Battle for Quinling-why never played?

General discussion of the Project Reality: BF2 modification.
Lange
Posts: 306
Joined: 2007-02-28 23:39

Battle for Quinling-why never played?

Post by Lange »

Hey guys,

I wanted to start a thread and discuss with everyone about why Battle for Quinling seems to be at the bottom of the barrel in public servers and what it seems, generally disliked by the PR community? Now why is this? It has all the features of
  • Its the one of the few 4k heavy vehicle battle maps other than Kashan Desert, and silent eagle and is similar in that sense
  • Jets? Helos? who doesn't love those? One of few maps to feature those
  • To me comparing it to the other maps of its kind(Silent Eagle, Kashan) it has nothing truely worse that should make it so its never played having a lot of similarities, yet its an outcast map
  • Only map for China that has trans helos/jet/tanks although probably doesn't mean much to many people its a fact, also only map with Jets for Britain
Then Why is this?

Ill make a few points on what i've noticed. It seems that playing the map to even a good level of teamwork/cooperation is beyond a lot of public players in servers and often due to their nature in these type of maps I notice this often with Kashan as well but not as game breaking.

Seemingly players will not defend the flags properly use the armor and assets properly and if that doesn't happen the other team becomes a wrecking force if they even just coordinate teamwork a significant amount better, then it becomes lopsided, they cap the other team out game over soon after the round has started.

Pretty much that's been the story of the rounds of Quinling so maybe players just don't know how to play it properly, and weirdly enough i've mostly happened to be Britain and get owned. Probably just coincidence as the asset balance seems next to perfect and for some reason the British team cannot get the sense of making sure they can't rush/attack farm outpost.

Secondly i've heard things about lag and such but runs fine for me and theirs 4k maps with MUCH more detail... I have though heard people say that they don't like it because of teamwork issues like I mentioned.

However the map itself besides the map people play it seems just great and up to par with the other 4 k ones in my opinion.

However what do you all think as a community?
Rhino
Retired PR Developer
Posts: 47909
Joined: 2005-12-13 20:00

Re: Battle for Quinling-why never played?

Post by Rhino »

The map kinda sucks without two coordinated teams, with them it really shines but without it just turns into lots of assets running about not working together.
Image
Rudd
Retired PR Developer
Posts: 21225
Joined: 2007-08-15 14:32

Re: Battle for Quinling-why never played?

Post by Rudd »

I love the 64 layer of qinling, not a fan of the others. But as Rhino said, it needs a coordinated team to be fun.

and I love the tornado, I love it :P
Image
Phantom2
Posts: 195
Joined: 2009-04-04 01:27

Re: Battle for Quinling-why never played?

Post by Phantom2 »

I think the reason why they hate it is because.
1) Mass coordination
2)Requires commander to have coordination
3) Chinese, not exactly a lot of people's favorite army
rampo
Posts: 2914
Joined: 2009-02-10 12:48

Re: Battle for Quinling-why never played?

Post by rampo »

More flags could help

Pelitutka ran it a few nights ago and it ran whitout emptying the server at all but the round was over too qucik because our team sucked...
Image
Silly_Savage
Posts: 2094
Joined: 2007-08-05 19:23

Re: Battle for Quinling-why never played?

Post by Silly_Savage »

The fact that you're usually fighting over random hills in the middle of nowhere whilst you're out in the open being raped by enemy armor and air power is not most people's idea of fun. The lag doesn't help either.
"Jafar, show me a sniper rifle." - Silly_Savage 2013
pleym
Retired PR Developer
Posts: 661
Joined: 2008-09-10 11:04

Re: Battle for Quinling-why never played?

Post by pleym »

It might just need a little renew... some new statics, and a small change on the assets maybe and a small town with some modern houses etc instead of the old hovels..

a Quinling v2 :p

PR:BF2 Mapper
Rudd
Retired PR Developer
Posts: 21225
Joined: 2007-08-15 14:32

Re: Battle for Quinling-why never played?

Post by Rudd »

Silly_Savage wrote:The fact that you're usually fighting over random hills in the middle of nowhere whilst you're out in the open being raped by enemy armor and air power is not most people's idea of fun. The lag doesn't help either.
that is true, random hills aren't so interesting for infantry, especially since the hills tend to be very smooth so theres nowhere for infantry to hide

though I prefer being mounted in a vehicle for this map anyway.
Image
Aquiller
Posts: 884
Joined: 2008-03-25 09:43

Re: Battle for Quinling-why never played?

Post by Aquiller »

Quinling could be a great map with some kind of city added into it. Generally speaking, the layout kind of sucks - like Silly_Savage mentioned - fights occur mostly on some ghost hills.
Elektro
Posts: 1824
Joined: 2009-01-05 14:53

Re: Battle for Quinling-why never played?

Post by Elektro »

Me thinks its because Tornado and SU-30 have outdated gunner HUDs :sad:

PS: Its Qinling ;)
MikeDude
Posts: 941
Joined: 2007-10-25 12:07

Re: Battle for Quinling-why never played?

Post by MikeDude »

[R-DEV]Rhino wrote:The map kinda sucks without two coordinated teams, with them it really shines but without it just turns into lots of assets running about not working together.
sounds like kashan..
Image
Image

[3dAC] MikeDude
Loving PR since 0.2.
Drunkenup
Posts: 786
Joined: 2009-03-16 20:53

Re: Battle for Quinling-why never played?

Post by Drunkenup »

mikeyboyz wrote:sounds like kashan..
Kashan is simply more straightforward and easier to play. You take a look at Quinling's mountainous terrain, and everything just changes, requires so many more tactics, Its so hard to get back on your feet if you die, or loose a objective. But when its coordinated with air support, infantry that knows what their doing, and a good crew of armor, its awesome fun.
Tim270
PR:BF2 Developer
Posts: 5166
Joined: 2009-02-28 20:05

Re: Battle for Quinling-why never played?

Post by Tim270 »

Its by all means not a bad map just honestly not that interesting.

Like others have said, simply detailing a few new objectives would really improve it. I.e underground section at the coal mine that armour cant get in. Some kind of outpost on the West side of the map etc.
Image
boilerrat
Posts: 1482
Joined: 2009-09-02 07:47

Re: Battle for Quinling-why never played?

Post by boilerrat »

Too little flags, the map feels so empty that its boring.

It's one of those maps if all of your flags are captured and you're losing, then everyone leaves.
Image
Infantry1242
Posts: 251
Joined: 2010-05-29 00:16

Re: Battle for Quinling-why never played?

Post by Infantry1242 »

rampo93(FIN) wrote:More flags could help

Pelitutka ran it a few nights ago and it ran whitout emptying the server at all but the round was over too qucik because our team sucked...
Yes,but do you see Kashan with alot of Caps either?
Image
Image
Image
Image
Mah Userbars!
chimpyang
Posts: 237
Joined: 2008-03-16 23:10

Re: Battle for Quinling-why never played?

Post by chimpyang »

This map could do with set flags - People have figured out Kashan eventaully because the flags have stayed the same since pretty much inception.

Also, if you're going to have a hill as an objective. Set some mapper placed fortifications a la Barracuda or Yamalia (the trenches going to the Canadian main is by far the most interesting fight - objectives on random moun ds are not much fun, but better than the hills in Qinling because you get raped from much closer range and stand a chance in hell of doing something about it) to help INF to hide somewhere. Even some deepish trenches which HAT can't be fired out of would help. Maybe move the village northwest into the non used section so you cant do cross-lake shots into or out of it and set it up so that one side or another has attempted to put up rudimentary fortifications. Sacrifice some trees for some 'defences' (like barricades, sandbag walls, etc...) or have it so that there has been an attempt to secure the village - like a rudimentary forward base, even is said base is not actually inside the village.

Finally, do the same for the Farm and Coal Mine flags. Or even add a new flag - the river crossing of either the bridge or the landbridge further north.

Basically, give Inf a fighting chance and something to do rather than be fodder/makeweights between flag to flag and it may appear more often.

I would love to see this map played too often, I pine for the chinese maps of yore, and find it a shame that only Qwai is played these days. Also the 2 seated bombers are unique to PR.

--------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
On another note, the 32 layer could be audited that the flags arn't so far apart. Given the low player pop. there should be another flag before either side is allowed to attack Farm/PLA forward outpost. The reason Kashan works is that after bunkers, each side has a possibility of a saving grace by holding out South or North village before they can attack bunker again. Now with Qinling 32, the flag number is not quite right given the assets.
Rhino
Retired PR Developer
Posts: 47909
Joined: 2005-12-13 20:00

Re: Battle for Quinling-why never played?

Post by Rhino »

Ye the map was never meant for the random flag setup with random hills as objectives. Fuzz thought it would improve them map so I let him have a play with it since it wasn't working too well in its old setup but its really no better with random flags, if anything its much worse since your basically gambling for a good flag setup, where most of the time one side will have a very clear advantage in the flag setup and its not something you really want to play with when even thou the enemy skill wise is no better than you, they are only winning because they can get to the flags quicker etc.
chimpyang wrote:Also the 2 seated bombers are unique to PR.
Not exactly, vBF2 had two seater fighter bombers :p
Image
Infantry1242
Posts: 251
Joined: 2010-05-29 00:16

Re: Battle for Quinling-why never played?

Post by Infantry1242 »

[R-DEV]Rhino wrote:Ye the map was never meant for the random flag setup with random hills as objectives. Fuzz thought it would improve them map so I let him have a play with it since it wasn't working too well in its old setup but its really no better with random flags, if anything its much worse since your basically gambling for a good flag setup, where most of the time one side will have a very clear advantage in the flag setup and its not something you really want to play with when even thou the enemy skill wise is no better than you, they are only winning because they can get to the flags quicker etc.



Not exactly, vBF2 had two seater fighter bombers :p
Those MiG bombers the MEC had. Right?
Image
Image
Image
Image
Mah Userbars!
Rhino
Retired PR Developer
Posts: 47909
Joined: 2005-12-13 20:00

Re: Battle for Quinling-why never played?

Post by Rhino »

Infantry1242 wrote:Those MiG bombers the MEC had. Right?
F-15E, Su-30mkk (the one we use for the PLA on Qinling) and the Su-34 which you should have already read since you replied to that "Old BF2 Traliers" topic in offtopic...
Image
Truism
Posts: 1189
Joined: 2008-07-27 13:52

Re: Battle for Quinling-why never played?

Post by Truism »

For me it's Kashan without the choke points and sexy bunkers to draw pubs into conflict.


So much promise in the map though.
SSGTSEAL <headshot M4> Osama

Counter-Terrorists Win!
Post Reply

Return to “PR:BF2 General Discussion”