project reality header
Go Back   Project Reality Forums > PR:BF2 Mod Forums > PR:BF2 Feedback > Maps
22 Jan 2018, 00:00:00 (PRT)
Register Forum RulesDeveloper Blogs Project Reality Members List Search Today's Posts Mark Forums Read

Reply
 
LinkBack Thread Tools Display Modes
Old 12-05-2017, 03:04 PM   #11
VTRaptor

VTRaptor's Avatar
Default Re: Charlie's point

IMO overgrowth change is meh, really liked previous one, felt like Vietnam, right now it's just grass ;/.

The map itself is unbalanced, but it's designed that way. Still, there are quite few options to favor US side a bit more, like removing quad guns or reducing CAS respawn timer or increasing boats survival rate or having two first flags instead of one or having a flamethrower tank spawning after 1st flag was capped or having area attack (mortar one) with low reload time (like WW2 omaha, where you had area attack every 5 minutes, so before landing it was good to drop it) and so on.
VTRaptor is offline Reply With Quote
Old 12-05-2017, 03:26 PM   #12
[R-DEV]Outlawz7
PR:BF2 Developer

[R-DEV]Outlawz7's Avatar
Default Re: Charlie's point

Undergrowth*. And US already has area attack. And the boats survive one RPG hit, why would we make them more resistant? People already mostly use them the same way as RHIBs and they're even set up for it (despawn time, even lower respawn time).

I lowered grass to crouch height and lowered ambient sound volume for next release, I also removed the quad guns except the ones at Airstrip and NVA main.

Anyway I don't know how the flag layout could be better or how exactly it's bad, please elaborate. All I gathered from playing it since the 1.4.10.0 update is that US players go for setting up FOBs and flanking on far east side of map most of the time before and after my update. Only difference was that after update with first flag now bleeding US at least the round wasn't 1 hour of useless flanking agony.

[R-DEV]Outlawz7 is offline
Last edited by [R-DEV]Outlawz7; 12-06-2017 at 10:24 AM..
Reply With Quote
Old 12-06-2017, 09:59 AM   #13
VTRaptor

VTRaptor's Avatar
Default Re: Charlie's point

Ye undergrowth. My mistake.

Well. Currently boats start burning after that 1 RPG shot, so they allow US forces to save themselves by bailing out after hit and trying to make it swimming. These boats are bullet magnets for hordes of NVA soldiers that rush for the coast with tons of RPGs and AKs, so making them not burn after 1 RPG shot could drasticaly increase their value especially as fire support. With all the weapons it carries, it could fight off NVA soldiers camping the river and after getting hit - get back to repair bay so it could quickly return and harass again and again

Just spammed any idea that came to my mind.
VTRaptor is offline Reply With Quote
Old 12-07-2017, 12:52 PM   #14
Fuller
PR Server License Moderator
Default Re: Charlie's point

There are several problems with charlies point in terms of gameplay:

1.) Large US DoD, so technically it's not allowed to fire in/out of DoD on most servers

2.) Boats can be easily destroyed by NVA due to low view range and relatively good cover on the beach (F7 area)

3.) D11 flag placement is not very good.
The hills north of the flag are a lot higher than the island, that favors the attacking faction.
Defenders have to cross the river in order to reinforce the flag.

4.) Similar problem with the I11 flag.

General gameplay problems.
1.)It is hard to spot enemys with the boats so they are only good for supression.
2.) Reduce the number of AP mines for NVA. A full squad can lay down massive minefields because the
kit is not restricted.

Fuller is offline Reply With Quote
Old 12-20-2017, 03:54 AM   #15
waldov

waldov's Avatar
Default Re: Charlie's point

I've played Charlies point more times then I can remember and its a map with potential but its so unbalanced that it sucks for both teams, usually turning into a kind of boring walk in the park for NVA and an infuriating waste of time for the US team. Some possible balances I've thought of include:

Two cappable flags in the beginning- This would make a massive difference and is probably the best recommendation I could think of, The NVA should have to defend both the rice paddies and the village at the same time giving the the US the advantage of choosing where to concentrate an attack versus the current almost game breaking situation where the US have to launch themselves hopelessly at a singular concentrated defensive position.

Reduced AA capability for NVA- The Quad AA of the NVA is too powerful, and seriously restricts the US air-power which is realistically there best means of advance and reinforcements. the NVA should be able to threaten American air-support but not dominate it, remember the NVA can build atleast 2 Dshk AA positions, have RPG's and a Dshk armed jeep (though they could probably do with 2 if they lose there quads).

Stronger Area attack/CAS for USMC- The strong static defenses the NVA often rely upon to dominate this map should be punished by stronger US fire-support Heavier area attacks or maybe two CAS huey's (1 un-respawnable), just something decisive to break through the strong defenses the NVA throw up, boats rarely make it past the bridge because of the density of defenses the NVA can easily set up around that area, this is something the US should have a realistic counter to.

Basically being worried of making the US overpowered shouldn't be too much of a serious concern, the game is so balanced in the NVA's favor at the moment its almost unplayable. Assets and flag layouts aside, the terrain like the long grass and rolling hills surrounding open paddies and rivers give the defending NVA serious advantage anyway. Anything to lend an advantage to the US team isn't likely to do any harm its a cool map it just sucks unbalanced it is.

waldov is offline Reply With Quote
Old 12-20-2017, 10:05 AM   #16
[R-DEV]Outlawz7
PR:BF2 Developer

[R-DEV]Outlawz7's Avatar
Default Re: Charlie's point

Quote:
Originally Posted by waldov View Post
Two cappable flags in the beginning- This would make a massive difference and is probably the best recommendation I could think of, The NVA should have to defend both the rice paddies and the village at the same time giving the the US the advantage of choosing where to concentrate an attack versus the current almost game breaking situation where the US have to launch themselves hopelessly at a singular concentrated defensive position.
Until NVA decides to leave one open and defend the other one, leading to same situation as now except US gets a flag at least which they also have to defend now. And once US hold both, they have to defend both and attack a third, reversing the situation and now giving NVA the same choice. Nah. The only thing I've seen work is making all flags neutral like I did on Barracuda (and it worked since time immemorial on Jabal), but that just means assault maps don't really work in PR anymore?

I did some of the things suggested already though.

[R-DEV]Outlawz7 is offline Reply With Quote
Old 12-21-2017, 01:09 AM   #17
waldov

waldov's Avatar
Default Re: Charlie's point

Quote:
Originally Posted by [R-DEV]Outlawz7 View Post
Until NVA decides to leave one open and defend the other one, leading to same situation as now except US gets a flag at least which they also have to defend now. And once US hold both, they have to defend both and attack a third, reversing the situation and now giving NVA the same choice. Nah. The only thing I've seen work is making all flags neutral like I did on Barracuda (and it worked since time immemorial on Jabal), but that just means assault maps don't really work in PR anymore?

I did some of the things suggested already though.
Thats a good point, another option to remedy that could be to make the first two flags non-recappable once they're fully seized. so there's a long enough cap time to allow a swift NVA counter-attack but once seized the NVA have to consolidate on the other flag or in the event of both flags being capped the NVA are pushed to the under-utilized bottom two-thirds of the map. But regardless of map layout I really think the ZPU should be removed altogether (except maybe right over NVA main) and replaced with an extra FAV or something, its just far too dominating of the center of the map.

waldov is offline Reply With Quote
Old 12-21-2017, 10:10 AM   #18
Jack_Howitzer
Default Re: Charlie's point

It's already pretty balanced map, the problem is just the incompetence of PR playerbase. If US fails to make 1 or 2 decent FOBs on high ground at the game start, then they are in trouble. All USA really needs to do (which I do every time I play that map on USA) is go to either western edge of map, or eastern hills of the map, and make FOB during the first 5 minutes. What this requires is 1 SL with brains and 1-2 capable trans pilots, which almost never happens. Squads are way too slow to build a FOB, it takes less than 5 mins to get FOB up if done right. And if they do build FOB, they build it on low ground, in the beach NE or NW side of map which makes the FOB a killzone for NVA.

Once USA gets 1-2 good FOBs up on high ground, things get pretty even as US weapons are superior so attacking defending NVA is not a problem. Just a shame that many maps don't work very well as people don't get the importance of FOBs in PR, even after it's been preached for 10 years.
Jack_Howitzer is offline Reply With Quote
Old 12-21-2017, 12:03 PM   #19
Frontliner
Project Reality Beta Tester
Default Re: Charlie's point

I feel like you're completely ignoring the NVA potentially also having capable players who know that you need to prevent FOBs West and East.

Maps like Charlie's Point are imbalanced because once a decent team shows up on side of the NVA it doesn't matter who's playing on US. The NVA simply does one thing - hunting FOBs - and wins the game because of it almost alone on virtue of doing so. Compare that to a map like Marlin where there isn't only the FOB game, but also APCs and Tanks to worry about. It's also worthy to note that infantry has the ability to move around rather freely, an option you do not have on CP with so much being water. The results of decent teams of equal strength going up against each other on Marlin would be a split 50:50, on CP it's like 95:5, perhaps even worse.

ArkUTD: Do note this issue was resolved by the admin team and mats, thus this was closed
]CIA[ SwampFox: well my definition of glitching is using an enemy kit to kill the enemy
Para: You sir are an arse and not what the game or our community needs.
AlonTavor: that's like 5% holocaust there
Frontliner is offline Reply With Quote
Old 12-21-2017, 09:36 PM   #20
Jack_Howitzer
Default Re: Charlie's point

Quote:
Originally Posted by Frontliner View Post
I feel like you're completely ignoring the NVA potentially also having capable players who know that you need to prevent FOBs West and East.

Maps like Charlie's Point are imbalanced because once a decent team shows up on side of the NVA it doesn't matter who's playing on US. The NVA simply does one thing - hunting FOBs - and wins the game because of it almost alone on virtue of doing so. Compare that to a map like Marlin where there isn't only the FOB game, but also APCs and Tanks to worry about. It's also worthy to note that infantry has the ability to move around rather freely, an option you do not have on CP with so much being water. The results of decent teams of equal strength going up against each other on Marlin would be a split 50:50, on CP it's like 95:5, perhaps even worse.
It takes NVA a lot longer to reach the high ground than it takes for US to reach it by helicopters. The win/lose balance comparison about Marlin and Charlie's point is probably true, but that's mostly because of the lack of competence when it comes to usage of trans helis. People can use supply trucks somewhat effectively, but can't use trans choppers while they're not that complicated to use. This leads to steamrolls of attacking team in many amphibious assault maps.

There is no way NVA are able to reach the eastern high ground before US does, if US actually wants to get there ASAP. Once USA gets there, they can just kill everything from there with M60s and there very little NVA can do about it. Plus, USA gets gun boats and CAS.
Jack_Howitzer is offline Reply With Quote
Reply


Tags
charlie, point
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 12:21 AM.


Powered by: vBulletin. ©vBulletin Solutions, Inc.
Search Engine Optimization by vBSEO 3.6.1
All Content Copyright ©2004 - 2015, Project Reality.