[Maps] PR v0.9 Map Overviews

[evya]

GB vs Checens is very strange choice, but since its fiction its ok... i guess

though im jealous at the beta testers, they get to play all those awesome maps first

[derg]

Before the Russian Faction was introduced to PR, the teams on Fools Road were UK vs. PLA

[Oak]

Awesome.

Some issues spotted:

1. AAS and Infantry versions both report the same map size... not sure if that's intentional or not.
2. Siege at Ochamachira, AAS Infantry & AAS Standard: no flags in map overview make it hard to understand which side is where. I think it's the only image without flags.
3. Fools Road, AAS Random Standard: says "Chechen Fortress 140n" instead of "140m".

[Scheintot887]

No, UK Vs Millitia....

UK was an placeholder for the Russian.... and know they changed it again.... sry, but at 0.9 you failed...

[Raegron]

Awesome work, PR team! I am really looking forward to this release .

I can't understand why so many people are whining about the factions and all. Why can't you just be happy with what you get for free?

[Aquiller]

How do you spell siege, like Siege at Ochamachira?

Because at some screens i've seen 'Seige'.

[Scheintot887]

Cauz its called Project REALITY.... I cant understand it why they change the factions....

[derg]

If you didnt notice, there is no America fighting against China. Actually the MEC doesnt exist either.

[Scheintot887]

Yes BUT Kashan Desert remembered on the Golf War....
PLA, thats true but why they make fools road more unrealistic? Its possible to make it more realistic with the right factions... thats my point..

[LeChuckle]

yay for chechen insurgency map

[Protector]

Project REALITY seem to think creating fictional battles between armies that haven't fought recently is perfectly accceptable... the rest of us just think its way to create more maps. Beirut anyone...

Edit : It wouldn't be so bad if the factional battles were between armies that actually fight eachother...

[bosco_]

Create your own map if you get so butthurt over factions.

[=]H[=COEMAN]

Sweet! New Insurgency Maps

[Truism]

Agreed. Im all for fictional conflicts.. but atleast try with some believable scenarios.

Chechnya vs. GB... eh.. what?

Pls stop to make the Factions unrealistic like on Fools road "UK vs Chechen".......

Russ vs chechen was ok... why you change it? Project REALITY<- ?

No, UK Vs Millitia....

UK was an placeholder for the Russian.... and know they changed it again.... sry, but at 0.9 you failed...

Cauz its called Project REALITY.... I cant understand it why they change the factions....

The original maker of the Operation Dragonfly series never intended for his maps to be Russia vs Chechnya from what I've heard. Besides which, the maps could really boring when infantry combat was pretty much always AK vs AK compared to how wildly different the two sides used to be (particularly when the old Militia officer had an SVD).

Also, if you'd care to recall, the scenario was a British led crackdown on an international arms dealer in the region. It's not so crazy that they'd be dodgey Chechans, though I'd prefer a non-specific Militia personally.

Project REALITY seem to think creating fictional battles between armies that haven't fought recently is perfectly accceptable... the rest of us just think its way to create more maps. Beirut anyone...

Edit : It wouldn't be so bad if the factional battles were between armies that actually fight eachother...

AND YOU
Please take note of what wars PR depicts: US vs China, US vs fictional MEC and so on. Project REALITY depicts not yet realised wars in realistic ways. Your tone of condescension actually made me a little angry, which really says something given how much I criticise on the forums.

[Lucke189]

It can also be a attack helicopter like the littlebird, just noticed theres also a normal LB

That's old news - The americans already have 2 apaches in PRSP. And you're link were to a Co-op map, thus the same. : )

[Panzerfire]

Personally I find the new maps as very promising and I know I'll enjoy them. That's for sure.

IMO fictional scenarios are not a problem what so ever since what PR aims for is a realistic combat experience... not a realistic historical-based plot that may or actually does happen today or in the near future. That sort of objective would limit the mod's vast potential.

If anyone really doesn't want to respect the Devs decision about the faction layout of the maps, then that person can feel free to pick another game to play.


And now for the lulz.... when do we get a Moscow map? =3

[motherdear]

Pls stop to make the Factions unrealistic like on Fools road "UK vs Chechen".......

Russ vs chechen was ok... why you change it? Project REALITY<- ?

because it's not the chechens fighting. this map used to be a british map and so did mestia. it was altered for the russians though to make it possible to get them integrated with enough maps.

fools road has and always will be one of 3 maps that are meant to be played in a trilogi. mestia, fools, and dragonfly. if you had played back in the day with the introduction of mestia and eventually fools road. you would know that they were fighting there as a NATO force.

and just because the name is project reality doesn't mean that we can't put our forces where ever we want them. this might as well be in kosovo as it could be in chechnya.

[Protector]

[quote=""'[R-DEV"]bosco;1239410']Create your own map if you get so butthurt over factions. [/quote]

I'm a texture artist by trade so no i will leave the maps to the mappers.

[quote="Truism""]
AND YOU
Please take note of what wars PR depicts: US vs China, US vs fictional MEC and so on. Project REALITY depicts not yet realised wars in realistic ways. Your tone of condescension actually made me a little angry, which really says something given how much I criticise on the forums.[/quote]

I know what PR already depicts in regards to fictional battles and the work is fantastic but it just seems a little odd to put so much effort into realistic modern warfare(INS v BLUFOR, IDF vs Hamas, Taliban vs Blufor, Rus vs Chech) and then create fictional modern battles when there is so much more that can be done realistically.

In regards to my tone I don't want it too seem patronizing & I mean no disrespect towards the developers as their work is incredible, i'm afraid my sarcastic ways get me into a little bit of bother sometimes but i mean nothing by this.

[Maxfragg]

why the heck do people prefere fighting over and over in iraq, instead of beeing glad that your giving us a variety of different szenarios? i mean, come on, its not "Project Wars of the last Years", PR was always meant to feature current armys/ armies of nnext 10 years, fighting in mostly fictional wars

@Panzerfire /signed

[Arquin]

Awesome new maps! Silent eagle and Beirut looks most interesting to me.
I wish for the day you will introduce EU faction ^^! Would be nice also to have more varied maps, seems to me that the only maps are either woodlands or desert. =( Nonetheless, nice job!