+ Reply to Thread
Page 1 of 2
1 2 LastLast
Results 1 to 15 of 28

Thread: Qinling vs. Kashan: Why Kashan is Better

  1. #1
    Startrekern's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jan 2009
    Location
    United States of America
    Posts
    776

    Qinling vs. Kashan: Why Kashan is Better

    Qinling:

    Both ATTACK CHOPPERS and JETS are around in one version, plus transports and a scout, taking more players up for air squads. Too many air assets here. British don't get a scout bird with guns on it anyway.

    Not enough flags/points of interest + AASv3 = Fail. Qinling was not designed for AASv3, and should use v2. There should be other points of interest throughout the map like the villages are on Kashan. Maybe a fortress here, a village there, and have them set flags. As it is, people have no real place to fight over and hills seem meaningless and so massive that infantry combat is difficult. Qinling is just an assload of trees and the 'real points of interest' almost NEVER see infantry combat (Temple, village, power station)


    Kashan:

    Only jets, or only attack helicopters. Air assets are limited and balanced. Both teams get an equal number of balanced armor and air assets, and both littlebirds have guns.

    Set flags/points of interest. Flags are set in specific locations, leading to fights being over those locations. Sure, gameplay is slightly more repetitive, but it makes more sense than random flags being generated on hills or random patches of desert in the middle of nowhere. There are actually villages to hide in, structures, rocks, oilfields -- things that make the map interesting.


    Quote of the Day:
    |TG-23rd|PaintScratcher: What exactly does Airborne Special Tactics Division mean? Paratroops, CAS?
    |TG-23rd|Startrekern: We get big sprayers.. And pour STD-water from the sky.
    |TG-23rd|PaintScratcher: Hahha oook, just wait for devs to add 'STD-water' and we're good.


  2. #2

    Join Date
    Nov 2008
    Age
    20
    Posts
    258

    Re: Qinling vs. Kashan: Why Kashan is Better

    I personally prefer Qinling but then I like it because it's easier for the infantry so you can actually use tactics without an APC from 600m's bringing down your whole squad.

    I also feel that Qinling is alot more diverse giving a more fun battleground rather than Kashan's "Sand... sand... sand... oh look a.. oh.. sand.."

    But that's my opinion


  3. #3
    BigGaayAl's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jul 2005
    Location
    gent, belgium
    Posts
    1,970

    Re: Qinling vs. Kashan: Why Kashan is Better

    Qinling: Trees only render at about 20% volume thus exposing all infantry to rape. This map should have been axed or given proper trees 3 versions ago. They did make new tree models in the newer maps, that perform better. They axed so many half decent maps. Time to axe this one.

    Kashan... Well empty desert beats dysfunctional trees.
    ****** Fabulous under Fire ******



  4.  
  5. #4
    Bandaid's Avatar
    Join Date
    Apr 2008
    Location
    Jeannette, PA, USA
    Age
    23
    Posts
    1,409

    Re: Qinling vs. Kashan: Why Kashan is Better

    I still love Kashan 16. Had a really good game on it just about an hour ago.
    Pittsburgh, The City of god-forsaken Losers who can't win anything...and the Penguins (they are ok).
    Steelers 8-well, let's call it a day
    "Work ruins my creative spirit." ~ kevlarorc


  6. #5
    Startrekern's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jan 2009
    Location
    United States of America
    Posts
    776

    Re: Qinling vs. Kashan: Why Kashan is Better

    Quote Originally Posted by Bandaid View Post
    I still love Kashan 16. Had a really good game on it just about an hour ago.

    Same. That, however, is STILL because there are focus points for infantry combat. On Qinling, there simply are not/they are not utilized.


    Quote of the Day:
    |TG-23rd|PaintScratcher: What exactly does Airborne Special Tactics Division mean? Paratroops, CAS?
    |TG-23rd|Startrekern: We get big sprayers.. And pour STD-water from the sky.
    |TG-23rd|PaintScratcher: Hahha oook, just wait for devs to add 'STD-water' and we're good.


  7. #6

    MarineSeaknight's Avatar
    Join Date
    Feb 2008
    Location
    Southern California
    Age
    20
    Posts
    2,498

    Re: Qinling vs. Kashan: Why Kashan is Better

    Quote Originally Posted by BigGaayAl View Post
    Qinling: Trees only render at about 20% volume thus exposing all infantry to rape. This map should have been axed or given proper trees 3 versions ago. They did make new tree models in the newer maps, that perform better. They axed so many half decent maps. Time to axe this one.

    Kashan... Well empty desert beats dysfunctional trees.
    They won't get rid of it because it's still decent and it's Rhino's baby.



  8.  
  9. #7
    Waldo_II's Avatar
    Join Date
    Dec 2007
    Location
    /home/minnesota
    Posts
    977

    Re: Qinling vs. Kashan: Why Kashan is Better

    Until this thread, I had never heard of anyone who appreciated Qinling more than Kashan.

    Flying in Qinling is terrible because the sky is pure white, same color as the ground when you are above the view distance. Runways are also far better on Kashan because there aren't bigass trees up in your grill and you have a proper amount of it. And you never have to worry about using a J-10.

    Kashan also has more variety in it. It has hills, villages, valleys, outposts, awesome bunker complexes, whereas on Qinling, it has a mine, one village, a ****load of cloned green hills, two small outposts, and a lake. Which nobody ever uses. The trees fail at rendering, too, so it may as well be plain. The prettiest part of the map, the river, is never seen.


  10. #8

    d1sp0sabl3H3r0's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jun 2007
    Location
    Suburban Chicago
    Age
    44
    Posts
    3,988

    Re: Qinling vs. Kashan: Why Kashan is Better

    Nice to see we're right on top of the map releases.


  11. #9

    thegreatnardini's Avatar
    Join Date
    Dec 2005
    Location
    the Mutara Nebula
    Posts
    3,172

    Re: Qinling vs. Kashan: Why Kashan is Better

    Quinling is a nightmare for infantry, period. At least on Kashan you have a chance of digging in and defending without having to worry about getting the crap blown out of you without any chance of retaliation. That's why I am disliking some of the changes they've made to aircraft in the last release: bombs should not be able to penetrate the bunkers and the F-16/Mig should be for air superiority only, and should lack ground-attack capabilities.

    Quinling is a mess with hardly anywhere for the infantry to hide, far too many vehicles, white sky so you can't see your aircraft HUD, the horrendous J-10, etc...

    It is awesome that a game like PR can effectively have combined-arms gameplay, but on some maps it's just too much...

    lTG-6thl NardDawg

    The sound of capturing a piece of the triforce is more glorious than the first time I took a girl's panty's off.






  12.  
  13. #10

    Join Date
    Sep 2006
    Location
    Around the Grand Rapids area, MI.
    Posts
    285

    Re: Qinling vs. Kashan: Why Kashan is Better

    Quote Originally Posted by thegreatnardini View Post
    Quinling is a nightmare for infantry, period. At least on Kashan you have a chance of digging in and defending without having to worry about getting the crap blown out of you without any chance of retaliation. That's why I am disliking some of the changes they've made to aircraft in the last release: bombs should not be able to penetrate the bunkers and the F-16/Mig should be for air superiority only, and should lack ground-attack capabilities.
    The staying power of the AirSup craft for air to ground operations is fractionally useful, more of a pinch hitter than a star. 2 bombs. No effective missiles or guns. I was unaware that the bunkers were penetrable by those bombs, normally they just shrug them off, like statics have a tendency to do. Once in a blue moon, I've been able to put one down the throat of the stairs to the top of the bunker, and those are always memorable rounds, but they are so rare.

    Quote Originally Posted by thegreatnardini View Post
    Quinling is a mess with hardly anywhere for the infantry to hide, far too many vehicles, white sky so you can't see your aircraft HUD, the horrendous J-10, etc...
    The infantry merely need to sit still to become invisible from the air on Qinling. As a pilot, I have little-no chance of spotting infantry (camo on forest) like I do on Kashan (black dots, light brown desert)

    Qinling is a challenge for me, I can't read my HUD, there is frequently lag when my client draws the ground for an attack run, the runways are about 250ft short of what they need to be and placed at absurd levels so that I have to come in at tree top level instead of a correct slope. Those same trees are always in the way to intercept a bomb or a view of a laze.

    Challenges are fun, but...challenging. Both on my nerves and my skills.

    In the end, I like them equally, for different reasons. Kashan is to blow off steam, rise into the wild blue yonder and deliver many kinds of hurt at the behest of the leaders on the ground. Qinling is to take my skills as a pilot to their outer limits and stretch them.
    Stealth: "Yea, your radar signature is the size of a bird. A bird going twice the speed of sound."
    On-again, off-again TG SM. It's a love/hate relationship with my bank.
    Everything is air-droppable at least once.


  14. #11

    thegreatnardini's Avatar
    Join Date
    Dec 2005
    Location
    the Mutara Nebula
    Posts
    3,172

    Re: Qinling vs. Kashan: Why Kashan is Better

    The bombs on Kashan will "penetrate" the bunkers and kill pretty much anyone inside. Basically there is absolutely nowhere for infantry to hide on the 64 version of Kashan (and one of the reasons it hasn't been on the server much lately).

    CAS may not be able to see infantry, but if the team has any half-decent spotters that completely negates that. IMO the F-16/Migs shouldn't be attacking ground troops, that's what the A-10 and Su's are for. There is plenty for them to do, such as shooting down any choppers or other jets which should take priority anyways for those craft. If you have a good pilot keeping the skies clear you'd be surprised how it makes a world of difference, sometimes more-so than a great CAS pilot.

    lTG-6thl NardDawg

    The sound of capturing a piece of the triforce is more glorious than the first time I took a girl's panty's off.





  15. #12
    Namebot's Avatar
    Join Date
    Aug 2007
    Posts
    971

    Re: Qinling vs. Kashan: Why Kashan is Better

    The way those maps are set up, infantry plays a much more secondary and "squishy" role to the assets. Extra sets of eyes, ears, and lazers.

    I don't particularly like either one, but there are no other alternatives with large scale battles.




  16.  
  17. #13
    Ferris Bueller's Avatar
    Join Date
    Sep 2006
    Location
    Hanging IV bags and charging paddles.
    Age
    27
    Posts
    6,775

    Re: Qinling vs. Kashan: Why Kashan is Better

    I'll break them down point by point, but I dont particularly like either one.
    Qinling:
    Pros:
    Highly varied terrain
    Lots of attack possibilities
    Very interesting aerial battles
    Cons:
    90% of the map goes unused on almost every game
    Bad terrain rendering and effects
    Prone to asset-whoring
    Infantry has trouble getting around on foot in a lot of places.
    Tanks roll uphill.

    Kashan:
    Pros:
    Wide open for engagements
    No negative terrain effects (cause theres nothing to render but sand)
    Asset heavy, but not OVERLY asset heavy.
    Cons:
    On the 32/64p maps, infantry have severely limited mobility due to assets that can smoke them in the open from 1000m
    The focus is ALWAYS on the bunker complex for 99% of every round.
    Air to ground weapons greatly exceed the range of ground to air weapons, so a good pilot can literally live forever if he stays at high altitude and just rains fire.

    Bottom line: they were both nice maps...when they came out. It was the novelty of the first "big" maps. But with recent changes, they tend to become largely unplayable...and boring. Doing the same exact thing every time you play a map because its the ONLY way a map can be played is a bit boring.


  18. #14
    Arma Officer

    Jeepo_SAS's Avatar
    Join Date
    Mar 2007
    Location
    Pax Britannica
    Age
    24
    Posts
    4,093

    Re: Qinling vs. Kashan: Why Kashan is Better

    I love Quinling, totally love it. More Quinling!
    |TG-1st|Jeepo
    TG-1st 2IC | ArmA GO | TG Pathfinder




    "People sleep peaceably in their beds at night only because rough men stand ready to do violence on their behalf"

    Nominate your teammates for a ribbon | TG Primer | Kicked? Banned? READ THIS FIRST!
    Server Rules and SOP's | Contact an Admin

    "I like our siggy's too. Partially because they are superbly done, but also because they were done by Xmaster whom I have a deep sexual desire for" - Python1


  19. #15


    O=T-M-A-N=O's Avatar
    Join Date
    Sep 2007
    Location
    Heidelberg, Germany
    Age
    45
    Posts
    1,766

    Re: Qinling vs. Kashan: Why Kashan is Better

    Quote Originally Posted by Namebot View Post
    The way those maps are set up, infantry plays a much more secondary and "squishy" role to the assets. Extra sets of eyes, ears, and lazers.

    I don't particularly like either one, but there are no other alternatives with large scale battles.
    Yes, finding maps for internal scrims is not that easy, as it is good to do a big one. Muttrah was interesting last time, but not optimal either. I think Kozelsk could be fun, but it also may end up being unbalanced for other reasons.
    |TG-E1st|_TMAN-Dean - Tactical Gamer University





  20.  
  

Thread Information

Users Browsing this Thread

There are currently 1 users browsing this thread. (0 members and 1 guests)

     

Bookmarks

Posting Permissions

  • You may not post new threads
  • You may not post replies
  • You may not post attachments
  • You may not edit your posts