project reality header
Go Back   Project Reality Forums > PR:BF2 Mod Forums > PR:BF2 Community Factions > Mapping
29 Nov 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 05-30-2009, 11:40 AM   #21
sakils2
Banned

sakils2's Avatar
Default Re: [Map] Northern Afghanistan (WIP name)

So, in layer 2 and 3 MEC won't get crap?
sakils2 is offline Reply With Quote
Old 05-30-2009, 11:58 AM   #22
Rangu

Rangu's Avatar
Default Re: [Map] Northern Afghanistan (WIP name)

nah, I think he just forgot to write up the vehicles on the MEC side, as he said he wanted it to be symetrical.

[R-DEV]Jaymz - If it wasn't for the F-18's incompetence, "Independence Day" would have ended half-way through.
Rangu is offline Reply With Quote
Old 05-30-2009, 11:58 AM   #23
RedAlertSF

RedAlertSF's Avatar
Default Re: [Map] Northern Afghanistan (WIP name)

I like the idea of Norwegians having only CV90 but I think MEC should get at least some tanks instead of BMPs. The BMP is pure rape on tracks. The autocannon is crazy and it still has the TOW. Way too overpowered, because I think CV90 has just a cannon?

Anyway, I like the idea of having Norway fighting against MEC. Keep the good work up!

EDIT: Oh CV90 has autocannon too but still no TOW. :/
RedAlertSF is offline
Last edited by RedAlertSF; 05-30-2009 at 12:06 PM..
Reply With Quote
Old 05-30-2009, 01:22 PM   #24
HeXeY
Default Re: [Map] Northern Afghanistan (WIP name)

As PR is set a few years in the future (says so all around the forums) tank could be added. We don't know what Diesen might do when he gets the position as "Forsvarssjef" (Chief of Defence? )


To view links or images in signatures your post count must be 1 or greater. You currently have 0 posts.
HeXeY is offline Reply With Quote
Old 05-30-2009, 01:25 PM   #25
sakils2
Banned

sakils2's Avatar
Default Re: [Map] Northern Afghanistan (WIP name)

Quote:
Originally Posted by RedAlertSF View Post
I like the idea of Norwegians having only CV90 but I think MEC should get at least some tanks instead of BMPs. The BMP is pure rape on tracks. The autocannon is crazy and it still has the TOW. Way too overpowered, because I think CV90 has just a cannon?

Anyway, I like the idea of having Norway fighting against MEC. Keep the good work up!

EDIT: Oh CV90 has autocannon too but still no TOW. :/
1) So is a tank, BMP-3 would be more appropriate.
2) BMP-3 does not have a TOW.
sakils2 is offline Reply With Quote
Old 05-30-2009, 01:31 PM   #26
Zimmer
Supporting Member

Zimmer's Avatar
Default Re: [Map] Northern Afghanistan (WIP name)

BMP-3 has something called AT-10 or something like that as far as I know.

People don't realize that autism doesn't mean they're "stupid". Just socially inept. Like rhino... > > or in a worst case scenario... Wicca. =)- Lithium fox

To view links or images in signatures your post count must be 1 or greater. You currently have 0 posts.
I found this sentence quite funny and since this is a war game forum I will put it here. No offense to the french just a good laugh.
"Going to war without France is like going deer hunting without an accordion. All you do is leave behind a lot of noisy baggage."
Zimmer is offline Reply With Quote
Old 05-30-2009, 02:47 PM   #27
RedAlertSF

RedAlertSF's Avatar
Default Re: [Map] Northern Afghanistan (WIP name)

Quote:
Originally Posted by sakils2 View Post
1) So is a tank, BMP-3 would be more appropriate.
2) BMP-3 does not have a TOW.
1) I don't know about map's terrain but I believe that a tank would be less mobile, giving some advantage for Norwegians, as the CV90 isn't heavily armored. If MEC gets BTR-90 back in the future, it would be good option too. I just think that BMP-3's rockets are overpowered.
2) Well it's an anti-tank rocket anyway. Are you happier if I call it AT-10 or 9M117?
RedAlertSF is offline Reply With Quote
Old 05-30-2009, 03:30 PM   #28
[R-CON]Wicca
PR:BF2 Event Coordinator
Supporting Member
PR Server License Administrator

[R-CON]Wicca's Avatar
Default Re: [Map] Northern Afghanistan (WIP name)

Yes its going to be assymetrical.

What i wrote is just a suggestion nothing is fixed, except for basics.

What is the basics?

Its going to be AAS

Its going to be Norway VS MEC

And its going to be 4X4

Its going to contain villages

Its going to be desert warfare with mountains and valleys. Its supposed to be tough terrain hard to come through unless you choose the right route, like roads.




So, what if, the MEC gets the BMP 3 + T 90, but no jet?

And norwegians gets the CV 90 + JET.

Well, basically, this is not fixed, i can change this as much as i want. Its going to have to go through a "test" process to see if its balanced or not.

Im not going to spend alot of time on the "Assets" until the end time of the map, but it is the one thing that shapes the gameplay of a map, and thats also what sets the tone of it.

So its important the Community can have a say so in this. But remember these are only suggestions. And i cant promise anything

Honestly, i would like the 64 Version to have 5 CV90 + 2 412 Bell for norgies
For MEC 5 BMP3, + 2 transport Helicopters.

But would that be balanced? If the CV9030 had more speed?
Its max velocity is 70 kmph

But the BMP3 is known for its imencive firepower. And has a higher speed velocity than the CV9030. With 75 on road, and 45 off road.

But the CV has 620 Hp while the BMP 3 only has 500
So the CV is stronger, which one is more effective for Desert warfare, and in the map i created, which one will be superrior?

The only way to find out? Test. Infantry combat might have alot of say so, as AT rockets and AT emplacements in my map might have a tactical advantage in form of surprise, camouflage aswell as cover.

Since i might add, my own belief of the fact that the CV90 most probably will loose, if it would be possible to drop a TOW rocket from the back of the CV90, as its known in the Norwegian army to have TOW teams working from APCs.

Please let me know what you think


To view links or images in signatures your post count must be 1 or greater. You currently have 0 posts.

Xact Wicca is The Joker. That is all.

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.
[R-CON]Wicca is offline Reply With Quote
Old 05-30-2009, 06:53 PM   #29
sakils2
Banned

sakils2's Avatar
Default Re: [Map] Northern Afghanistan (WIP name)

Quote:
Originally Posted by RedAlertSF View Post
1) I don't know about map's terrain but I believe that a tank would be less mobile, giving some advantage for Norwegians, as the CV90 isn't heavily armored. If MEC gets BTR-90 back in the future, it would be good option too. I just think that BMP-3's rockets are overpowered.
2) Well it's an anti-tank rocket anyway. Are you happier if I call it AT-10 or 9M117?
1) Give more CV90 to the BluFor.
2) Yes.
sakils2 is offline Reply With Quote
Old 05-31-2009, 07:06 AM   #30
[R-CON]Wicca
PR:BF2 Event Coordinator
Supporting Member
PR Server License Administrator

[R-CON]Wicca's Avatar
Default Re: [Map] Northern Afghanistan (WIP name)

Well if we could drop TOWs from the back of the CV9030, by pressing, X and then engage targets such as the BMP3, that would be nice.

But, giving the Bluefor a JET, could that be done too? Would that balance it? we can try...


To view links or images in signatures your post count must be 1 or greater. You currently have 0 posts.

Xact Wicca is The Joker. That is all.

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.
[R-CON]Wicca is offline Reply With Quote
Reply


Tags
4km, afghanistan, karez, map, northern, offensive, wip
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 04:28 AM.


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