Op Barracuda Feedback.

[lucky.BOY]

It is questionable if the map is unbalanced, i have played some rounds and i saw USMC win and loose, but what is definitely bad is that you have to capture the airstrip and then GO BACK to capture north rock or beach front as we see on these minimaps above...

[dtacs]

There is no need to start a new thread so I'll post this here;

I was gobsmacked to find that on Barracuda Inf, the US get only two transport choppers, in addition to something like 10 boats. Not only is this utterly illogical considering Marines use air attacks in their amphibious assaults, it causes so many problems for the US to the point where they get confined to the carrier doing absolutely nothing. Roughly 20 minutes ago on TG we ended the round without the US managing to even get near the first flag (docks). The round was in shambles but even when we organized an operation (op. F**KSTORM) with a boat and two choppers packed with infantry to move, we lost the choppers which confined us to the carrier for something like 20 minutes.

Barracuda 16 needs a complete overhaul for both teams in order to make it a legitimate choice for maplists. This is of course in addition to the plethora of problems which have seriously diminished the quality of the map.

[chrisweb89]

Being on china that round you could rack up the kills, but it really wasn't that fun. Your one foothold at supply fort was only defended by a squad. As the enemy I am happy you didn't reinforce it a lot and get sneaky FB up to avoid mortars, but instead reallied on constant trans, ending in a squad kdr of like 40-4 and a near 3:1 team kd.

[dtacs]

Unfortunately the map layout was opposite, with the docks being the first cap. If it was airfield, the supply fort FOB would have been a much more effective tool.

[Kain888]

I really like Cuda 16, I find it more enjoying as US than quite bad 64 version. 16 seems so more balanced and challenging. We have had some good rounds on it.

[Jigsaw]

There is no need to start a new thread so I'll post this here;

I was gobsmacked to find that on Barracuda Inf, the US get only two transport choppers, in addition to something like 10 boats. Not only is this utterly illogical considering Marines use air attacks in their amphibious assaults, it causes so many problems for the US to the point where they get confined to the carrier doing absolutely nothing. Roughly 20 minutes ago on TG we ended the round without the US managing to even get near the first flag (docks). The round was in shambles but even when we organized an operation (op. F**KSTORM) with a boat and two choppers packed with infantry to move, we lost the choppers which confined us to the carrier for something like 20 minutes.

Barracuda 16 needs a complete overhaul for both teams in order to make it a legitimate choice for maplists. This is of course in addition to the plethora of problems which have seriously diminished the quality of the map.

/bad round rant


I'm sorry but I've had several excellent rounds on Barracuda Inf, there are no attack choppers because it is the infantry version so to put them in would utterly negate the point of the layer. Just because you've been unable to get a foothold against what I can only assume will have been a strongly organised team doesn't mean that the layer is bad, you've just been unable to adapt to the situation.

Not so long ago I wrote a quick guide to Barracuda Std layer, but this particular paragraph applies to the Inf layer equally:

Jigsaw;1282667']However the best advice that I can give for this map is that at least whilst gaining a foothold the US must ignore the flags. Attempting an assault too early will likely result in sporadic forces dripping onto the first flag, so it is essential that sufficient strength is built up on the island before any attack is attempted.

Just look at all that glorious open space down to the South West of the map where you could have got a foothold.

I remember in the PRT C7 when Nato 1 played this map, the flags were roughly where they are in your game but they utterly ignored them and landed at Airfield. They fortified heavily there and sat there for the entire round forcing the Chinese to attack them.

It's all about how you adapt to the situation, and directly assaulting an easily fortifiable beachead like Docks Objective is always going to be suicide.

[Rudd]

what do Chi get on 16? if there is a balance issue, thats a good place to start.

[dtacs]

It wasn't just a 'bad round', the majority of players on the Chinese team agreed over global that the map was clearly imbalanced. I joined halfway through the round but it was clearly ominous that there were problems; db, Issuez and I among others had 4 full infantry squads going and had put up some excellent firebases, surrounding the island and giving the US a firm stranglehold. The |?| guys were running their usual sneaky tactics of mining and ambushing vehicles coming down from the main, but alas the lack of US assets gave no option to push onto the docks. To reiterate, we had a great team comprised of excellent players and strategists, but the FAV's and lack of US heavy vehicles caused a supreme loss of tickets as we tried - through valiant assaults - to push them off.

This map has been logically flawed for over 2 years and we still haven't seen any changes to the flag layout other than increasing the Airfield cap to 200m. The GPO's have been edited significantly, but that still hasn't remedied the nature of the map in general.

I'm not saying that Barracuda should follow a scenario specifically, but when we have Marines (an amphibious fighting force) staying well away from a beach assault and instead deciding to flank and attack a cornered airfield, one must question the validity of the layout. Its an idiotic proposal for the US to hold a position on the Island which isn't strategically relevant, and then expect the Chinese to throw themselves until their tickets are depleted. Thats going not only against basic game development concepts, but against the very nature of Project Reality.

what do Chi get on 16? if there is a balance issue, thats a good place to start.

FAV's, 2 I think, but the problem are the US ones or lack thereof. An LAV or AAV is silly to put on an Inf layer, but increasing chopper numbers and decreasing their spawn time wouldn't hurt.

[Jigsaw]

but alas the lack of US assets gave no option to push onto the docks.

You're completely missing the main point of my argument; the fact that there is no point whatsoever in even trying to take docks.

I'm not saying that Barracuda should follow a scenario specifically, but when we have Marines (an amphibious fighting force) staying well away from a beach assault and instead deciding to flank and attack a cornered airfield, one must question the validity of the layout. Its an idiotic proposal for the US to hold a position on the Island which isn't strategically relevant, and then expect the Chinese to throw themselves until their tickets are depleted. Thats going not only against basic game development concepts, but against the very nature of Project Reality.

Well if you'd like to discuss the strategic options of the map I would argue that attacking a wide, exposed, isolated airfield to establish a foothold is far more advantageous to the attacker than attempting an assault on a narrow, fortified beachead which is on it's own little spit of land away from the rest of the island.

But I digress to the tried and tested argument that this isn't Project Reality, it's Project Teamwork and despite the personalities you've described being present you failed to understand the essence of the map or adapt to the situation.



Now I can agree with you that the very fact I'm arguing that you should ignore the flags completely indicates that there is a severe flaw in the map, and perhaps removing the FAVs would be useful but imo in it's current state the map is very decent and you cannot write it off on the basis of one negative experience.

[Rudd]

I don't currently have the files on my computer, gonna be Dling for a couple of days.

However could someone please tell me exactly what the Chinese have?

One of dtac's complaints is valid, that if the Chi get their deployables up the boats don't have a chance, which is why the AAV7 is balanced in standard. So in order to balance perhaps it would be best to give the Chinese some non-expiring rally points, 1 at north rock, one at supplies base so that they don't need firebases for a while, but can't put down deployables. the supply trucks are already on delayed afaik but we could link them to the docks or 2nd flag which would start neutral instead.

that way the chinese don't have an overwhelming rush advantage, this seems fair in my mind. The choppers are NOT the primary mode of transport in 16, they are the backup transport, but primarily supply for when you are already on the island.

So I think both sides of the arguement have merits here, yes the Chinese can use assets designed around 64 (e.g. TOWs) to gain an advantage, but also the Americans cannot play 16 like they do 64, you have to adapt different tactics.

The changes I have outlined above should address the issue without adversely affecting fun.

ofc, I'll have to finished downloading PR before I give a conclusive answer

[matty1053]

Well, I love the map. Really does have some amazing combat experiences for everyone. (The old and new)

But, one thing is that I do not get why the Chinese can spawn on the Airfield Flag?


I have yet to see (After playing countless rounds on thte map) the US really have a victory.


I would not mind to see the Chinese not be able to spawn on the Airfield.
IT's nearly impossible to win if you have horrible trans heli pilots. Or lack of trans.


I love the dude who made the map though. Very fun.

[K4on]

AFAIK its always hard to win if u lack transport.

[matty1053]

AFAIK its always hard to win if u lack transport.

Thank you for moving my post .

But lol ofc you can't win with no trans.

But I still think Chinese should not spawn at airfield.
It's very tough for USA to win.

[Daxt2]

Barracuda is one of my FAVOURITE maps.
That is all I have to say, everytime I have played it I have had great fun.

[PlaynCool]

If i have to guess the reasoning behind China being able to spawn in the airfield is that, they control the whole island, so a spawn point that lasts the first 5 minutes is ok with me. US have to build a firebase somewhere on the beach and start slowly walking to the flag. I have seen US win many times it's possible with a nice and coordinated team with good logistics squad.

[Bringerof_D]

remove ticket bleed from first US flag. It's already a heavy drain on assets and players for them to assault the island. I don't see the need for a ticket bleed on first flag. It also seems out of place considering the airfield is chinese turf to begin with, unlike the first flag of inland based maps where that may be considered a staging area for the operation. On barracuda, the staging area would be the same as the main base.

I also feel that airfield as first flag is to put it nicely flawed. the USMC first objective in a real assault would be to disable not capture said airfield. next priorities would be to establish a food hold which is anywhere on the coast they can land a chopper, boat or w/e else and establish defenses for their follow on boats, amphibious assault craft, and further helicopters. The airfield would essentially be irrelevant until the rest of the island is captured. The airfield would likely be the last area to secure, it's only purpose would then be for receiving supplies to reinforce the island to prepare for a counter attack.

simple solution, i'd just make airfield the chinese main, make the far end of the runway the second last flag, rename chinese main base to radio command post or something then orient the rest of the map's cap points so that the amphibious assault force would come from the north east and east and not the north where it is now. Also considering the chinese have no aircraft on this map, lets throw a few craters on the runway to explain why. reason as above.

[sweedensniiperr]

simple solution

Interesting. I am however in the opinion that this map is a clusterfuck from the beginning and doesn't fit PR that well.

Docks>facility>fort/trenches>airfield.

Sounds better imo than current.

[Bringerof_D]

Docks>facility>fort/trenches>airfield.

pretty much what i'm getting at for the short term solution.

As for long term the map really needs to be rebuilt for a great number of reasons. An island Assault/Defense type map is great, but this as it is just isn't right.

[Nightingale]

I know it's not what you guys are talking about, but I have a big complaint about this map:

It's incredibly (unrealistically) smooth. It's like somebody used the "raise terrain" tool like 20 times, smoothed it all a couple billion times, and left it like that. There needs to be more small-scale dips and valleys in the terrain. They don't need to be very big. Even the tiny variations in terrain height, like in the southern half of Kozelsk, can give adequate cover to infantry. As it is now, there is basically no concealment/cover for infantry unless you are hidden behind a concrete bunker.

[Banana Joe]

Hey guys,
not sure if this has been mentioned before but on the AAS Std. layout (not vietnam) the chinese transport trucks have small supply crates of the canadian faction, making them useless.

Cheers,
Banana