[R-DEV]Drav wrote:A lot of ops in Afghanistan appear to have the allies use the dry open plains up in the mountains to move about in, then coming down closer to the villages to find the enemy. They seem to be relatively safe out in the desert, but coming closer to the town often is dangerous. The exception to this seems to be where the mountains get big and vehicles have to negotiate narrow passes to get to the next section of open desert.
Korengal had mountainsides, but is not a map for vehicles. I see lots of steep mountains in your WIP shots, but not much as described earlier. I hope Feyzabad has some open high desert for the allies to manoeveur in, with a pass or two for ambushes. This will also help keep the Taliban ingame within the greenzone and around the caches, as with long vis, no scopes and no cover they will have no chance in the open country.
I dont think the essence of the fighting in Afganistan has been captured yet. Korengal looks awesome and is a great map to play, but you get the feeling the enemy are EVERYWHERE. Korengal for me doesent create that dynamic of manoevering from relative safety closer and closer to a suspect village, all peaceful, then suddenly the whole village starts shooting, and a 4km map has the opportunity to create that.
I love the point you brought up and I agree entirely. It's not often I come across opinions with similar perspectives and ideals for critical approaches on gameplay.
I usually don't spend my time commenting on the development of maps simply because they are open-ended and usually the creator of the map makes it the way they want anyway. But as for areas of open terrain, it is a necessary element of the battlefield if armored units are intended to be stationed there to begin with. Otherwise, it's a waste of a teams effort especially when assets are present on a map with no practical application of their use.
Despite the number of Insurgency maps created to this day, I still don't think a majority of them reflect this highly important feature. The only one that seems to come remotely close is what appeared to be a map in development named Sangin. The features of wide-open terrain in specific locations of the battlefield are critical.
Basically for all engagements between the U.S. and the British teams in an Insurgency game mode; open areas are a very important aspect of the battlefield. This allows vehicles to maneuver and take effective firing positions to support infantry movements. However the Insurgents need a portion of the map for thier own use. Basically a map that is about 50% open areas and 50% rugged terrain, or dense urban areas are the essence of an insurgency map.
My favorite Insurgency map that supports armored assets and infantry coordination has always been Al Basrah to this day. Although it may not always be played out with coordination, it has the greatest amount of potential that I have ever seen on a map of it's kind. It may be an old map to PR now, but it has a wonderful nature about it that will be the basis of what all Insurgency maps should be based around. The combination of a closed-in city centers to protect insurgents and wide-open desert and green fields to support allied troops and armored assets still remain unparalleled to this day. Even when compared to the map Ramiel.
This is why I have always felt the Stryker that is available on Korengal Valley to be redundant. It's effectiveness is limited by the crewman as they are unable to be entirely aware of their surroundings because of the lack of visual distance and abilities to hear outside of the vehicle. In other words, there is a deficit in situational awareness that makes it nearly impossible to use in such a setting. Not to mention the limitations of mobility from a lack of sufficient roadways and/or open terrain including the limitations of highly elevated terrain surrounding a majority of the map.
Also in consideration to the v0.85 build, the abundance of Insurgent RPG's (Even with it's reduction in firepower.) and the newly revised and restricted Engineers functionality; the Strykers role on Korengal Valley at this time is basically useless. If it is used at all on the map, it is clearly a suicide mission at some point where it will become disabled and stranded in the middle of nowhere with little to no chance of survival.
As a veteran user of vehicles and an avid fan of armored combat with a tendancy to prefer survival over kill count; I cannot see how practical APC's will perform in scenarios like this. They are at best a one-way ticket with a combat life expectancy of no longer than 5 minutes on average.
I don't see how allied armored assets could survive such an encounter for long periods of time. Feyzabad appears to be almost identical to Korengal Valley in essence, with the exception of a larger map size and aircraft fire support. A continual bottleneck road along the riverside being overwatched from elevated positions with little to no open fields of view. This is just another reason for a armored crewman to be paranoid. Armored assets placed on this map will be subjected to basically same terms as they are in Korengal Valley...
One way suicide missions.
