Map Audit Project: Boosted Player Count (BPC) Layers

[badmojo420]

I agree with LegioX, more APCs (stykers, btrs, etc) with the same amount of IFV's to escort them.

I'd love to see a couple strykers full of infantry being escorted across Kashan by a couple of Bradleys, maybe some abrams too.

Kashan is such a basic open and "easy" map to play, it might be a good idea to remove the air transport all together on one layer. Having the CAS and Recon be the only aircraft. Like a mechanized infantry layer.

Too often you'll see infantry being stranded on Kashan, because air trans is facing AA, tank fire, APC fire, manpad aa, etc, etc. So not only are the infantry stranded, but they're usually desperate for supplies and support, which APCs and IFVs are great for.

[Brainlaag]

I do agree with the idea of adding more APCs but I'm still afraid it could end up in a rapefest for infantry :\.

[ShockUnitBlack]

More APCs (not IFVs) and more trucks in general would be good I think. HMMWVs and Land Rovers are tougher to balance out as none of the OPFOR factions really have similar counterparts to them.

[vishuddaxxx]

the whole point of the current 64 asst layout was that on some maps there was way too many assets and not enough ground troops, I think if assets should change, then the only thing we should see an increase in is more transport and definetly not any weapons vehicle assets..

I think Op barrucuda as it stands is good enough, I think there are 4 Hueys maybe 3, and boats too, we def dont need any heavy assets there..

the whole point of 128 players is to increaes ground infantry who can compliment the limited assets, if we increase tanks/ apcs or whatever then we are just going back into 64 player like play, where there is too many assets and not enough ground squads.

conclusion; please only increase basic transport and nothing else...

[arjan]

More ''light'' apc's and vehicles would do fine I guess , like the chinese.50 call apc's and strykers etc.
More focus should be put on the infantry, but that is my opinion.

[killonsight95]

Sicne everyones tlaking about kashan I giht as well add my opinion.
I think kashan should have the following assets:
US Army:
Transport/Logistics
- 1 Transport truck (non respawning)
- 2 Logi trucks (respawning) + 1 Logi truck (spawns in with AA)
- 2 Blackhawks
- 1 Chinook, if not possible add another 1 black hawk
Armor:
- 1 TOW humvee (non-respawning)
- 1 LAV (non re-spawning)
- 2 Bradleys (outside main) + 4 Bradleys (spawning in hanger + re-spawning)
- 4 M1A1's (outside main) + 4 M1A1's (spawning in hanger + re-spawning)
- 4 AA
CAS:
- 2 Apache's
- 1 Kiowa

MEC:
Transport/Logistics
- 2 Logi trucks (respawning) + 1 Logi truck (spawns in with AA)
- 2 Flying Cow's
Armor:
- 1 BRDM (non-respawning)
- 1 MTLB 30mm (non re-spawning)
- 2 BMP's (outside main) + 4 BMP's (spawning in hanger + re-spawning)
- 4 T80's(?) (outside main) + 4 T80's(?) (spawning in hanger + re-spawning)
- 4 AA
CAS:
- 2 Havoks
- 1 Tiger Attack helicopter

The MEC will have more heavy hitting air assets but less manouverablity making it a balenced non-asmetrical map.
Or you could just have it as it is now with 1-2 non-respawing transport trucks at the start.

[[R-COM]Hulabi]

Originally Posted by killonsight95

Sicne everyones tlaking about kashan I giht as well add my opinion.
I think kashan should have the following assets:
US Army:
Transport/Logistics
- 1 Transport truck (non respawning)
- 2 Logi trucks (respawning) + 1 Logi truck (spawns in with AA)
- 1 Blackhawk
- 1 Chinook, if not possible add another 2 black hawks
Armor:
- 1 TOW humvee (non-respawning)
- 1 LAV (non re-spawning)
- 2 Bradleys (outside main) + 4 Bradleys (spawning in hanger + re-spawning)
- 4 M1A1's (outside main) + 4 M1A1's (spawning in hanger + re-spawning)
- 4 AA
CAS:
- 2 Apache's
- 1 Kiowa

MEC:
Transport/Logistics
- 2 Logi trucks (respawning) + 1 Logi truck (spawns in with AA)
- 2 Flying Cow's
Armor:
- 1 BRDM (non-respawning)
- 1 MTLB 30mm (non re-spawning)
- 2 BMP's (outside main) + 4 BMP's (spawning in hanger + re-spawning)
- 4 T80's(?) (outside main) + 4 T80's(?) (spawning in hanger + re-spawning)
- 4 AA
CAS:
- 2 Havoks
- 1 Tiger Attack helicopter

The MEC will have more heavy hitting air assets but less manouverablity making it a balenced non-asmetrical map.
Or you could just have it as it is now with 1-2 non-respawing transport trucks at the start.

1 non-respawning trans truck, really? U.S. Army need way more transport than what you've listed there. What if / when the choppers get blown to pieces? You're left with 1 trans truck (which is most likely abandoned in middle of nowhere and lost) and some IFV's that most likely will not transport infantry but act as tanks...

[TheComedian]

Originally Posted by killonsight95

- 1 Tiger Attack helicopter

MEC dont have the EC655 Tiger. They have the other EC light scout.

[killonsight95]

the point of the non-respawning trans truck is to allow for a SQ to quickly get out of main without going in either the chinook or 1 of the 3 BH's. Also adding transport trucks is pointless with 3 trans helis...
I'm pretty sure they have a mini attack heli on burning sands?

[spawncaptain]

Originally Posted by killonsight95

- 1 LAV (non re-spawning)
- 4 M1A1's (outside main) + 4 M1A1's (spawning in hanger + re-spawning)

The US Army does not employ the LAV (although the Stryker is similar) and all M1A1s have been upgraded to the M1A2 (SEP?) standard I believe. Unfortunately, there currently is no scout vehicle available for the US Army (no Recon stryker, HMMWV or M3 CFV). I don't think that anybody would use them in a realistic fashion, though, so the devs spend their time better modelling the M240.

Edit: And it doesn't make sense to have Strykers and Bradleys on the same map considering the limited scope of PR.