Fly Map ...

Sgt1_Jackson · Post by **Sgt1_Jackson** » 2008-04-22 19:06

Hello, i don't know if i'm the first and i didn't find any other topics of it, i just want a real, big, fly map, and by night. Is this possible? or do you have a deadline of how big the map can be? i just want an airbase like in Al Basrah and just a map where you can make real dogfights. Sorry if this has been suggested earlier.

- Sgt1 Jackson

Sgt1_Jackson · Post by **Sgt1_Jackson** » 2008-04-22 19:14

black-wolf wrote:LOL! Kashan desert by night!

Bigger, a map where u can fly 30 seconds straight without get out of the map or something ...

Cyrax-Sektor · Post by **Cyrax-Sektor** » 2008-04-22 19:15

64 jets at night? Might be cool, except for the frequent crashes. Doesn't really fit PR tho.

Sgt1_Jackson · Post by **Sgt1_Jackson** » 2008-04-22 19:16

Cyrax-Sektor wrote:64 jets at night? Might be cool, except for the frequent crashes. Doesn't really fit PR tho.

NVG! ..... why would u crash when u got NVG? (See you in thebattlearena.com now

Sgt1Winters)

Post by **Rudd** » 2008-04-22 19:18

Sgt1_Jackson wrote:NVG! ..... why would u crash when u got NVG? (See you in thebattlearena.com now Sgt1Winters)

the server crash variety- all night maps seem to have it

Cyrax-Sektor · Post by **Cyrax-Sektor** » 2008-04-22 19:19

Sgt1_Jackson wrote:NVG! ..... why would u crash when u got NVG? (See you in thebattlearena.com now Sgt1Winters)

It better be good NVG, not like SF. You couldn't see anything with all that static in the Apache on Leviathan.

Didn't think of game crashes, more mid-air crashes.

Who are you? I'm bad with names.

I was going to hop in just now.

Sgt1_Jackson · Post by **Sgt1_Jackson** » 2008-04-22 19:22

Game crashed, im Sgt1Winters ingame, going in again, dont ride over my IED

[Edit1: Sorry, i didn't know maps crash when u make it by night.]

Post by **Spec** » 2008-04-22 19:54

Isnt kashan at the size limit already?

Scot · Post by **Scot** » 2008-04-22 19:59

dude, it would never really happen in PR, doesnt fit it at all.

Post by **Pride** » 2008-04-22 20:00

You can make maps bigger than 4kmx4km, however there is a big issue with the colour maps, which means that the map looks **** unless you cover everything but the middle section with water (I think)

Post by **Spec** » 2008-04-22 20:19

hmm... yes, then a huge naval operation, carrier vs. carrier or carrier vs. island would be... wait

Wasnt there a wake island remake like that planned?

Scot · Post by **Scot** » 2008-04-22 20:21

a huge naval operation would be sweet, however, think of how many peoples computers would grab a taxi to the nearest bridge, tie a rope round the edge and then them, and then jump!

Mora · Post by **Mora** » 2008-04-22 20:24

https://www.realitymod.com/forum/f66-co ... emake.html ...

Its not night but still very big!!

CAS_117 · Post by **CAS_117** » 2008-04-22 20:28

Well I consider the amount of firepower brought to bear on the Taliban, an irregular army, fighting somewhat under staffed NATO forces. Compare that to the number of casualties each round in PR, usually 150-200 per engagement. I'm thinking that in a conventional war, the respective armies would have 1-2 littlebirds with rockets on most maps. I'm not saying lets have B-52 with 5 minute respawn, but the complete lack of any kind of fire support on most of the maps is pretty absurd. I mean we're fighting the Taliban and we're still using a dozen bombs on them, but in PR having to C4 tanks because theres only two Eyrx launchers is not my idea of "modern". How can there be more tanks than ATGMs?

If we fought a conventional war with another country it would be much more intense. I feel that trying to make PR fit the slow paced wars against insurgents in Afghanistan and Iraq, when the game is more often about fighting highly mobile and aggressive conventional militaries can contribute to some of the spammier parts of PR. Places like Seven Gates and fools road, where the defense just sits in their base and the attackers charge it (and god forbid they build a bunker), can lead to some pretty unrealistic "fire fights". Just as a rule, if they have tanks, infantry have air. If they have air, you have SAMs, or more air.

Places like Qwai when fighting Chinese armor, I'd figure the US would at least have a Bradley or in this case a few littlebirds with hydras. Same with most maps with armor on them. Just charging a flag repeatedly, and having the enemy just respawn in Bunkers over and over has gotten real thin. Indestructible buildings ect. All just make this so much gameyer than it should be. Its like WW2 or WW1 with no trenches.

dude, it would never really happen in PR, doesnt fit it at all.

Oh and if you hate vehicles, theres always Americas Army or Insurgency mod.

Zimmer · Post by **Zimmer** » 2008-04-22 21:04

As Cas said even if pr is set to a future war not to long in the future we still run and plant explosives at thetanks instead of designate fastair at the tank or presise artillery or any other anti tank asset. I still wonder why commander cant have more tactical assets then two alternatives be bob the builder or wait for an hour so you can drop a jdam and then wait an hour drop jdam.

xxncxx · Post by **xxncxx** » 2008-04-22 21:18

Well i have a small suggestion if you guys have so much aircraft you never use in this game then why dont you add more aircraft based maps

Alex6714 · Post by **Alex6714** » 2008-04-22 21:19

Cas, you make a very good point there.

Post by **Rudd** » 2008-04-22 21:28

Alex6714 wrote:Cas, you make a very good point there.

+1

Alex6714 · Post by **Alex6714** » 2008-04-22 22:59

In my opinion it should be like this:

64 player maps (just using the size to diferenciate):

Lots of assets, not too much, but enough. Lower respawn on assets, all out multi-role warfare.

32 player versions of the maps:

Like they are now, less assets, slightly longer respawn, a bit more slow infantry friendly.

16 player maps:

Infantry based, maybe the odd light vehicle.

Now thats just the general idea, but I think it could work.