Project Reality Forums

Stop me now if this is getting off topic.

Remember we're technically in a 'beta' all the time, PR isn't 'finished'.

That's such a formality and overplayed card it isn't valid anymore. PR has come so far that sub-par work should be radically criticized and game-play tested before addition.

Ochamchira wasn't.

Stop me now if this is getting off topic.

I think that's still relevant to the question about what maps are rare and why If anyone thinks we're OT, blame me, please, and don't lock the thread because of it.

The thing I mean is - and that also gets us back to the previous discussion - that even if a map that is 'experimental' is added to PR, the servers can always just cease to run it, as they did with many that, for instance, CTD'd or have bad gameplay, and eventually underplayed maps will be removed anyway, so all we really lose is a few MB of hard disk space until the next version is released. I think for a game that isn't really finished (which, just because it's an overplayed card, doesn't make it invalid) that's acceptable.

The developers comment on the 'developer standard', that all maps should reach each-others quality and build. Maps such as Ochamchira and Wanda Shan are counter-examples to this statement. Constant improvement should be the aim, not churning out unfinished or low quality product over time.

'You've set the bar, now reach it'

If we go by the logic that 'the players can just opt out of being involved', then Sunset City, OGT and Ejod should not have been removed. They were "flawed", but servers can just not choose them, right? It wasn't like they were having a sizable impact on the download.

dtacs, shut up...

As to Iron Eagle, server admins should check out the alternative layer, it'll probably play much better...

dtacs wrote: Only final products should be put in the game, not testbeds.

So how can you tell something is final if you never tested it?

I am sad that Battle for Qinling is never played anymore. The alternative layer is so awesome... Scout cars, APCs, tanks, AAVs, transport choppers, attack choppers, bombers. mimimimimi

dtacs quit acting like you can interpret the developers intentions because you can't. None of us can. They have the right to choose what is going to be released and removed and I'm sure that there is a ton of debate and feedback to sift through in any case.

dtacs, shut up...

x2

You get what you pay for gentlemen, and in that regard I think PR has provided great bang for buck

I do want to see some maps played more, but we do want more specific feedback on a map by map basis.

"I don't like Burning Sands because there's not enough flags going in the city, more flags in the city would be better" was some feedback I've received, and I've completed the work required for next version for this to be corrected.

"I don't like X, so do Y"

thats the feedback we want, and we want LOTS of it on a map by map basis; the community can really help us here to keep everything cool and up to standard by simply writing down their thoughts in a constructive manner.

The problem is that if a map doesn't give good first impressions when it's released, it's pretty much doomed forever. People just leave as soon as a "bad" map starts loading, which results in a round with broken teams that eventually spirals into unserious and non-constructive gameplay, which in turn make even more people hate the map. A bad cycle in other words.

The only way to change this is to not leave as soon as a "bad" map loads. I personally always give it a try and only leave if things aren't going well after 20 minutes or so. And it actully pays of - I ended up having fun on a lot of maps I generally didn't like.

Some servers like to run different maps and/or layers.

Iron Eagle, Wanda (RIP), and qinlin, but as the map loads in you can watch the players DC.

At PRTA we've come to the conclusion 'rare' maps can only be run at peak with a good crowd on, and even then it's scary....

The old harcoded player stuff again, just look at VBF and Karkand.

Farks wrote:The problem is that if a map doesn't give good first impressions when it's released, it's pretty much doomed forever. People just leave as soon as a "bad" map starts loading, which results in a round with broken teams that eventually spirals into unserious and non-constructive gameplay, which in turn make even more people hate the map. A bad cycle in other words.

The only way to change this is to not leave as soon as a "bad" map loads. I personally always give it a try and only leave if things aren't going well after 20 minutes or so. And it actully pays of - I ended up having fun on a lot of maps I generally didn't like.

^This.

As much as I hate the thought of Siege of Ochamchira I would actually give it a go for the sake of variety. Shame that there isn't a server that only rotates the most unplayed maps...or even an event with theme of "maps we hate", with the respective clan showing the public how to play them properly.

Arcturus_Shielder wrote:or even an event with theme of "maps we hate", with the respective clan showing the public how to play them properly.

lol I can see a lot of people signing up with that title

But ye, best way to get unpopular maps played is with some kind of organised event


I also think dtacs and Farks have a point where too many maps over the last few releases have been released before they are really ready to be released and as such, even if improved in the future players don't really want to spend a few hrs seeing if anything has changed... We need to get back into developing and testing maps more before there first release

Hmmmm there's an idea for server 2 this weekend, *NwA* party under played maps?

Iron Ridge is a rare map to play too, especially the Insurgency mode. which is a real shame because that is the best layout for that map.

*NwA*Orford wrote:Hmmmm there's an idea for server 2 this weekend, *NwA* party under played maps?

I would seriously look forward to that. And believe it or not, I actually thought in registering in your website just to suggest this.

SISU 128 plays it quite often, truly an awesome map

*NwA*Orford wrote:Hmmmm there's an idea for server 2 this weekend, *NwA* party under played maps?

Me and my mates are in, so gogogo

Jolly wrote:If your friendly vehicles are noobs and your forces lost all of them.
You can image this: Lots of Inf-man walk to next flag (when there is bad flag layou, they will be mad)in iron eagle. It seems take a ceuntry to get the next flag.

I believe such map like iron eagle is great! But we need nice players if we want play it.

What jolly said. On large maps make sure you take some transport along. You cant always rely on 1 transport helicopter, it might get shot down. Shoot, supplies and transport. Get the last 2 done and you will get to do more of the first.

I have seen momentum on those maps stop because

1. People got stuck on a flag

and

2. people did not set additional fobs to attack the last flags.

saXoni wrote:Does that many people really have issues with the map?

If you have Windows Xp you can only play Shija Valley Skirmish.

I love iron eagle.

dtacs wrote: If we go by the logic that 'the players can just opt out of being involved', then Sunset City, OGT and Ejod should not have been removed. They were "flawed"...

Sunset was just a joke. It was just outdated and needed to go. EJOD was pretty good but really suffered for its lack of enterable buildings and in this current PR would be a TOTAL wank considering mortars.

And we come to OGT... oh my. I was PISSED when they removed that. No jungle maps in PR annoys me. The usual tagline "Too small, we're into bigger maps". Then they add Gaza city which is like Sunset city but with less ability to flank.

I get the idea of the statement about where the Devs want to go with map design, more combined arms, 4km, etc, but then it seems contradictory when we have really weak and yes indeed small maps being added that seem to be more flawed than some classics like OGT.

I personally wish there were more straight up infantry maps that didn't rely on a never-played Inf layer to showcase straight up infantry fighting. The biggest problem with PR maps these days is placing a big emphasis on combined arms for BASIC operations. This means things like the infantry being totally screwed if you happen to have tards in your trans squads crashing your assets every 2 minutes.

A nice jungle map like OGT was great cause you didn't need the landrovers, you didn't even need FOBs as much on the far side. In a jungle they were even a liability, even if the map was twice as big. Map definitely needed a refresh, but compared to Ocham or Gaza, it hands down wins in my book.

Learning to play infantry properly in the jungle is the best bet. Its too bad you can't do that anymore.

Shijia however is epic. I wish it was on more. I think that does hit the balance on assets and infantry.

Maybe if all the servers agreed to unilaterally pick more interesting map rotations we could revamp the way we play PR. If I logged on and saw 2 servers running Shijia at the same time rather than Kokan, Kokan, Muttrah, Fallujah, Muttrah, I'd get pretty excited.