Kudos for Ramelle-Neuville -1 reply

Please wait...

SymZ

Someone set us up the bomb

50 XP

9th September 2004

0 Uploads

1,148 Posts

0 Threads

#21 14 years ago
Mr_CheeseI wonder if it's possible to make fences passable by tanks but solid to infantry. This would be a solution to the 46 ton tank being stopped by a small wooden fence without having to have the whole destroyable statics etc thing...

It would be great if the barbed wire code could be worked the same way so they don't bounce.




Mhirok

The Internet ends at GF

50 XP

9th June 2003

0 Uploads

142 Posts

0 Threads

#22 14 years ago

LordKhaineHell of Bocage has quite a few flaws. Only two real exits from the allied main springs to mind. And one of those is made worse by... fences. Tiny fences are all over this map, blocking tanks. It's amusing to see a a 46ton tank destroyer forced to go around a tiny wooden fence. It's a case of German tanks cruise in, get taken out by lone rambos with bazookas in hedges. And eventually the Americans lose all their flags. And then the map is more or less over since the panzers move up to cover both bridges leading to the allied spawn. It's one of those FH maps that just plays the same way, every time. Doesn't stop the map being fun at times, but it's frustrating loading a map knowing the outcome is virtually decided.

As for Ramelle-Neuville. It also can be fun, but I've never seen a close game on it. Either the Germans never get the first flag, or they do. And every time I've seen the Germans cap the first flag they've gone on to win. Perhaps this is just my experiences, and others have seen different outcomes?

I think those fences are just representing a real Bocage hedge. Almost no tanks were able to drive through/over them. But yes, then they have to be an obstacle for infantry too.

Ramelle: As said before, german tanks are the key. If they move in (at least 2 at a time) the germans will probably capture a flag. They proceed to the bridge and then they start raping the poor americans. I think, due this killing, the americans loose lots of tickets and will loose the map. Capturing the germans flags back, is so difficult, because the germans have tanks, and the americans not. The bridge is sooo small, and becomes easier to defend.




Fuzzy Bunny

Luke, I am your mother.

50 XP

2nd May 2005

0 Uploads

6,274 Posts

0 Threads

#23 14 years ago
MhirokCapturing the germans flags back, is so difficult, because the germans have tanks, and the americans not. The bridge is sooo small, and becomes easier to defend.

I think it's great that it's so difficult for the Americans to recap the two topmost flags without making it a push map. The fights I've seen where the Germans did manage to get into town (first time I'd seen Axis win last night, they started with a 25-12 advantage and even then had a hard time of it) the top two flags go back and forth.

Whenever the US lose all three top flags, it seems to me to be a good thing to let combat focus more on the Southern side of the river, giving the map more of a dynamic. Unfortunately, as someone else said, there's a ticket bleed for Allies when the Germans take the bridge flag, removing the motivation for them to advance. That should go.

I would suggest:

-raising the proportion of Axis tickets to Allied tickets at start -removing the Allied ticket bleed until they lose _all_ flags (like Axis used to be on 0.67a Gold Beach) -giving the Germans ticket bleed until they actually own the bridge flag.

What do you think?




{9thInf}QbanRev*E*

Hero

50 XP

26th October 2005

0 Uploads

276 Posts

0 Threads

#24 14 years ago
FuzzyBunnyI would just like to *hug* whoever made that map. Finally something which abjectly punishes tanker scorewhore campers with a big fat "L". I strongly encourage allies to ridicule, mock and annoy any Axis team that sits outside the gates racking up points. Tick tock. Unlike "some" other maps that enforce teamplay, this one doesn't give the defenders any imbalanced technical advantages. Only team play, and reliance on the cowardice of children in their precious panzers. Now I only wish bftracks listed "wins", "losses", and "really miserable defeats because YOU sat around in a tank being a chickensh**". I love it!

Wins and Losses should be no1 priority amongst stats. that also means NO teamswitching during the middle of the round! just before u spawn for the first time. Also, if your winning the map, you are gaurenteed to get better stats than if your losing it. Flags taken are way more important than kdr. That map kinda aggrevated me with its bottleneck/ness though. i mean, oh no magic lines in the water, no room for flanking. like the germans wouldnt have thought "well they have this area held down well, time to surround them." Nope! they just run into garands for 45 minutes:lol:




caeno

Yeah.

50 XP

9th August 2003

0 Uploads

410 Posts

0 Threads

#25 14 years ago

even though, you can get good fightings on the map, it's still too small, too narrow and a tube map. I just expect more complex and diversity from this kind of mod. This map could be a DoD or cs map just because it's such a small tube map.

I really hope maps like these won't get in FH2.




Lobo

All your base are belong to FH

50 XP

27th April 2003

0 Uploads

6,883 Posts

0 Threads

#26 14 years ago

What are you talking about?, variety is salt of life, FH2 will have this kind of maps also, indeed




caeno

Yeah.

50 XP

9th August 2003

0 Uploads

410 Posts

0 Threads

#27 14 years ago

if i wanna play small maps with narrow paths, i'll play dod, cs, et, cod etc etc...

You can make a lot better maps with BF engine than this map. Great maps are well designed maps. If map is small, it's either bad desing or just because some one likes small and narrow maps which don't give a lot of options to move forward. I'd like FH to remain atleast that realistic that maps give you more options to advance than 1 route!!! bottleneck maps aren't that realistic, because you could always try to advance from another way. try to make the maps so they are still very intense, but give you a lot of freedom of choice - where to advance etc.

and as you said "variety is salt of life" that doesen't really happen in ramelle ;) it's just a tube which you run up and down.




Tas

Serious business brigade

50 XP

4th September 2004

0 Uploads

7,275 Posts

0 Threads

#28 14 years ago

The problem with wide open maps is that people walk all over alone, not together like they should, making it a sort of team deathmatch type of thing. Instead of defence and assault.




Lobo

All your base are belong to FH

50 XP

27th April 2003

0 Uploads

6,883 Posts

0 Threads

#29 14 years ago

Sorry, but I must disagree, caeno, Ramelle has diferent paths to attack the city and inside, the only bottleneck is the bridge, there is nothing wrong in diferent kind of maps in FH, big maps for great freedom of strategic movements and smaller ones with intense and focused battles, everybody will find its cup of tea and the mod will be not boring




caeno

Yeah.

50 XP

9th August 2003

0 Uploads

410 Posts

0 Threads

#30 14 years ago

well, i just like maps with more options than 1-4. ramelle doesen't really have more options than that. i wouldn't call it an option if you can guard all of the paths from one position... still, maps can be small, complex, with lots of options. it just needs to be designed well. Simply, ramelle is too straight forward running in a tube like map, imo.

(can't edit my previous post for some reason, but noticed i missed one word "if a map is _too_ small". Just to straighten this up: I do not call all small maps bad.)

But, let's just disagree and leave it there. So useless to argue about opinions.