PR| Suggestion requested on new desert map: 'Udairi Desert'

|TG| Mr.47(NL) · 01-18-2009, 03:17 PM

I posted this message on the Project Reality forums and thought I'd also post it here.

• 'Udairi Desert' •

I am working on a new desert map a la Kashan Desert but on a even bigger scale for al those tank/CAS lovers out there. The main focus is to promote Teamwork, tactics & massive - large scale heavy vehicle desert warfare.

Project Reality has an ever growing community of player and developers, that's why I am posting this thread. If you have serious ideas on great teamplay features that are new and inspiring not directly found in current PR maps, please share them with the rest of. This will give us all to the opportunity to contribute and discuss new map features, ultimately resulting in an awesome large scale desert map where we can all be proud of.

Check out this original post for more info on what I have in mind:

www . realitymod.com/forum/f66-...early-wip.html

I recieved these great tips by Jonny:

"Dont realy on structures/settlements/man-made things as objectives. Its just too obvious. Go for a map where most of the things to hold are actually strategic areas in the terrain, such as a river crossing, a thin pass, etc.

If you basically avoid all but the minimum statics that you need (ie, no oil pumps, towns or villages) then you will get it done quicker. The more progress you see, the more you are inclined to continue.

I would also go with a map which is, basically, just based on vehicles. No infantry part in the middle that will end up being a bowl-of-death, ala kashan. The bigger the cap radius on flags the better, they should always be areas instead of buildings."

All serious suggestions, ideas and reference material are all welcome.

(Some might recognise 'Camp Buehring' on my initial map lay-out, I came across this base and thought it would be a great reference for a the USMC main base.)

I'd love to know what you think...

Thanks in advance and I see you all on the battlefield....

- |TG| Mr.47(NL)

Check out the promotional material down here:
High quality versions are also available:
(more to follow soon....)

**Fivenine** · 01-18-2009, 03:32 PM

you need to correct the link to your original post at realitymod.com

Sonic · 01-18-2009, 04:07 PM

Hey, 47 best of luck in the map making. But, I'm going to be honest here.

I think we've all seen what happens on a pubbie round of Quinling, now when I saw the proposed vehicles, it kind of reminded me alot of vanilla. Hey, it might work out. But, from what I read there will be:

4 Jets
2 Gunships
4 Transport Helos
8 Tanks
10 Armoured APCs and Vehicles

That's 28 assets that you can pretty much bet someone will use. About 50 players can fill those assets, out of a team of 32.

Leaving very few Infantry units - who will be fishfood for the other assets

With the abundance of cool vehicles you can bet you'll see a lot of 1 manning armour, 1 manning gunships and a crap load of drama that is sure to derive from player's enjoyment, and especially an admin who has to sort it out.

Like I said, it might work out, but from seeing how quinling usually progresses, I'm weary. That means you will be lucky to see even 1 solid infantry squad. I know the prupose is to create a higher level of teamplay with assets, but without the backbone of infantry to which these assets must support I'm unsure how it would turn out.

IMHO, I believe it would most likely turn into a "Every Asset for themselves" kind of battle. The Jets would go off and dog fight enemy ones, the tanks would kill tanks and there would be really very little cohesion between the units. It lacks the glue that holds a team together: Infantry.

Let's take Kashan for example, on Kashan you can often find great teamwork. The Armour supports the Infantry, who in return can push forward capping flags and the Jets support the ground forces in thier push by eliminating armoured units and other air threats. But, when there is no infantry to advance, the objective based gameplay PR is driven by will be kind of lost.

I can't really make any suggestions as this is the kind of thing you're aiming for. If I were to change something I would maybe cut back on the amount of air and armoured assets. It may work great, this is just my opinion.

In any case best of luck.

Serjikal · 01-18-2009, 06:24 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Sonic

Hey, 47 best of luck in the map making. But, I'm going to be honest here.

I think we've all seen what happens on a pubbie round of Quinling, now when I saw the proposed vehicles, it kind of reminded me alot of vanilla. Hey, it might work out. But, from what I read there will be:

4 Jets
2 Gunships
4 Transport Helos
8 Tanks
10 Armoured APCs and Vehicles

That's 28 assets that you can pretty much bet someone will use. About 50 players can fill those assets, out of a team of 32.

Leaving very few Infantry units - who will be fishfood for the other assets

With the abundance of cool vehicles you can bet you'll see a lot of 1 manning armour, 1 manning gunships and a crap load of drama that is sure to derive from player's enjoyment, and especially an admin who has to sort it out.

Like I said, it might work out, but from seeing how quinling usually progresses, I'm weary. That means you will be lucky to see even 1 solid infantry squad. I know the prupose is to create a higher level of teamplay with assets, but without the backbone of infantry to which these assets must support I'm unsure how it would turn out.

IMHO, I believe it would most likely turn into a "Every Asset for themselves" kind of battle. The Jets would go off and dog fight enemy ones, the tanks would kill tanks and there would be really very little cohesion between the units. It lacks the glue that holds a team together: Infantry.

Let's take Kashan for example, on Kashan you can often find great teamwork. The Armour supports the Infantry, who in return can push forward capping flags and the Jets support the ground forces in thier push by eliminating armoured units and other air threats. But, when there is no infantry to advance, the objective based gameplay PR is driven by will be kind of lost.

I can't really make any suggestions as this is the kind of thing you're aiming for. If I were to change something I would maybe cut back on the amount of air and armoured assets. It may work great, this is just my opinion.

In any case best of luck.

Agreed.

Mr.47, your map idea is fantastic, and with the idea about moving away from "Town-Based" Flags" to more regional, I have high hopes. It sounds like a great map and I look forward to playing it.

However, I think you're doubling up on vehicles that do pretty much the same job. Under your list you have the Osprey, Blackhawk, and Chinook. All of which, are transport/supply vehicles. I'm not sure you need that many/that much variety. Maybe 2 Black Hawk, and 2 (or 1) Chinook (with its proposed 2 Supply crates I think?) would be a better idea? Limiting your Helicopter/Transport/Support air assets to 1 or 2 types would be a lot more managable. I just think your vehicle loadout might be a little "too" extreme.

1 or 2 A10s
1 Jet
3-4 Helos (2 of a kind probably, but not 3...)
5-6 tanks
2-4 AA
4ish Trucks
ect....

while you'll want to make a map that is mostly vehicle/cas ehavy, infantry still are going to play a part in capping those flags, make sure atleast that you leave enough assets so that there is still an infantry component, even if it's just 2 or 3 squads of 3-6 people.

**Portable.Cougar** · 01-18-2009, 06:35 PM

Make the map, you can deal with assets later, just work on the map for now.

Ohh and we need tank cover. fixed built up postions to fire from.

**Namebot** · 01-18-2009, 07:11 PM

Sounds interesting. I'd like to try a vehicle based map. If you make the flags capable by the tanks and other vehicles then you won't need the infantry so much.

**warpig1292** · 01-18-2009, 07:27 PM

I think was his main objective was to not rely on infantry and have it a vehicle battle. Great idea i would love to play it

EDIT: here is his post on the PR site
http://www.realitymod.com/forum/f66-...early-wip.html
http://www.realitymod.com/forum/f18-...ri-desert.html

**gijoe** · 01-18-2009, 08:23 PM

Yeah i like the sound of this actually. Make it a straight elimination type game where the point of the map is just basically to destroy the enemy. Like in the game Company of Heroes and the game mode Annihilate where you basically kill the baddies base. Id like to make a map as well but i dont have patience or the skills needed to make a map. So i say good luck to you!

Belhade · 01-18-2009, 11:08 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by warpig1292

I think was his main objective was to not rely on infantry and have it a vehicle battle. Great idea i would love to play it

EDIT: here is his post on the PR site
http://www.realitymod.com/forum/f66-...early-wip.html
http://www.realitymod.com/forum/f18-...ri-desert.html

That's what I thought of when I saw this. A map played out almost exclusively by vehicles. With correspondingly larger map size, view and cap ranges. An interesting idea to try out.

**Berlancic** · 01-19-2009, 03:43 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Portable.Cougar

Make the map, you can deal with assets later, just work on the map for now.

Ohh and we need tank cover. fixed built up postions to fire from.

I made that mistake on a bf1942 map editor and such when I was creating a (fictional) invasion of Japan by the USMC. The map didn't look so good and you know what else? The terrain paint appeared back to front! I had painted island terrain on the Japanese soil! What's this sand and grass near an industrial compound and train station for coal transport!?

It's hard to explain, but it was weird, I just made these maps for recreation. I wasn't like some all out pwnage map creator.

Good luck with these maps man!

Fighter · 01-19-2009, 10:42 AM

I'm messing around with the BF2Editor trying to make a Kashan 16 style map except smaller with tanks and tow hummers. Much like a Qwai River setting except in the desert and without the river. I don't know how it will turn out, it crashed at 15% loading when I tryed to load it up.

**browna3** · 01-19-2009, 10:44 AM

i look forward to hearing about your updates on this. i've been wanting to make a vehicle based map for a while but could never get around to starting it.
to all those people who said it would lack infantry THATS THE POINT!! as he said in his statement

Quote:

Originally Posted by |TG| Mr.47(NL)

large scale heavy vehicle desert warfare.

this implies the lack of infantry needed. ok you'd need spotters but apart from that its would be good.

On a side note: With the up coming release of .85 you could maybe put in repair stations that spawn once a certain flag has been capped. dunno if thats possible but it could be an idea

**Jeepo_SAS** · 01-19-2009, 11:01 AM

Agree with Cougar, needs to have tank hull down positions, like in ejod, those things are great.

**TurkishDelight** · 01-19-2009, 04:17 PM

I love how it says "Ealry Research"

Xatu miller · 01-19-2009, 05:47 PM

Yes like some said before. Make the map first and then worry about the assets.

Armor combat- Big hilly areas where the tanks could have some real combat and cover if needed. Kind of Kashan like but sized up. So mostly then tanks would be used to stop enemy reinforcements and engage other armor. But it can't be so open that a jeep or a co-truck won't be able to drive through alife.

The CAS and FAC, Airborn logistics(my favorite part). The terrain around vital control points should be a hilly so transport choppers can get through safer then on kashan. This would also make a good environment for the low flying attack helicopters. CAS jets

they need only a long view range and big ass GBU-28 fitted with AGM-64's(what ever variants will be used for other side). FAC- well dogfight is dogfight, long view range would do good that for sure.

For the map setting i would say kind of like kind of like desert rats though the sun should be touching the horizon.(dusk).

Factions- I would like US army vs some one(i only care its gonna be US)

Overall i really like the idea and i am waiting to see first screens and stuff.