Weekly Debrief

Maps

2»

Comments

  • xXHappy_PuppyXx
    158 postsMember, Battlefield 3, Battlefield 4, Battlefield Hardline, Battlefield, Battlefield 1, Battlefield V Member
    edited January 12
    Trokey66 wrote: »
    StormSaxon wrote: »
    I really hope the don’t do another DDay.
    If they want beach landings go Salerno or Anzio.
    If they do do DDay, give us Gold-Sword-Juno or Utah not ... yawn.... Omaha. Again.

    I’m hoping for a Market Garden, Kursk, El Alamein, Warsaw, Berlin and Kesserine maps. Give us the WW2 that gets neglected.

    The reason they use Omaha for games is because its the only that the Germans held for any reasonable amount of time.. not much game play if you pick a location that one side was steam rolled with in a couple hours... there was a real threat that the Omaha landings were going to fail out right.. and that makes it better for a game play map.

    If you follow your reasoning, then the Americans should win every round!

    Maps are measly locations that should provide a reasonably balanced game play.
    StormSaxon wrote: »
    StormSaxon wrote: »
    I really hope the don’t do another DDay.
    If they want beach landings go Salerno or Anzio.
    If they do do DDay, give us Gold-Sword-Juno or Utah not ... yawn.... Omaha. Again.

    I’m hoping for a Market Garden, Kursk, El Alamein, Warsaw, Berlin and Kesserine maps. Give us the WW2 that gets neglected.

    The reason they use Omaha for games is because its the only that the Germans held for any reasonable amount of time.. not much game play if you pick a location that one side was steam rolled with in a couple hours... there was a real threat that the Omaha landings were going to fail out right.. and that makes it better for a game play map.

    That might be a reason for it in a Hollywood movie. Or a table top wargame based on history.
    This is a first person shooter, so you can put Juno beach and have the Canadians storm it, if it’s a steam rolling it’s down to the defender.

    You WONT get a more historical “feel” from Omaha, as what happens on your map bears no relation to reality. Omaha was 1 day, and 1 beach out of 5, how that encapsulates a 6 year multi continent, multi theatre war Christ alone knows.

    Fact is it’s 90%, I’d guess, Americans that want Omaha, not because it’s “balanced” or a “better” game because for them that’s WW2. Hell I’d take a Dieppe over another Omaha. I’ve done Omaha multiple times in other games.




    /facepalm

    Talk about getting your panties in a wad...


    The point was that the reason Omaha is used is that it was the only place Germans put up an effective resistance on the beach so it would make sense that games are useing that battle as the basis of for game play.

    There are much better areas to show case other battles that were just after D-Day itself.. such as the Battle for Caen where the Germans bled the British from Sword and Juno beach. This battle started June 10th just 4 days after D-Day and lasted till August. This would be a great battle and map to use as it would have the British trying to expand their beach head while the Germans counter attack trying to throw the British and Canadians back into the sea and would have Normandy country side as well as urban battles in Caen itself.

    But if you are sticking with the 24 hours of D-Day it self.. the bloodiest and most vicious combat was Omaha beach.. that's really not debatable and why its used in games and movies more then any other.. There are some movies that look at the other beaches such as The Longest Day but even in that moves the bulk of the fighting is Omaha.

    The fact you think its Americans that want it not because its "balanced and its what the war is to them".. just shows what a racist you are.. as that's in no way what was said.
    Post edited by xXHappy_PuppyXx on
  • Trokey66
    8357 postsMember, Battlefield 3, Battlefield 4, Battlefield Hardline, Battlefield, Battlefield 1, CTE, Battlefield V Member
    Trokey66 wrote: »
    StormSaxon wrote: »
    I really hope the don’t do another DDay.
    If they want beach landings go Salerno or Anzio.
    If they do do DDay, give us Gold-Sword-Juno or Utah not ... yawn.... Omaha. Again.

    I’m hoping for a Market Garden, Kursk, El Alamein, Warsaw, Berlin and Kesserine maps. Give us the WW2 that gets neglected.

    The reason they use Omaha for games is because its the only that the Germans held for any reasonable amount of time.. not much game play if you pick a location that one side was steam rolled with in a couple hours... there was a real threat that the Omaha landings were going to fail out right.. and that makes it better for a game play map.

    If you follow your reasoning, then the Americans should win every round!

    Maps are measly locations that should provide a reasonably balanced game play.
    StormSaxon wrote: »
    StormSaxon wrote: »
    I really hope the don’t do another DDay.
    If they want beach landings go Salerno or Anzio.
    If they do do DDay, give us Gold-Sword-Juno or Utah not ... yawn.... Omaha. Again.

    I’m hoping for a Market Garden, Kursk, El Alamein, Warsaw, Berlin and Kesserine maps. Give us the WW2 that gets neglected.

    The reason they use Omaha for games is because its the only that the Germans held for any reasonable amount of time.. not much game play if you pick a location that one side was steam rolled with in a couple hours... there was a real threat that the Omaha landings were going to fail out right.. and that makes it better for a game play map.

    That might be a reason for it in a Hollywood movie. Or a table top wargame based on history.
    This is a first person shooter, so you can put Juno beach and have the Canadians storm it, if it’s a steam rolling it’s down to the defender.

    You WONT get a more historical “feel” from Omaha, as what happens on your map bears no relation to reality. Omaha was 1 day, and 1 beach out of 5, how that encapsulates a 6 year multi continent, multi theatre war Christ alone knows.

    Fact is it’s 90%, I’d guess, Americans that want Omaha, not because it’s “balanced” or a “better” game because for them that’s WW2. Hell I’d take a Dieppe over another Omaha. I’ve done Omaha multiple times in other games.




    /facepalm

    Talk about getting your panties in a wad...


    The point was that the reason Omaha is used is that it was the only place Germans put up an effective resistance on the beach so it would make sense that games are useing that battle as the basis of for game play.

    There are much better areas to show case other battles that were just after D-Day itself.. such as the Battle for Caen where the Germans bled the British from Sword and Juno beach. This battle started June 10th just 4 days after D-Day and lasted till August. This would be a great battle and map to use as it would have the British trying to expand their beach head while the Germans counter attack trying to throw the British and Canadians back into the sea and would have Normandy country side as well as urban battles in Caen itself.

    But if you are sticking with the 24 hours of D-Day it self.. the bloodiest and most vicious combat was Omaha beach.. that's really not debatable and why its used in games and movies more then any other.. There are some movies that look at the other beaches such as The Longest Day but even in that moves the bulk of the fighting is Omaha.

    The fact you think its Americans that want it not because its "balanced and its what the war is to them".. just shows what a racist you are.. as that's in no way what was said.

    The point being is that there are 32 players on each side irrespective of what happened in 'real life'.

    Come on, it's a video game, think about it!
  • Head3masher
    1420 postsMember, Battlefield 3, Battlefield 4, Battlefield, Battlefield 1, BF1IncursionsAlpha, Battlefield V Member
    Maps are terrible for the Domination and team deathmatch modes. Unless you want to get sniped, there is not much to do.
  • StormSaxon
    658 postsMember, Battlefield 3, Battlefield 4, Battlefield Hardline, Battlefield, Battlefield 1, CTE, Battlefield V Member
    edited January 12
    Trokey66 wrote: »
    StormSaxon wrote: »
    I really hope the don’t do another DDay.
    If they want beach landings go Salerno or Anzio.
    If they do do DDay, give us Gold-Sword-Juno or Utah not ... yawn.... Omaha. Again.

    I’m hoping for a Market Garden, Kursk, El Alamein, Warsaw, Berlin and Kesserine maps. Give us the WW2 that gets neglected.

    The reason they use Omaha for games is because its the only that the Germans held for any reasonable amount of time.. not much game play if you pick a location that one side was steam rolled with in a couple hours... there was a real threat that the Omaha landings were going to fail out right.. and that makes it better for a game play map.

    If you follow your reasoning, then the Americans should win every round!

    Maps are measly locations that should provide a reasonably balanced game play.
    StormSaxon wrote: »
    StormSaxon wrote: »
    I really hope the don’t do another DDay.
    If they want beach landings go Salerno or Anzio.
    If they do do DDay, give us Gold-Sword-Juno or Utah not ... yawn.... Omaha. Again.

    I’m hoping for a Market Garden, Kursk, El Alamein, Warsaw, Berlin and Kesserine maps. Give us the WW2 that gets neglected.

    The reason they use Omaha for games is because its the only that the Germans held for any reasonable amount of time.. not much game play if you pick a location that one side was steam rolled with in a couple hours... there was a real threat that the Omaha landings were going to fail out right.. and that makes it better for a game play map.

    That might be a reason for it in a Hollywood movie. Or a table top wargame based on history.
    This is a first person shooter, so you can put Juno beach and have the Canadians storm it, if it’s a steam rolling it’s down to the defender.

    You WONT get a more historical “feel” from Omaha, as what happens on your map bears no relation to reality. Omaha was 1 day, and 1 beach out of 5, how that encapsulates a 6 year multi continent, multi theatre war Christ alone knows.

    Fact is it’s 90%, I’d guess, Americans that want Omaha, not because it’s “balanced” or a “better” game because for them that’s WW2. Hell I’d take a Dieppe over another Omaha. I’ve done Omaha multiple times in other games.




    /facepalm

    Talk about getting your panties in a wad...


    The point was that the reason Omaha is used is that it was the only place Germans put up an effective resistance on the beach so it would make sense that games are useing that battle as the basis of for game play.

    There are much better areas to show case other battles that were just after D-Day itself.. such as the Battle for Caen where the Germans bled the British from Sword and Juno beach. This battle started June 10th just 4 days after D-Day and lasted till August. This would be a great battle and map to use as it would have the British trying to expand their beach head while the Germans counter attack trying to throw the British and Canadians back into the sea and would have Normandy country side as well as urban battles in Caen itself.

    But if you are sticking with the 24 hours of D-Day it self.. the bloodiest and most vicious combat was Omaha beach.. that's really not debatable and why its used in games and movies more then any other.. There are some movies that look at the other beaches such as The Longest Day but even in that moves the bulk of the fighting is Omaha.

    The fact you think its Americans that want it not because its "balanced and its what the war is to them".. just shows what a racist you are.. as that's in no way what was said.

    I’ll ignore your lack of understanding of racism. Especially as I’m probably the same race as the Americans I’m complaining about. But if I am, for pointing out that some US posters don’t know about WW2, then they are also bigger racists for ignoring the struggles of non Americans.
    But I’m not that silly to bandy about accusations of racism in a thread in which race hasn’t been mentioned.

    My point was that it doesn’t matter that Omaha was the heaviest casualties, as what we do on our maps bares very little relation to reality. We can do Omaha. Again. And depending on the players it can be a good balanced fight. An attacking steamroll or a massacre. We could do Junot, it wouldn’t matter.... the players would affect the tempo of the fight not the historical heaviness of the fighting. Personally having played Omaha before, in several games I’m glad it’s not it it as it’s uninspiring and has been done to death.

    But Omaha doesn’t “feel more ww2” than other historical locations.

    My response was to a somewhat “twisted knickers” post about how “fighting battles in snow doesn’t feel like WW2 and we need an Omaha”.... paraphrased but that was the jist of it.

    Now I don’t dispute that Fjell is a terrible map. Better than a couple of BF4 maps, but almost Metro in its bad design.. probably in the top 5 worst battlefield maps ever. But it looks and feels pretty WW2... unless you know jack about WW2 admittedly.

    So I disagree. Omaha doesn’t offer anything that any other landing offers.
    Utah would offer the same gaming opportunities.
    Omaha purely panders to the US ego.

    I’m fairly sure that for that reason you’ll get it eventually. But maybe some folk can wind their necks in crying about having to wait fot it. It’s still WW2 before the US joined...

  • xXHappy_PuppyXx
    158 postsMember, Battlefield 3, Battlefield 4, Battlefield Hardline, Battlefield, Battlefield 1, Battlefield V Member
    StormSaxon wrote: »
    Trokey66 wrote: »
    StormSaxon wrote: »
    I really hope the don’t do another DDay.
    If they want beach landings go Salerno or Anzio.
    If they do do DDay, give us Gold-Sword-Juno or Utah not ... yawn.... Omaha. Again.

    I’m hoping for a Market Garden, Kursk, El Alamein, Warsaw, Berlin and Kesserine maps. Give us the WW2 that gets neglected.

    The reason they use Omaha for games is because its the only that the Germans held for any reasonable amount of time.. not much game play if you pick a location that one side was steam rolled with in a couple hours... there was a real threat that the Omaha landings were going to fail out right.. and that makes it better for a game play map.

    If you follow your reasoning, then the Americans should win every round!

    Maps are measly locations that should provide a reasonably balanced game play.
    StormSaxon wrote: »
    StormSaxon wrote: »
    I really hope the don’t do another DDay.
    If they want beach landings go Salerno or Anzio.
    If they do do DDay, give us Gold-Sword-Juno or Utah not ... yawn.... Omaha. Again.

    I’m hoping for a Market Garden, Kursk, El Alamein, Warsaw, Berlin and Kesserine maps. Give us the WW2 that gets neglected.

    The reason they use Omaha for games is because its the only that the Germans held for any reasonable amount of time.. not much game play if you pick a location that one side was steam rolled with in a couple hours... there was a real threat that the Omaha landings were going to fail out right.. and that makes it better for a game play map.

    That might be a reason for it in a Hollywood movie. Or a table top wargame based on history.
    This is a first person shooter, so you can put Juno beach and have the Canadians storm it, if it’s a steam rolling it’s down to the defender.

    You WONT get a more historical “feel” from Omaha, as what happens on your map bears no relation to reality. Omaha was 1 day, and 1 beach out of 5, how that encapsulates a 6 year multi continent, multi theatre war Christ alone knows.

    Fact is it’s 90%, I’d guess, Americans that want Omaha, not because it’s “balanced” or a “better” game because for them that’s WW2. Hell I’d take a Dieppe over another Omaha. I’ve done Omaha multiple times in other games.




    /facepalm

    Talk about getting your panties in a wad...


    The point was that the reason Omaha is used is that it was the only place Germans put up an effective resistance on the beach so it would make sense that games are useing that battle as the basis of for game play.

    There are much better areas to show case other battles that were just after D-Day itself.. such as the Battle for Caen where the Germans bled the British from Sword and Juno beach. This battle started June 10th just 4 days after D-Day and lasted till August. This would be a great battle and map to use as it would have the British trying to expand their beach head while the Germans counter attack trying to throw the British and Canadians back into the sea and would have Normandy country side as well as urban battles in Caen itself.

    But if you are sticking with the 24 hours of D-Day it self.. the bloodiest and most vicious combat was Omaha beach.. that's really not debatable and why its used in games and movies more then any other.. There are some movies that look at the other beaches such as The Longest Day but even in that moves the bulk of the fighting is Omaha.

    The fact you think its Americans that want it not because its "balanced and its what the war is to them".. just shows what a racist you are.. as that's in no way what was said.

    I’ll ignore your lack of understanding of racism. Especially as I’m probably the same race as the Americans I’m complaining about. But if I am, for pointing out that some US posters don’t know about WW2, then they are also bigger racists for ignoring the struggles of non Americans.
    But I’m not that silly to bandy about accusations of racism in a thread in which race hasn’t been mentioned.

    My point was that it doesn’t matter that Omaha was the heaviest casualties, as what we do on our maps bares very little relation to reality. We can do Omaha. Again. And depending on the players it can be a good balanced fight. An attacking steamroll or a massacre. We could do Junot, it wouldn’t matter.... the players would affect the tempo of the fight not the historical heaviness of the fighting. Personally having played Omaha before, in several games I’m glad it’s not it it as it’s uninspiring and has been done to death.

    But Omaha doesn’t “feel more ww2” than other historical locations.

    My response was to a somewhat “twisted knickers” post about how “fighting battles in snow doesn’t feel like WW2 and we need an Omaha”.... paraphrased but that was the jist of it.

    Now I don’t dispute that Fjell is a terrible map. Better than a couple of BF4 maps, but almost Metro in its bad design.. probably in the top 5 worst battlefield maps ever. But it looks and feels pretty WW2... unless you know jack about WW2 admittedly.

    So I disagree. Omaha doesn’t offer anything that any other landing offers.
    Utah would offer the same gaming opportunities.
    Omaha purely panders to the US ego.

    I’m fairly sure that for that reason you’ll get it eventually. But maybe some folk can wind their necks in crying about having to wait fot it. It’s still WW2 before the US joined...

    "struggles of non Americans"... good lord.. you people **** that we get involved and then **** if we don't.. talk about pathetic.. in the end its the responsibility of ones own country and their people.. not for another country to police you or support you.

    As far as Americans not understanding WW2.. you're the only ignorant one here. As there are just as many non educated people in regards to WW2 in any country. Maybe more so in other country's. There are well known battles that are hyped up in US more then others sure.. just like there are in other countries such as Dunkirk in Briton or Stalingrad or the Siege of Saint Petersburg in Russia that are no different then battles such as D day, Pearl Harbor or the Battle of the Bulge are for the US.

    You seem to be unable to grasp that the argument put forth as that D-Day and Omaha was only wanted do to Americans is false.. but more so just a out right lie. When in fact it was the only location that Germans put up a defense that was a real threat to the landings. It has nothing to do with American ego and everything to do with history. I also pointed out a battle that was primarily British and Canadian forces.. a battle that Ironically was a day one objective (that they failed to take) for those invasion groups that took them 3 months to dislodge the Germans and only after operation Cobra from the American sectors that broke through and compromised the Germans flank. Yet you totally ignored that.

    To be clear Operation Goodwood the British and Canadian's did was courageous as they knowingly threw themselves at German defenses to draw them away from the Americans in the Hedgerow country to allow Operation Cobra to become the succus that it was causing the near totally collapse of German defenses in Northern France.
  • Trokey66
    8357 postsMember, Battlefield 3, Battlefield 4, Battlefield Hardline, Battlefield, Battlefield 1, CTE, Battlefield V Member
    StormSaxon wrote: »
    Trokey66 wrote: »
    StormSaxon wrote: »
    I really hope the don’t do another DDay.
    If they want beach landings go Salerno or Anzio.
    If they do do DDay, give us Gold-Sword-Juno or Utah not ... yawn.... Omaha. Again.

    I’m hoping for a Market Garden, Kursk, El Alamein, Warsaw, Berlin and Kesserine maps. Give us the WW2 that gets neglected.

    The reason they use Omaha for games is because its the only that the Germans held for any reasonable amount of time.. not much game play if you pick a location that one side was steam rolled with in a couple hours... there was a real threat that the Omaha landings were going to fail out right.. and that makes it better for a game play map.

    If you follow your reasoning, then the Americans should win every round!

    Maps are measly locations that should provide a reasonably balanced game play.
    StormSaxon wrote: »
    StormSaxon wrote: »
    I really hope the don’t do another DDay.
    If they want beach landings go Salerno or Anzio.
    If they do do DDay, give us Gold-Sword-Juno or Utah not ... yawn.... Omaha. Again.

    I’m hoping for a Market Garden, Kursk, El Alamein, Warsaw, Berlin and Kesserine maps. Give us the WW2 that gets neglected.

    The reason they use Omaha for games is because its the only that the Germans held for any reasonable amount of time.. not much game play if you pick a location that one side was steam rolled with in a couple hours... there was a real threat that the Omaha landings were going to fail out right.. and that makes it better for a game play map.

    That might be a reason for it in a Hollywood movie. Or a table top wargame based on history.
    This is a first person shooter, so you can put Juno beach and have the Canadians storm it, if it’s a steam rolling it’s down to the defender.

    You WONT get a more historical “feel” from Omaha, as what happens on your map bears no relation to reality. Omaha was 1 day, and 1 beach out of 5, how that encapsulates a 6 year multi continent, multi theatre war Christ alone knows.

    Fact is it’s 90%, I’d guess, Americans that want Omaha, not because it’s “balanced” or a “better” game because for them that’s WW2. Hell I’d take a Dieppe over another Omaha. I’ve done Omaha multiple times in other games.




    /facepalm

    Talk about getting your panties in a wad...


    The point was that the reason Omaha is used is that it was the only place Germans put up an effective resistance on the beach so it would make sense that games are useing that battle as the basis of for game play.

    There are much better areas to show case other battles that were just after D-Day itself.. such as the Battle for Caen where the Germans bled the British from Sword and Juno beach. This battle started June 10th just 4 days after D-Day and lasted till August. This would be a great battle and map to use as it would have the British trying to expand their beach head while the Germans counter attack trying to throw the British and Canadians back into the sea and would have Normandy country side as well as urban battles in Caen itself.

    But if you are sticking with the 24 hours of D-Day it self.. the bloodiest and most vicious combat was Omaha beach.. that's really not debatable and why its used in games and movies more then any other.. There are some movies that look at the other beaches such as The Longest Day but even in that moves the bulk of the fighting is Omaha.

    The fact you think its Americans that want it not because its "balanced and its what the war is to them".. just shows what a racist you are.. as that's in no way what was said.

    I’ll ignore your lack of understanding of racism. Especially as I’m probably the same race as the Americans I’m complaining about. But if I am, for pointing out that some US posters don’t know about WW2, then they are also bigger racists for ignoring the struggles of non Americans.
    But I’m not that silly to bandy about accusations of racism in a thread in which race hasn’t been mentioned.

    My point was that it doesn’t matter that Omaha was the heaviest casualties, as what we do on our maps bares very little relation to reality. We can do Omaha. Again. And depending on the players it can be a good balanced fight. An attacking steamroll or a massacre. We could do Junot, it wouldn’t matter.... the players would affect the tempo of the fight not the historical heaviness of the fighting. Personally having played Omaha before, in several games I’m glad it’s not it it as it’s uninspiring and has been done to death.

    But Omaha doesn’t “feel more ww2” than other historical locations.

    My response was to a somewhat “twisted knickers” post about how “fighting battles in snow doesn’t feel like WW2 and we need an Omaha”.... paraphrased but that was the jist of it.

    Now I don’t dispute that Fjell is a terrible map. Better than a couple of BF4 maps, but almost Metro in its bad design.. probably in the top 5 worst battlefield maps ever. But it looks and feels pretty WW2... unless you know jack about WW2 admittedly.

    So I disagree. Omaha doesn’t offer anything that any other landing offers.
    Utah would offer the same gaming opportunities.
    Omaha purely panders to the US ego.

    I’m fairly sure that for that reason you’ll get it eventually. But maybe some folk can wind their necks in crying about having to wait fot it. It’s still WW2 before the US joined...

    "struggles of non Americans"... good lord.. you people **** that we get involved and then **** if we don't.. talk about pathetic.. in the end its the responsibility of ones own country and their people.. not for another country to police you or support you.

    As far as Americans not understanding WW2.. you're the only ignorant one here. As there are just as many non educated people in regards to WW2 in any country. Maybe more so in other country's. There are well known battles that are hyped up in US more then others sure.. just like there are in other countries such as Dunkirk in Briton or Stalingrad or the Siege of Saint Petersburg in Russia that are no different then battles such as D day, Pearl Harbor or the Battle of the Bulge are for the US.

    You seem to be unable to grasp that the argument put forth as that D-Day and Omaha was only wanted do to Americans is false.. but more so just a out right lie. When in fact it was the only location that Germans put up a defense that was a real threat to the landings. It has nothing to do with American ego and everything to do with history. I also pointed out a battle that was primarily British and Canadian forces.. a battle that Ironically was a day one objective (that they failed to take) for those invasion groups that took them 3 months to dislodge the Germans and only after operation Cobra from the American sectors that broke through and compromised the Germans flank. Yet you totally ignored that.

    To be clear Operation Goodwood the British and Canadian's did was courageous as they knowingly threw themselves at German defenses to draw them away from the Americans in the Hedgerow country to allow Operation Cobra to become the succus that it was causing the near totally collapse of German defenses in Northern France.

    Yet you still fail to grasp the fundamental point being made.......
  • UsainskiSemperFi
    524 postsMember, Battlefield 3, Battlefield 4, Battlefield, Battlefield 1, Battlefield V Member
    edited January 14
    all i want from Battlefield V is more weapons more ICONIC maps, less game modes, and balance improvements. The lack of content is killing me.
  • xXHappy_PuppyXx
    158 postsMember, Battlefield 3, Battlefield 4, Battlefield Hardline, Battlefield, Battlefield 1, Battlefield V Member
    Trokey66 wrote: »
    StormSaxon wrote: »
    Trokey66 wrote: »
    StormSaxon wrote: »
    I really hope the don’t do another DDay.
    If they want beach landings go Salerno or Anzio.
    If they do do DDay, give us Gold-Sword-Juno or Utah not ... yawn.... Omaha. Again.

    I’m hoping for a Market Garden, Kursk, El Alamein, Warsaw, Berlin and Kesserine maps. Give us the WW2 that gets neglected.

    The reason they use Omaha for games is because its the only that the Germans held for any reasonable amount of time.. not much game play if you pick a location that one side was steam rolled with in a couple hours... there was a real threat that the Omaha landings were going to fail out right.. and that makes it better for a game play map.

    If you follow your reasoning, then the Americans should win every round!

    Maps are measly locations that should provide a reasonably balanced game play.
    StormSaxon wrote: »
    StormSaxon wrote: »
    I really hope the don’t do another DDay.
    If they want beach landings go Salerno or Anzio.
    If they do do DDay, give us Gold-Sword-Juno or Utah not ... yawn.... Omaha. Again.

    I’m hoping for a Market Garden, Kursk, El Alamein, Warsaw, Berlin and Kesserine maps. Give us the WW2 that gets neglected.

    The reason they use Omaha for games is because its the only that the Germans held for any reasonable amount of time.. not much game play if you pick a location that one side was steam rolled with in a couple hours... there was a real threat that the Omaha landings were going to fail out right.. and that makes it better for a game play map.

    That might be a reason for it in a Hollywood movie. Or a table top wargame based on history.
    This is a first person shooter, so you can put Juno beach and have the Canadians storm it, if it’s a steam rolling it’s down to the defender.

    You WONT get a more historical “feel” from Omaha, as what happens on your map bears no relation to reality. Omaha was 1 day, and 1 beach out of 5, how that encapsulates a 6 year multi continent, multi theatre war Christ alone knows.

    Fact is it’s 90%, I’d guess, Americans that want Omaha, not because it’s “balanced” or a “better” game because for them that’s WW2. Hell I’d take a Dieppe over another Omaha. I’ve done Omaha multiple times in other games.




    /facepalm

    Talk about getting your panties in a wad...


    The point was that the reason Omaha is used is that it was the only place Germans put up an effective resistance on the beach so it would make sense that games are useing that battle as the basis of for game play.

    There are much better areas to show case other battles that were just after D-Day itself.. such as the Battle for Caen where the Germans bled the British from Sword and Juno beach. This battle started June 10th just 4 days after D-Day and lasted till August. This would be a great battle and map to use as it would have the British trying to expand their beach head while the Germans counter attack trying to throw the British and Canadians back into the sea and would have Normandy country side as well as urban battles in Caen itself.

    But if you are sticking with the 24 hours of D-Day it self.. the bloodiest and most vicious combat was Omaha beach.. that's really not debatable and why its used in games and movies more then any other.. There are some movies that look at the other beaches such as The Longest Day but even in that moves the bulk of the fighting is Omaha.

    The fact you think its Americans that want it not because its "balanced and its what the war is to them".. just shows what a racist you are.. as that's in no way what was said.

    I’ll ignore your lack of understanding of racism. Especially as I’m probably the same race as the Americans I’m complaining about. But if I am, for pointing out that some US posters don’t know about WW2, then they are also bigger racists for ignoring the struggles of non Americans.
    But I’m not that silly to bandy about accusations of racism in a thread in which race hasn’t been mentioned.

    My point was that it doesn’t matter that Omaha was the heaviest casualties, as what we do on our maps bares very little relation to reality. We can do Omaha. Again. And depending on the players it can be a good balanced fight. An attacking steamroll or a massacre. We could do Junot, it wouldn’t matter.... the players would affect the tempo of the fight not the historical heaviness of the fighting. Personally having played Omaha before, in several games I’m glad it’s not it it as it’s uninspiring and has been done to death.

    But Omaha doesn’t “feel more ww2” than other historical locations.

    My response was to a somewhat “twisted knickers” post about how “fighting battles in snow doesn’t feel like WW2 and we need an Omaha”.... paraphrased but that was the jist of it.

    Now I don’t dispute that Fjell is a terrible map. Better than a couple of BF4 maps, but almost Metro in its bad design.. probably in the top 5 worst battlefield maps ever. But it looks and feels pretty WW2... unless you know jack about WW2 admittedly.

    So I disagree. Omaha doesn’t offer anything that any other landing offers.
    Utah would offer the same gaming opportunities.
    Omaha purely panders to the US ego.

    I’m fairly sure that for that reason you’ll get it eventually. But maybe some folk can wind their necks in crying about having to wait fot it. It’s still WW2 before the US joined...

    "struggles of non Americans"... good lord.. you people **** that we get involved and then **** if we don't.. talk about pathetic.. in the end its the responsibility of ones own country and their people.. not for another country to police you or support you.

    As far as Americans not understanding WW2.. you're the only ignorant one here. As there are just as many non educated people in regards to WW2 in any country. Maybe more so in other country's. There are well known battles that are hyped up in US more then others sure.. just like there are in other countries such as Dunkirk in Briton or Stalingrad or the Siege of Saint Petersburg in Russia that are no different then battles such as D day, Pearl Harbor or the Battle of the Bulge are for the US.

    You seem to be unable to grasp that the argument put forth as that D-Day and Omaha was only wanted do to Americans is false.. but more so just a out right lie. When in fact it was the only location that Germans put up a defense that was a real threat to the landings. It has nothing to do with American ego and everything to do with history. I also pointed out a battle that was primarily British and Canadian forces.. a battle that Ironically was a day one objective (that they failed to take) for those invasion groups that took them 3 months to dislodge the Germans and only after operation Cobra from the American sectors that broke through and compromised the Germans flank. Yet you totally ignored that.

    To be clear Operation Goodwood the British and Canadian's did was courageous as they knowingly threw themselves at German defenses to draw them away from the Americans in the Hedgerow country to allow Operation Cobra to become the succus that it was causing the near totally collapse of German defenses in Northern France.

    Yet you still fail to grasp the fundamental point being made.......

    That solely resides in your court.
  • doctorrocktor
    1800 postsMember, Battlefield 3, Battlefield 4, Battlefield Hardline, Battlefield, Battlefield 1, CTE, Battlefield V Member
    Twisted steel,arras,rotterdam,devastation i think are great maps.i would like to see the battle of the bulge,the battle at monte casino,tubruk,market garden.
  • StormSaxon
    658 postsMember, Battlefield 3, Battlefield 4, Battlefield Hardline, Battlefield, Battlefield 1, CTE, Battlefield V Member
    StormSaxon wrote: »
    Trokey66 wrote: »
    StormSaxon wrote: »
    I really hope the don’t do another DDay.
    If they want beach landings go Salerno or Anzio.
    If they do do DDay, give us Gold-Sword-Juno or Utah not ... yawn.... Omaha. Again.

    I’m hoping for a Market Garden, Kursk, El Alamein, Warsaw, Berlin and Kesserine maps. Give us the WW2 that gets neglected.

    The reason they use Omaha for games is because its the only that the Germans held for any reasonable amount of time.. not much game play if you pick a location that one side was steam rolled with in a couple hours... there was a real threat that the Omaha landings were going to fail out right.. and that makes it better for a game play map.

    If you follow your reasoning, then the Americans should win every round!

    Maps are measly locations that should provide a reasonably balanced game play.
    StormSaxon wrote: »
    StormSaxon wrote: »
    I really hope the don’t do another DDay.
    If they want beach landings go Salerno or Anzio.
    If they do do DDay, give us Gold-Sword-Juno or Utah not ... yawn.... Omaha. Again.

    I’m hoping for a Market Garden, Kursk, El Alamein, Warsaw, Berlin and Kesserine maps. Give us the WW2 that gets neglected.

    The reason they use Omaha for games is because its the only that the Germans held for any reasonable amount of time.. not much game play if you pick a location that one side was steam rolled with in a couple hours... there was a real threat that the Omaha landings were going to fail out right.. and that makes it better for a game play map.

    That might be a reason for it in a Hollywood movie. Or a table top wargame based on history.
    This is a first person shooter, so you can put Juno beach and have the Canadians storm it, if it’s a steam rolling it’s down to the defender.

    You WONT get a more historical “feel” from Omaha, as what happens on your map bears no relation to reality. Omaha was 1 day, and 1 beach out of 5, how that encapsulates a 6 year multi continent, multi theatre war Christ alone knows.

    Fact is it’s 90%, I’d guess, Americans that want Omaha, not because it’s “balanced” or a “better” game because for them that’s WW2. Hell I’d take a Dieppe over another Omaha. I’ve done Omaha multiple times in other games.




    /facepalm

    Talk about getting your panties in a wad...


    The point was that the reason Omaha is used is that it was the only place Germans put up an effective resistance on the beach so it would make sense that games are useing that battle as the basis of for game play.

    There are much better areas to show case other battles that were just after D-Day itself.. such as the Battle for Caen where the Germans bled the British from Sword and Juno beach. This battle started June 10th just 4 days after D-Day and lasted till August. This would be a great battle and map to use as it would have the British trying to expand their beach head while the Germans counter attack trying to throw the British and Canadians back into the sea and would have Normandy country side as well as urban battles in Caen itself.

    But if you are sticking with the 24 hours of D-Day it self.. the bloodiest and most vicious combat was Omaha beach.. that's really not debatable and why its used in games and movies more then any other.. There are some movies that look at the other beaches such as The Longest Day but even in that moves the bulk of the fighting is Omaha.

    The fact you think its Americans that want it not because its "balanced and its what the war is to them".. just shows what a racist you are.. as that's in no way what was said.

    I’ll ignore your lack of understanding of racism. Especially as I’m probably the same race as the Americans I’m complaining about. But if I am, for pointing out that some US posters don’t know about WW2, then they are also bigger racists for ignoring the struggles of non Americans.
    But I’m not that silly to bandy about accusations of racism in a thread in which race hasn’t been mentioned.

    My point was that it doesn’t matter that Omaha was the heaviest casualties, as what we do on our maps bares very little relation to reality. We can do Omaha. Again. And depending on the players it can be a good balanced fight. An attacking steamroll or a massacre. We could do Junot, it wouldn’t matter.... the players would affect the tempo of the fight not the historical heaviness of the fighting. Personally having played Omaha before, in several games I’m glad it’s not it it as it’s uninspiring and has been done to death.

    But Omaha doesn’t “feel more ww2” than other historical locations.

    My response was to a somewhat “twisted knickers” post about how “fighting battles in snow doesn’t feel like WW2 and we need an Omaha”.... paraphrased but that was the jist of it.

    Now I don’t dispute that Fjell is a terrible map. Better than a couple of BF4 maps, but almost Metro in its bad design.. probably in the top 5 worst battlefield maps ever. But it looks and feels pretty WW2... unless you know jack about WW2 admittedly.

    So I disagree. Omaha doesn’t offer anything that any other landing offers.
    Utah would offer the same gaming opportunities.
    Omaha purely panders to the US ego.

    I’m fairly sure that for that reason you’ll get it eventually. But maybe some folk can wind their necks in crying about having to wait fot it. It’s still WW2 before the US joined...

    "struggles of non Americans"... good lord.. you people **** that we get involved and then **** if we don't.. talk about pathetic.. in the end its the responsibility of ones own country and their people.. not for another country to police you or support you.

    As far as Americans not understanding WW2.. you're the only ignorant one here. As there are just as many non educated people in regards to WW2 in any country. Maybe more so in other country's. There are well known battles that are hyped up in US more then others sure.. just like there are in other countries such as Dunkirk in Briton or Stalingrad or the Siege of Saint Petersburg in Russia that are no different then battles such as D day, Pearl Harbor or the Battle of the Bulge are for the US.

    You seem to be unable to grasp that the argument put forth as that D-Day and Omaha was only wanted do to Americans is false.. but more so just a out right lie. When in fact it was the only location that Germans put up a defense that was a real threat to the landings. It has nothing to do with American ego and everything to do with history. I also pointed out a battle that was primarily British and Canadian forces.. a battle that Ironically was a day one objective (that they failed to take) for those invasion groups that took them 3 months to dislodge the Germans and only after operation Cobra from the American sectors that broke through and compromised the Germans flank. Yet you totally ignored that.

    To be clear Operation Goodwood the British and Canadian's did was courageous as they knowingly threw themselves at German defenses to draw them away from the Americans in the Hedgerow country to allow Operation Cobra to become the succus that it was causing the near totally collapse of German defenses in Northern France.

    Really?
    Let’s lay this out simple.

    This is a WW2 game.
    It feels very WW2 because it involves 2 of the main combatants fighting in battlefields based on actual WW2 battles. With WW2 weapons.

    This is a game. The historical performance of the Americans means monthing as what we do in it doesn’t reflect anything. IE. we could play Junot or Sword beach and have have exactly the same experience. But either way with out Omaha beach, this game will still feel like WW2.

    And no. I don’t think it’s false. I’d wager 90% of the people you find on this forum moaning about there being no Americans in it so it doesn’t feel like WW2 are American. My comments are based purely on this forum... not Americans as a whole nation, but American battlefield forum members who whine about Americans not being in the game, EVEN though it’s known they will be eventually.

    And wind your neck in. You might, and evidently know your history, but every idiot claiming the Norway campaign was not “really WW2” or that “snow doesnt look right” clearly don’t.
    I’ve even seen people claiming it’s too bright! As if during WW2 there was a a grim grey light filter! The sun never shined!
    It doesn’t look enough like SPR for them.

    Whose “crying” that “you” got involved? Not me. I’m shocked that some posters on here don’t seem to realise the rest of Europe was fighting hard for 3 years without the US though, and the presence of the US doesn’t make or break a WW2 game.

    I want the US in it. But I’d like to see it fresh and in a setting games neglect. Kesserine Pass, Anzio, The Bulge, Operation Varsity.... but not another DDay rehash.

    I can’t wait for the Russians either but will be bummed if they think only of doing Stalingrad... Give us Berlin, Finland, Kursk or the Summer Battles... not the S.O.S.
  • StormSaxon
    658 postsMember, Battlefield 3, Battlefield 4, Battlefield Hardline, Battlefield, Battlefield 1, CTE, Battlefield V Member
    I like twisted steel, but 95% of my reboots are after having played on it.
  • Trokey66
    8357 postsMember, Battlefield 3, Battlefield 4, Battlefield Hardline, Battlefield, Battlefield 1, CTE, Battlefield V Member
    Trokey66 wrote: »
    StormSaxon wrote: »
    Trokey66 wrote: »
    StormSaxon wrote: »
    I really hope the don’t do another DDay.
    If they want beach landings go Salerno or Anzio.
    If they do do DDay, give us Gold-Sword-Juno or Utah not ... yawn.... Omaha. Again.

    I’m hoping for a Market Garden, Kursk, El Alamein, Warsaw, Berlin and Kesserine maps. Give us the WW2 that gets neglected.

    The reason they use Omaha for games is because its the only that the Germans held for any reasonable amount of time.. not much game play if you pick a location that one side was steam rolled with in a couple hours... there was a real threat that the Omaha landings were going to fail out right.. and that makes it better for a game play map.

    If you follow your reasoning, then the Americans should win every round!

    Maps are measly locations that should provide a reasonably balanced game play.
    StormSaxon wrote: »
    StormSaxon wrote: »
    I really hope the don’t do another DDay.
    If they want beach landings go Salerno or Anzio.
    If they do do DDay, give us Gold-Sword-Juno or Utah not ... yawn.... Omaha. Again.

    I’m hoping for a Market Garden, Kursk, El Alamein, Warsaw, Berlin and Kesserine maps. Give us the WW2 that gets neglected.

    The reason they use Omaha for games is because its the only that the Germans held for any reasonable amount of time.. not much game play if you pick a location that one side was steam rolled with in a couple hours... there was a real threat that the Omaha landings were going to fail out right.. and that makes it better for a game play map.

    That might be a reason for it in a Hollywood movie. Or a table top wargame based on history.
    This is a first person shooter, so you can put Juno beach and have the Canadians storm it, if it’s a steam rolling it’s down to the defender.

    You WONT get a more historical “feel” from Omaha, as what happens on your map bears no relation to reality. Omaha was 1 day, and 1 beach out of 5, how that encapsulates a 6 year multi continent, multi theatre war Christ alone knows.

    Fact is it’s 90%, I’d guess, Americans that want Omaha, not because it’s “balanced” or a “better” game because for them that’s WW2. Hell I’d take a Dieppe over another Omaha. I’ve done Omaha multiple times in other games.




    /facepalm

    Talk about getting your panties in a wad...


    The point was that the reason Omaha is used is that it was the only place Germans put up an effective resistance on the beach so it would make sense that games are useing that battle as the basis of for game play.

    There are much better areas to show case other battles that were just after D-Day itself.. such as the Battle for Caen where the Germans bled the British from Sword and Juno beach. This battle started June 10th just 4 days after D-Day and lasted till August. This would be a great battle and map to use as it would have the British trying to expand their beach head while the Germans counter attack trying to throw the British and Canadians back into the sea and would have Normandy country side as well as urban battles in Caen itself.

    But if you are sticking with the 24 hours of D-Day it self.. the bloodiest and most vicious combat was Omaha beach.. that's really not debatable and why its used in games and movies more then any other.. There are some movies that look at the other beaches such as The Longest Day but even in that moves the bulk of the fighting is Omaha.

    The fact you think its Americans that want it not because its "balanced and its what the war is to them".. just shows what a racist you are.. as that's in no way what was said.

    I’ll ignore your lack of understanding of racism. Especially as I’m probably the same race as the Americans I’m complaining about. But if I am, for pointing out that some US posters don’t know about WW2, then they are also bigger racists for ignoring the struggles of non Americans.
    But I’m not that silly to bandy about accusations of racism in a thread in which race hasn’t been mentioned.

    My point was that it doesn’t matter that Omaha was the heaviest casualties, as what we do on our maps bares very little relation to reality. We can do Omaha. Again. And depending on the players it can be a good balanced fight. An attacking steamroll or a massacre. We could do Junot, it wouldn’t matter.... the players would affect the tempo of the fight not the historical heaviness of the fighting. Personally having played Omaha before, in several games I’m glad it’s not it it as it’s uninspiring and has been done to death.

    But Omaha doesn’t “feel more ww2” than other historical locations.

    My response was to a somewhat “twisted knickers” post about how “fighting battles in snow doesn’t feel like WW2 and we need an Omaha”.... paraphrased but that was the jist of it.

    Now I don’t dispute that Fjell is a terrible map. Better than a couple of BF4 maps, but almost Metro in its bad design.. probably in the top 5 worst battlefield maps ever. But it looks and feels pretty WW2... unless you know jack about WW2 admittedly.

    So I disagree. Omaha doesn’t offer anything that any other landing offers.
    Utah would offer the same gaming opportunities.
    Omaha purely panders to the US ego.

    I’m fairly sure that for that reason you’ll get it eventually. But maybe some folk can wind their necks in crying about having to wait fot it. It’s still WW2 before the US joined...

    "struggles of non Americans"... good lord.. you people **** that we get involved and then **** if we don't.. talk about pathetic.. in the end its the responsibility of ones own country and their people.. not for another country to police you or support you.

    As far as Americans not understanding WW2.. you're the only ignorant one here. As there are just as many non educated people in regards to WW2 in any country. Maybe more so in other country's. There are well known battles that are hyped up in US more then others sure.. just like there are in other countries such as Dunkirk in Briton or Stalingrad or the Siege of Saint Petersburg in Russia that are no different then battles such as D day, Pearl Harbor or the Battle of the Bulge are for the US.

    You seem to be unable to grasp that the argument put forth as that D-Day and Omaha was only wanted do to Americans is false.. but more so just a out right lie. When in fact it was the only location that Germans put up a defense that was a real threat to the landings. It has nothing to do with American ego and everything to do with history. I also pointed out a battle that was primarily British and Canadian forces.. a battle that Ironically was a day one objective (that they failed to take) for those invasion groups that took them 3 months to dislodge the Germans and only after operation Cobra from the American sectors that broke through and compromised the Germans flank. Yet you totally ignored that.

    To be clear Operation Goodwood the British and Canadian's did was courageous as they knowingly threw themselves at German defenses to draw them away from the Americans in the Hedgerow country to allow Operation Cobra to become the succus that it was causing the near totally collapse of German defenses in Northern France.

    Yet you still fail to grasp the fundamental point being made.......

    That solely resides in your court.

    Nope, lost me there.....

    Can you explain?
  • xXHappy_PuppyXx
    158 postsMember, Battlefield 3, Battlefield 4, Battlefield Hardline, Battlefield, Battlefield 1, Battlefield V Member
    Trokey66 wrote: »
    Trokey66 wrote: »
    StormSaxon wrote: »
    Trokey66 wrote: »
    StormSaxon wrote: »
    I really hope the don’t do another DDay.
    If they want beach landings go Salerno or Anzio.
    If they do do DDay, give us Gold-Sword-Juno or Utah not ... yawn.... Omaha. Again.

    I’m hoping for a Market Garden, Kursk, El Alamein, Warsaw, Berlin and Kesserine maps. Give us the WW2 that gets neglected.

    The reason they use Omaha for games is because its the only that the Germans held for any reasonable amount of time.. not much game play if you pick a location that one side was steam rolled with in a couple hours... there was a real threat that the Omaha landings were going to fail out right.. and that makes it better for a game play map.

    If you follow your reasoning, then the Americans should win every round!

    Maps are measly locations that should provide a reasonably balanced game play.
    StormSaxon wrote: »
    StormSaxon wrote: »
    I really hope the don’t do another DDay.
    If they want beach landings go Salerno or Anzio.
    If they do do DDay, give us Gold-Sword-Juno or Utah not ... yawn.... Omaha. Again.

    I’m hoping for a Market Garden, Kursk, El Alamein, Warsaw, Berlin and Kesserine maps. Give us the WW2 that gets neglected.

    The reason they use Omaha for games is because its the only that the Germans held for any reasonable amount of time.. not much game play if you pick a location that one side was steam rolled with in a couple hours... there was a real threat that the Omaha landings were going to fail out right.. and that makes it better for a game play map.

    That might be a reason for it in a Hollywood movie. Or a table top wargame based on history.
    This is a first person shooter, so you can put Juno beach and have the Canadians storm it, if it’s a steam rolling it’s down to the defender.

    You WONT get a more historical “feel” from Omaha, as what happens on your map bears no relation to reality. Omaha was 1 day, and 1 beach out of 5, how that encapsulates a 6 year multi continent, multi theatre war Christ alone knows.

    Fact is it’s 90%, I’d guess, Americans that want Omaha, not because it’s “balanced” or a “better” game because for them that’s WW2. Hell I’d take a Dieppe over another Omaha. I’ve done Omaha multiple times in other games.




    /facepalm

    Talk about getting your panties in a wad...


    The point was that the reason Omaha is used is that it was the only place Germans put up an effective resistance on the beach so it would make sense that games are useing that battle as the basis of for game play.

    There are much better areas to show case other battles that were just after D-Day itself.. such as the Battle for Caen where the Germans bled the British from Sword and Juno beach. This battle started June 10th just 4 days after D-Day and lasted till August. This would be a great battle and map to use as it would have the British trying to expand their beach head while the Germans counter attack trying to throw the British and Canadians back into the sea and would have Normandy country side as well as urban battles in Caen itself.

    But if you are sticking with the 24 hours of D-Day it self.. the bloodiest and most vicious combat was Omaha beach.. that's really not debatable and why its used in games and movies more then any other.. There are some movies that look at the other beaches such as The Longest Day but even in that moves the bulk of the fighting is Omaha.

    The fact you think its Americans that want it not because its "balanced and its what the war is to them".. just shows what a racist you are.. as that's in no way what was said.

    I’ll ignore your lack of understanding of racism. Especially as I’m probably the same race as the Americans I’m complaining about. But if I am, for pointing out that some US posters don’t know about WW2, then they are also bigger racists for ignoring the struggles of non Americans.
    But I’m not that silly to bandy about accusations of racism in a thread in which race hasn’t been mentioned.

    My point was that it doesn’t matter that Omaha was the heaviest casualties, as what we do on our maps bares very little relation to reality. We can do Omaha. Again. And depending on the players it can be a good balanced fight. An attacking steamroll or a massacre. We could do Junot, it wouldn’t matter.... the players would affect the tempo of the fight not the historical heaviness of the fighting. Personally having played Omaha before, in several games I’m glad it’s not it it as it’s uninspiring and has been done to death.

    But Omaha doesn’t “feel more ww2” than other historical locations.

    My response was to a somewhat “twisted knickers” post about how “fighting battles in snow doesn’t feel like WW2 and we need an Omaha”.... paraphrased but that was the jist of it.

    Now I don’t dispute that Fjell is a terrible map. Better than a couple of BF4 maps, but almost Metro in its bad design.. probably in the top 5 worst battlefield maps ever. But it looks and feels pretty WW2... unless you know jack about WW2 admittedly.

    So I disagree. Omaha doesn’t offer anything that any other landing offers.
    Utah would offer the same gaming opportunities.
    Omaha purely panders to the US ego.

    I’m fairly sure that for that reason you’ll get it eventually. But maybe some folk can wind their necks in crying about having to wait fot it. It’s still WW2 before the US joined...

    "struggles of non Americans"... good lord.. you people **** that we get involved and then **** if we don't.. talk about pathetic.. in the end its the responsibility of ones own country and their people.. not for another country to police you or support you.

    As far as Americans not understanding WW2.. you're the only ignorant one here. As there are just as many non educated people in regards to WW2 in any country. Maybe more so in other country's. There are well known battles that are hyped up in US more then others sure.. just like there are in other countries such as Dunkirk in Briton or Stalingrad or the Siege of Saint Petersburg in Russia that are no different then battles such as D day, Pearl Harbor or the Battle of the Bulge are for the US.

    You seem to be unable to grasp that the argument put forth as that D-Day and Omaha was only wanted do to Americans is false.. but more so just a out right lie. When in fact it was the only location that Germans put up a defense that was a real threat to the landings. It has nothing to do with American ego and everything to do with history. I also pointed out a battle that was primarily British and Canadian forces.. a battle that Ironically was a day one objective (that they failed to take) for those invasion groups that took them 3 months to dislodge the Germans and only after operation Cobra from the American sectors that broke through and compromised the Germans flank. Yet you totally ignored that.

    To be clear Operation Goodwood the British and Canadian's did was courageous as they knowingly threw themselves at German defenses to draw them away from the Americans in the Hedgerow country to allow Operation Cobra to become the succus that it was causing the near totally collapse of German defenses in Northern France.

    Yet you still fail to grasp the fundamental point being made.......

    That solely resides in your court.

    Nope, lost me there.....

    Can you explain?

    You and another got all pissy when all I said was there is a reason Omaha is used as it was the only location that put up a true resistance to the landings. You and another went off on a asinine tangent about Americans and how Omaha is WW2 to them and they are not educated enough to know anything.

    All I did is point out why on D-Day it self that Omaha is used in most movies and games at it offers the game play to a real battle that happened where both sides had a shot at winning.

    If you studied the battles you would see that both Sword and Juno beaches offered limited German resistance they didn't have the man power and both the British and Canadians landed with their supporting tanks, while at Omaha the American commander of those landing didn't believe in the use of the assault tanks in the initial landings and by the time they used their tanks the ocean swells had increased in size floundering most of them allowing the few that got to shore to be targeted by Germans and disabled. Making the break out from the beach fall on the infantry with almost no armor support.

    Most of the British and Canadian casualties were when they attempted to move inland off there respective beaches. Also I like how you seemed to ignore Gold beach as well as Utah. Utah another American beach that guess what isn't in games or many movies as just like the other beaches the Germans were not able to stall the invasions force for any significant amount of time. There is also Gold Beach that you seemed to have forgotten as well. 4 of the 5 landings were pushed through with relative ease and speed. Only ONE offered resistance that could of doomed the invasion force... and that is why its used for games.

    I even offered alternative battles that were part of D-Day +4 in the Battle of Caen that was British and Canadian and was a fierce battle lasting months vs dogged German Defensives and counter attacks as a alternative to using beaches on D-Day itself that were decidedly lop sided.

    This has nothing to do with 32 on 32 players.. it has to do with using real world battles that historically both sides were relatively matched.. not battles where one side steam rolled the other with out much of a fight. I took issue with implying that Americans were to stupid and uneducated to know anything about WW2 out side of movies and games.... because this Americans knows more about WW2 and many other past wars and battles then most people and I don't go around saying well you Europeans are just stupid because you didn't study x battle or y war and only listen to your own propaganda.

  • Trokey66
    8357 postsMember, Battlefield 3, Battlefield 4, Battlefield Hardline, Battlefield, Battlefield 1, CTE, Battlefield V Member
    Trokey66 wrote: »
    Trokey66 wrote: »
    StormSaxon wrote: »
    Trokey66 wrote: »
    StormSaxon wrote: »
    I really hope the don’t do another DDay.
    If they want beach landings go Salerno or Anzio.
    If they do do DDay, give us Gold-Sword-Juno or Utah not ... yawn.... Omaha. Again.

    I’m hoping for a Market Garden, Kursk, El Alamein, Warsaw, Berlin and Kesserine maps. Give us the WW2 that gets neglected.

    The reason they use Omaha for games is because its the only that the Germans held for any reasonable amount of time.. not much game play if you pick a location that one side was steam rolled with in a couple hours... there was a real threat that the Omaha landings were going to fail out right.. and that makes it better for a game play map.

    If you follow your reasoning, then the Americans should win every round!

    Maps are measly locations that should provide a reasonably balanced game play.
    StormSaxon wrote: »
    StormSaxon wrote: »
    I really hope the don’t do another DDay.
    If they want beach landings go Salerno or Anzio.
    If they do do DDay, give us Gold-Sword-Juno or Utah not ... yawn.... Omaha. Again.

    I’m hoping for a Market Garden, Kursk, El Alamein, Warsaw, Berlin and Kesserine maps. Give us the WW2 that gets neglected.

    The reason they use Omaha for games is because its the only that the Germans held for any reasonable amount of time.. not much game play if you pick a location that one side was steam rolled with in a couple hours... there was a real threat that the Omaha landings were going to fail out right.. and that makes it better for a game play map.

    That might be a reason for it in a Hollywood movie. Or a table top wargame based on history.
    This is a first person shooter, so you can put Juno beach and have the Canadians storm it, if it’s a steam rolling it’s down to the defender.

    You WONT get a more historical “feel” from Omaha, as what happens on your map bears no relation to reality. Omaha was 1 day, and 1 beach out of 5, how that encapsulates a 6 year multi continent, multi theatre war Christ alone knows.

    Fact is it’s 90%, I’d guess, Americans that want Omaha, not because it’s “balanced” or a “better” game because for them that’s WW2. Hell I’d take a Dieppe over another Omaha. I’ve done Omaha multiple times in other games.




    /facepalm

    Talk about getting your panties in a wad...


    The point was that the reason Omaha is used is that it was the only place Germans put up an effective resistance on the beach so it would make sense that games are useing that battle as the basis of for game play.

    There are much better areas to show case other battles that were just after D-Day itself.. such as the Battle for Caen where the Germans bled the British from Sword and Juno beach. This battle started June 10th just 4 days after D-Day and lasted till August. This would be a great battle and map to use as it would have the British trying to expand their beach head while the Germans counter attack trying to throw the British and Canadians back into the sea and would have Normandy country side as well as urban battles in Caen itself.

    But if you are sticking with the 24 hours of D-Day it self.. the bloodiest and most vicious combat was Omaha beach.. that's really not debatable and why its used in games and movies more then any other.. There are some movies that look at the other beaches such as The Longest Day but even in that moves the bulk of the fighting is Omaha.

    The fact you think its Americans that want it not because its "balanced and its what the war is to them".. just shows what a racist you are.. as that's in no way what was said.

    I’ll ignore your lack of understanding of racism. Especially as I’m probably the same race as the Americans I’m complaining about. But if I am, for pointing out that some US posters don’t know about WW2, then they are also bigger racists for ignoring the struggles of non Americans.
    But I’m not that silly to bandy about accusations of racism in a thread in which race hasn’t been mentioned.

    My point was that it doesn’t matter that Omaha was the heaviest casualties, as what we do on our maps bares very little relation to reality. We can do Omaha. Again. And depending on the players it can be a good balanced fight. An attacking steamroll or a massacre. We could do Junot, it wouldn’t matter.... the players would affect the tempo of the fight not the historical heaviness of the fighting. Personally having played Omaha before, in several games I’m glad it’s not it it as it’s uninspiring and has been done to death.

    But Omaha doesn’t “feel more ww2” than other historical locations.

    My response was to a somewhat “twisted knickers” post about how “fighting battles in snow doesn’t feel like WW2 and we need an Omaha”.... paraphrased but that was the jist of it.

    Now I don’t dispute that Fjell is a terrible map. Better than a couple of BF4 maps, but almost Metro in its bad design.. probably in the top 5 worst battlefield maps ever. But it looks and feels pretty WW2... unless you know jack about WW2 admittedly.

    So I disagree. Omaha doesn’t offer anything that any other landing offers.
    Utah would offer the same gaming opportunities.
    Omaha purely panders to the US ego.

    I’m fairly sure that for that reason you’ll get it eventually. But maybe some folk can wind their necks in crying about having to wait fot it. It’s still WW2 before the US joined...

    "struggles of non Americans"... good lord.. you people **** that we get involved and then **** if we don't.. talk about pathetic.. in the end its the responsibility of ones own country and their people.. not for another country to police you or support you.

    As far as Americans not understanding WW2.. you're the only ignorant one here. As there are just as many non educated people in regards to WW2 in any country. Maybe more so in other country's. There are well known battles that are hyped up in US more then others sure.. just like there are in other countries such as Dunkirk in Briton or Stalingrad or the Siege of Saint Petersburg in Russia that are no different then battles such as D day, Pearl Harbor or the Battle of the Bulge are for the US.

    You seem to be unable to grasp that the argument put forth as that D-Day and Omaha was only wanted do to Americans is false.. but more so just a out right lie. When in fact it was the only location that Germans put up a defense that was a real threat to the landings. It has nothing to do with American ego and everything to do with history. I also pointed out a battle that was primarily British and Canadian forces.. a battle that Ironically was a day one objective (that they failed to take) for those invasion groups that took them 3 months to dislodge the Germans and only after operation Cobra from the American sectors that broke through and compromised the Germans flank. Yet you totally ignored that.

    To be clear Operation Goodwood the British and Canadian's did was courageous as they knowingly threw themselves at German defenses to draw them away from the Americans in the Hedgerow country to allow Operation Cobra to become the succus that it was causing the near totally collapse of German defenses in Northern France.

    Yet you still fail to grasp the fundamental point being made.......

    That solely resides in your court.

    Nope, lost me there.....

    Can you explain?

    You and another got all pissy when all I said was there is a reason Omaha is used as it was the only location that put up a true resistance to the landings. You and another went off on a asinine tangent about Americans and how Omaha is WW2 to them and they are not educated enough to know anything.

    All I did is point out why on D-Day it self that Omaha is used in most movies and games at it offers the game play to a real battle that happened where both sides had a shot at winning.

    If you studied the battles you would see that both Sword and Juno beaches offered limited German resistance they didn't have the man power and both the British and Canadians landed with their supporting tanks, while at Omaha the American commander of those landing didn't believe in the use of the assault tanks in the initial landings and by the time they used their tanks the ocean swells had increased in size floundering most of them allowing the few that got to shore to be targeted by Germans and disabled. Making the break out from the beach fall on the infantry with almost no armor support.

    Most of the British and Canadian casualties were when they attempted to move inland off there respective beaches. Also I like how you seemed to ignore Gold beach as well as Utah. Utah another American beach that guess what isn't in games or many movies as just like the other beaches the Germans were not able to stall the invasions force for any significant amount of time. There is also Gold Beach that you seemed to have forgotten as well. 4 of the 5 landings were pushed through with relative ease and speed. Only ONE offered resistance that could of doomed the invasion force... and that is why its used for games.

    I even offered alternative battles that were part of D-Day +4 in the Battle of Caen that was British and Canadian and was a fierce battle lasting months vs dogged German Defensives and counter attacks as a alternative to using beaches on D-Day itself that were decidedly lop sided.

    This has nothing to do with 32 on 32 players.. it has to do with using real world battles that historically both sides were relatively matched.. not battles where one side steam rolled the other with out much of a fight. I took issue with implying that Americans were to stupid and uneducated to know anything about WW2 out side of movies and games.... because this Americans knows more about WW2 and many other past wars and battles then most people and I don't go around saying well you Europeans are just stupid because you didn't study x battle or y war and only listen to your own propaganda.

    Yep, still missing the point.
Sign In or Register to comment.