[Map] Road to Ramadi [scrapped]

V3N0N_br · Post by **V3N0N_br** » 2006-12-30 21:03

Flag positioning (somewhat different from the first project) should be like this IMO, according to the best areas for fighting in the map:

option 1: using aas v2

option 2:

Maybe the problem with version 2 would be that the firefight between the 2 teams would start around the palace. So I would have to give some more equipment for the US, since it would be more difficult for them to get another flag.

Post by **duckhunt** » 2006-12-30 22:11

Good work. Im looking forward to some screenshots of your favourite areas!

Im glad there are more maps like this. In my opinion this is what the City maps should be like. Why make just a city when you can add loads of stuff around the outside aswell?

luizinhuu · Post by **luizinhuu** » 2006-12-31 00:52

since it doesnt lag HARDCORELY..

Hauler · Post by **Hauler** » 2006-12-31 01:04

comments like "Al Lagsra" and other stuff you have posted has earned you a 24 hour ban.

-egg

luizinhuu wrote:since it doesnt lag HARDCORELY..

I was going to ask is it going to be like Al Lagsra or is it going to actually be ok??

causticbeat · Post by **causticbeat** » 2006-12-31 06:39

AASv2 option 1 looks AMAZING

splitting up the first flags seems like it would give the USMC a chance to get a foothold, and they would need to move really fast/well coordinatedly to get both before the insurgents come.

V3N0N_br · Post by **V3N0N_br** » 2006-12-31 14:18

luizinhuu wrote:since it doesnt lag HARDCORELY..

In-game, at least for me, it's like al basra for the first 5 mins. It lags and then it stabilizes =)
The only thing that probably will take long is the loading time of the map when all lightmaps are generated, since there are lots of objects. Also, draw distance is set 230, so it'll not lag hard while on the game, and it's not out of place because it just looks like the fog is actually raised dust from the bombings and stuff.

causticbeat wrote:AASv2 option 1 looks AMAZING

splitting up the first flags seems like it would give the USMC a chance to get a foothold, and they would need to move really fast/well coordinatedly to get both before the insurgents come.

Yeah, but then I'm afraid US might not get over that place and the firefight will stop there.

@Duckhunt

Thanks again man
I'll post screenshots whenever I actually finish areas (w/o lightmaps). Since I still gotta finish asphalt areas and grass (repainted terrain) i can't actually post it if not to just give a idea of what it's becoming.

luizinhuu · Post by **luizinhuu** » 2006-12-31 14:43

plehease venon dont make it another unplayable map for people with less money lol ;(

V3N0N_br · Post by **V3N0N_br** » 2006-12-31 15:15

Trust me, it's playable
If it runs on my PC, it runs on any

Post by **duckhunt** » 2006-12-31 15:27

luizinhuu wrote:plehease venon dont make it another unplayable map for people with less money lol ;(

heh, well there should not be anymore more 'unplayable' maps with v0.5. If this map has lag troubles im sure people like myself can help can help venon using past experience of fixing maps from lag to no lag.
Like I said this is the kind of map that makes for real big tactical battles, and greatly increases the scope of the game.

Hfett · Post by **Hfett** » 2006-12-31 17:29

Yeah i played on the Movie version of Basrah and it was great, no more memory swap on my pc

Venom, your maps is looking great
I think AAS v2 will work better

the option 2 could make USA get traped on the first flag

V3N0N_br · Post by **V3N0N_br** » 2006-12-31 17:49

Ok. Progress with this is real slow and I know, part because the computer and editor is slow (and crashes all time) and part because I'm just lazy sometimes lol.
I tested the new configs, with smaller fog and draw distance, and it just ran smootly with no lag, so don't worry =)
even with near 3000 objects it only lags in the begining (running on my normal low configs at least, the same I use to play online)

Some screenshots I just took. Never mind about texture, as I said, i gotta remake it and been having some trouble, still gonna sort it out ("need uncomprehensed texture!")

Since ground is fckd up, so is the undergrowth. So i guess this will only do good to show static positioning...

This will be stage for a good firefight since there will be a flag. The reason for the flag is that a insurgent leader is suspected to be on one of the houses.

Another flag will be near the tower, in the high city.

a heli crash

A parking lot

Images of the village:

Post by **Rhino** » 2006-12-31 17:54

looks pretty cool, might want to do a reskin for the tunnel entrance static so it looks more like a archway.

here is what i would do for CP layout, with AAS v2.

if you dont understand, each flag group is colour coded, and also has the SGID number on it

thou if you where going to keep the lower CP still in group 4, you would want to add a little bridge or something to allow the US to be able to attack it from another direction than just from the other CP. maybe add afew boats in?

Figisaacnewton · Post by **Figisaacnewton** » 2006-12-31 17:57

I think that would be the best AAS layout. Map looks amazing btw!

Post by **GeZe** » 2006-12-31 17:57

I agree with Rhino, I think that would be the best AAS.

Post by **Rhino** » 2006-12-31 18:00

also you would make the ticket bleed so when one team had all the middle flags, then the ticket bleed would start for the other side. This way you keep most of the fighting in the centre of the map, and once its been pushed out of there, its really your victory after that unless the other team can manage to do a good counter attack if they dont defend all 4 points or dont get a point in the next group fast

Post by **eggman** » 2006-12-31 18:39

wrt the AAS order Whino posted.. looks great for 64p, but you might consider splitting Rhino's #3 group into 2 seperate groups of 2, so you would have 6 SGIDs in 32p instead of 5 (there's more people to defend in 64p).

Or you could make the bottom most #3 CP part of SGID 4, so both would be 3 CP Groups.

Map is looking great .. agree about the arch reskin, embedding your own client texture with appropriate coloring would make a difference. Looks a bit outta place color wise atm.

Also wrt some of th SF objects.... hehe... lightmapping these is a pita. Basically needs to be done in Max (which afaik is a bit tedious to learn but much more efficient and quicker than the BF2 Editor which has a habit of crashing regularly).

Post by **Rhino** » 2006-12-31 19:02

ye that was only 64, 32 and 16 would just be smaller versions, maybe have flags in diffrent places.

V3N0N_br · Post by **V3N0N_br** » 2006-12-31 19:55

Thanks for comments guys.

Hadn't thought of that design Rhino offered. Might be better cause it'll make a sort of a more well concepted frontline giving more attack options, what will suit perfectly the many streets that lead to each flag.
I think that's ok for the 64 version - the only thing i'd change is the botton numb. 2 flag, cause there's not at that spot right now, and there is a small restaurant a lil bit west of that position, close to that round part of the terrain.

Also, I'd make blank one of the 5 insurgent flags, so they'd have to split up in the begining of the round and make a little more difficult for them to reach the group 4 flag. Or just doing what egg said, turning southest #3 CP into #4.

Rhino wrote:thou if you where going to keep the lower CP still in group 4, you would want to add a little bridge or something to allow the US to be able to attack it from another direction than just from the other CP. maybe add afew boats in?

Thought of that too, maybe adding a bridge but wouldn't be very realistic at least I think. If you take a look at the satellite pic of the area you'll find only 1 bridge on the west side of Ramadi and the train bridge (of course I won't sacrifice and screw up gameplay for realism), and this same train bridge passes just south of the Palace (south g4 CP).

The boats will be the best option - although there'll be a black hawk and a MH-6, I'm pretty sure there'll be losses with those helis, and they can't take the whole team. Maybe 1 RIB with a short spawning time, like 1min.

For now balancing is like this:

US-
-2x HMMWV .50
-1x HMMWV TOW
-1x HMMWV Support
-1x M1A2
-1x LAV (?) # On this one, if PR ever get to add the bradley, I'll switch for it. In lots of vids have I found Bradleys in Ramadi.
-1x Blackhawk
-1x MH6
-1x AH6

If you add all the slots in those vehicles you get room for even more than 32 people (if all vehicle slots are used).

After US gets palace, spawns a HMMVW tow.

Insurgents:

*At the mosque, flag #1
-3x T62
-2x BRDM
-2x Hilux
-1x Dirtbike

*at train station, north flag #3
-2x civilian car

Post by **GeZe** » 2006-12-31 20:03

remember to give the insurgents the suicide truck

Post by **eggman** » 2006-12-31 21:35

suicide bombers and mobile spawners need to be used w Insurgents. What you are proposing from a vehicular perspective is a bit too much for Insurgents. And generally I would say that any tanks used for Insurgent scenarios should never respawn.

Also one design consideration to take into account is having many of the CPs NOT have spawn points. Particularly where Insurgents are used, they should be relying on the mobility of the spawn cars.