• Please make sure you are familiar with the forum rules. You can find them here: https://forums.tripwireinteractive.com/index.php?threads/forum-rules.2334636/

Change Barashka please

sander

Grizzled Veteran
Jun 24, 2006
635
0
34
The Netherlands
Please change Barashka! It ****s pretty hard now as it is over in a couple of minutes (last game was 3 minutes!). Some lame things about that map:

- the ice, all tanks cross over it (maybe just fix the gates in the stone wall (with some small holes for infantry). Tanks should fall trough ice at the first step...

- the Tiger, change it for the Panther please, Wiking didn't had Tigers

- artillery on the bridges? Why would any army do that while they want to cross the bridges... Make that impossible for artillery.

- the objects, do something about those. Let the Germans/Russians first get the south/north object, than one of the bridges and after that the north/south object. That way people can't drive fast to the other side of the map and get that object.

I know that some people have made custom Barashka's but they aren't played a lot, TW should make their maps as the high standard, it shouldn't need to be tweaked by custommappers to undo it from it's shortcomings.
 
Please change Barashka! It ****s pretty hard now as it is over in a couple of minutes (last game was 3 minutes!). Some lame things about that map:

- the ice, all tanks cross over it (maybe just fix the gates in the stone wall (with some small holes for infantry). Tanks should fall trough ice at the first step...

- the Tiger, change it for the Panther please, Wiking didn't had Tigers

- artillery on the bridges? Why would any army do that while they want to cross the bridges... Make that impossible for artillery.

- the objects, do something about those. Let the Germans/Russians first get the south/north object, than one of the bridges and after that the north/south object. That way people can't drive fast to the other side of the map and get that object.

I know that some people have made custom Barashka's but they aren't played a lot, TW should make their maps as the high standard, it shouldn't need to be tweaked by custommappers to undo it from it's shortcomings.
Yeah the required objectives tweak makes it so a good team just rushes the 2 required and ends the round in 3 minutes. Even though the old way ended in stalemates alot it was still better that way IMO. Also I agree 100% on tanks not being able to drive over the ice, 40+ tons supported by what? 5 inches of ice? How thick is this ice supposed to be? Maybe if it was 10 feet thick it might support them. If ice was made immpassable by vehicle people would have to use.....ehm bridges! I knew bridges existed for a reason! It would funnel the confrontation and make for some furious clashes trying to cross the bridges rather than just bypass them.
 
Upvote 0
by the way give barashka AT LEAST double size and add a slight bigger view distance !!!! PLEASE PLEASE ... IM SICK OF SHORT TANK MAPS THAT HAVE THE OGLEDOW/ARAD-SYNDROME and of course fix the other named issues from above, he is right!


its good that the infantry starts at the bridge ... but non the less the size should be biger to alow a bit flanking ... its so awfull when there is no way for you to flank that angled tiger/IS2 with your panzer IV or T34 ...
 
Upvote 0
I just found an online canadian guide to, amoungst other things i guess, not falling through ice. It recons that the minimum ice thickness required to support a 2.5 ton truck is 8", yet for a 7-8 ton truck it's 10 inches. I am suprised a mere 2" increase has such an large effect on load bearing ability.
A 7 ton truck could be supported by 6 wheels. A 55,000kg tiger (about 7-8 times the truck's weight) has a ground pressure of 1.04kg/km^2
How thick can a river ice over I wonder?

Anyway i won't go on because I cant be bothered to do any sums and I always enjoy playing barashka whether it's realistic or not. That said I do think all the points here are all valid, panthers would be an especially good addition.
However it's better perhaps if barashka is accepted as it is and a mapper makes a similar style map from scratch with features like the ones suggested here.
 
Upvote 0
by the way give barashka AT LEAST double size and add a slight bigger view distance !!!! PLEASE PLEASE ... IM SICK OF SHORT TANK MAPS THAT HAVE THE OGLEDOW/ARAD-SYNDROME and of course fix the other named issues from above, he is right!


its good that the infantry starts at the bridge ... but non the less the size should be biger to alow a bit flanking ... its so awfull when there is no way for you to flank that angled tiger/IS2 with your panzer IV or T34 ...
Yeah I never tank on Arad, Ogledow or Barashka because they are WAY WAY WAY....WAY! too small for quality tanking IMO. When I'm on any of those maps I'm always infantry. Great maps but I think maybe turning them into infantry maps with tank "support" might be something more interesting instead of just having "park tank here, kill/get killed then repeat"
Like you said there is almost no room for any manuevering.
 
Upvote 0
Barashka is a horrible map to begin with LOL...

But barashka was much better before the changes... infact I liked it much better when there was no ice (MOD DAYS).... which made it more challanging to get across a bridge, and have all cap zones...

Lets put it this way... when water freezes, only the top layer freezes... and that layer isnt always the thickest.... and even so... I dont think it would be very smart and safe to even drive a tank on ice.... it would break the ice in seconds with all that weight, and sink into the freezing water killing the tank crew...

its just plain stupid.. please take it out... and the new layout is also just bad... the bridges were extended... why; this serves no purpose... just add more land in between the bridges....:D
 
Upvote 0
I quite like Baraskka, and think it's one of the better offical CA maps.
But then I don't tend to play it as a CA map rather than a tank map. SO I'm usually in a SU-76 or StuG, shelling the hell out of the crunchies. Or if I'm in the StuG, I'll I'll switch to tank destroyer depending on how things are going.

If the map were to change, I'd like to see the following differences.
  • Change it from one of the "symmetrical maps". Have the Russians starting off on both sides of the river and the Germans have to advance across the whole map.
  • Add in the AT-guns (when they arrive), for the Russians.
  • Remove the ice. Or make it crossable by infantry only. Yes, shell would break the ice, but we can't have everything in life.
  • There should be less tanks. And ratio between tank and assult gun should be lowered. Russians should have fewer tanks as they have the AT guns.
  • Widen the rail bridge to carry 2 tracks.
I know this would be a radically different map, but it's my 2 cents.
I don't have no idea how historically accurate this would be.
 
Upvote 0
How thick can a river ice over I wonder?

Years ago, Lower NY Bay used to freeze over thick enough for people to travel across to Brooklyn, Staten Island, New Jersey, etc..

Thick enough for the Canadian ICE Highway to be established every year for fully loaded 18 wheelers to use it through the winter months.

Learn about the Canadian Ice Highway HERE - Its a good read.
 
Upvote 0
Yes ice is questionable for high load characteristics. History fact: The germans had their best luck with ice bridges when they could use them on the northern parts of the OST front. Their is an account of a ice rail bridge being used for 3 years ( seasonally of course) and it was subjected to bombing and partisan attacks but it could never be destroyed.
 
Upvote 0
Tanks should fall trough ice at the first step...


Umm no. They wouldn't. 1 metre of ice can carry roughly 80 tonnes of tank if i remember correctly from my army days: The Norwegian Leopard tank needed around 60 cm of ice to carry it's 43 tonnes, and a Tiger tank would need around 75 - 80 cm to carry its 57 tonnes.

It takes a few days only to get that thick in Russia.
 
Upvote 0
Umm no. They wouldn't. 1 metre of ice can carry roughly 80 tonnes of tank if i remember correctly from my army days: The Norwegian Leopard tank needed around 60 cm of ice to carry it's 43 tonnes, and a Tiger tank would need around 75 - 80 cm to carry its 57 tonnes
Thanks- i was trying to work out the thickness required from other weight load data, but didn't really trust my estimates.
It also dawned on me that ground pressure (that i mentioned in my post) may not be a real factor as ice is brittle and cracks in sheets- you do not sink into it like mud.
I played bara last night and did think as you drop onto ice at speed from bank it probably would crack, however.

Anyways, ice wasn't the only point of this thread and last night I felt I would like to see an all new snow map like barashka, about twice as big with more, wider bridges. And panthers instead of tigers.
 
Upvote 0
Np, those are estimates, albeit close ones. I have been in armoured personnell carriers myself as they drove over the ice - i few inches thick at most. When water freezes like that it's not brittle at all - there's a reason why we call it "steel ice".

It really is strong as steel, and you don't need many inches for it to be impenetrable, even for tank shells.

Now, imagine drilling through that for the sole purpose of getting some fish. *sigh*

but barashka is not russia
Ooops. That's what I get for assuming :)

Anyway, done with the ice now :)

EDIT: Did some searching and found a chart which is roughly the same numbers I remembered: http://www.mvp-wc.usace.army.mil/ice/graphics/iceload1.png
 
Upvote 0
So I guess the question now is: Does Hungary get cold enough to have ice freeze 4 feet thick or so?
A Tiger needs less than 4 feet, more like 2,5 feet. And yes, it's more than cold enough - it can happen here in Norway and we have a warmer winter than Hungary due to the Gulf Stream keeping us all nice and cozed up in all the snugliness you can imagine.
 
Last edited:
Upvote 0
A Tiger needs less than 4 feet, more like 2,5 feet. And yes, it's more than cold enough - it can happen here in Norway and we have a warmer winter than Hungary due to the Gulf Stream keeping us all nice and cozed up in all the snugliness you can imagine.
NOOOOOOOO!!!!!!!! Oh well I guess the ice crossing is staying then unless they decide to change Barashka battle to one of the other seasons.
 
Upvote 0