new game... new rules (bf1942 VS bf2)

**Wyzcrak** · 06-13-2005, 11:27 AM

Some old rules will stay. Some will go. New, never-heard of rules will arrive.

Quote:

Originally Posted by houdini

we may want to re-think our BF1942 mindset of keeping the original spawn base as off limits to attackers

Quote:

Originally Posted by asch

Several rules from the BF1942/DC days will most likely have to change with BF2 and some new rules will be introduced.

Apophis told me last night that a necessity existed in BF2 for attacking uncapturable spawns, but he also said that being in uncapturable spawns and doing nothing but spawn camping would not be allowed.

Nothing is official until it comes from Tempus or Apophis, but I wanted to remind people to be open-minded about rules. Short of things explicitly and already announced by Tempus or Apophis about BF2, think not of BF1942 when deciding what's allowed, but rather what's best for the server and its gameplay (even if it means you use rules identical to how we managed BF1942).

**Tempus** · 06-13-2005, 11:30 AM

Great point. Bf2 introduces new dynamics in gameplay over 1942. There are resizable maps, more variable spawn points, different chains of command, etc. We're still playing a limited demo, so we need to be open-minded when it comes to what future rules will and will not enforced on the server.

**CingularDuality** · 06-13-2005, 11:54 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Wyzcrak

Apophis told me last night that a necessity existed in BF2 for attacking uncapturable spawns, but he also said that being in uncapturable spawns and doing nothing but spawn camping would not be allowed.

Yeah... Spawn camping the UCB is no longer an issue and is, in fact, necessary due to the supporting infrastructure. I think that the squad leader spawn points make up for this, tactically...

Mateo · 06-13-2005, 01:08 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Wyzcrak

Apophis told me last night that a necessity existed in BF2 for attacking uncapturable spawns, but he also said that being in uncapturable spawns and doing nothing but spawn camping would not be allowed.

Which is it? Either the enemy has no business being in an uncapturable spawn, which by defintion, you cannot capture, or spawn raping is allowed.

If you own the field, then being in the enemy's spawn is not what you should be doing. The team should switch to defense, and hold the group they have.

What tactical reason is there for someone to go into the enemie's spawn? There isn't one. Ever. You can't capture it, so it's NOT AN OBJECTIVE. If it's not an objective, you should not be doing it. All you are doing is KILL PADDING. Pure and simple.

To allow someone to go into the opposition's spawn for any reason invites trouble, and frankly, has no business on our servers.

**CingularDuality** · 06-13-2005, 01:11 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by TG_Mateo

What tactical reason is there for someone to go into the enemie's spawn?

Destroying artillery, radar and UAV tower? Killing the commander?

No, the rules will definitely have to change for this game...

**Wyzcrak** · 06-13-2005, 01:13 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by TG_Mateo

If it's not an objective, you should not be doing it. All you are doing is KILL PADDING. Pure and simple.

Let's call each other "deathmatchers" and "fragmonkeys" while we're at it.

GET THE TORCHES!!

No. It's not that simple.

In BF2, UCBs are just and only that -- uncapturable. They're not WB -- worthless bases. In these bases are radar and valuable enemy tech. There ARE objectives in those bases and it's possible you DO have business being there.

Details will work themselves out, but I think we agree so far that UCBs aren't to be entirely off limits.

**TG_JBRanger** · 06-13-2005, 01:18 PM

Like maybe taking out airfields with artillery? I know as commander I was kicked while bombarding the aircraft carrier (no one was on deck, so no kill padding). I was taking out valuable air assets that then therefore made it harder for the enemy to retake ground. Was I spawn raping? Tactically, no. Gameplay wise, maybe.

Mateo · 06-13-2005, 01:32 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Wyzcrak

Let's call each other "deathmatchers" and "fragmonkeys" while we're at it.

GET THE TORCHES!!

Yes, lets! It's too easy for someone to say, I went in taking out artillery, and BTW, eliminated everyone that was respawning. It's almost an excuse.....the core reason I play here is that such things are not allowed, a welcome respit from any other public server. If it becomes de rigeur to allow players to go into the UCB and eliminate "objectives" what seperates us from ANY other server?

Quote:

No. It's not that simple.

Yes it is. There is no reason to let our standards slip simply because the game allows it.

Quote:

In BF2, UCBs are just and only that -- uncapturable. They're not WB -- worthless bases. In these bases are radar and valuable enemy tech. There ARE objectives in those bases and it's possible you DO have business being there.

No, you don't, see the comments above. Only if you think the game is offensive only. If the objective is hold the most bases, then that's what you should be doing. Destroying technicals and anything that gets in your way in that "objective" merely santcions fragmonkey-ness.

Those valuable assets can be countered with superior force and *gasp* strategy. Ever hear of it?

Quote:

Details will work themselves out, but I think we agree so far that UCBs aren't to be entirely off limits.

I'm not interested in reliving Joint Ops fragmonekyness simply because you designate the UCB fair.

**Wyzcrak** · 06-13-2005, 01:34 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by TG_Mateo

I'll pass.

I bet you're wrong!

**TG_JBRanger** · 06-13-2005, 01:37 PM

Well, bickering it may be, but I feel as I though I did a service by removing those resources and was a tactically savvy move. Maybe a bit rough but oh well. Do I swim out to the ship or camp aircraft on the runway, NO. I was commander, I saw a target, I took it out. Do I do this always, NO. Do I recommend camping UCB's, NO. However going into the MEC's area of their UCB to take out arty or the UAV trailer is a Spec Ops type role that would benefit the rest of the team.

**Tempus** · 06-13-2005, 01:40 PM

You guys are getting way to excited about an issue that may not exist once the game dynamics are resolved. Nobody can come in here and say "It must be this way, because in some other game it had to be this way."

And if you're going to give up on a game that is 3 days into DEMO play, then you're doing a disservice to the game and yourself.

Please be patient while we all learn and understand this exciting game.

**Pokerface** · 06-13-2005, 01:41 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by TG_Mateo

Yes, lets! It's too easy for someone to say, I went in taking out artillery, and BTW, eliminated everyone that was respawning. It's almost an excuse.....the core reason I play here is that such things are not allowed, a welcome respit from any other public server. If it becomes de rigeur to allow players to go into the UCB and eliminate "objectives" what seperates us from ANY other server?

Yes it is. There is no reason to let our standards slip simply because the game allows it.

No, you don't, see the comments above. Only if you think the game is offensive only. If the objective is hold the most bases, then that's what you should be doing. Destroying technicals and anything that gets in your way in that "objective" merely santcions fragmonkey-ness.

Those valuable assets can be countered with superior force and *gasp* strategy. Ever hear of it?

If so, I'll pass. I'm not interested in reliving Joint Ops fragmonekyness simply because you designate the UCB fair.

There are now assets in UCBs. Those assets can and should be fair game. Much like in DC when SCUDs were launching from a UCB, UCB access is permitted within a tactical scope.

There's zero reason to create a rule that hamstrings mature gameplay for the purposes of smacktard elimination. If someone is spawncamping, then kick them. If someone is in your UCB eliminating assets, then protect your assets better.

A UCB isn't like the swingsets when you're playing freeze tag, a place where you're totally safe: it's a BASE, with things worth defending in it.

Mateo · 06-13-2005, 01:48 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Wyzcrak

I bet you're wrong!

Yeah, I edited that. Heat of the moment and all.

Mateo · 06-13-2005, 01:54 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Pokerface

A UCB isn't like the swingsets when you're playing freeze tag, a place where you're totally safe: it's a BASE, with things worth defending in it.

Explain to me then why we uphold boundaries in the other games we play?

Why are there boundaries (albeit shifting and imaginary) in PCS that we haggle over?

Why were bases off limits in Joint Ops?

Why uphold one standard of play for one game, and then toss that for another?

We have upheld rules and limits in all other games-and we shouldn't relax our standards here because it is expedient.

You want to bomb or artillery technicals and assets: go right ahead. If you own the map, you must have the pilots and weapons to do so. But to my mind, you have no business in the UCB.

**kormendi** · 06-13-2005, 02:02 PM

The UCB should have a squad to defend it. Losing radar and artilery can hurt a team significantly. Dont let the opposition walk in, own your assets, and spawn camp. Instead, take tactical positions and use your resources to keep the base clean.

Sure it might be boring to be the one who has to defend the UCB, but I believe it will be a necessary job.

06-13-2005, 11:30 AM	#2 (permalink)
Tempus Join Date: May 2003 Location: Miami, FL Age: 38 Posts: 8,272	Re: new game... new rules (bf1942 VS bf2) Great point. Bf2 introduces new dynamics in gameplay over 1942. There are resizable maps, more variable spawn points, different chains of command, etc. We're still playing a limited demo, so we need to be open-minded when it comes to what future rules will and will not enforced on the server. __________________ Battlefield 2/2142 Game Officer Contact me with server/player/admin issues. -- Suits are what you wear when doing things you shouldn’t want to do anyway. FROM THE TACTICAL GAMER PRIMER. 3) Support game play in a near-simulation environment. Where the focus of play would not be solely on doing what it takes to win, but doing so utilizing real-world combat strategy and tactics rather than leveraging exploits provided to players by the design of the game engine.

06-13-2005, 01:18 PM	#7 (permalink)
TG_JBRanger Join Date: Aug 2004 Location: Atl, GA Age: 29 Posts: 663	Re: new game... new rules (bf1942 VS bf2) Like maybe taking out airfields with artillery? I know as commander I was kicked while bombarding the aircraft carrier (no one was on deck, so no kill padding). I was taking out valuable air assets that then therefore made it harder for the enemy to retake ground. Was I spawn raping? Tactically, no. Gameplay wise, maybe. __________________ In the pursuit of... something.

06-13-2005, 01:37 PM	#10 (permalink)
TG_JBRanger Join Date: Aug 2004 Location: Atl, GA Age: 29 Posts: 663	Re: new game... new rules (bf1942 VS bf2) Well, bickering it may be, but I feel as I though I did a service by removing those resources and was a tactically savvy move. Maybe a bit rough but oh well. Do I swim out to the ship or camp aircraft on the runway, NO. I was commander, I saw a target, I took it out. Do I do this always, NO. Do I recommend camping UCB's, NO. However going into the MEC's area of their UCB to take out arty or the UAV trailer is a Spec Ops type role that would benefit the rest of the team. __________________ In the pursuit of... something.

06-13-2005, 01:40 PM	#11 (permalink)
Tempus Join Date: May 2003 Location: Miami, FL Age: 38 Posts: 8,272	Re: new game... new rules (bf1942 VS bf2) You guys are getting way to excited about an issue that may not exist once the game dynamics are resolved. Nobody can come in here and say "It must be this way, because in some other game it had to be this way." And if you're going to give up on a game that is 3 days into DEMO play, then you're doing a disservice to the game and yourself. Please be patient while we all learn and understand this exciting game. __________________ Battlefield 2/2142 Game Officer Contact me with server/player/admin issues. -- Suits are what you wear when doing things you shouldn’t want to do anyway. FROM THE TACTICAL GAMER PRIMER. 3) Support game play in a near-simulation environment. Where the focus of play would not be solely on doing what it takes to win, but doing so utilizing real-world combat strategy and tactics rather than leveraging exploits provided to players by the design of the game engine.

06-13-2005, 02:02 PM	#15 (permalink)
kormendi Join Date: Aug 2004 Location: Fairfax, Virginia Age: 27 Posts: 2,177	Re: new game... new rules (bf1942 VS bf2) The UCB should have a squad to defend it. Losing radar and artilery can hurt a team significantly. Dont let the opposition walk in, own your assets, and spawn camp. Instead, take tactical positions and use your resources to keep the base clean. Sure it might be boring to be the one who has to defend the UCB, but I believe it will be a necessary job.

Currently Active Users Viewing This Thread: 1 (0 members and 1 guests)

Similar Threads
Thread	Thread Starter	Forum	Replies	Last Post
Response from EA/DICE about SL spawn changes in 1.3	Red	Battlefield 2 - Ranked Vanilla	53	05-17-2006 04:16 PM
Catalyst v5.8 Drivers Out Today	FishRoy	Hardware & Software Discussion	1	09-17-2005 09:31 PM
BF2 Burried treasure!? from bf2scene.com, Supply line game mode!!!	Nigelbland	Battlefield 2 - Ranked Vanilla	0	07-01-2005 08:09 PM

Sponsored links

Sponsored links

Sponsored links