detailed CQB sized maps - a discussion

[twisted 128]

sacriligeous? just a moment before pulling out your flame throwers and arming your weapons of mass indignation.

i'm merely suggesting the option of having some smaller sized maps (around 1-3km square) that can give the mad visceral feel of a tighter battleground - including CQB city combat. This would mean in these maps that ground based vehciles/infantry are restricted to a certain area. Planes shouldn't be that retricted of course. the classic CTF/AAS,KOTH would all have a place here.

This will:

1) help ensure the popularity of AA. especially because the millions of bf2 people out there will find a play mode they undersdtand.

2) People intimidated or feeling lost at first on the big (i love em) AA maps will get a chance to enjoy the game easier.

3) I'll get to own those fools who try and bunnyhop and shoot. Selfish, yes, but ever so satisfying as well.

4) It's a classic use for Join in Progress that AA brings.

i would be damn interested in playing smallish intense maps using AA modern weapons/OFP type realism improved.

of course it would be in no way a replacement for the big sweeping lovely open maps OFP has. just an extra choice for players.

[-DirTyDeeDs--Ziggy- 0]

Have you ever played OFP??

THERE ARE PLENTY OF THE MAPS YOU DESCRIBE

[Big Dawg KS 6]

But all of those people that it would attract are exactly the kind of people who most people here wouldn't want playing Armed Assault... We shouldn't be tricking BF2 players into playing Armed Assault like that anyways, because that isn't the true nature of the game. Instead, the game will attract those who are actually interested in Armed Assault's style of gameplay, it will attract people who appreciate the game for what it is, not put on an act to luer people who are into almost the complete opposite type of gameplay. IMO, if you feel intimidated by Armed Assault then you shouldn't be playing it, you'd do better playing an unintimidating game like BF2 where you allways have an advantage.

[Scrub 0]

While both points are honest and true, I don't think it would be tricking people (lureing? definately! ). It's just using the broad features of this engine to attract (addict) FPS types -out of the box-.

It would introduce them to more real movement and force them to work as a team (under pain of virtual death).  More to the point, when former BF players are skinned alive by seasoned OFP vets, who are (reasonably) more mature, and do not get the "YYYeeaaa boyyyy i ScReWeD u nOOb!",  they might actually learn some manners and end up being pleasant to play with.  Vivid imagination?  yeah, sure.  

Still.. nifty idea twisted.  

[JdB 151]

seasoned OFP vets, who are (reasonably) more mature, and do not get the "YYYeeaaa boyyyy i ScReWeD u nOOb!", they might actually learn some manners and end up being pleasant to play with.

And you seriously think those vets would even stay around long enough for those BF2 kiddos to actually learn something?

If I want to get worthless kids to behave maturely, I'd rather join the real army and become a drill instructor thank you.

Sounds nice, teaching people to play maturely and getting yelled at every single minute...

[galbaldy 0]

This could be useful for reducing lag for CQB, but that's about it.

[Metal Heart 0]

Well there's the intro island and you can limit the game area in missions on larger islands quite easily too.

I don't really see the point of including a smaller island unless it's really heavy on objects. There might be some kind of integrated addon downloader so you could make new islands for missions without having to have everyone download them separately.

[twisted 128]

i do play OFP. every night. It's the game i play most.

However, the online scene is a bit small ATM, very few people online most times. understandable cause game is 4 years old and looking a bit dated. the main server i play on is OGN (australian/NZ) and i can't recall seeing such small maps played.

maybe i'm missing something. i'll take another look but the smallest map i've seen is desert island.

and I didn't mention tricking anywhere. Just bringing up the possibility of very intense map play. not forcing or tricking. Many, obviously would not play said maps. no problem. But maybe many would play. i would if they existed.

i presonally prefer not to discrimate who i shoot online. the more tagets the better.

obviously more feedback like the above and this discussion would have a real final conclusion.

[-DirTyDeeDs--Ziggy- 0]

i'll take another look but the smallest map i've seen is desert island.

take another look.

many maps have boundaries that make it CQB, with or without vehicles.

St Pierre?

Canyon Clash?

[shinRaiden 0]

TP3 for VBS1 shows that you can approach a BF2 level of density in the common engine, while retaining large scale maps. If the n00blings wish to gun and run their way into the city they're more than welcome to, me personally I prefer to stay back and send some indirect fire their way.

[mattxr 9]

This could be useful for reducing lag for CQB, but that's about it.

you just put the veiw ditance down (fog) so you can just pretty much see the city then there you go.. wall off the city or something then your done..

1. confined to only a city

2. Aircraft Limited cos of the fog

3. other things lol

[hellfish6 7]

One of my favorite maps for OFP is Hell's Circus' Spearhead 44 (I haven't tried the latest one, I'm referring to the original). It was a pretty small map, but very detailed. There were microregions throughout the map - hedgerows, a city, fighting positions, defended beach and a radar station, among others. It was a great map for fast infantry fights in the BF2/DoD sense.

Sometimes you don't need 100 square kilometers, sometimes it's just nice to have small little areas to fight in and not worry about running out of vehicles to get you back into the fight 5000m away. I'm glad OFP and, I presume, AA allow imaginations to run wild. I fully expect to see a new [HC] small island shortly after AA is released (hear that, Para! )

[funnyguy1 0]

I think "bf sized maps" should be changed for "much smaller but more detailed CQB maps"...

It would be great to have a detailed and fully urbanized island/piece of land for CQB/MOUT-only scenarios, the idea isn`t bad at all....

Of course no problem if Arma can handle it (urbanized areas with complex buildings and interriors you could enter and interact with)....

If someone could do a R6 mod for ofp/ArmA....mmmm

[robert(uk) 0]

I think "bf sized maps" should be changed for "much smaller but more detailed CQB maps"...

Exactly. After all, I remember all the people who complimented Soldner on this feature when it first appeard. Because if you wanted to snipe, you could go up on a hillside some way from the main battle and kill noobs from up there, without being punished for leaving the 'operational area'. That is the trouble with BF style games.

[Scrub 0]

Quote[/b] ]Lt HuNTeR Posted on Feb. 02 2006,22:08

--------------------------------------------------------------------------------

Quote (Scrub @ Feb. 03 2006,03:31)

seasoned OFP vets, who are (reasonably) more mature, and do not get the "YYYeeaaa boyyyy i ScReWeD u nOOb!",  they might actually learn some manners and end up being pleasant to play with.

And you seriously think those vets would even stay around long enough for those BF2 kiddos to actually learn something?  

If I want to get worthless kids to behave maturely, I'd rather join the real army and become a drill instructor thank you.

Sounds nice, teaching people to play maturely and getting yelled at every single minute...  

Cynic!  

@ Twisted: 'Rumble in the Jungle' is quite small, not very detailed AFA buildings, but in trees and terrain.

[450R 1]

We may not need smaller maps to achieve greater detail in AA if the "streaming engine" technology is as good as I hope.

[Randy 0]

The idea is a good one and the work required to slap a few small maps on the end product is minimal at most, hell these people are making 100 square kilometre maps here, whats 1 square k? Yes, I also believe it would help the games popularity and attract more players.

The 'we don't want those immature simpletons playing OUR game' attitude is discusstingly elitist, lose it. If this game can lure in some BF2 players, it will change them, for the better. Plus we can completely kick their asses with the power of thoughtful strategy.

Their awesome lack-of-ridalin induced twitch reflexes that get them so far in counter-strike will wither under the gaze of ARMA's harsh reality.

[lwlooz 0]

Well,what a great idea again.Why let the BIS staff work on important things that improve the concept and gameplay of their game(which is as we known kinda different to the mainstream idiocy) if they can work on including CQB maps that introduce forced limitation in the good ole limitless OFP world.Now im slighly biased i admit,i always got bored of CTF,TDM and DM or any CQB stuff alike....

So.. as conclusion: I always said,you can give people the best engine with no limits,1000 sq kms of playable ground and you still can lock yourself up in a 5mx5m(by walls for example) area shooting at each other round for round in mindless fun going for the enemy flag.So nothing BIS needs to focus on.IMO

[Blackblood 0]

Hehe...I did start a project a lifetime ago for OFP called "MAYALL" (May All Your Actions Lag Less). Multiple square km maps in different climates/surrounding for people less fortunate on the rig budget. Very much scrapped by numerous reasons.

[-DirTyDeeDs--Ziggy- 0]

If this game can lure in some BF2 players, it will change them, for the better. Plus we can completely kick their asses with the power of thoughtful strategy.

Their awesome lack-of-ridalin induced twitch reflexes that get them so far in counter-strike will wither under the gaze of ARMA's harsh reality.

holy crap ... that is a GEM of a comment!

[-kelet0r 0]

There seems to be huge demand for close quarters combat set in an urban environment right now - probably because it is the environment most people live in and cqc is far more visceral than wide open warfare

Counterstrike and the current map preferences in bf2 bear witness to this so Armed Assault should not neglect this area of multiplayer especially

[robert(uk) 0]

There seems to be huge demand for close quarters combat set in an urban environment right now - probably because it is the environment most people live in and cqc is far more visceral than wide open warfare

Counterstrike and the current map preferences in bf2 bear witness to this so Armed Assault should not neglect this area of multiplayer especially

Yeah the urban maps in BF2 (Karkand, Mashtuur and Sharqi) are definitely the most popular. Some servers are dedicated to playing JUST those maps...

[lwlooz 0]

I have already said it and I will say it again.You all can enjoy being locked up in tiny spaces even if BIS doesnt focus on completely overhauling their maps transforming them from large island type things to small-high-detail-closed-by-artificial-walls maps.

Just look at OFP.Locking yourself into 50mx50m in Hexenkessel gives the kicks to some people who enjoy that and it doesn't ruin the lifes for the rest of us who actually try to create some warfare-scenarios that are bigger than: "I'm my own Army" types.

PS:As Shinraiden said.Look at VBS1-TP3.. thats some place for Cool roXxor CQB ,ain't it.. I can imagine the downed bhd and delta boys right away

[funnyguy1 0]

The idea is to add a few(one?) map(s) much smaller but heavily urbanized for CQB (no matter sp or mp).

Nobody is asking BIS to change/transform the maps we have now...

[twisted 128]

The idea is to add a few(one?) map(s) much smaller but heavily urbanized for CQB (no matter sp or mp).

Nobody is asking BIS to change/transform the maps we have now...

absolutey. Armed Ass must have the massive maps or else it just wouldnt be the franchise it is. but there is room for a little diversity.