MAPS NEED TO BE SMALLER

pasfreak · Post by **pasfreak** » 2008-01-29 02:41

right now, on a maxed out server its 32 vs 32, which is like platoon vs platoon on a 6x6 kilometer map? come on, how realistic is that?

debate.

Post by **Mosquill** » 2008-01-29 02:52

Hell no! Big maps is one of those things I like PR for. We need more maps like Kashan and Qinling.

Heskey · Post by **Heskey** » 2008-01-29 02:53

Mosquill wrote:Hell no! Big maps is one of those things I like PR for. We need more maps like Kashan and Qinling.

No we bleeding don't need anymore 3 hour tank-frag fest team-kill happyslap maps.

I'm not voting because I want maps to remain their current size, with the exception of the two quoted above.

Ironcomatose · Post by **Ironcomatose** » 2008-01-29 02:55

I think the DEVs could look at some of the bigger maps and "cute out" the places where there is very little or no fighting. That or they can make those places more useful. I say look as AL Basrah as an example. Almost every area of that map is usefull and is traversed often.

Of course i ask this to be don in the sake of optimization for better lag free play. If what i suggest has no affect on that then hell why not have the maps that big.

CDN-SMOKEJUMPER · Post by **CDN-SMOKEJUMPER** » 2008-01-29 03:20

Mosquill wrote:Hell no! Big maps is one of those things I like PR for. We need more maps like Kashan and Qinling.

I go play something else while Kashan is on and the drop in numbers whenever I see it come up tells me that others find it boring as hell also. The worst part is I would rather play PR but as I have a job I'm not wasting any of my gaming time being bored silly for three hours.

BloodBane611 · Post by **BloodBane611** » 2008-01-29 03:27

32 players doesn't really represent a platoon. There is a high concentration of heavy weapons, so 1 squad in PR really has the heavy weapons of a full squad with 1/2 to 2/3 the personnel. Vehicles only taking 2 crew, whereas a tank in real life would have 4, and an APC generally 3 or 4, means that you get a lot more armor density as well.

As far as realism goes, in real life you have a huge amount of space to operate and maneuver in. PR accurately reflects this.

SGT.JOKER · Post by **SGT.JOKER** » 2008-01-29 03:33

we need some more infantry/transport maps is all, more maps simmilar to Qwai River would be nice, maps like that are perfect if you ask me

VipersGhost · Post by **VipersGhost** » 2008-01-29 08:05

The map size is fine imo but the bigger maps seem to have left the infantry out to dry a bit. Not to say its all bad but I think they could use some big adjustments in that area.

mammikoura · Post by **mammikoura** » 2008-01-29 09:20

pasfreak, first of all you are missing an option from the poll. Something like "I like the current size, no need to change anything"

And yeah it might be 32 vs 32. But during the 2 hours of so hundreds of people get killed. If there is 400 per side then it's more like 400 vs 400 instead of 32 vs 32.

As for the map sizes, I don't see anything wrong with them. Kashan and Quinling suck for infantry players (imo) but then again those are maps where a lot of attention is directed towards the use of vehicles. If you don't like this kind of maps then don't play them (I rarely do, for example haven't played kashan after the 0.6 beta) but they should still stay because there are a lot of people who like them.

Post by **Masaq** » 2008-01-29 11:12

Pasfreak, you're clearly missing the point of Project Reality, which is to make the most realistic BF2 experience possible on the engine.

Maps are large because the real world is large.
Maps are large because people need space to manouver.
Maps are large because the Devs don't WANT 24/7 constant combat action in their mod.
Maps are large because as many have said, you're NOT putting a platoon up against another platoon - you're putting most of a battalion into battle on most of the large-scale maps.

If you want to use the "it's 32 players against 32 players, and that's only a platoon" argument, fine - we'll cut out tickets to 32 and give players one life each, shall we? Then we can have some single platoon-based maps.

Pain · Post by **Pain** » 2008-01-29 11:32

I voted: make them bigger

In my opinion max sized maps are one of the best features of this mod.
This force teamwork and communications and give much more tactical aspects to the game.

The absolutly best map atm is basrah. I think kashan is a bit empty it could need 1-2 towns more and more inf cover.

Ejod is bad designed in my opinion for this size, the city part should raise into the hills...

Maps should have more buildings at all, because tanks can climb all hills here in the game, but thats not realistic. They can climb and drive trough rough area but i dont think they can climb on real world hilltops. To compensate this there should be more cover all over the maps.

I know this would raise some pc specs, but for better and bigger games you need better pcs. And here you dont need buy a crysis pc maybe a new gfx or ram is enough....

my 2 cents

Ragni<RangersPL> · Post by **Ragni<RangersPL>** » 2008-01-29 11:39

Where is my option in the poll? "We need a mix of both, medium(32) and big(64) maps"

Post by **Rudd** » 2008-01-29 11:54

mammikoura wrote:pasfreak, first of all you are missing an option from the poll. Something like "I like the current size, no need to change anything"

And yeah it might be 32 vs 32. But during the 2 hours of so hundreds of people get killed. If there is 400 per side then it's more like 400 vs 400 instead of 32 vs 32.

As for the map sizes, I don't see anything wrong with them. Kashan and Quinling suck for infantry players (imo) but then again those are maps where a lot of attention is directed towards the use of vehicles. If you don't like this kind of maps then don't play them (I rarely do, for example haven't played kashan after the 0.6 beta) but they should still stay because there are a lot of people who like them.

Cant argue with the arithmatic,

Kashan is **** for infantry, until the bunkers are in play- then organised infantry squads can rock.

Big maps need teamplay, but small maps are good for training purposes

fludblud · Post by **fludblud** » 2008-01-29 11:59

i love the big maps, i just wish you could have more people in them.

Cp · Post by Cp » 2008-01-29 12:42

Saying that kashan is bad because its hard to play infantry is like saying hills of hamgyong is bad because it lacks armor.

Kashan is a vehicle based map and hamgyong is a infantry based map, the whole point with having multiple maps is that everyone can atleast have 1 favorite map with their favorite kind of gameplay. just because you dont like vehicle based maps dosent mean that they should be removed, just change server.

I'm starting to get sick of the urban maps because its starting to get dull to zerg a tiny city until one team runs out of resources, I would like more maps like Fool road, the larger maps are often won by the team that can manouver and flank the best and not by the one who manages to zerg the most flags.

This is my 2 cents and I respect that you dont like tanks and Im not saying that they should remove any of urban maps, im just saying that I want more maps like fools road.

hx.bjoffe · Post by **hx.bjoffe** » 2008-01-29 12:49

I got some real ambivalence to the direction of PR, where the downside is the appearant rule: All new maps are to be kashan-sized.
I hope for more mid-sized maps, the large ones are too tiring for me in the long run.

Take Qwai, Jabal, Ejod etc. From a time long passed. Perfect sizing.

I would also love pure infantery-maps in production. Seeing we're loosing all the ones we had. God, that would be great. This does NOT mean they have to be super-cramped and tiny...

...but i'm just here for the ride, ofcourse.

It is of course heart-breaking when developers and players have different dreams. C'est la vie.

PS. Who made Mao Valley? Perfect map for a re-make.

Jagular · Post by **Jagular** » 2008-01-29 12:56

Any way more x32 maps will be nice

Post by **Rhino** » 2008-01-29 12:58

hx.bjoffe wrote:I got some real ambivalence to the direction of PR, where the downside is the appearant rule: All new maps are to be kashan-sized.

dunno where you got that idea from... We only have 1 map in the works at the moment that is a 1024x4 (kashan/qinling size), all the other maps that are in the works are 1024x2 (qwai/basrah size) with one being a 512x2 (OGT size).

Cp20000 has the general idea, in each map we try to offer something diffrent to suit everyone and to keep the gameplay of the mod "fresh" and diffrent. If every map was the same, everyone would get board of the mod real quickly.

hx.bjoffe · Post by **hx.bjoffe** » 2008-01-29 13:14

^ ok sorry for that, Rhino. Guess you're referring to Baracuda?
I thought Fools Road were about same-sized, but then its just the feeling it gives me.

I'm not trying to be a arrogant whiny prick, this is simply my personal opinion. And i know im just one out of very many players around. I love the changes made to gameplay, still i don't favour the maps that's come with the past couple of releases. And its not simply nostalgia.

You got my hopes sky-high for Muttrah2, man. Get back to work, you know you want to please me