Project Reality Forums

My title says it all, but I would like to have different layouts for skirmish mode so that we can mix up the type of action on the same map, by changing the map boundaries based upon the selection of the "Map Size"

That is all

Thank you so much Johnny, I truly appreciate that you have completed that thought.

Like Johnny said, I am am just looking for similar size in boundary but different locations.

Thanks again.

I agree with this suggestion its perfectly doable, its just a bit annoying

never mind I would like to see this added, but as Rudd said it's annoying. As it is though. It's basically just a time waster and to get people on a server. OR for small parties of players. Since the Skirmish maps aren't used regularly in such a way as say, normal PR maps, I think this will be at the bottom of the "TO DO" list if it's even on there

^ well its only really annoying now I think since there'd be a load of maps that need their skirmish layers altered, but for newer maps theres no problem adding more skirmish layers. I find skirmish with 32 or less players as fulfilling as the full game, just not as comprehensive

I think it should be on there, as many in the PR community look for infantry only engagements especially the l33t MW2 and BC2 players come in to the mix.

But for instance, on Iron Ridge, there is an enormous space and if there were 32v32 engagements house to house and building to building, this would truly be something to behold.

Different boundaries mean opportunities to role play on a tournament level, where one team of 3x32, 96 players go up against another 96 engaging on three servers at the same time.

However what will most likely happen is more skirmish servers which would offer more, and NEWER players a way to integrate into PR without being completely overwhelmed with wasting assets or what have you. A teamwork introduction if you will.

Well Rudd, I'd say you better get started jk. You're right about the new maps.... but yes the old maps would need to be changed. Would be an interesting change, but I think the majority of EXPERIENCED players would still rather play 64 version maps then skirmish since personally, the skirmish maps seem a lot like CoD :S people running around with no vehicles, taking whatever kits etc etc etc. Yes there are squads but it's no difference then having a couple buddies with mics. Just skirmish is a bit larger scaled

Well I could help a little in terms of retro fitting the older maps

AFAIK it would only require a new gpo and new 32 and 64 folders in the server.zip

right?

personally I don't know much about layers, other than the general Idea of them. Until now I thought only 3 we're possible, then I looked at some of the map files and realized otherwise. So personally I don't know, I would think there would be some other things, like the .desc file etc etc and the map loading screen would need to be changed

sylent/shooter wrote:personally I don't know much about layers, other than the general Idea of them. Until now I thought only 3 we're possible, then I looked at some of the map files and realized otherwise. So personally I don't know, I would think there would be some other things, like the .desc file etc etc and the map loading screen would need to be changed

No, youre right, there are only three, that 128 is there just to piss off modders

https://www.realitymod.com/forum/f189-m ... audit.html

I see no reason not to have a go at making new skirmish layers yourself

the .desc file would just need a quick copy past of 2 extra lines, thats the easy part

the loading minimap is a bit of a bugger, but not insurmoutable, nor is it 100% necessary for the skirmish layers tbh

the ingame minimap is conformed to the combat area you assign to a map, which is done automatically so don't worry about that.

skirmish or AAS or even insurgencie. i am up to maps whicht the size proportial to players. whicht equipement proportional to it.

wtf we need mediun maps back. the good old meidun AAS only whicht light vehicles for good

HAAN4, skirmish is for small numbers of players, period, the numbers are just incidental to how vbf2 worked.

... I didn't understand that at all.

I think he was saying he wants maps like how vbf2 was, where 16 maps were small, 32 were a bit bigger, 64 were the biggest

[R-CON]Rudd wrote:I think he was saying he wants maps like how vbf2 was, where 16 maps were small, 32 were a bit bigger, 64 were the biggest

yes, but also Insurgency map for 16 and 32, since some guys are like this shiet so much that actually play it no matter how few players the server have.

the same go to AAS prefer to have a few vehicles that engange the enemy to see action so they play AAS even whicht small pop.

so we need 16/32/64 AAS, Insurgency and 16 skimirsh.

AAS

16=only trunks.
32=Trunks and Jeaps and one or 2 APCs. (wtf try at last make AAS desing to 32 players for good)
64=Trunks, jeaps, MBT, APC, helicopters. and in some maps everthing else.

Skirmish

Suposed to 16 only


Insurgency:

16= 3 caches
32= 5 caches
64= 7 caches (standard)



i mean all those are to be Map layouts

Haan...muffin...

The number in front of the layout (i.e. 16,32,64) has no relation to the actual map size.

Though I like some of your ideas for insurgency, your post doesn't have very much to do with the point of this thread.

Personally i'd like to see Skirmish fought in different areas. =)


And by the way, this thread has to be the most grammatically correct thread I've ever seen. o_o