Project Reality Forums

With 1.0 looming out there somewhere in the foreseeable future i am curious as to whether or not caves will still be present in 1.0. I don't think many people doubt how unbalancing they are, those defending caves almost always are guaranteed to win the round (there's exceptions of course). With 1.0 ironing out most of the flaws itd be nice to see caves removed, IRL they just cave them in or drop thermobaric weapons into them but with the limits of the BF2 engine this just isnt possible so i think removing them all together would be the best solution (unless you can get flamethrowers).

Good examples of unbalancing caves are:
Kozelsk
Lashkar valley
theres a few other ones that have escaped me but those are good examples.

Caves are ok and are easy to take if you know how to. You just haven't tried different approaches.

Nah they are one of the awesome things in PR. I rarely see the enemy team hold a cache or objective inside a cave for that long. At some point their defenses break somewhere and your team makes it in.

Even with 3 full Squads, disciplined to the max, you will not hold the tunnel on Kozelsk forever if you are playing against a balanced team (my own experience). The secret tunnel/cave entering weapons are HATs/LATs ... as soon as the enemy gets the idea to start using them on you, you are pretty much screwed. You might dodge the first 3 or 5...but at some point they will hit or wound you and the enemy INF will overrun your squads position.

Been there, done that several times...on both sides.

Caves are ok and brings bit of variety in the gameplay

Only cave that seems to be impossible is the cave in laskhar in A7. The only way to get the cache is by climbing a long ladder which is really easy to defend. You cant even c4 the cache from the top or from below. I remember that we defended that cache with 4players in 128 server for entire round. Even the hordes of 8man squad blops had no chance

waldov wrote:(unless you can get flamethrowers).

; - )

7char

Finrar wrote:I remember that we defended that cache with 4players in 128 server for entire round. Even the hordes of 8man squad blops had no chance

And you didn't run out of ammo?

What Fin said.

Daniel wrote:And you didn't run out of ammo?

Not with a cache 5m away. That lashkar cave is hell for attackers if the enemy is prepared. But in general caves a different place to fight and i like them. Some more could spice up some maps...

The best way to get cave caches is to destroy the enemy hideouts around it. Take away their reinforcements and sooner or later their defenses will fail.

Best tools for caves are grenades, lats, hats, C4 and full auto.

I'm not a big fan of caves, however if you're on a team with great teamwork, attacking and taking over a cave is quite easy if coordinated properly.

I only have one problem with them. They should be way, waaaaay darker. Underground area without light source should be really hard to navigate, which'd make sneaking in easier, too.

[R-MOD]Spec wrote:I only have one problem with them. They should be way, waaaaay darker. Underground area without light source should be really hard to navigate, which'd make sneaking in easier, too.

That would be awesome if the caves were dark. Is this possible though?

Doubt it.^^

labonte95 wrote:That would be awesome if the caves were dark. Is this possible though?

Maybe suggest it? I doubt it is an *** (Already Suggested Suggestion) already... (Btw, who knows if the coders/mappers worked on the cave-lightning alread since we waiting sooo long for PR 1.0, so just judging by time they could do it theoretically...

waldov wrote:(unless you can get flamethrowers).

I like this solution the best.

[R-MOD]Spec wrote:Doubt it.^^

Oh it's very possible, just a matter of tweaking the lighting values of a map.

Sure that wouldn't affect the inside of buildings, shadows of trees, etc equally?

Whaaat...
Kozelsk is such a great map because of its cave,
I had a lot great memories with that cave in PR,battles around and inside of it . . .
Especially if you are defending it . . .