Where did you see that if you don’t mind me asking. I know they outsource art and visual related stuff.
… then what are we paying them for? Like, do you mean outsourcing as in to a different team, or some completely disconnected company?
id been avoiding the forums for a few days to not have to reply if you had already lmao, youre a better person than I
yes we can fundamentally agree on that
2 Likes
See, I can see your point, but you’d have to make it a massive map, not just one city. A few villages here and there, open fields, and hills. Tanks weren’t used in those battles. Yes, there is footage of a T-90M providing supporting fire, but that is about it. It was there just to fire some fragmentation rounds at positions.
They need to look at games like IL-2 Sturmovik—I’ve played the tank campaigns and they’re very good. But as you know, not many people in the community like realism, and they tend to ruin the experience for others.
At this point we’re looking at a more Arma type game. Don’t get me wrong, i love the idea, but how many would actually like it is the question.
these maps on a city zone would be nice for infantry battles but yeah sending tanks into a city specially if its not heavily bombarded previously is nothing short of suidisal most attempts to do this IRL end in disaster for the attacking force hence why its rare seeing tanks in such battlefields until battle itself has gone far beyond the initial assault, in my opinion rather than high complexity city maps depicting google earth locations, big battle zones without as many structures where battles already took place would be the way to go for huge maps, for example open fields or farm lands with many artillery craters to use as cover, broken trees, tank wrecks and long roads would be cool or maybe some sort of jungle with long road where upon contact with enemy tanks must scatter around the woods and MG their way into a village to capture something like vietnam road and jungle for example
1 Like