|
PR Time:
|
||||||
| Register | Forum Rules | Developer Blogs | Project Reality | Members List | Search | Today's Posts | Mark Forums Read |
| PR:BF2 Suggestions Suggestions from our community members. Read the stickies before posting. |
![]() |
|
|
LinkBack | Thread Tools | Display Modes |
|
|
#21 | |
![]() |
Quote:
Much simpler and more realistic portray of controlling areas imo. | |
|
|
|
|
|
#22 | |
![]() Join Date: Nov 2007
Location: You can't get here from there
Posts: 1,602
|
Quote:
I also like dislexiclawyer's idea - any variation of the OP would be great for gameplay, as well as a little realism. | |
|
|
|
|
|
#23 |
![]() |
BUNKERS WITHIN THE CAP AREA DEFENSIVE BUNKERS SHOULD SWITCH BETWEEN FLAGS IF FLAG IS CAPPED THE BUNKER CAN BE USED BY TEAM IN CONTROL OF THAT FLAG
|
|
|
|
|
|
#24 |
![]() Join Date: Nov 2007
Location: You can't get here from there
Posts: 1,602
|
What's the point of having the bunkers at all, and what separates that from Vanilla flag spawns?
|
|
|
|
|
|
#25 |
![]() Join Date: Apr 2008
Location: Szczecin
Posts: 6
|
I don't think it's a good idea, since (especially on urban maps) it won't be too realistic. I have never heard about armies building bunkers etc. every 400 m (or w/e the distance between control points is).
Although dislexiclawyer's idea, about bunkers protecting the flag from being capped by enemy sounds good to me. |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
#27 |
![]() Join Date: Jul 2007
Posts: 247
|
The thread tittle has become a bit misleading. I don't think the object should be a bunker like the bunkers in PR are at the moment. Whatever it is and would be called (I have called it here as "Forward Command Post") would be a symbol for something between Commander (Command Post) and squads (which in BF2 spawn system are almost like platoons), something like Company Level Command Post - the names really doesn't matter.
If you ever have been with conventional army you would notice how slow and prepared they make maneuvers. All the logistics have to know where to go and for troops there is a lot of waiting time in every step of major moves. Everything is controlled by strict hierarchy and to get things approved takes time. What you see in game is just a tip of the iceberg. The idea to slow capture process with this "FCP" or "CLCP" or whatever, is really meant to get rid off the rapid back and forth flowing flag capture process we have at the moment. How is that realistic that you need three guys in a "flag" order to "capture" it? They can be just standing and hiding anywhere that area and actually do nothing. If you have a static object which you have to build and even more important, defend, you really need to gain control on that area and get your logistics organized, and protect your "Company commander", communication systems, supplies, everything. |
|
|
Last edited by fubar++; 12-30-2008 at 08:20 AM..
|
|
|
#28 |
![]() Join Date: Nov 2007
Posts: 450
|
I still like the idea, but think it should be as an improvement to C&C mode instead of incorporated into AAS mode. It would be represented better on larger maps in that mode than smaller urban maps where there is often little space for bunker/FOBs.
I have hope that C&C mode with its more open-ended approach can be made into something that folks like as much as AAS and Insurgency modes. Right now I see servers empty way too quickly for folks to even try it... |
|
|
|
|
|
#29 |
![]() |
C&C isn't played on servers that often, it's mostly AAS or insurgency. It's nice if this idea would be seen more often as and not just the few times you play C&C.
The cool things with this is that you can get some real intense battles, that go on for a while, around each flag. Flanking and manoeuvring will be more important. Having one group to defend/attack the FCP while another one is patrolling to find the enemy spawn. This could also make teamwork more important. Lone wolfing would be impossible. Today two or three vanilla noobs could be running about on their own and happen to end up at the same CP. Since they're more than 2 they can capture the flag without really realising it. With this idea, if you don't co-operate to build a bunker they wont be able to cap the flag. They'll just stand there and get killed after a while. This enforces them to team up and build a bunker. Earlier you could go lone wolfing, spawning at a FOB and just run to a flag and get at least something done. But this proposal really kills the meaning of even that, you wont be able to do anything at all except killing. As a lone wolf nowadays you can actually cap a flag as in my example above but with this idea you would need more people (to get it done fast at least). |
|
To view links or images in signatures your post count must be 1 or greater. You currently have 0 posts. |
|
|
|
|
|
|
#30 | |
![]() Join Date: Nov 2007
Posts: 450
|
Quote:
C&C isn't used because it doesn't have a lot going for it besides it's free form style play, which confuses pubbers that have no leadership telling them not to just rape the enemies main and go out and build FOBs. When they have to build FOBS/Bunkers in key areas it turns into something more along the lines of what you want, without messing with the AAS mode. | |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
![]() |
| Tags |
| building, bunkers, capture, flag |
| Thread Tools | |
| Display Modes | |
|
|