[Official Statement] Why some assets have been removed from some maps - Page 3

ReaperMAC · 07-01-2009, 07:33 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by clueless_noob

I have had sound bugs not only from choppers, but strykers, supply trucks and even molotovs. How does these fit into view distance theory?

LOL you really are clueless aren't you?

From the OP:

Edit: Ninja'd by Rhino

[R-DEV]fuzzhead · 07-02-2009, 01:11 AM

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.

Wilkinson · 07-02-2009, 01:19 AM

PR thinks for the future every build, one step at a time.

Great work DEVs. Keep the good Stuff coming.
This Rule makes very much sense. Less clutter, fighting for assets, and more more fun and teamwork.

Spartan0189 · 07-02-2009, 01:20 AM

Hm, That sounds good, I've always wanted more large maps to replace the ones I always play on

(Archer, Basrah, Ramiel, Karbala, Qinling, Kashan)

Besides, Removing all assets and turning into an Infantry mod would kill it, Then there would be no point for the bigger maps.

Conman51 · 07-02-2009, 01:39 AM

good news with the 4km maps

but please dont neglect infantry in the future, their still have to be good infantry maps, like fallujah or barracuda

McBumLuv · 07-02-2009, 01:43 AM

They aren't going to neglect infantry, I'm sure. Besides, Sanguin looks like it could be an awesome infantry map, and I'm sure many of the other 4k maps will be very infantry intensive as well.

IronTaxi · 07-02-2009, 01:47 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Conman51=US=

good news with the 4km maps

but please dont neglect infantry in the future, their still have to be good infantry maps, like fallujah or barracuda

we have so many damn maps coming down the pipe we will be able to specialize specific maps for left handed infantry only if you like.

Tartantyco · 07-02-2009, 04:22 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by [R-DEV]IronTaxi

we have so many damn maps coming down the pipe we will be able to specialize specific maps for left handed infantry only if you like.

-It's about damn time! Stop the oppression of left handed people!

Rudd · 07-02-2009, 05:36 AM

Quote:

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.

We'll see how many of the non-DEV maps make it to finished products

ty for clarifying this Rhino.

Mr.Hyde · 07-02-2009, 05:47 AM

This thread was the reason why Forums were created in the first place. To get accurate info out to the masses.

TY for letting us know what the deal was. Now I feel like I can put out the torches and send the farmers and their pitchforks back to work.

You guys rock!

07-02-2009, 01:11 AM	#22
[R-DEV]fuzzhead PR Developer Join Date: Aug 2005 Canada Location: Windsor Posts: 7,386 Blog Entries: 10	Re: [Official Statement] Why some assets have been removed from some maps 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.
	To view links or images in signatures your post count must be 1 or greater. You currently have 0 posts. To view links or images in signatures your post count must be 1 or greater. You currently have 0 posts.
	Last edited by [R-DEV]fuzzhead; 07-02-2009 at 01:22 AM..

07-02-2009, 01:19 AM	#23
Wilkinson Join Date: Aug 2008 United States of America Location: Florida Posts: 2,164	Re: [Official Statement] Why some assets have been removed from some maps PR thinks for the future every build, one step at a time. Great work DEVs. Keep the good Stuff coming. This Rule makes very much sense. Less clutter, fighting for assets, and more more fun and teamwork.
	To view links or images in signatures your post count must be 1 or greater. You currently have 0 posts. To view links or images in signatures your post count must be 1 or greater. You currently have 0 posts.

07-02-2009, 01:20 AM	#24
Spartan0189 Join Date: Jul 2008 United States of America Location: San Bruno, CA Posts: 1,315	Re: [Official Statement] Why some assets have been removed from some maps Hm, That sounds good, I've always wanted more large maps to replace the ones I always play on (Archer, Basrah, Ramiel, Karbala, Qinling, Kashan) Besides, Removing all assets and turning into an Infantry mod would kill it, Then there would be no point for the bigger maps.
	To view links or images in signatures your post count must be 1 or greater. You currently have 0 posts.

07-02-2009, 01:39 AM	#25
Conman51 Join Date: May 2008 United States of America Location: Lake Forest, California Posts: 2,025	Re: [Official Statement] Why some assets have been removed from some maps good news with the 4km maps but please dont neglect infantry in the future, their still have to be good infantry maps, like fallujah or barracuda
	"It's not the size of the dog in the fight, it's the size of the fight in the dog." -Mark Twain

07-02-2009, 01:43 AM	#26
McBumLuv Join Date: Aug 2008 Canada Location: St. Catharines, ON Posts: 3,575	Re: [Official Statement] Why some assets have been removed from some maps They aren't going to neglect infantry, I'm sure. Besides, Sanguin looks like it could be an awesome infantry map, and I'm sure many of the other 4k maps will be very infantry intensive as well.
	To view links or images in signatures your post count must be 1 or greater. You currently have 0 posts. To view links or images in signatures your post count must be 1 or greater. You currently have 0 posts. To view links or images in signatures your post count must be 1 or greater. You currently have 0 posts.

07-02-2009, 05:47 AM	#30
Mr.Hyde Join Date: Jun 2009 Germany Location: Heidelberg Posts: 190	Re: [Official Statement] Why some assets have been removed from some maps This thread was the reason why Forums were created in the first place. To get accurate info out to the masses. TY for letting us know what the deal was. Now I feel like I can put out the torches and send the farmers and their pitchforks back to work. You guys rock!
	"Any society that would give up a little liberty to gain a little security will deserve neither and lose both" ~Benjamin Franklin

Thread Tools
Show Printable Version Email this Page
Display Modes
Linear Mode Switch to Hybrid Mode Switch to Threaded Mode

Sponsored Links