project reality header
Go Back   Project Reality Forums > PR:BF2 Mod Forums > PR:BF2 Feedback > Maps
02 Dec 2022, 00:00:00 (PRT)
Register Developer Blogs Project Reality Members List Search Today's Posts Mark Forums Read

Thread Tools Display Modes
Old 2022-09-21, 23:08   #21

waldov's Avatar
Default Re: Kunar Province Feedback

I want to start off by saying the map looks great, it perfectly captures the valley forest aesthetic of Afghanistan better then any map in any game I've ever played to date. Its also worth emphasizing the unique challenges the map offers to mobility and logistics are strengths not weaknesses IMO. The fact a couple players can't handle anything more then flat capture the flag maps is no fault of the map design. Movement in my experience was fine if somewhat challenging, nothing like the frustrating mess of Korengal (a map I still love in spite of its flaws).

The main problem plaguing the map currently is the balance, the INS layer has lots of promise to be an all time great IMO but the current balance is just horrendous for the US. Ill jump right in as to why:

-2 AAV's and 2 SPG's is just simply too much. The US has zero armor and only light vehicles that are mincemeat against either of these assets. While I understand the AAV's are there too counter the single CAS asset on the map, they end up being far too effective against everything else aswell, Trans, humvees and trucks stand no chance. If that wasn't bad enough there's also 2 SPG techies roaming around. Surely even an extra AA/MANPAD kit or two at mainbase could substitute for atleast one of the AAV's, as for the SPG's they could both be removed with no detriment to the map, or have one but balanced out against some better US ground vehicles.

It feels like the current balance of Taliban assets doesn't take into account the many other variables in the Taliban's favor:

A) Assets aside the Taliban has plenty of LAT's, HAT, SPG emplacements, DSHK emplacements, MANPADS, Suicide vehicles and IED's galore. More then ample to deal with all US ground assets and seriously contest TRANs and CAS.

B) The terrain degrades the effectiveness of CAS ALOT. Even in the total Absence of air defense (not suggested). the Terrain is very rugged and broken with lots of vegetation and cover that I feel like puts a hard limit on just how effective CAS can be in the first place. A CAS team thats well coordinated with spotters and SL's still has plenty of room to be devastating in the right circumstances, but the current balance definitely feels like there was too much concern with CAS being OP that its ended up going the opposite direction and being nullified to "maybe sometimes useful?" if you have a good CAS squad and the enemy team has terrible AA.

-Now on the US side of things and as others have pointed out, TRANs is essential to the map being the slightest bit playable. I feel like the 2 huey's just don't cut it, and the almost total dependence on a single Chinook for logistics is almost gamebreaking. If it gets shot down early the US game stagnates almost immediately. Yes the logi trucks provide some opportunities as well, but they're significantly limited especially on a rugged mountainous 4km map. Huey's being upgraded to blackhawks or maybe replaced with another chinook would drastically free up the logistical burden on the US team.

-As for ground assets the lack of armor on the US team is a great and realistic choice, but I feel like the offensive capability of their light vehicles should be bulked up somewhat. AAV and SPG techies aside, the humvees and trucks are at a serious disadvantage with the limited road options and terrain that seriously favors defenders with RPG's and IED's. A MK-19's and/or CROWs would go a long way toward making leaving the US main by ground a viable option and not feel like a total death sentence.

-My only other gripe is that the US is dependent on the A-10 for any extra offensive ability, juts like with the logistic's situation; dependence on a singular asset for a vital role is always a recipe for disaster. The US should at the very least get area attacks and one could argue for a CAS kiowa or something that bridges the gap in US options. It is Insurgency after all, the Taliban should be the underdogs and not vice versa. With the advantages the terrain offers to defenders any half decent Taliban team would be quite hard-pressed to lose regardless of asset balance IMO.

Still a great unique map, that I feel like is just simply misunderstood due to balance issues. Once its fixed I feel like it'll grow on to be a fan favorite.

waldov is offline Reply With Quote
Old 2022-09-22, 13:52   #22
Default Re: Kunar Province Feedback

This map in 'normal' AAS has grown on me quite a bit since SQ-leaders are starting to figure out how it is played.

The problem with the 24-flag layout in my eyes is still that the Taliban isn't mobile enough to organize a real defense. Perhaps it is an idea to limit the US to a single chinook in the 24-flag layout and instead provide a bunch of transport humvees.
chupachupp is offline Reply With Quote
Old 2022-09-23, 04:24   #23

Nightingale's Avatar
Default Re: Kunar Province Feedback


1. Anyone who complains that the terrain is too steep or too slippery clearly has not actually played on Korengal. The terrain of Kunar is absolutely fine.

2. Because infantry cannot move quickly on this hilly map, I think it'd be best to move the 5 AAS capzones closer together and also increase their radius to like 150m. There is A LOT of space between flags, and I think that doesn't lead to interesting gameplay. Please consider making it more like Burning Sands, where most of the map doesn't have capzones and all the capzones are concentrated in a smaller 2km area.

3. Current ticket bleed for losing all flags is very very slow.

Nightingale is offline Reply With Quote
Old 2022-09-23, 14:10   #24
PR:BF2 Developer
Supporting Member

Ason's Avatar
Default Re: Kunar Province Feedback

Thanks for all the feedback, alot of good points that I agree with!

These are the changes planned for next patch:

All layers
  • Heli respawn times lowered to 5 min
  • Added Artillery

AAS16 (23 flag layout)
  • Replaced A-10 with Kiowa
  • Made Taliban rallypoints permament with 10 minute respawn if destroyed.
  • Reduced flag radii to 200m from 350m

AAS32 (US 4xFOB defense layout)
  • Reduced Taliban tickets by 100
  • Replaced A-10 with Apache

AAS64 (Normal AAS US vs Taliban layout)
  • Replaced two humvees with mk19 humvees.

AAS128 (US vs MEC)
  • Replaced MTLB with BTR-80

  • Switched USMC to US Army
  • Replaced A-10 with Apache
  • Added Kiowa
  • Replaced UH1N's with Blackhawks

Some words about AAS16:

AAS16 Is an experimental layer that I created because I wanted to try something new.
The idea behind the layer is to simulate US forces going on patrols and taliban acting as the offensive force, ambushing and hunting blufor.

The Taliban objective is not to defend every single flag (or the 3 closest to US main for that matter) but to hunt down US forces and drain their precious few tickets.

It is expected that blufor will capture alot of flags. The flags are more or less only there to give intel to Taliban about US presence. The ticket advantage that the Taliban have lets them lose alot of flags before reaching the same ticket level as the US.

The Taliban team should spread out on the entire map, build hideouts and then find and kill blufor.

With that said; yes it might be a bad idea that won't work. So far I've only seen one round, and 90% of the taliban team was concentrated on the 3 flags closest to US main the entire round.

I've seen alot of people say "wtf is this" when the layer gets played, so I just wanted to write a small explanation of what I was thinking when I made this and how I envisioned the gameplay to be. Hopefully this reaches some of those people.

Ason is offline Reply With Quote
Old 2022-09-24, 01:55   #25

Coalz101's Avatar
Default Re: Kunar Province Feedback

Originally Posted by Ason View Post
  • Made Taliban rallypoints permament with 10 minute respawn if destroyed.
This alone should fix most problems with that layout, might opt to give more tickets again to taliban so people can suicide and respawn in relevant areas more often without fear of draining tickets

Coalz101 is offline Reply With Quote
Old 2022-09-25, 14:06   #26
Default Re: Kunar Province Feedback

Originally Posted by Suchar View Post
Originally Posted by Suchar View Post
It took me whole 15 minutes..
So you say we all just hallucinated?

Did you watch the replays of real people on this map?

WingWalker is offline Reply With Quote
Old 2022-09-25, 17:50   #27
PR:BF2 Developer
Project Reality Beta Tester
Default Re: Kunar Province Feedback

Originally Posted by WingWalker View Post
So you say we all just hallucinated?
No, I said something else:
If moving is this much of an issue, perhaps it is not the map that is at fault.
I even provided a solution to your issue:
If you really can't walk, coordinate with others to get some transport
Originally Posted by WingWalker View Post
Did you watch the replays of real people on this map?
I am pretty sure I am a real person too.

Secret link last updated: 12th Oct 2022
Suchar is offline Reply With Quote
Old 2022-10-01, 21:59   #28

UncleSmek's Avatar
Default Re: Kunar Province Feedback

Cool map.
Add China v Mec layer
UncleSmek is offline Reply With Quote

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

All times are GMT. The time now is 03:31.