With everyone talking about how they need to break up Guad into seperate maps... -1 reply

Please wait...

Suckyshot

meh I got nothin...

50 XP

14th June 2005

0 Uploads

1,161 Posts

0 Threads

#31 15 years ago

ditto2.gif that's exactly what I'm thinking now. Too many maps, like Iwo Jima and Guadalcanal, try and cram too much into a small map. They try to offer a little of everything, but fail in absolutely every regard. Invasion of the Philippenes is one of the worst examples of this. The map is just too freaking big, and by the time you try and get somewhere (like a flag being capped), it's either too late, or you get shot and have to spawn on the other side of the map and do the whole thing over again. We need smaller maps, that encompass a specific part of a battle. I'm not saying we need 20 maps for Guadalcanal, or 30 for the Philippenes, but try to break it down a bit. 2 or 3 for most of the major battles will do fine.




Lt.General.Rodkeif

.50 cal Thompson

50 XP

5th July 2005

0 Uploads

138 Posts

0 Threads

#32 15 years ago

but the pacific would need more maps because it took very long to get Islands like iwo jima and okanawa.also iwo jima need a map just for the arrtillery bombing from the ships and bomb raids from the planes.then a map for the raid.




Oldschool

Shinjirarenai!

50 XP

18th April 2003

0 Uploads

790 Posts

0 Threads

#33 15 years ago

I'm surprised so many ppl have embraced this idea, when it was first suggested some years ago it was shot down, mainly because what some ppl are saying: there will be too many pacific maps, thus it will take longer for the devs to churn out other theaters.

While that might be the case, the devs don't have to split EVERY pacific map. Wake, Tarawa, genearly smaller island maps do not have to split up, they could just be enlarged.

However, there are some like Guadacanal, Iwo Jima, and Saipan that are being done a great injustice by just keeping them as one map. They were larger islands in general in RL, and imo they should represented as so in FH.

Hell, they don't need to even do the 2 to 3 maps for them, maybe just one beach landing or inland fighting map for, lets say, Saipan, would suffice. Just as long as they don't make it some dinky island and label it as Saipan, I think that would make a great improvement overall.




Lobo

All your base are belong to FH

50 XP

27th April 2003

0 Uploads

6,883 Posts

0 Threads

#34 15 years ago

It depends in the design that the maper has in mind, if he wants a big scenario with massive strategic movements of the fleets, aerial combat and infantery the pacific islands must be scaled. If he wants more close combat infantery fight he can split a pacific battle and choose a smaller area




Lt.General.Rodkeif

.50 cal Thompson

50 XP

5th July 2005

0 Uploads

138 Posts

0 Threads

#35 15 years ago

Hell Your completly right about that and the dinky island thing because I see some custom maps that say they the real thing and it ends up being some thing a 2 year old did.but sure tarawa NEEDS to be enlarged and have more tickets and with wake and so forth but there should be the maps like iwo jima and tarawa(mabe)and some other maps have night battles:naughty: :tommygun:




Lt.General.Rodkeif

.50 cal Thompson

50 XP

5th July 2005

0 Uploads

138 Posts

0 Threads

#36 15 years ago

cause those battles with others didnt just last one day.also it would look very good.