How PRMM Should be Played

EON_MagicMan · Post by **EON_MagicMan** » 2006-02-05 18:59

Three words: 16-player maps. Without armor.

Seriously, these have been my best experiences, because they have few flags, and it's good even with up to 50 players. When 32 player maps come on (mainly stock maps), one side always ends up getting their clocks cleaned, everyone's all over the map (mostly not even with their squads), and there are usually so many flags.

One of the most exciting games I've had was today on Zatar Wetlands (16 player version, no vehicles), with about 30 people playing. People generally stuck with their squads, and we had huge firefights that lasted 10 minutes or more, with some squads trying flanking movements.

Maybe I'm just a stickler for infantry, but armor ruins it for me. When you have both sides using lots of armor, infantry doesn't stand a chance, and even when there's one tank, there isn't much sense going Anti Tank (only having a pistol is crippling, especially if there is only one tank roaming around). Don't get me wrong, Steel Thunder and El Alamein are pretty decent maps, and the whole all vehicles thing is fun, but often times in more infantry oriented maps, it ruins it.

So basically, from what I've observed, the best maps are small (and they all of a sudden become so much bigger in this mod, partly because of player speeds but mostly because you literally fight for every single inch), and they are simplistic and linear in terms of base layout (3 bases is perfect).

In the end, no one really likes the rounds that last 10 minutes and end with a score of 287-0, because one team loses out bad, and the match is over quickly. The best thing is just having a hell of a fight the whole time.

I hope this thread gets the attention of the server administrators for the main PRMM server, because more 16 player maps would be appreciated I think by a lot of people. It also shows new people what (I think) this mod is really about!

It just isn't fun to be getting killed by Tanks and APCs from 500 meters away, and then waiting another 35 seconds just to do it again!

Post by **fuzzhead** » 2006-02-05 20:01

MagicMan:

I agree with you, as it stands the bf2 vanilla maps with all the armored vehicles enabled are just annoying, they offer very little teamplay and are not fun at all with project reality.

I enjoy Armored Vehicles coordinating with infantry in maps. My problem with them is their spawns. An armored APC or MBT should be a REAL asset for the team. When its destroyed, it should not come back for a very long time, if at all. This way its used in a realistic context, and it is valued much more than currently.

4thRangerDiv. · Post by **4thRangerDiv.** » 2006-02-05 20:05

I also agree, but i think there should be huge 64 maps with lots of armor, because with the mods to the tanks and apc's, the battle wont have 2 tanks 3 feet away blowing eachother away at piont blank. Therefor when there a huge armor battle, it will be across the hole map, witch would make it alot of fun.

DEDMON5811 · Post by **DEDMON5811** » 2006-02-05 20:16

Well I dont know how many times I have said that I am not a big fan of armor especcially on small maps.

I would love to see all the maps played as 16 player maps with up to 64 players on them. It leads to some of the most amazing Firefights and fun battles ever.

torio · Post by **torio** » 2006-02-06 14:22

And without this annoying artillery;
WOW

Rifleman · Post by **Rifleman** » 2006-02-06 14:56

I enjoy Armored Vehicles coordinating with infantry in maps. My problem with them is their spawns. An armored APC or MBT should be a REAL asset for the team. When its destroyed, it should not come back for a very long time, if at all. This way its used in a realistic context, and it is valued much more than currently.

100% Agree!

Braddock096 · Post by **Braddock096** » 2006-02-06 20:34

Also agreed. I enjoy playing AT on tank maps provided I stick with a good, communicating squad.