Do we really need more U.S. Maps?

Who Dares Wins · Post by **Who Dares Wins** » 2009-01-20 17:43

First off I think the PR Devs (And Community Mappers) do a great job, so don't think i'm some ungreatful twat or anything that like.

Looking at the four maps in the 0.85 line up it seems the Ruskies get 1 new map (Okay, they get Assault on Metsia and Fools Road but there not new), Britian gets 1 new map and oh look, the U.S. get 2.

How many maps do the U.S. Currently have? It must be more than half of the overall maps, heck 0.80 was only U.S. Maps.

Personally, i'd like to see a few more maps given to the other Countries (EG: Kashern to the British when the Chinook comes out etc).

google · Post by **google** » 2009-01-20 17:47

Well, you could always make one if you're so adamant about having more British maps.

Boda1 · Post by **Boda1** » 2009-01-20 17:47

NO, we don't. I want more British maps honestly. Especially a British vs. Russian map.

burghUK · Post by **burghUK** » 2009-01-20 17:48

Brits need more maps now that the russians have theived half their good ones.

Who Dares Wins · Post by **Who Dares Wins** » 2009-01-20 17:50

google wrote:Well, you could always make one if you're so adamant about having more British maps.

Was waiting to see how quickly someone would post that...as CrAck said, all our decent ones have been given to the Ruskies.

Post by **Bob_Marley** » 2009-01-20 17:52

There are two US factions and only one British. And with the Malitia maps being pinched by our former communist friends it just means that we'll have to wait it out (or get mapping) to get more British/Russian/whatever maps.

Post by **Rudd** » 2009-01-20 18:01

I'm having a go at mapping myself, but its going to take a long time b4 I'm any good,

I'll try and get something small together though, we'll see.

I want more britsh everything, but its the mapper's choice on what he does. Need more anglophile mappers

Post by **OkitaMakoto** » 2009-01-20 18:07

You realize the same thing happened when the British were added? Factions are often switched around to whoevers newest

But yeah, it basically boils down to who is making the map and what they want to do. Every mapper has their own factions they like, or their own locations, etc. And in the end, they are doing it for fun, so of course they'll want to pick something they will enjoy after a year of putting work into it

I understand you though, but just know that its a free flowing thing that changes with each release. The US Army just got released with .8 so its only natural they get a bit of the limelight. Now the Russians are getting the spotlight

Post by **Rudd** » 2009-01-20 18:10

I say bring back operation compton, rerelease helmand and give inishiale forest (or whatever it was called) to the British, then we're all happy

spartan117gw · Post by **spartan117gw** » 2009-01-20 18:12

more us. nuff said.

Post by **CodeRedFox** » 2009-01-20 18:30

spartan117gw wrote:more us. nuff said.

Wow what a great addition to this thread

Mapping for PR has to do allot with the current wars which the US are more engaged in. The British have there maps coming. But expect to see more Russian map in the near future as its the new hotness.

Looking back Okita said it best.

PFunk · Post by **PFunk** » 2009-01-20 18:34

Just remember that when the Canadians show up the US is losing Archer. Its always shifting. Plus they are adding a new British vs. MEC map to the new release.

Asad Khal

Give it time. With new factions comes a new approach to the map balance. And if you want go bug the Russian Forces people to start a Brit Russ map.

Post by **Outlawz7** » 2009-01-20 18:35

How about in the future we only create maps for PLA, MEC, Insurgents and Militia and have US and GB counting as opfor, that way there will be no more "moar US!!!/GBz!!! mapz!!!"

Scot · Post by **Scot** » 2009-01-20 18:36

I do agree with OP, we have very few maps now in .85 it seems.

However, it is like this every release, the power struggle between Factions for maps, the more factions = less maps per faction(as maps are transported etc) but I mean it depends on how many maps are planned on being released for the new faction, I think with the Germans we won't experience too many map changes, as they have got quite a few maps on the way, specifically made for them.

Everyone wants to see their own faction, with most maps in every game mode. You can see the flaw there, right?

And at Outlawz, you do realise that for every map that comes, it has to have an Opfor, therefore your statement is invalid? Yes the Militia, MEC and PLA are considered Opfor, but you won't get the majority of mappers saying that their country is Opfor. Yes, there is yet to be a Map specifically made for PLA,MEC or Militia, but I doubt if you made a map with GB as Opfor, it would change much. Surprisingly, you would still have the same amount of maps with GB and US, just them being called Opfor...

spartan117gw · Post by **spartan117gw** » 2009-01-20 18:41

ok the maps are based on theature. so thats why we got a lot of us. and we need more

also

how about a map with both british. and us forces. afghanistan? us and canadians working together? would look pretty cool wouldnt it

nuff said

Post by **Rudd** » 2009-01-20 18:44

how about a map with both british. and us forces. afghanistan? us and canadians working together? would look pretty cool wouldnt it

its hard to do, there is a Dutch ANA map in the mix

I can see it can be done, but not in a pub friendly fashion

spartan117gw · Post by **spartan117gw** » 2009-01-20 18:54

its actually tooo easy. first

the init con for the map
looks like this

gameLogic.setTeamName 1 "MEC"
gameLogic.setTeamName 2 "US"

gameLogic.setTeamLanguage 1 "MEC"
gameLogic.setTeamLanguage 2 "English"

gameLogic.setTeamFlag 0 "flag_neutral"
gameLogic.setTeamFlag 1 "flag_mec"
gameLogic.setTeamFlag 2 "flag_us"

gameLogic.setKit 1 0 "MEC_Specops" "mec_light_soldier"
gameLogic.setKit 2 0 "US_Specops" "us_light_soldier"

gameLogic.setKit 1 1 "MEC_Sniper" "mec_light_soldier"
gameLogic.setKit 2 1 "US_Sniper" "us_light_soldier"

gameLogic.setKit 1 2 "MEC_Assault" "mec_heavy_soldier"
gameLogic.setKit 2 2 "US_Assault" "us_heavy_soldier"

gameLogic.setKit 1 3 "MEC_Support" "mec_heavy_soldier"
gameLogic.setKit 2 3 "US_Support" "us_heavy_soldier"

gameLogic.setKit 1 4 "MEC_Engineer" "mec_light_soldier"
gameLogic.setKit 2 4 "US_Engineer" "us_light_soldier"

gameLogic.setKit 1 5 "MEC_Medic" "mec_light_soldier"
gameLogic.setKit 2 5 "US_Medic" "us_light_soldier"

gameLogic.setKit 1 6 "MEC_AT" "mec_heavy_soldier"
gameLogic.setKit 2 6 "US_AT" "us_heavy_soldier"

(thats a standard vanila code) all udo is change the us soldiers to british ones. along with the kit. so say u got british medic. us anti tank. britsh sniper. us spec ops and rifleman and support. etc. stuff like that. tooooo easy

Polka · Post by **Polka** » 2009-01-20 18:58

More everything, less brits.

Scot · Post by **Scot** » 2009-01-20 19:03

Polka wrote:More everything, less brits.

Hey! You got your Ruskies! Get backa in yo hole!

@ spartan, then you would have US and UK forces working on a squad level = not realistic.

Post by **Rudd** » 2009-01-20 19:08

@ spartan, then you would have US and UK forces working on a squad level = not realistic.

the bigger issue imo is seeing american servicemen grabbing crewmen and operating british vehicle and the like

I mean, I'd like to have a map with both US and UK assets, and a clone of every kit that can be spawned with or requested so that you can be british or us...but it just gets so complicated

Do we really need more U.S. Maps?

Do we really need more U.S. Maps?

Re: Do we really need more U.S. Maps?

Re: Do we really need more U.S. Maps?

Re: Do we really need more U.S. Maps?

Re: Do we really need more U.S. Maps?

Re: Do we really need more U.S. Maps?

Re: Do we really need more U.S. Maps?

Re: Do we really need more U.S. Maps?

Re: Do we really need more U.S. Maps?

Re: Do we really need more U.S. Maps?

Re: Do we really need more U.S. Maps?

Re: Do we really need more U.S. Maps?

Re: Do we really need more U.S. Maps?

Re: Do we really need more U.S. Maps?

Re: Do we really need more U.S. Maps?

Re: Do we really need more U.S. Maps?

Re: Do we really need more U.S. Maps?

Re: Do we really need more U.S. Maps?

Re: Do we really need more U.S. Maps?

Re: Do we really need more U.S. Maps?