Rotta wrote:I would rather have RPs demanding at least 50% of the squad in its "influence". By this, I mean both living and death players: In a squad of six players you could have two dead soldiers queueing to RP. They spawn if one more dead player enters the queue, or one living squad mate comes to a radius of, say, 30 metres. The only exception would obviously have to be two-men squads, requiring both the soldiers.
Already thought out, main reason this wouldn't work is that squads would leave one guy permanently near the RP while the rest attacks = exploiting the idea.
This current ver proves to be harder to exploit, a good thing.
«Hollywood jackasses who insist on spending seriously huge amounts of money to make films that even my cat won't watch. And he'll happily sit in the bathroom and watch me shit.»
- [R-DEV]Masaq
FusionGames wrote:It's a really good change, we should consider the 30s of the rally as a "Regroup", seeing it in that way, i STRONGLY recommend that RP's placement requires 3 SQ members (2 soldiers 1 SL).
Only if possible, also i recommend a "delay", i mean that the SL must keep pressed the "Place rally point" button by 5 or 10 seconds to place it, with the SQ members less than 10meters from him.
What if 4 members have been killed? I prefer 2. The rally is only going to be open for 30 seconds and than you get a very long wait time before you can set one up again. IMO good way to get a squad rallied with there SL no matter what the reasons are. Than having to walk 300M to get to him. If 4 members are dead, with your idea. They cannot rally.
It doesn't diminish what the devs are trying to accomplish in getting people for focused on FOB's. Just gives a squad a quick way to regroup there squad if needed which I like.
I definetly like these changes over the first beta. Where there was no rallies. It was definetly a refreshing change of game-play but it would have gotten boring and stressful very fast due to the ammount of walking that was in place. Atleast with these additions the RP is not completly removed but it's also not depended upon as it only lasts 30 seconds leaving the team with still having to setup FOB's and defend them.
It seems that the reason you guys want to make these changes is to force people to think tactically and set up Defensive Fortifications. Not just the firebase, but the HMG, foxholes, AAs, and barricades, as well.
To do that, you don't really need to use spawn points as leverage. The only reason that I see for people not building Defensive Fortifications is that they're normally worthless. The only thing of value is the spawn point the firebase gives (and the AAs on certain maps). Foxholes and HMGs are deathtraps, and barbed wires are difficult to use to your advantage. I have a couple of suggestions to improve them:
First, the problem with foxholes and HMGs are that anyone sitting in one after being spotted by the enemy is about to die. For foxholes, the problem is that in order to use one you have to stand up, which means you cant shoot for **** and your torso is exposed. On top of that, since they're normally 5 feet high, they can be seen a kilometer away. I'm guessing that putting them underground wasn't an option cause of limitations with BF2s code. To make them safe for player to use, though, I think you should allow players to press "E" to deploy their gun, with some type of animation that only places the soldiers head above the sandbags. If you can't lower the foxholes below ground level then maybe pressing "E" can let players enter them. In the real world, the helmets worn by soldiers will stop most small arms fire, so there's essentially only a small target area for a fortified soldier to worry about. Maybe even cheat a bit for defenders and leave a gap between sandbags that when deployed, the weapon gives the defender a field of view a bit larger than they should have.
For HMGs, the problem is that there's no cover at all from the front. I believe real world machine gun nests are camouflaged to make a difficult target, but that's not gonna happen in this game. How about instead you place sandbags or a weapon shield around the player, to the point where nothing but a well placed shot from a rifle with high magnification can take him out. If this blocks his FOV then put a shallow trench under his body so that his head and the gun are elevated, but the rest protected from shots coming at 10 or 15 degrees.
For barbed wires, you can allow the squad leader to place them in two steps. The first build order will set the left end, and the second the right. This would allow you to place these things exactly where you want them, and chain them together with no gaps for infantry to cross. Even better would be if the squad leader could set a build order, and then run along the path that he wants the wire to run. This would let you block off your flank on hill objectives, and probably a million things we've never thought of, yet.
If you throw in these changes, I think Defensive Fortifications will be so powerful that you'll have to tweak HAT ammo availability and repair time for soldiers to achieve a balance with the strength of the fortifications. I think these would be server side changes though. Medics would also need to be reigned in further so that players can't die five times without coughing up a single ticket. It would be great though to see players trying to do things like lob grenades into foxholes for a change!
The last suggestion I have would be to shrink the cap radius for objectives. Just draw each one into the map and keep the radius on the map as a general guide. If Hill 179 is the objective, then make THE TOP OF THE HILL the cap radius. force players to clear out the enemy instead of just waiting in bushes looking every direction waiting for someone to try to flush out the other, while the flag stays neutral. A mini outpost built into the map as an objective should yield it's flag to whoever controls it. I have some other suggestions for tweaking the maps, but I'll place those in another post in the appropriate forum. Tweaking the maps I think is probably the biggest way you can influence the tactics players do or don't use. I won't go into detail, but in brief I think thickening the underbrush on forest and jungle maps to realistic levels and forcing players to use preset trails (or make the knife a machete?) would make chokepoints and defensive perimeters more effective.
Well, I Have tried it. And I Must say I like it for the most part. But I can play the slow waiting game. but the more casual weekend players will not stay. And I do believe this one move of trying to get rid of RP's will just force the game into a new level of slowness boring walking. And as I pointed out on the 1st test, "He who camps the route from the OP4 main, will win the battle for his team." 1 Tank can and as I have seen today will win a whole battle of Kashen. Just by camping the normal routes from the USa main. A Mec tank just sat on a hill and blasted everything that came over the hill. And with no Rally to out flank wth. It was just a white wash. I Must point out that it was not base raping. It's the same on Muttra. MEc can and almost every time the map comes up, Do Rush to D4k5 with a truck and build AA and bring a HAT. They can get there just as the 1st chooper lands at the docks. Now that's if the USMC team is going well. When they are not. It's just a rape feast. The LAV can't get near due to HAT fire. and the Choopers can't get near due to AA. Sure you can all the way around. But it's to late. The Damage is done. At least with an RP you could flank the D4k5 FB.
So in the long run. The squad that rushes. Will win the map for there team. Just because they will slow the OP4 team so far back IE: the main. This will kill the MOD for casual player. Well I think so.
Oddsodz wrote:Well, I Have tried it. And I Must say I like it for the most part. But I can play the slow waiting game. but the more casual weekend players will not stay. And I do believe this one move of trying to get rid of RP's will just force the game into a new level of slowness boring walking. And as I pointed out on the 1st test, "He who camps the route from the OP4 main, will win the battle for his team." 1 Tank can and as I have seen today will win a whole battle of Kashen. Just by camping the normal routes from the USa main. A Mec tank just sat on a hill and blasted everything that came over the hill. And with no Rally to out flank wth. It was just a white wash. I Must point out that it was not base raping. It's the same on Muttra. MEc can and almost every time the map comes up, Do Rush to D4k5 with a truck and build AA and bring a HAT. They can get there just as the 1st chooper lands at the docks. Now that's if the USMC team is going well. When they are not. It's just a rape feast. The LAV can't get near due to HAT fire. and the Choopers can't get near due to AA. Sure you can all the way around. But it's to late. The Damage is done. At least with an RP you could flank the D4k5 FB.
So in the long run. The squad that rushes. Will win the map for there team. Just because they will slow the OP4 team so far back IE: the main. This will kill the MOD for casual player. Well I think so.
Flawed logic IMHO. Just because there's an AA and HAT doesn't mean they can't be destroyed. Just because there's armor ambushing the main road on Kashan doesn't mean it can't be destroyed.
Regarding the "boring walking", not everything needs to be !!!!ALL AcTiOn ALL ThE TiMe!!!! It really doesn't take that long to get to yours quad. Really man, come on.
2 things i want to say. My experience from playing the new versions
1.) its like being on a squad whose sl has an sniper kits and doesn't put spawn point for you. My team won because we put a strategic fb in area of map no one ever goes. But still had to end up walking 600m to next objective if you died. That sucked. Imagine you walked 700m soon as you get there, get killed and have to walk 700 m again.
2.) you guys want more teamwork, have you forgot 90% of the players are teenagers, They will not fair well with your new teamwork plans. Not saying teens are dumb by anymeans but you are asking a lot from them. I can see in advance, it will take a long time before they catch on and the game runs smoothly like before.
To make a long story short, no spawn points anymore a lot of walking and your gonna lose if you have the most teens on your team. : \
corp_calqluslethal wrote:2 things i want to say. My experience from playing the new versions
1.) its like being on a squad whose sl has an sniper kits and doesn't put spawn point for you. My team won because we put a strategic fb in area of map no one ever goes. But still had to end up walking 600m to next objective if you died. That sucked. Imagine you walked 700m soon as you get there, get killed and have to walk 700 m again.
2.) you guys want more teamwork, have you forgot 90% of the players are teenagers, They will not fair well with your new teamwork plans. Not saying teens are dumb by anymeans but you are asking a lot from them. I can see in advance, it will take a long time before they catch on and the game runs smoothly like before.
To make a long story short, no spawn points anymore a lot of walking and your gonna lose if you have the most teens on your team. : \
there's a poll around here somewhere that has an age breakdown. teenagers are not 90% of the player base. not even close. and to be honest, i dont think age matters at all. i have seen plenty of good teenagers and plenty of bad 20+ year olds (and vice versa).
not having them sucks, and now having them for 30 seconds just defeats the object of a rally., might as well just spawn on sql like nilla.
rally points should be placed with 3 soldiers like 0.856- and never expire. the over run radious should be lowered also. this forces people to fall back if they are over run with enemy to seek an extra sql member from a FOB nerarby. gameplay dramatically changed in -.86 with the rally changes but the 0.856 rally was perfect
corp_calqluslethal wrote:
1.) its like being on a squad whose sl has an sniper kits and doesn't put spawn point for you. My team won because we put a strategic fb in area of map no one ever goes. But still had to end up walking 600m to next objective if you died. That sucked. Imagine you walked 700m soon as you get there, get killed and have to walk 700 m again.
Then try harder to not die and/or defend FBs in strategic positions. Thats the idea. Almost every other FPS out there is run-and-gun BS. Play those if you don't want to walk. You already admitted you don't like to build assets. You're basically saying you don't like to play as a team/squad member. Guess what, thats what PR is all about; being part of a team.
corp_calqluslethal wrote:2.) you guys want more teamwork, have you forgot 90% of the players are teenagers, They will not fair well with your new teamwork plans. Not saying teens are dumb by anymeans but you are asking a lot from them. I can see in advance, it will take a long time before they catch on and the game runs smoothly like before.
To make a long story short, no spawn points anymore a lot of walking and your gonna lose if you have the most teens on your team. : \
This is totally inaccurate. Do you have your VOIP on? Its clearly NOT mostly teens playing PR. Check the poll, too. The majority are 20 -> early 30 somethings.
Most people just don't like change and they're afraid of even the mention of something being different. Especially once you get to be 30+.....
Just because there is a poll here on this site, Does not mean it is true.
Easy way to say it. Look what happened to the black hawk in vBF2. The players who did not like its miniguns complained. But the rest of the game playing population knew northing, Only to find in the next patch it was fucked. Same thing happened to the J-10. Players did not see that the balance for the J-10 was the map they was on. Not the F-35b (IE: Cap the dam airfield and then the J-10 was useless).
So just because a poll here says everybody is over 20+. Does not make it so.
Like I said. I Can deal with the walking. In fact I would bet that I have more walking miles on my boots in PR than most. But I don't think the majority will like the extra walking + Boring time involved that goes with it.
corp_calqluslethal wrote:2 things i want to say. My experience from playing the new versions
1.) its like being on a squad whose sl has an sniper kits and doesn't put spawn point for you. My team won because we put a strategic fb in area of map no one ever goes. But still had to end up walking 600m to next objective if you died. That sucked. Imagine you walked 700m soon as you get there, get killed and have to walk 700 m again.
2.) you guys want more teamwork, have you forgot 90% of the players are teenagers, They will not fair well with your new teamwork plans. Not saying teens are dumb by anymeans but you are asking a lot from them. I can see in advance, it will take a long time before they catch on and the game runs smoothly like before.
To make a long story short, no spawn points anymore a lot of walking and your gonna lose if you have the most teens on your team. : \
so teach em, these manuvers are simple, not complex. maybe even put a tactical section into the manual for the game, hell most of it is on this forum from what i have writen and others have.
comabt manuvering is designed for the uneducated to be able to understand. if a teenager with a comp cant figure out how to suppress with half his team and assault with the other half then they need to go back to elementry school. lol. its simple and is much prefered over the lemmings assaults.
The Clan Web Page is http://1-120thcab.aowc.net/ I didnt join the Army, I joined the Infantry, The Army is just my support, thanks POG's for the support (BTW, not my real RR, this is a RR for my clan, because this is a GAME.)
'[R-DEV wrote:Jaymz;1185593']The changes that will remain the same are:
Forward Outposts can now be built with one supply crate instead of two (all other deployables still need two).
Isn't that a bit weird? It can be confusing for some people when you have things like this. Either have two supply crates required for all, or one crate required for all, not one for one and two for the rest. Dont make things more difficult and confusing than needed..
Other than that the changes look promising. Or, I would perhaps like to see the rally expire time increased, maybe to 50sec or 60sec (one minute).
well i just play it in Tactical gamers and it was really good i have to admit it , actually i like it too much.
Is there any way the Pilot could talk with his crew because typing while you fly its really hard and in other ocations you do evac without knowing that there are enemies in the area so you have to take them, leave and type while you fly sometimes it is mortal so its just a Idea the Pilot could talk with the people inside the chopper.
chilean wrote:well i just play it in Tactical gamers and it was really good i have to admit it , actually i like it too much.
Is there any way the Pilot could talk with his crew because typing while you fly its really hard and in other ocations you do evac without knowing that there are enemies in the area so you have to take them, leave and type while you fly sometimes it is mortal so its just a Idea the Pilot could talk with the people inside the chopper.
The changes are BULL...... for Insurgentcy...
Played 8 rounds and near by everyone ends with 100 to 0 for Insurgents.
Best US/UK round was 90 - 0 for Insurgents
This mode was hard - now its impossible...
Kongreal for example is very easy to win: Mine the mainroad and camp the mainbase = epic win. The only real problem is outpost at the beginning but thats it...
