Jungle Fire

Project Reality announcements and development highlights.
Kain888
Posts: 954
Joined: 2009-04-22 07:20

Re: Jungle Fire

Post by Kain888 »

I hope there won't be too many fords as they defeat the point to use CSB and are quite unrealistic in most settings.
Image
Rudd
Retired PR Developer
Posts: 21225
Joined: 2007-08-15 14:32

Re: Jungle Fire

Post by Rudd »

Kain888 wrote:I hope there won't be too many fords as they defeat the point to use CSB and are quite unrealistic in most settings.
afaik there are a couple of places where you can just about get a non-amph vehicle accross with serious damage, but otherwise no there are no fords at all
Image
ytman
Posts: 634
Joined: 2010-04-22 17:32

Re: Jungle Fire

Post by ytman »

My issue with CSBs in the current state is that they take really valuable supply crates to utilize. Of course this is because most maps weren't designed with CSBs in mind (Qwia and Fools Road are huge offenders of pointless CSB locations), but its a huge detractor when you have only two supply trucks available at any one time.

If this map requires large CSB constructs (like 5 or more) then you might have an issue unless you have enough logistics trucks. A 5 minute drive to the river, back from the river, back to the river, quickly adds up and makes the task risky and rarely rewarding.

Now... if the french and chinese get some (amphibious!) L class APCs then I have no problems at all. The APC-Ls would then have the frontline FO duty while the logitrucks would have the rear FO/CSB duty.
Rudd
Retired PR Developer
Posts: 21225
Joined: 2007-08-15 14:32

Re: Jungle Fire

Post by Rudd »

I'm pretty sure amph vehicles will feature...even teh VN3 is amph for goodness sake. Don't forget Trans choppers will be present so don't worry your pretty head that the supply trucks will be overtasked :)

there are several bridges, so even if one or two is blown, there is probably still somewhere to cross.
Image
Amok@ndy
Retired PR Developer
Posts: 5144
Joined: 2008-11-27 22:13

Re: Jungle Fire

Post by Amok@ndy »

the bridges and fords are only important for Heavy Vehicles and Logistictrucks everything else is amphibious or by air
Image
bnaveb
Posts: 9
Joined: 2010-09-27 11:03

Re: Jungle Fire

Post by bnaveb »

cant wait for it to caome out nice work man looks real nice!!!!!
K4on
Retired PR Developer
Posts: 5055
Joined: 2009-05-08 19:48

Re: Jungle Fire

Post by K4on »

-post edited, cause it shouldn't be known by the public community (yet). mapper is informed.
LudacrisKill
Posts: 262
Joined: 2008-05-15 19:20

Re: Jungle Fire

Post by LudacrisKill »

Giving 1 side trans choppers and the other side not, on a 4km map is a mistake imo. Also I hope the attack choppers are 'light'. Not apaches etc.

I would bet that each side will get air trans or both none after an update is made to the map after release.
Rudd
Retired PR Developer
Posts: 21225
Joined: 2007-08-15 14:32

Re: Jungle Fire

Post by Rudd »

LudacrisKill wrote:Giving 1 side trans choppers and the other side not, on a 4km map is a mistake imo. Also I hope the attack choppers are 'light'. Not apaches etc.

I would bet that each side will get air trans or both none after an update is made to the map after release.
afaik the Chinese get air transport, just less; but more amph vehicles
Image
LudacrisKill
Posts: 262
Joined: 2008-05-15 19:20

Re: Jungle Fire

Post by LudacrisKill »

[R-DEV]Rudd wrote:afaik the Chinese get air transport, just less; but more amph vehicles
In that case, it should be ok. :)

Was looking forward to a 4km tad sae style map :D
dtacs
Posts: 5512
Joined: 2008-12-07 23:30

Re: Jungle Fire

Post by dtacs »

[R-DEV]Rudd wrote:afaik the Chinese get air transport, just less; but more amph vehicles
One thing to remember is that they will be implemented by players as light tanks, not amphibious transports. Symmetry means that its 100% balanced and the utilization of respective assets is what will allow one side to win, having less transport means the assets will be distinctly more aggressive since they are more plentiful.

Asymmetrical GPO's are a double edged sword really.
Amok@ndy
Retired PR Developer
Posts: 5144
Joined: 2008-11-27 22:13

Re: Jungle Fire

Post by Amok@ndy »

you will see its balanced
Image
myles
Posts: 1614
Joined: 2008-11-09 14:34

Re: Jungle Fire

Post by myles »

Love jungle maps we need more this is a start!
Check out my Project Reaity gamplay here http://www.youtube.com/user/Projectreality1

Image
simeon5541
Posts: 507
Joined: 2011-01-11 22:33
Location: Serbia

Re: Jungle Fire

Post by simeon5541 »

Guys . . .
This is AWESOME !!
Look statics !! :D
Would be there some Mirage or Rafale in future ?
havoc1482
Posts: 315
Joined: 2009-02-28 19:39

Re: Jungle Fire

Post by havoc1482 »

Looks good! At first I thought it was a PR:V map haha
Image
Image
ImageImage
Valleyforge3946
Posts: 210
Joined: 2009-12-09 18:53

Re: Jungle Fire

Post by Valleyforge3946 »

I'm physched!! Cant wait for this map.
SiŁeńŤĤŨňŤeŘ
A.Filikov
Posts: 71
Joined: 2010-10-03 18:06

Re: Jungle Fire

Post by A.Filikov »

Jungle!! YAY! :-D

Really nice job can't wait for this.
ebevan91
Posts: 1318
Joined: 2009-03-19 15:51

Re: Jungle Fire

Post by ebevan91 »

Will the map have problems like Iron Ridge where alot of people were complaining about their frame rate due to the massive amount of vegetation?

Hope not. This one looks great.
Rudd
Retired PR Developer
Posts: 21225
Joined: 2007-08-15 14:32

Re: Jungle Fire

Post by Rudd »

Will the map have problems like Iron Ridge where alot of people were complaining about their frame rate due to the massive amount of vegetation?
I've not had trouble on IR, nor have I seem people have trouble on IR, some people have claimed there is rubber banding on IR - i.e. lag not framerate...

I hate 'alot of people complaining' comments cuz I cant seem to find a thread talking about it...

rest assured that great pains have gone in to optimising this map.
Image
Sizum85
Posts: 669
Joined: 2008-03-18 10:51

Re: Jungle Fire

Post by Sizum85 »

nice, good piece of work.
Locked

Return to “Announcements & Highlights”