delems

Infantry spawn building (SP).

169 posts in this topic

1JOE8Wr.jpg

M3VCnY7.pngG1xhpoZ.png   5WdMHL0.pngq19cpye.pngX5B4ub0.png

These are all 8-1/2" by 11" don't know why some show different sized, but they could be posted in the spawn buildings.  Never heard a Rat answer on this.  It would educate people to the fact that the building they spawn in is not the one to be defended, but the one with the flag building is.

But also they have to do something so people can't walk into a flag building and absorb a hail of gunfire and kill the defenders and capture a Flagged Building, I find it exceptionally frustrating that individuals ignore being shot.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
3 hours ago, downtown said:

1JOE8Wr.jpg

M3VCnY7.pngG1xhpoZ.png   5WdMHL0.pngq19cpye.pngX5B4ub0.png

These are all 8-1/2" by 11" don't know why some show different sized, but they could be posted in the spawn buildings.  Never heard a Rat answer on this.  It would educate people to the fact that the building they spawn in is not the one to be defended, but the one with the flag building is.

But also they have to do something so people can't walk into a flag building and absorb a hail of gunfire and kill the defenders and capture a Flagged Building, I find it exceptionally frustrating that individuals ignore being shot.

I can appreciate the effort as I spend most of my time defending CPs and in town fighting. 

However, most players (vets) know full well that ABs and CPs matter. They just don't care. This goes back to a prior conversation on situational awareness as well. New players may benefit from said posters....but even after individual direct messages, many still don't defend appropriately. 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

(brainstorming)

What if for each cardinal direction we would have a Full AB, but setting up spawns and flags in a specific order to improve City fights:

along the roads with buildings in-between:

[town civilian flags]—-——[AB spawns]———-[bunker flag]——[depot spawn]——[depot flag] ........................................... FB

this allows to divide battles into cardinal areas (N, E, S, W), since you can contest and hold the depot flag until capturing the bunker which is reinforced only if defenders control that area from their depot. Less camping , more dense close combats

 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

The ABs are already awful and stupid, frankly, more of them would be a problem, not a solution.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

If you mean actual ABs, no, would mean vehicles and mess with supply (as it is based on AB #).

If you mean the AB structure as just another capture point, could work.

Though I agree, I don't like suicide running into a single door to try and capture - reminds me of banzi, not infantry battles/tactics.

 

We have some good towns to fight in, and with a bit of adjustment they would even be better.

Kalm isn't too bad, just move each CP area 100m further from town, N E S.

Wuust ok too, but same, move CP areas a bit further from center, especially N one.

Oostmalle is quite good, just move N and E CPs further away.

Schilde good, just move Lier CP 100m W and AB area 100m E - put in a few other bldgs or trees.

Lier is much better, but again, push all CPs 100m further from town or so.

 

Most towns just need to push the CPs out a bit.

And, I  still think changing the 3 story spawn point is critical, make ground level only.

 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
11 minutes ago, delems said:

If you mean actual ABs, no, would mean vehicles and mess with supply (as it is based on AB #).

If you mean the AB structure as just another capture point, could work.

Though I agree, I don't like suicide running into a single door to try and capture - reminds me of banzi, not infantry battles/tactics.

 

We have some good towns to fight in, and with a bit of adjustment they would even be better.

Kalm isn't too bad, just move each CP area 100m further from town, N E S.

Wuust ok too, but same, move CP areas a bit further from center, especially N one.

Oostmalle is quite good, just move N and E CPs further away.

Schilde good, just move Lier CP 100m W and AB area 100m E - put in a few other bldgs or trees.

Lier is much better, but again, push all CPs 100m further from town or so.

 

Most towns just need to push the CPs out a bit.

And, I  still think changing the 3 story spawn point is critical, make ground level only.

 

this would result in more camping not less........ ie surround the cps with tanks..... gg noob

Edited by kgarner

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
10 minutes ago, delems said:

If you mean actual ABs, no, would mean vehicles and mess with supply (as it is based on AB #).

If you mean the AB structure as just another capture point, could work.

In this concept I move the bunker (capture) flag outside AB and leave the spawns alone, so that the enemy has no reason to be in that area.

With this design you can drastically decrease supplies and hence ease (local) attrition effects. The overall battle would last  longer as well. 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

camping isn't a building placement issue.... its a population issue.  Whenever 1 side has more people than the other side in a specific condensed area..... the side with few will feel camped...... simple because more angle are cut and there are fewer friendlies to clear those angles.

2 minutes ago, ZEBBEEE said:

In this concept I move the bunker (capture) flag outside AB and leave the spawns alone, so that the enemy has no reason to be in that area.

With this design you can drastically decrease supplies and hence ease (local) attrition effects. The overall battle would last  longer as well. 

no it wouldn't..... cuz all you would have to do is surround the cap point with tanks and make them come to you...... or cap it and take the supply out of the equation

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

af and af ab's are a pretty good example of this

Edited by kgarner

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

if you are talking about essentially making every town a 2 ab town....... but instead of having a full 1.5 abs worth of supply ...... u just split the 1 ab supply into two separate ab's with .5 supply in each....... that could work

Edited by kgarner

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

would also serve to slow down low pop steamrolls...... I would imagine  

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

*** this would result in more camping not less........ ie surround the cps with tanks..... gg noob

I don't think so, easier to get ATGs out.

Look at some of the towns I mentioned, not that easy to get tanks in there to camp.

And, I still think everything with a motor in supply list needs to be cut in half.

 

*** In this concept I move the bunker (capture) flag outside AB and leave the spawns alone

Guess I'm unclear what you actually mean.

 

Edited by delems

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

the further away a capture point is from the spawn point......... the easier it is to camp.  Camping isn't just dying on spawn in.  Camping in a more general sense...... is creating a situation where 1 side has to get to a spot....... but it is impossible.  You are suggesting the later is better......... I am saying they are essentially the same thing.  If you move cap points far away from spawns..... then surrounding the cp's and making them impossible to get to is easier.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

*** If you move cap points far away from spawns..... 

Ah, I'm not saying that.

The SP is still near the CP, I'm saying move the SP/CP pair further away from center of town.

Make the SP single story only.

 

The idea is to provide more actual fighting between CPs, not have them stacked on top of each other.

I'd would have no CP within 100m, and probably even 200m from any other capture point.

Look at St Ric, if N CP were 200m more N; or even Schilde if Lier was 100m more W and AB complex 100m more E.

 

Edited by delems

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

i personally dont like that idea because it creates more ded time....... Instead of capping something and it only taking 30 secs to get on to the next one...... with the likelihood of having interaction with the enemy being likely the whole time...... You are suggesting that a ninja cap..... followed by 5 or 10 mins of walking or getting more set up in place to move on to the next one....... is somehow better.  You are a nonaction type of player.  Most players want nonstop action

Edited by kgarner

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
16 minutes ago, delems said:

Guess I'm unclear what you actually mean.

I’d move the Bunker outside the AB area, like we already have in open air ABs. except that I would keep them along the road and not middle of nowhere in the fields 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
3 minutes ago, ZEBBEEE said:

I’d move the Bunker outside the AB area, like we already have in open air ABs. except that I would keep them along the road and not middle of nowhere in the campaign 

honestly dont see what effect that would have.... except that it would be easier for the attackers to take it.  With the current set up.... it is stupid to ever take the ab before all the cps are capped first.  So I dont think it would really add any value to do this

Edited by kgarner

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

*** you are suggesting that a ninja cap..... followed by 5 or 10 mins of walking

Not at all, be a 100 to 200m assault between CPs, no more than 20 seconds.

The bright spot is, now you can have rifle firefights in that range while assaulting.

Not SMGs running 10m to hose the next rifle in the next CP right next door.

Each side has to maneuver the 200m to get to the other CP, this makes for team play, tactics, rifles suppressing etc.

Not 1 SMG ramboing 10m between CPs.

 

Edited by delems

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

if pop was higher i might agree......... but currently there are already alot of issues with cohesion .... more space between things will only add to that IMO.... Most people won't even drive a truck for 3 mins to get an ms up. 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

The idea is, with better sustained fights, more players will join and stay, hence the pop will grow.

Instead of being blasted by SMG they never see in a bldg all the time.

 

Edited by delems
1 person likes this

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

We have this huge map, and most fighting is in and around the same 3-4 buildings, seconds apart, and the combat at warpy barrel in the chest ranges. It’s boring. “Cohesion” in that context just means multiple guys capping so when the warpy smg comes in, he has a better. Hancenkf getting killed, leaving at least one to keep capping. Staring at a door is boring. Fire and movement across a few hundred m of ground is more interesting in the game.

1 person likes this

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
2 minutes ago, tater said:

We have this huge map, and most fighting is in and around the same 3-4 buildings, seconds apart, and the combat at warpy barrel in the chest ranges. It’s boring. “Cohesion” in that context just means multiple guys capping so when the warpy smg comes in, he has a better. Hancenkf getting killed, leaving at least one to keep capping. Staring at a door is boring. Fire and movement across a few hundred m of ground is more interesting in the game.

Dont agree at all

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

There isn't cohesion cause the game didn't teach cohesion via drop spawn mission and forget, spawn point gets capped/destroyed/flipped and the ML and spawners are separated and players go find another mission to spawn at.

20 years of coded organizational misconception has a toll on learned player behavior.

1 person likes this

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

"We have this huge map, and most fighting is in and around the same 3-4 buildings, seconds apart, and the combat at warpy barrel in the chest ranges. It’s boring. “Cohesion” in that context just means multiple guys capping so when the warpy smg comes in, he has a better. Hancenkf getting killed, leaving at least one to keep capping. Staring at a door is boring. Fire and movement across a few hundred m of ground is more interesting in the game. "

 

the current game offers well rounded options for any type of style you enjoy more.  If you like playing over open ground with a rifle..... go chase down MS's or attack or defend an FB.  If you like capping cps and smg close combat like I do.... awesome Ill see you in the CP

Edited by kgarner

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
2 minutes ago, kgarner said:

Dont agree at all

What is your theory? I am not sure I understand 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

  • Recently Browsing   0 members

    No registered users viewing this page.