Santa

Today i was flying a jet in daquing-something-or-other (the one with the carrier). When i saw an enemy boat get roughly 300-400 meters out of the carrier, i would bomb it. After the match i thought about it and was wondering if it was actually legit or not? Also, if an enemy gets in the USS essex to try to shoot me down, am i allowed to strafe the sam site? I would use only the chain gun as to prevent collateral damage, but i resisted even attempting to do so because i wasnt sure if this was allowed. Another question sort of along the same lines, if a tunguska is in an enemy UCB and is firing at me, can i bomb it?

Riki_Rude_BTYC

ive wondered the samething, if your passing by a UCB if you can bomb something thats shooting you.

Legato895

for ground pounders the ONLY time you can fire is if your taking fire. so i would say that even an unmanned vulcan is fair game. just shoot it with your main guns. and with the AAA tanks, chances are they will open fire on you, and its their mistake being in a AAA vehicle anyway.

i would also surmise that the boat is fair game. its not like your camping it, and they are choosing to use it.

__________________
|TG-Irr|Legato

perry

Well, the boat is out of the UCB, so.... I've been bombed and attacked by the attack helo while in a boat enough times that I don't think the powers that be have a problem with attacking them while going in from the carrier.

You really shouldn't be out by the carrier long enough for the guns to matter (and with the dumb missles, the gunner would be risking team damage by firing them). It doesn't have far enough range to track you as you're making passes at beach flags. Here at TG, the Essex really isn't a relevant threat.

But the ground pounder thing I don't think is correct. From the rules:
So, a sniper can setup camp outside/inside a UCB and fire at anyone attempting to repair the assets. "I swear it looked like a wrench in his hand, not a rifle!"

Phelan Ward

Umm...I would say I'm pretty good with the Essex. Of the few planes that attacked the carrier on Oman I shot down at least half of them. I got "team damage" only twice. Once a plane flew through my minigun and another when I shot down a chopper and it crashed into a plane taking off. (Random as hell by the way.)

__________________

perry

Where does the line get drawn? If you were an engineer in that tank, wouldn't they have been allowed to spawn an AT guy and start firing at you then? (does the area effect repair the assets?) Throw AT mines around the assets and snipe you when you got out to remove the mines? Bombing your tank would be fair game because, after all, they are attempting to keep the assets down, right? Where does the gray area end and a rules violation begin?

And why were planes attacking the carrier anyways? I know they can bomb the assets on deck, but how many runs does it take? My point was, OpFor pilots really don't need to be within range of the Essex's guns.

Wulfyn

I think people are getting a little bit confused. The UCB is not a magical place with a 50 mile exclusion zone. Although it cannot be camped, it can be 'seiged'. That is to say that these actions are allowed:


1*Mining roads that lead into the UCB / Setting up ambushes
2*Patrolling the water outside the Essex
3*Taking assets down, and keeping them down.
4* Taking out aircraft over the UCB once they are airborne.


So in the case of 1, you can see here that this is not UCB camping. THe players have spawned, reoriented themselves, and are now leaving the UCB. As they are leaving the UCB they are combat ready (or should be). If you want to set up an ambush 60m down the road then it is up to the enemy to try and clear you out. The important factor here is that you are not shooting into the UCB.

2 is a similar situation. The boats have left the essex and are crossing the water. They have left the UCB and are active. Now it is a different matter if you wait near the aft of the Essex for boats to come out to shoot them from where people have spawned. But once about 30m clear then they are easily fair game. IT's pretty easy to judge. If you were in the boat and got shot the second you emerged you'd think that was pretty cheap. If you are trying to cross and the enemy have set up a CAP along
the beachhead, well you should have gotten some air support yourself.

3 is always going to be hard to fully judge, and this is why intent is needed as the key word. Last night in Daqing Bommando's assets were taken out. However it's pretty crummy to do that only for an engineer to come sauntering up to try and repair it again 10 seconds later. So you are allowed to kill that engineer (yes even with a sniper). It becomes the responsibility here for the enemy to shrug you off of your attack on the assets to get them back up. Additionally if you are being shot at then the enemy is fair game, no matter where they are. But the intent here is the assets, no the flag. The flag is incidental. Bommando overcame the sniper by hopping in a tank (yes the area effect repair does work here). And as he is sat there guarding the assets then why not have a guy spawn back in as AT to take that tank out. Again the scenario has the UCB as incidental. It may be near by, but it is not a factor.

4 is similar to 3. You are not allowed to take out aircraft that are taking off, but give them some time to get airborne. I think good benchmarks of this is when the aircraft levels out from it's initial climb, and/or makes a turn then they are active, and become a target. Again intent comes into play. If it is your intent to nail the guy the moment he gets in the air that you feel you can 'legally' get away with, it means you are probably doing something wrong.


It is hard to be black and white here guys, as it is about your attitude over exact actions. Just don't do to the enemy what you wouldn't expect done to you in return, and play with respect to your opponents

__________________

Legato895

heres a few more observations i have. first off, MOST of the time, a UCB will be clearly defined. most main bases on the 64 player maps have fences, main gates, and check point guard houses. use common sense when deciding on boundaries. second, the more we try making a set in stone line for everyone to follow, the more people will try pushing it. its up to you to use common sense. ask yourself if you would be whining and bitching if it was you that just popped into existence only to be knifed in the back (before the post spawn glitchy-ness levels out!)

anyway, it comes down to the more limits we set, the more they will be pushed. the UCB is not some 300m cone of protection, its up to the spawning team to set up UAV and scans if you are annoying enough to merit it. just stick to a gentlemen's code and nobody will even remember you were there come the next round.

__________________
|TG-Irr|Legato

Syn

See, I seem to disagree with the airfield stuff. although I've never sat at an airstrip with AA sights glaring down a runway, I think preventing the enemy from using their air assets by whatever means is a viable tactic. It's up to, as you said, the opposing force to make sure their own assets (aircraft/airfields included) are protected. If there's a threat to an airfield, it should be taken care of. No military force in their right mind would ever leave an airfield undefended, given how important air superiority is. Yet, I see it all the time.

Someone mining the airfield? Better get them taken out.
AA nearby? Better get a squad to take that out too.
I just find given the power of aircraft with the pilots we have, being able to take down a jet while it's taking off would help balance maps like Kubra Dam

If you want that deadly air power, your team better damn well defend it's right to have it.

Opinions?

__________________
|TG|Syn - [defense] :row__572:

Tempus

It's already been discussed and decided, so we don't need to go there again. There are other, more important flags to amuse yourself with.

__________________
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.

Syn

hey it can always be addressed and changed, current rulesets seem to make certain maps boring/annoying to play on because we're not 'allowed' to assault an airfield peroperly. I'm jus saying the whole airfield thing is unrealistically restrictive, and having the game soley revolve around flagpoints gets tedious.

__________________
|TG|Syn - [defense] :row__572:

Wulfyn

Ahh I wondered why there were gaps where I wasn't being arty'd


Syn - that was just an interpretation of the existing rules rather than my take on what it should be like. Sure if it were up to me I'd make little tweaks here and there, as I'm sure any of us would if it were down to just one person's choice. But that is why it is good that it is down to more than one person's choice, as I am sure that ideas that I thought would work just plain wouldn't.

In regards to aircraft there is nothing to stop you performing a CAP above the UCB and killing the enemy aircraft when they get in the air. But let's make a game of it eh, and actually let them get up in the air and ready to fight back.

__________________

Apophis

The UCB rules are ones we're not going to debate over and over and over again. We've done it enough.

__________________
Diplomacy is the art of saying "good doggie" while looking for a bigger stick.

TEMM

Last night we had a frustating problem with a MEC pilot who kept bailing out of his plane over the MEC airbase and taking the other plane that was there when he was being chased by a USMC jet. The USMC jet would proceed to shoot the MEC pilot as he took off under the notion that if he was in a perfectly good jet, and was beiling out because he didnt want to die he was still fair game as the engagement hadnt ended.

This person ended up complaining, i cant remember if it was on team speak or not but we ended up getting warned by Bom. After that point I dont think the MEC pilot kept bailing out but, in my opinion and my squad mates, in that case the enemy fighter taking off was fair game. The other pilot even asked my opinion on it about 10 minutes earlier and I gave him permission to engage the enemy while taking off if he was bailing just to avoid being killed.

What're your guys opinions on this matter?

Dark Viper

I did not consider it true UCB camping because the guy was already flying around for atleast a minute before he bailed over his UCB. I tried to shoot the plane with missles and guns right when he got in it but I was afraid to bomb it cause somebody that just spawned might get caught in the explosion and that would be bad. If TG considers this to be in violation of thier rules, I will not do it anymore.