Page 1 of 3

What did you think about the new gamearea?

Posted: 18 Jun 2010, 09:07
by Berget-events
:?:

Posted: 19 Jun 2010, 16:19
by Smacker
the onley downside was the length to safezone for poldavian 3rd mountaineers. but overall it is a lot better than berget 6 and 7.

Posted: 19 Jun 2010, 17:08
by seaQ
Really nice area but the lack of a "town" is clearly a drawback! Maybe next year we'll see a "Bashir City" rise again!

Posted: 19 Jun 2010, 19:25
by Svansst?mper
yeah, a town would be nice, other than that it was great and big!! :lol:

Posted: 19 Jun 2010, 20:06
by Plante
It felt like the area was alot bigger and more challenging .

I would have liked some more transport tho

Posted: 19 Jun 2010, 21:58
by Stig
Smacker wrote:the onley downside was the length to safezone for poldavian 3rd mountaineers. but overall it is a lot better than berget 6 and 7.
I tend to agree, but it did add to the milsim experience, with the base feeling pretty remote.
If Berget only had better transport, it wouldn't have been as much of a problem.

Posted: 20 Jun 2010, 04:48
by Gauntlet
I also missed Bashir City, which sorta was the center of attention last year.

And personally, the parts of the game area I did get to see had a little too dense forest and heavy undergrowth for my tasting.

Posted: 20 Jun 2010, 12:08
by Cowboy
I thought the Green Zone would be like Bashir City on Berget 7, but it wasn't. The tents in the refugee camp were too scattered. Great event, though!!!

Posted: 20 Jun 2010, 15:53
by Parzi
The area was nice and the net of roads was fun. The forests around ranger base were real nice. Otherwise the area was reapeating itself.

Posted: 20 Jun 2010, 16:07
by cSalinas
Great area. But the bases location could be better, think that you should try and put the civilians somewhere in the middle.

Me to was hoping for some kind of buildings.

Posted: 20 Jun 2010, 16:46
by Eldoriath
A good area, 2*2km playarea felt large enough. You had energy to walk pretty much everywhere every day and some left to fight with ^^

A bit dense growth in some areas, but that is unavoidable. And I did miss a bashir-city, that was great last year.

Posted: 20 Jun 2010, 23:38
by Fenan
great area with many roads and no or little contact with offgame (private) housing. Can we have another game there now? :)

Posted: 21 Jun 2010, 00:19
by Ouveni
I think the area wasn't good at all. The only good things were roads and scrapyard. I would not like to come there again next year. Tho I trust BE would do much more to improve the area for next year. Given the time you guys had, I think you did ok.

The area was quite alot bigger than 2km x 2km..

Posted: 21 Jun 2010, 00:24
by Panzergraf
I liked it, though I still prefer Härnösand as the area there was more diverse.

The size was good, but most of it was just woods, woods, woods...
More "features" would have been great :)

Posted: 21 Jun 2010, 01:08
by J.M.Korhonen
In my opinion, the area wasn't that good for this large a game. In most places I fought in, perhaps with the exception of the Scrapyard and its surroundings, the forest was so dense that the fights tended to degenerate into one-on-one matches where you couldn't get proper support even from your buddy, let alone your team or your platoon. In a sense, what we had was a series of weekend skirmishes (ie. a handful of players from each side participating in a fight) with very long walks to the respawn point - not the world's biggest airsoft game.

As an example, the less densely wooded, pine tree covered hilly area in the safezone, near NAF base, would have been much better suited for platoon vs platoon (or company vs platoon, or battalion vs battalion :) ) actions. In that kind of terrain, the squads would have been able to really maneuver and support each other, and in my opinion, that would have made the fights MUCH more intense and interesting! If this area is to be used in Berget 9, please try to put the strategic points etc. in more open terrain - that would make a big difference!

In addition, the Psyops base was in my opinion a bad choice, at least gamewise. It sure looked impressive, but it was eminently clear that it was impervious to direct assault - the fence alone would have pretty much guaranteed that, even without those bunkers. Of course, it didn't really come to test as our Bn. stopped the NAF attack cold :)...

(As an idea, might there be a way to use AT weapons or something similar as area effect/anti-bunker weapons, either with a version of BAWS system in bunkers, or perhaps with a GM to "judge" their effectiveness? There were a lot of situations where direct fire area effect weapons would have been very useful and would have kept the game more fluid and interesting!)