Project Reality Forums

=(DK)=stoffen_tacticalsup wrote:Removing maps is imho only viable if they are severely hurting the overall standard of the release thus making it slip in regards to things such as Mod of the year etc.

Anything else is just pure nonsense.

Since maps are updated with each release, removing old map frees up resources to be used on the official maps and future maps that fit the way the game is moving.

As noted above, any old retired maps can always be brought back with a map pack instead of being on the general server lists. I for one would like to see the resources directed at new maps instead of updating old maps that no longer fit the game play.

make a poll and let the community deside which 7 maps will removed?

Ejod = great

Ejod just needs some love with new statics.
And maybe a new structuring of the city.

arjan wrote:Ejod = great

Ejod just needs some love with new statics.
And maybe a new structuring of the city.

EXACTLY

I mean its a great map which actually still fits the gameplay of the mod

And maybe just complete re-done as long as the total count of maps is not decreasing i'am happy.

The only maps that should be removed at the moment are Sunset City and Kyongan Ni.

Theve been in far too long and they have turned into BF2 maps, where its just constant death and frustration.

Remove them all except Fallujah and add Sangin and I'll be happy

snooggums wrote:Since maps are updated with each release, removing old map frees up resources to be used on the official maps and future maps that fit the way the game is moving.

As noted above, any old retired maps can always be brought back with a map pack instead of being on the general server lists. I for one would like to see the resources directed at new maps instead of updating old maps that no longer fit the game play.

nevermind

In theory you could play any map that has every been in PR simply by dl'ing the version of PR it was in and adding that map it to the current level's folder (and then hosting a server with that map on it). This works because very rarely (if ever) are objects removed from the static objects database, allowing for continued compatibility. Retro packs are just an organized way of taking maps from older versions and throwing em all together into one package for convenience. Maps from PR that are removed will never really be lost; you just have to have the incentive to download them so you can play em again.

The two issues which cause maps to be removed in the first place are file size and quality. Just as a quick example Sunset City is 87.2 MB in size yet is only a 2*2km map with even less workable playing space, while Battle for Quinling (even if it isnt played very often ) is able to get 4*4kms (4 times the space) with only 77.6 MB. It makes sense to favor larger maps because of this.

My experience with the BF2 editor suggest that the amount of work required to bring a map up to date is minimal. New shadows, assets, lightning, new fields etc can be implemented "easy". In case of the fields, its simply nullifying under/overgrowth and place statics (which is not timeconsumeing depending on the areas). Indeed many things can be edited using the .con files.

hmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmm

Depends on what your changing tbh, and the changed version still needs a rigourous beta test.

I am saddened by loss of maps. But I suspect we will see them again in the R-COM area anyway.

if they are being removed they are removed for good reason. everyone hates change from the old, but sometimes it's needed. i trust that they will make good decisions and with good reason for the changes.

=(DK)=stoffen_tacticalsup wrote:My experience with the BF2 editor suggest that the amount of work required to bring a map up to date is minimal. New shadows, assets, lightning, new fields etc can be implemented "easy". In case of the fields, its simply nullifying under/overgrowth and place statics (which is not timeconsumeing depending on the areas). Indeed many things can be edited using the .con files.

Compared to the work required for new maps, updating old maps is most of the time just something done in a second.

The work required is not the issue as far as I know.

Please, feel free at any time to put in this "minimal" ammount of work / effort to update all the old maps with new statics, fields, lighting, lightmaps, GPOs and everything else that is needed.


PS. Its taken me around 4 days JUST to setup a map for (re-)lightmapping, I can tell you now it requires excatly the same amount of work if I was lightmapping a brand new map.

maybe ur just a noob rhino?

Maybe I should stfu and go outside and play hide and go fcuk myself? ops:

I guess we can conclude that the loss of maps is acceptable compared to the work it would require to bring them on into the next version.

Work, I entirely agree, that is put to better use at making new maps etc.

But Imma retain my opponion on certain maps, but thats just personal.

(Please dont throw away EJOD and Kufrah)

Heck with EJOD and Seven Gates. DON'T TOUCH AL KRUFRAH!!!!

Note: I respect the amount of time that has gone into each and every map and the DEV's that continuously input their own time to VOLUNTEER for this mod without pay, but I just don't enjoy EJOD or Seven Gates as much as other maps.

Hmm, i completely agree that we need to get rid of some old maps, to make room for new ones. The Devs need to focus their work on the new and great looking maps, instead of spending alot of time on outdated ones..
But could you please make a poll to find out which maps people cant live without, and which we can cut out? (Not that you nesseceraly have to do what we say )

Personally i would like to loose Ejod and Jabal, but please not Seven gates! That map is just too epic, despite its small size.

Whatever happens, the new maps better be epic as hell. Which, to be perfectly honest that is what it looks like they're shaping out to be. Sangin, Dragonfly, and the modified Korengal in particular.

Gosu-Rizzle wrote:But could you please make a poll to find out which maps people cant live without, and which we can cut out? (Not that you nesseceraly have to do what we say )

https://www.realitymod.com/forum/f253-v ... -maps.html

Thanks for the link, i guess that can be used. Even though naming your favourite maps is not quite the same thing as choosing the maps you want to leave out...

I'm confident that the upcoming maps will more than fill the gap left by the removed maps.