Project Reality Forums

"4km maps are the way PR is meant to be played, and we need more of them than Kashan and Quinling with more detail".

Just an FYI: there is currently many 4km maps under development for v0.9. These large maps will be corner stone for larger assets and will eventually become the standard size of a PR map - so instead of 2km being the "normal" size map, there will be just as many 2km as 4km maps, and 1km will be somewhat rare.

Smaller maps = smaller assets, cramming needlessly large and complex assets onto tiny maps is great to have an arcade feel, but to have these assets truly behave in realistic fashion and engage enemy forces at realistic ranges, the maps MUST have large distances between objective areas and MUST have large view distances.

Future of combined arms fighting in PR is on the large 4km maps. 2km will be mixed but not contain much large assets (rare exceptions) and 1km will be exclusively infantry/mech inf.

Basically up until this point we've only ever had 2 4km maps (kashan and qinling). With the next update, we will have much more variety in larger maps.

v0.86 vehicle and map tweaks was in prep for these new maps coming in v0.9, as we want to give vehicles as realistic behavior as possible but that just cant happen by sticking these deadly assets on tiny maps.

There is some community members who will mindlessly rant about how PR is turning into infantry exclusive mod and removing all large assets. You can safely ignore these blanket statements and know that the future of PR gameplay will involve largescale assets in largescale maps, as its the primary focus for the future. But also know that we wont be cramming tiny maps with vehicles that just dont belong on them just for the sake of the vehicle whores out there. We want vehicles to behave realistically and have room to maneuver around the battlefield, and not have 1 powerful vehicle dominate the entire map.

GoreZiad wrote:Would it be possible to have bigger maps than 4 km? If, that is, EA would pull their fingers out of their *** and increase the player limit.

[R-CON]MAINERROR wrote:Unfortunately it is not really possible to have bigger land maps than 4 KM. You can however make a 8 KM map but the biggest part of it has to be water covered.

8 KM land maps are bugged, you can see terrain issues and such.

tarsonis wrote:We need 128 players or more to drastically increase map size imo.

Mr.Hyde wrote:Would it be possible to create an island chain map without causing the gliches?

HughJass wrote:Sadly, 4 out of 7 maps currently in development (that have been revealed) are all 2km maps. Only timor, and sangin are 4km.

'[R-DEV wrote:fuzzhead;1025000']

Code: Select all

[size=175][b]Current maps in development for v0.9+[/b][/size]

[list=1]
[*]Map Name: Arrow Beach / Ras Al Hadd
Map Creator(s): [R-DEV]Rhino
Map Description: largescale amphibuous assault on airfield
Map Size: 4KM
Map Factions: UK vs MEC

[*]Map Name: Arzan Kar Region (Ambush)
Map Creator(s): [R-CON]marcoelnk
Map Description: Afghanistan open country
Map Size: 1KM
Map Factions: GERMANY vs TALIBAN

[*]Map Name: Codename Silent Eagle (Airborne)
Map Creator(s): [R-CON]marcoelnk
Map Description: Eastern European forested countryside with central town and airbases
Map Size: 4KM
Map Factions: GERMANY vs RUSSIA

[*]Map Name: Devils Tower
Map Creator(s): [R-DEV]Paramedic
Map Description: Mid east open country
Map Size: 4KM
Map Factions: CF vs TALIBAN

[*]Map Name: Dili - Timor
Map Creator(s): [R-DEV]CodeRedFox
Map Description: Dili Timor, Indonesia with City, Forest, Hills/Mountains.
Map Size: 4KM
Map Factions: BLUFOR vs. Insurgents

[*]Map Name: Dragonfly
Map Creator(s): [R-DEV]Irontaxi & [R-DEV]nickbond
Map Description: Russian urban / rural
Map Size: 2KM
Map Factions: RUSSIA vs CHECHEN

[*]Map Name: Feyzabad
Map Creator(s): [R-DEV]coderedfox
Map Description: Afghanistan river valley
Map Size: 4KM
Map Factions: US ARMY vs TALIBAN

[*]Map Name: Gaza Beach
Map Creator(s): [R-CON]Hfett 
Map Description: Tight urban combat
Map Size: 2KM
Map Factions: IDF vs HAMAS

[*]Map Name: Hell's Cavalry
Map Creator(s): [R-DEV]Rhino
Map Description: Rural Armour Battle
Map Size: 4KM
Map Factions: BLUFOR vs PLA

[*]Map Name: Iron Ridge
Map Creator(s): [R-DEV]~KILL~Pirate 
Map Description: rural
Map Size: 4KM
Map Factions: ??? vs ???

[*]Map Name: Kandahar Region
Map Creator(s): [R-DEV]Hans Martin Slayer
Map Description: Afghanistan rural/urban
Map Size: 4KM
Map Factions: ??? vs TALIBAN

[*]Map Name: Lashkar Valley
Map Creator(s): [R-DEV]Hans Martin Slayer
Map Description: Afghanistan rural in river valley
Map Size: 2KM
Map Factions: GERMANY vs TALIBAN

[*]Map Name: Marsh (WIP Name)
Map Creator(s): [R-DEV]Deer
Map Description: rural swamp
Map Size: 4KM
Map Factions: RUSSIA vs ???

[*]Map Name: Monchegorsk
Map Creator(s): [R-CON]space
Map Description: rural forest with military complexes
Map Size: 4KM
Map Factions: ??? vs ???

[*]Map Name: Sangin
Map Creator(s): [R-DEV]Dr Rank
Map Description: Afghanistan rural combat
Map Size: 4KM
Map Factions: UK vs TALIBAN

[*]Map Name: Siege at Ochamachira
Map Creator(s): [R-DEV]IronTaxi
Map Description: industrial defense
Map Size: 2KM
Map Factions: RUSSIA vs CHECHEN

[*]Map Name: Sosnovyy Bor
Map Creator(s): [R-CON]9cookie_monster
Map Description: industrial and woodland
Map Size: 2KM
Map Factions: ??? vs ???
[/list]

[b][u]Total Maps in Development:[/u][/b]
17

[u][b]Map Sizes in Development:[/b][/u]
1KM - 1
2KM - 5
4KM - 11

As you can see from the above map development, a HUGE amount of resources is going to put combined arms maps in the highlight of PR. 4km maps will be great to showcase large assets, but sticking them on smaller maps so players can use them like they did in vanilla, I dont see that working, especially as we increase their deadliness and align them with their real life attributes, putting them on small maps is kind of a waste.

tarsonis wrote:We need 128 players or more to drastically increase map size imo.

Raegron wrote:I'd like to see bots used for base defenses, integrate a part of PRSP into PRMP. The bots don't need to be supersmart, they should just know how to operate their guns