Are the developers going too far?

[Alex6714]

Originally Posted by [R-DEV]fuzzhead

This is exactly as intended. Aircraft should NOT be flying low across the whole map, scanning for targets. Instead they should be maintaining an altitude HIGHER than their engagement range (and the engagement range of enemy AA). When a target is called in, THAT is when you drop to engagement range, destroy your target and get the hell out.

Thats excellent Fuzzhead, I agree. But, never does it happen on a public game. Never does anyone call out targets, lase, or simply say what there is and when the do its: "omg tank chopper destroy now! or "lasing now, lasing now, lasing now". But hey, where?

[IAJTHOMAS]

That's fair enough, and i do enjoy being part of armoured columns on Quinling and seeing the airsupport buzz over head etc, really makes you feel like your there.

I accept that you can have several inf squads on the map, but they are only really useful directly on the flags, as a method of capping them once armour has cleared out the enemy, rather than 'fighting' for, say, the village. Mine for example is a death trap when you get in it.

I just think that when you have maps the size of Quinling there is plenty of scope to add areas of the map where infantry support become more necessary, for instance some areas could be made more densely wooded and tiresome to by pass, with an indirect path(s) through for vehciles. Infantry would have to dismount from APCs to clear the woods and check for ambushes etc.

Village could be made a bit bigger and perhaps more difficult to dominate from the surrounding hills, armour entering would again need inf support. (may be difficult as its on the lakeside, i'm just using Quinling as an example of how you could incoporate a few more inf firendly areas)

Thinking back to Road to Kyonyang (or whatever :P), a concept like the bridge flag could be added, i.e. a river crossing in an urban area. This would be particluarly interesting is it WASN'T a CP, and alternative crossing points are scare and a difficult detour. Makes for a important strategic point that teams would have to take the initaive to seize without having a big flag on it. A inf squad with a FB there could really influence the flow of the battle.

I'm not trying to assinate Quinling here, I love the map and it makes for some great battles and when played well it can one of the best PR maps, just some thought about how one map can perhaps provide environments where everyone can find their ideal type of battle for some of the time in some areas.

Still, the PR mappers are a very cappable bunch, and the maps are well tested, so, i'm sure they think about the options in far greater depth than i have and i'm probably teaching my grandmother how to suck eggs! I'm like the majority of people, come up with ideas and have little to no ability to impliment them, so i'll take what i'm given!

[[R-DEV]Rhino]

ye, the main thing for infantry on qinling is really to change there tactics, from being mainly used in direct combat like they are in other maps, to be used more as recon and SF missions aswell as supporting flag capping.

You would be surprised how vital recon is on this map, if used well it can turn the tide of the game

When craig and the ABA guys where doing recon for us, me and squidy in a MBT knew just where the enemy tank was, even thou we had a huge hill in the way, what direction they where heading etc and we just could swing round the hill, come right up behind them and get two shots into there ass before they had any idea what was going on

Its also quite hard to make areas that are really infantry friendly in a area that is meant to be a large mountain range with pandas in it

[General_J0k3r]

Originally Posted by [R-DEV]Rhino

The problem you have here fuzz is you believe that every map should be infantry focused in the game, with very little armor or none because you find infantry the most fun part of the game and thats all you want to play. Infantry is a factor on every single map as every one spawns in as infantry. Qinling is not made for the infantry whores, but for the asset whores if you really want to group it up into whore categories, the question you should ask yourself, whats wrong with being a asset or infantry whore? Qinling on the other hand has been made to support 3 infantry squads, with 1 mech infantry squad in that aswell as all its assets when full with 64 players and I've also received lots of feedback from [R-DEV]UK_Force that the use of assets in Qinling has been the most realistic he has seen as of to date after the tactical gamer vs PR clans battle. Thou no doubt still room for improvement.

Every map in PR should offer something different and should not have the same Infantry, jeeps and APC style combat which is all you want fuzz

/me wants qinling not to crash anymore *whine*. i like the map and its a pity that we can't run it on our server (i think it's due to our server being linux. correct me if im wrong).

[[R-DEV]Rhino]

Originally Posted by General_J0k3r

/me wants qinling not to crash anymore *whine*. i like the map and its a pity that we can't run it on our server (i think it's due to our server being linux. correct me if im wrong).

ye there is a problem with the J-10 we thinks that is making it crash when run on linux servers, windows just ignores the problem

Try running the 32 player version of the map which is mech infantry only really

[IAJTHOMAS]

Originally Posted by [R-DEV]Rhino

Its also quite hard to make areas that are really infantry friendly in a area that is meant to be a large mountain range with pandas in it

Yeah, I appreciate what you were aiming at in Qinling, it was never going to be a direct inf contact map and thats fine. I was really just using it as an example of a large, reasonable open, armour friendly map, the idea of 'area variety' coudl apply to any such type.

I suppose every map can't please everyone, at least we have a diverse range of good quality maps so you can find what you want somewhere.

[[R-DEV]fuzzhead]

Originally Posted by [R-DEV]Rhino

should not have the same Infantry, jeeps and APC style combat which is all you want fuzz

Yes I agree, the more different specialties means the more different ways to play, which means increased replayability which generally means more fun and cool stuff to do

Ive never said I only want infantry jeep or APC combat...

I HAVE said this though: A map should focus on a specific branch of assets, and not EVERY asset on every map (ala vbf2). When you do this I believe its 10 times harder for an infantry squad to work together, because there is just so many other options out there. Combining that with a commander who is frustrated out of his mind because no one is actually capturing or defending anything and just riding around in vehicles, this means its really hard to get a team organised and supporting each other in attacks or defense, but rather everyone is driving around their own personal vehicles. Im not against armor only maps, but I AM against armor/air/apc/helicopter maps with fast respawn times (what qinling basically is)....

Never does anyone call out targets, lase, or simply say what there is and when the do its: "omg tank chopper destroy now! or "lasing now, lasing now, lasing now".

Never??? Hop on Tactics&Teamwork, Tcombat.com or Tacticalgamer.com servers during the evening hours.... and especially on weekends. Your guaranteed to get well coordinated air squads that will wreck the enemies day! But remember it doesnt always happen, the best way to figure out if your going to have a good air squad is to look at the commander. If you have a commander you can recognize and respect, then you will more than probably have a kickass CAS and a good team. Have a crap CO or no CO at all?? Dont expect ANYTHING from the air squad other than crashing into walls, mountains and other friendly vehicles...

Just the way an open community like PR works....

[[R-COM]Glimmerman]

It is and will allways be just game, if you want some real action, enlist and ship out to Iraq of Afghanistan.

[[R-DEV]Rhino]

Originally Posted by [R-DEV]fuzzhead

but I AM against armor/air/apc/helicopter maps with fast respawn times (what qinling basically is)....

even if it dose bring the most realistic use of assets into PR? I thought you said it all depends on the players anyways

[Jonny]

I think part of his point is that covering/supressing/moving as a unit is only present in infantry squads really, so you need to make the tanks/APCs/helis used more like that on a few maps instead of the usual camping a flag on your own.

Part of the problem with that is the squad system, You can have six infantry or two/three vehicles. Which is why I also prefer infantry.

An 8x8 km map would help, using statics for terrain, so that vehicles would have to be used like infantry by staying together and not getting picked off on your own. But people would still take a while to realise they are supposed to do this, I know I did with Quinling.

Ultimately every aspect of the game needs to be about the people around you, not just yourself.