Project Reality Forums

Perhaps an edited Karkand with a carrier and helos, or Jalabad with an expanded city, or Highway Tampa with, oh wait that sux.

If someone wants to audit those vanilla maps i would encourage to make Zatar with a similiar gameplay to Barracuda (Only transport choopers for the US team + 2 attack hueys) against mec with only transport trucks with random cp's.

That could work with almost every vanilla Map that have a carrier, but you would need boats since it would be easy to place a firebase with an AA aiming to the carrier.

Although Oman was alright I think Zatar was amazing. Also I see nothing wrong with using the vanilla BF2 maps. As long as they can provide a good PR experiance I say put them in.

[R-CON]Hfett wrote:If someone wants to audit those vanilla maps i would encourage to make Zatar with a similiar gameplay to Barracuda (Only transport choopers for the US team + 2 attack hueys) against mec with only transport trucks with random cp's.

That could work with almost every vanilla Map that have a carrier, but you would need boats since it would be easy to place a firebase with an AA aiming to the carrier.

yes, i really want to do that. or maybe make a new map all together

[R-CON]Hfett wrote:If someone wants to audit those vanilla maps i would encourage to make Zatar with a similiar gameplay to Barracuda (Only transport choopers for the US team + 2 attack hueys) against mec with only transport trucks with random cp's.

That could work with almost every vanilla Map that have a carrier, but you would need boats since it would be easy to place a firebase with an AA aiming to the carrier.

I've been strongly considering taking Rhino up on his challenge here, which I think is what he does that in the hope of... :\

In the wake of the way the poll was phrased, I thought more carefully about all the vBF2 maps. I feel that there are a few maps that have life in them for PR, just not the way they were forced to play out in vBF2. Zatar was actually just a really good map for PR that forced a lot of interesting gameplay, Oman is a lot more questionable, true, but nothing in there couldn't be tweaked - it's like Muttrah's amphibious, combined arms big brother. Sharqi would actually make a very interesting infantry AAS map IMO, but only for Skirmish numbers. Even Karkand of the Grenadespam would make a pretty cool 16/32 person Insurgency map if hiding places could be found. Most vBF2 maps are just too small and choke pointed to work for combined arms, but would work alright for infantry - lack of enterables is the biggest problem for them.

In my humble opinion, Zatar worked just fine as it was, and doesn't need much at all in the way of changes from it's .75 incarnation. At most a rocket huey or two. It doesn't need to be rebuilt from the ground up to work because it was working fine already in Counter-Attack mode, and was probably PR's best example of how the concept was meant to work.

I bet you I could expand the Karkand city and make an insurgency map... Now imagine if a mapper even better than me did it... it would be one awesome level. I still like the idea of a carrier and helos in that level... with asymmetrical battle and air assets to drop troops in, you wouldn't worry about choke points. If audited well, all of the bf2 levels, even Highway Tampa, could make good PR levels.

Why say no? What's wrong with more PR maps?

GreedoNeverShot wrote:I bet you I could expand the Karkand city and make an insurgency map... Now imagine if a mapper even better than me did it... it would be one awesome level. I still like the idea of a carrier and helos in that level... with asymmetrical battle and air assets to drop troops in, you wouldn't worry about choke points. If audited well, all of the bf2 levels, even Highway Tampa, could make good PR levels.

Why say no? What's wrong with more PR maps?

Karkand is to small, it could work for clan matches with Skirmish, but on a public sever with 64 players it would be the old days of nade spawn.

Zaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaattttaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaarrrrr!!!!!

You can NEVER have too many maps, it keeps gameplay interesting and fresh (at least until AASv3 is fixed, even then more maps = more playability)

Didn't enjoy any of the Vanilla maps myself and if i'm honest i was pleased to see the back of them!

Pr always felt so tacked on when you played those maps and when the dev's have worked so hard to make some of the best maps of the Bf2 modding scene it seems dam ungrateful to be asking for EA shoddiness back really.

No, PR has plenty of good maps for me to play!

for me

Personaly I would like to see some BF2 maps with changes in the flags, I want to say that I would like to have BF2 maps with less flags basically for infantry combat(try the BF2 maps wich some of we may dont knew that exist). I always think that to have a lot of maps is good, would be good and real start in a new map which most of the people dont know the role. We have a lot of servers so we can have a lot of maps.
Im sure that PRteam will know how to do a BF2 maps good for PR 0.8 talking about infantry combat basically. But sincerelly I hated the BF2 demo map in PR.

Anyway PR has a very good map named "fools road" for me this is the best map in BF2 and mods, and european servers(I dont know the others) does not play it too much, I tried the new modegame without flags(I dont know how is called) in this map and was wonderfoul for me(may a little sorth round).

*offtopic: I love "korengal valley" map despite I had to change the graphic settings to play PR, congrats and thanks to coderedfox. I think that I saw your next map WIP and seems similar style, this seems nice.
And I think that "bi ming" is pretty good for 64players I dont know why you put that is for 32.

Well sorry for the post and dont ban me for my english

Anyone intersted in mapping, I encourage you to start mapping from a fresh start.

Take it from someone who has edited a few vanilla maps, in the end it is just not worth it, because vanilla level designers were not thinking about realism when they laid out their cities, hills, forests etc, there is so much things you need to improve on a vanilla map, its much easier just to create a new map, which thankfully SEVERAL of you have now done, which means the sky is the limit in terms of new PR maps.

If you havnt noticed the dev journal or community modding section, PR is currently growing in mappers exponentially, the days of having to settle for sub-par custom maps from totalbf2 or using vanilla maps are over... were now free to take maps 100% from our community, which are custom made to fit PR gameplay and made with realism and attention to detail in mind.

The bf2 maps are probably most feasible for the skirmish mode but Im way more interested in the new pr maps and ways to use them
Ive never got round to playing that last patch map bf2 got though

Zatar was my first PR map and man it was so awesome. I remember holding the centre of the map with my and other squads with hardly any reinforcments or AT weapons against the MEC Armored reinforcments. Good times...

NO Vast majority of vanilla maps are just not made for PR..nothing real on em 'nuff said.

I prefer new maps for sure.

I'm just going to throw one out there one more time - this thread was never meant to be about Vanilla maps in general (which it seems clear is what the poll is about, and what the majority of replies are related to), it was meant to be about Zatar and Oman. As far as I see, with current gameplay (excluding Skirmish mode), these are the only BF2 maps that are really solid for PR without substantial changes.

Zatar was (and still is) the best example of counter-attack that PR has had. Seven Gates is a great map, and works wonderfully on Counter-Attack mode, but it still doesn't work anywhere near as well as Zatar did at letting one side get hammered for an hour, then break out and hammer them right back, while still allowing both sides a lot of room for creative play (engineer drops on the MEC tanks anyone?).

Oman had its problems. For starters, the density of heavy vehicles was probably too high for such a small map. Gameplay was also a lot faster paced than the Devs want us to be playing in 0.8, but that isn't a necessarily a big problem. As with most vBF2 carrier maps, the carrier was just a bit too close to the shore for helicopter comfort on deck. Muttrah city seems to want to be what Oman was, but the pace just isn't the same - it's a lot slower and has a tendancy to turn into a static "Camp on the roof with HAT and AA," fest. Don't get me wrong for a second; Muttrah is a great map in its own right, but it doesn't replace what Oman was - an amphibious assualt gone very wrong.

Oman? Great?

Not with the flag distributions its not.

Muttrah is 10x the map than Oman will ever be.

Meester wrote:Oman? Great?

Not with the flag distributions its not.

Muttrah is 10x the map than Oman will ever be.

+1 on that front.

If i want to play vBF2 ill use launch vBF2's .exe

I think PR as more than what it needs to beat vBF2 when it comes to overall map quality.