Nice to hear your working on push style maps Mcgibs,the only way you can ever create anything even resembling a front in BF is with push style maps. Joint Ops has a push system,cap point A before you can cap point B,it works great and leads for some intense battles on a frontline.
McGibsWe are currently working on getting a working push style gameplay working (much better then DCs ) as well as experimenting with other capture types (as you may have noticed, the american base on norwind needs multiple players to capture) You can expect maps to be retrofitted with these features in .7
Hell yeah! woohooo! awesome! pwnage! :bows: :bows: :bows: :bows: only have to wait till next year :uhoh: ;)
big maps are fun, IMO, although Rambos wouldn't be a problem if people actually defended flags, but who wants to stay behind and wait... And the fewer the players, the more difficult it is to defend several flags.
Big maps are indeed fun, but rearguard flags shouldnt be able to be capped. I see flags in FH resemble something a presance for the force owning that flag, in real life such a force would attack the enemy's front(flag) (attacking with more then one guy in a willy jeep). They would take over the enemy positions if they were succesfull and would move the front line. Gold beach for one, the allies did not get of the beach and drive deep into france to take over a town/strategic point there. They took over the beach and the german defences, then moved inland after making a beachhead.. To make a long story short, war is about large groups attacking another large group. FH should try to make this happen in the game. As its now, you might get lucky and get two tanks to team up and attack a flag.. But if its truely a realism mod, those tanks should be covered by infantry as well.. push style maps would force the teams to stick together. This sometimes naturally happens in maps like Alpenfestung, untill some guy bails out of his plane and somehow takes controll of an area with just a pistol and a knife. it would be nice if people would defend thier rear flags, but this is not an option in the bf192 engine. with only 60 players in total, you would need at least two guys to cover each flag; one AT and one to cover the AT guy against infantry attacks. In real life no-one would think about parashuting behind enemy lines without expecting quik reinforcements or extraction. Logistics plays a part too, irl ammo didnt come from magic green boxes on the ground strangely enough. sorry for this long-ass post. we need push-style maps. period.
The new maps are well made and look really nice but imho they are too big and there are too many flags.
Indeed. The three western flags on Orel, along with a good chunk of the map itself, should be completely removed. There's always two different games going on -- one in the center and a jeep race over in the west.
I agree with what most everyone else has already said. Push style gameplay is needed, especially on the large maps.
The Falaise pocket ? i cant see any realisme in any way i play this map,
are the devs actualy read someting about these historical events, i wonder.
SMAUGThe Falaise pocket ? i cant see any realisme in any way i play this map, are the devs actualy read someting about these historical events, i wonder. regards
Ehm..its about the maps being too big:)
I know, but if i actualy open another tread for this, naaah
Battle of orel is by far the worst map when it comes to flags. Back and forth you go. Great looking but boring as hell. Looking at all the dice maps you will see that almost all the maps have a maxium of 3-4 flags. sometimes 5 but very rarely. While people slag off the dice maps they tend to be fun to play and have a lot of good choke points meaning you will get a good battle going on. The Fh maps tend to very well made in terms of look,s but tend to play very badly. Arhnem is a great map but is ruined by twats who drive kuberwagons to the back flag. That point aside please when you do release a hotfix which iam sure you will...please remove some of those flags. Iam begging you!:bows:
I blame it on the capture being tied to spawning. Realistically a force should be able to capture a behind the lines objective, that's the whole point of paratroopers really.
The problem in my opinion is that the flags are directly tied to spawning, and not the armies them selves. If spawning was tied to the Army, and flags only used to control the map objectives, I think we'd see a more realistic approach on confrontation. Flags would be less of a priority, and destroying the enemies army would be a higher priority.
I believe the carelessness on equipment, isn't necessarily caused by this though. I think the carelessness steams from the equipment being so readily available. Who cares if anyone runs a tank right across the bridge and it get's wasted? It'll spawn again in 30 seconds.
That's why I made a "Mission Series" map. I'd like to see a totally different method to winning the map(faster maps, but more of an importance place on actions) and a higher importance placed on equipment. As vehicles become more important, the tactics used with them should start to mirror reality. When there is only one tiger on the map period, and you don't get another until reset (Map runs shorter though.) the tactics used with it start to become less careless from my experience. I want vehicles to be disabled more, and last around on the battle field as burning wrecks, etc ect....
I've gotten really good feedback on it so far, but haven't seen high numbers yet. It's rough to get a game started. No one wants to be the first 8 people on. lol