Map Size: 2KM
Map Factions: ??? vs ???
[/list]

[b][u]Total Maps in Development:[/u][/b]
17

[u][b]Map Sizes in Development:[/b][/u]
1KM - 2
2KM - 4
4KM - 11

Conclusion:

Other than Al Kufrah, Qwai River and Sunset City, what exactly are you asking for here? Be more specific?

As you can see from the above map development, a HUGE amount of resources is going to put combined arms maps in the highlight of PR. 4km maps will be great to showcase large assets, but sticking them on smaller maps so players can use them like they did in vanilla, I dont see that working, especially as we increase their deadliness and align them with their real life attributes, putting them on small maps is kind of a waste.

**NOTE: just because I listed some maps here, does not mean they will be in v0.9 or will in fact ever be released, just showing you that we got a "Plan" when it comes to assets in PR.

[fuzzhead]

changed for you danke so no one throws a hissy fit

[Outlawz7]

You could always increase the view distance on Jabal, it's a bare desert/urban map with little stuff to be loaded during play (compared to heavy urban/forest maps like Muttrah/Kozelsk) however any IGLA set up on the mountains around West Beach/Dam/Bridge would mean that the helicopters couldn't leave the carrier without getting locked on depending on how much of the area around the carrier could be seen.

Also there were a lot more jet maps before 0.6, when the aircraft got overhauled

[EmBra]

*Warning* Whiny content

People hate Qinling for some reason. It empties servers. I never really got it. It's the Kashan equivalent, but with trees.

It empties servers because it simply isn't fun anymore, not since it got those random control point spawns. Those random control points always make the map unbalanced and thus not fun to play.

I used to love playing it when it had fixed control point positions.

There used to be fights at the coalmine, village and FOB.. now you have to fight over a random spot in the middle of nowhere... how fun is that?

Also, moar assets for the players

Third, Karbala is pretty horribad for an apache, viewdistance sucks for the heli to be any useful + the insurgence have both technicals and AA-kit and RPGs to kill it with. Not to mention the US mainbase is to close to the fightingarea for the heli to even be safe when it repair on the helipad.

Further more, Al kufrah oilfield is better now tbh.

Lastly, woot 11 new 4km maps?!? \o/ gief now!!

[FuzzySquirrel]

Qwai River - the map that sparks all this controversy New setup still has armor (light and medium APCs) versus light strykers and humvees and a TOW. Wait and see how it plays before judging what the loss of the tanks and little birds does to the map.

I still stand by the layer setup of new and old...Then watch and see which layer servers play more often...

[Alex6714]

Is there any particular reason old qwai couldn`t be kept for 64 layer and a 32 layer made for the new layout? That makes most sense to me.

[Zi8]

As a infantry whore, I hope HEAVY ARMOR SHALL BE REMOVED FOR EVER! APC's/IFV's + infantry FTW!


P.S. Aircraft for the WIN too, *without tanks*

+1
Less assets -> less people destroying them -> more teamplay.

[Rudd]

great post fuzzhead

[gazzthompson]

i see where the devs are coming from, assets are for big maps... the last few versions have not had many assets maps, because its not had many maps the devs whish to put them on (4km maps) thus they have added them to smaller , less adequate maps for the time being. now with .9 having a large amount of big maps the devs started to remove some of the assets from maps they didnt wish to add but had to due to lack of big maps.

thats my drunken, opinion/

[Dirtboy]

There are lots of reasons why Qinling isn't played often. Here are my own opinions.

1. Asset whore central. When there is only 1 Infantry squad...there is something wrong. I will bet if you go to a Qinling server right now you will see the following Squads:

Sq 1. Sniper/CAS
Sq 2. Jets
Sq 3. Attack Chopper
Sq 4. AA
Sq 5. Armor
Sq 6. Trans Helo
Sq 7. LogiTruck
Sq 8. Sniper
Sq 9. Infantry

2. The map lags alot of players out.

3. Takes WAY too long to play.


Now bear in mind that this is only my opinion. At the Tactical Gamer server, I believe we are playing the 16 player version and it plays out pretty decent.