project reality header
Go Back   Project Reality Forums > PR:BF2 Mod Forums > PR:BF2 Feedback > Maps
25 Oct 2014, 00:00:00 (PRT)
Register Forum RulesDeveloper Blogs Project Reality Members List Search Today's Posts Mark Forums Read

Contact Support Team Frequently Asked Questions Register today!

Reply
 
LinkBack Thread Tools Display Modes
Old 12-29-2011, 09:26 AM   #31
[R-DEV]AFsoccer
PR:BF2 Developer
Supporting Member

[R-DEV]AFsoccer's Avatar
Default Re: Qwai armour imbalance

I played Qwai last night on TG and we (the Chinese) lost by about 300 points. The U.S. used HATs against our APCs and the Strykers finished us off.

Just something to think about.


To view links or images in signatures your post count must be 1 or greater. You currently have 0 posts.
[R-DEV]AFsoccer is offline Reply With Quote
Old 12-29-2011, 09:58 AM   #32
Portable.Cougar

Portable.Cougar's Avatar
Default Re: Qwai armour imbalance

I know I have won just as many games on China as I have on USA


To view links or images in signatures your post count must be 1 or greater. You currently have 0 posts.
Portable.Cougar is offline Reply With Quote
Old 12-29-2011, 10:16 AM   #33
tankninja1

tankninja1's Avatar
Default Re: Qwai armour imbalance

Unless the Chinese are slower than snails getting out of their main, and the US forces can cap and set up defences on both sides of the river, the US will always lose.

Why are there no size 12.5US shoes? Seriously, the f**k?
tankninja1 is offline Reply With Quote
Old 12-29-2011, 10:39 AM   #34
40mmrain
Supporting Member

40mmrain's Avatar
Default Re: Qwai armour imbalance

the chinese can win yes.

The map itself's results arent too imbalanced, its difficult to operate with armour on that map, its just that playing as american armour is brutal as youre up against so much.

Its like black gold J10 vs mig29. The j10 beats mig29 every time, but the russians can still win with superior inf or armour, its just that its no fun to fly as the russians.
40mmrain is offline Reply With Quote
Old 12-29-2011, 11:57 AM   #35
sharpie
Supporting Member

sharpie's Avatar
Default Re: Qwai armour imbalance

Quote:
Originally Posted by [R-DEV]AFsoccer View Post
I played Qwai last night on TG and we (the Chinese) lost by about 300 points. The U.S. used HATs against our APCs and the Strykers finished us off.

Just something to think about.
But your mortars were still sexy.

I think all we needed were moar crates, and we could have won the day buy overrunning them with supplies.


OT, an armour balance would be nice, but you just have to play the US armour correctly for the US to win.
And I don't believe the tank is really needed anymore.


To view links or images in signatures your post count must be 1 or greater. You currently have 0 posts.
"Tom I think you have influenced the combat effectiveness of this team! Everyone has gone full potato."~Foxxyfrost
[DM]P*Funk: its like a funk guitar seminar up in that bitch
[R-DEV] K_Rivers-"...everything is broken in your country,"
sharpie is offline
Last edited by sharpie; 12-29-2011 at 11:59 AM.. Reason: adding some thoughts
Reply With Quote
Old 12-29-2011, 12:09 PM   #36
Murphy

Murphy's Avatar
Default Re: Qwai armour imbalance

Or you can just not go head to head with the tank? I've caught many tank crews with the Bradley waiting in ambush. Sorry gents but I think trying to use the Bradley as an offensive unit is what is causing you to thin this map is unbalanced. Get your Bradley to sit back a bit and let the inf get intel on enemy armor then respond accordingly.

Strykers should also avoid head to head confrontations with the enemy 30mm, you would figure it's quite common sense. Let your uber guided HAT take out the biggest threats then rip those VN3s apart (if your stryker dies to vn3 go inf please).

Think of US armor as mobile defensive emplacements with the option to advance if/when things are safe enough to cross the river. The PLA have the option to have their armor act offensively which should be easy prey for the bradley/AT inf, and if the PLA camps their side the US has time to maneuver an AT team into place as there are very very few places to hide on this map.

As Portable mentioned you're playing it wrong, the US Army needs to keep their armor more defensive then the PLA otherwise they will lose everything within the opening minutes (Like the bradley mentioned in Dtacs post, we had an APC and a HAT deployed and waiting before he could get across).


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.

Murphy is offline Reply With Quote
Old 12-30-2011, 05:04 AM   #37
40mmrain
Supporting Member

40mmrain's Avatar
Default Re: Qwai armour imbalance

Quote:
Originally Posted by Murphy View Post
Or you can just not go head to head with the tank? I've caught many tank crews with the Bradley waiting in ambush. Sorry gents but I think trying to use the Bradley as an offensive unit is what is causing you to thin this map is unbalanced. Get your Bradley to sit back a bit and let the inf get intel on enemy armor then respond accordingly.

Strykers should also avoid head to head confrontations with the enemy 30mm, you would figure it's quite common sense. Let your uber guided HAT take out the biggest threats then rip those VN3s apart (if your stryker dies to vn3 go inf please).

Think of US armor as mobile defensive emplacements with the option to advance if/when things are safe enough to cross the river. The PLA have the option to have their armor act offensively which should be easy prey for the bradley/AT inf, and if the PLA camps their side the US has time to maneuver an AT team into place as there are very very few places to hide on this map.

As Portable mentioned you're playing it wrong, the US Army needs to keep their armor more defensive then the PLA otherwise they will lose everything within the opening minutes (Like the bradley mentioned in Dtacs post, we had an APC and a HAT deployed and waiting before he could get across).
So the americans get .50 cal, 25mm and ATGM for defense. The chinese get 30mm, 14.5mm, 120mm and ATGM for defense.

Seems fair and balanced. The chinese get mobile defensive emplacements as well, just better ones.
40mmrain is offline
Last edited by 40mmrain; 12-30-2011 at 05:15 AM..
Reply With Quote
Old 12-30-2011, 06:24 PM   #38
Murphy

Murphy's Avatar
Default Re: Qwai armour imbalance

The US Army also has those nifty guided HATs that can trump a big loud bulky tank any day of the week, while the PLA hat kit is very predictable it's still nowhere in the same league as the American equipment. The US has more then enough opportunity to deal with PLA armor with their infantry, the same could be said of the PLA as well.

The US team just needs to handle the Tank and then enjoy the advantages of having an active Bradley (still very susceptible to AT fire).


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.

Murphy is offline Reply With Quote
Reply


Tags
armour, imbalance, qwai
Thread Tools
Display Modes

Posting Rules
You may not post new threads
You may not post replies
You may not post attachments
You may not edit your posts

BB code is On
Smilies are On
[IMG] code is On
HTML code is Off
Trackbacks are On
Pingbacks are On
Refbacks are On



All times are GMT -4. The time now is 03:39 PM.


Powered by: vBulletin. ©vBulletin Solutions, Inc.
Search Engine Optimization by vBSEO 3.6.1
All Content Copyright ©2004 - 2014, Project Reality.