Feedback on Map Rotation

View previous topic View next topic Go down

Feedback on Map Rotation

Post by Player_1 on Sat 5 Oct - 4:56:45

Hey guys, I just wanted to share my thoughts on the current set up. It appears to be really stable and is certainly a fresh sight. Yesterday we made it all the way to Karbala before a crash :). I'll be honest, at first I was a bit perplexed by seeing Marlin Inf and Shijia Valley so early in there, but I've really warmed up to them. Especially Marlin with it's intense city fighting (FAMAS be damned).

There is only one proposal I have regarding this map list: change Fallujah West from the Standard layout to the Infantry layout. The reason for this is simply that the USMC with four APC/IFVs are too OP on that map. It's not the entirely the fault of a couple bad INS teams that I bring this up. Since the release of 1.0 I have seen the INS team win once on this map. Of course there have been many games I was not present for, but of the seven games I remember playing since the new patch, five very recently, when the USMC won they did so with overwhelming destruction to the INS team. By this I mean that the INS end up with a K/D somewhere in the range of 0.25-0.33. If there were any good squad leaders on the INS team they will start to quit half way through the round. This has a chain effect through the rest of the evening as games get progressively worse for that team.

I won't deny that I almost always play Blufor on that map. It is one of my favorite maps. The issue is that since the increase of players per team, the USMC can field all of their armor and have a couple of infantry squads assault a cache. They already have the advantage of scoped weapon, so the increase in boots on the ground is not balanced at all versus the insurgents who, while also getting this boost, do not get an increase in RPGs/PKMs/RPKs. Most of the time the area around the cache devolves into a turkey shoot by one element, including armor support, while another moves on the cache area thus overrunning any nearby hideouts. Simple, easy tactic with a predictable outcome for the USMC with no effective counter by the INS. This layout relies way to much on a capable SPG techie crew and RPG teams and mediocre to incompetent armor crews to be balanced. God help the INS team if the USMC have a commander that is working with the armor.

The assets on the infantry layout are much more balanced in my opinion. For those unfamiliar with them, I've compiled this list.

USMC: Logistics Truck x2
          Eight-man Transport Truck x2
          HMMWV CROWS x2
          HMMWV Thin-skin with .50 cal x2
          HMMWV Up-armored with .50 cal x1

Of these assets, only the CROWS do not respawn.

INS: Same asset layout except that the SPG is exchanged for a 12.7mm technical and there are no Garys.

With this setup the USMC would have to work really hard not to lose their CROWS and would not be able to sit back with armor shooting every window that could pose a threat. Of course they still retain their advantage with optics for ranged engagements. The insurgents get the advantage of having more Marines to shoot at and don't have to worry about being destroyed by armor. Due to the increased focus on infantry combat, both teams would be encouraged to build hideouts and FOBs. It looks like a win-win situation to me. What do you guys think?

_________________
A man convinced against his will is of the same opinion still.

Player_1

Registration date : 2012-10-08

Back to top Go down

View previous topic View next topic Back to top

- Similar topics

 
Permissions in this forum:
You cannot reply to topics in this forum