Re: UCB Rule update

**pred011586** · 06-09-2009, 04:30 PM

I have a question regarding the rule. I'm assuming that a CO can not Oribital Strike any armor that retreats back into the UCB since OS is an "indiscriminant killer" (correct me if I'm wrong there), but what about EMP striking armor that falls back into the UCB? I may be answering my own question here, but seeing as EMP strikes don't kill anybody, EMPing armor that's retreated into the UCB may not be a problem, as freshly spawned soldiers effected by the EMP can just not engage the enemy until it wears off, but I want to be sure before I EMP a tank shelling my troops from the UCB. I've already gotten in trouble once for OSing a tank shelling my troops from it's UCB, I'd rather not be in that situation again over an EMP strike.

**Lorax74** · 06-09-2009, 04:51 PM

Originally Posted by Zhohar

I for one am very grateful about this.
Certainly on Belgrade, there will be a larger and more profound need for teamwork. If the enemy holds the first flag out of the UCB, your armor is basically non-existent. Armor squads will need to rely on infantry squads to clear out the first flag and then move out.

Exactly right.

Originally Posted by pred011586

I have a question regarding the rule. I'm assuming that a CO can not Oribital Strike any armor that retreats back into the UCB since OS is an "indiscriminant killer" (correct me if I'm wrong there), but what about EMP striking armor that falls back into the UCB? I may be answering my own question here, but seeing as EMP strikes don't kill anybody, EMPing armor that's retreated into the UCB may not be a problem, as freshly spawned soldiers effected by the EMP can just not engage the enemy until it wears off, but I want to be sure before I EMP a tank shelling my troops from the UCB. I've already gotten in trouble once for OSing a tank shelling my troops from it's UCB, I'd rather not be in that situation again over an EMP strike.

Commanders may not drop on OS or EMP in the uncap. I can think of a number of scenarios which would irk me if I had just spawned in an uncap and got hit by an EMP, including but not limited to:

I can't see a damn thing, causing me to wait until my vision clears. Sounds minor, but in this game, seconds count
a gunship takes off and gets caught in the emp and goes down, either taking minimal damage or gets destroyed. It wasn't a combatant yet it took damage as a result of an attack on the uncap
I hop in the PAC hover tank and start forward when dreah runs right out in front of me. I start to steer around him when the EMP disables my controls. Instead of gliding to the slide, I squish him... Of course I giggle because I've just TK'd dreah (again), but it was avoidable if I wasn't EMPed.

Those are off the top of my head, without discussing with anyone else, but it's enough to put me against the idea of allowing EMPs in uncaps, hostile or otherwise.

**Catman1975** · 06-09-2009, 05:49 PM

Originally Posted by Lorax74

What this update has done is removed a loophole in the old rule which disallowed entry into the UCB for anything other than asset destruction. In the old version, armor and/or infantry could engage in combat and then retreat to the UCB without fear of attack. Also, on certain maps, armor could engage in long range combat from within the UCB with impunity, this is no longer the case.

Oops, I have to say "my bad" as working under Rage I have followed and attacked armor in the past if it attacked from the UCB or if it retreated to the UCB.

Glad to see the loophole has been patched and sealed.

**pred011586** · 06-09-2009, 05:57 PM

Originally Posted by Lorax74

Commanders may not drop on OS or EMP in the uncap. I can think of a number of scenarios which would irk me if I had just spawned in an uncap and got hit by an EMP, including but not limited to:

I can't see a damn thing, causing me to wait until my vision clears. Sounds minor, but in this game, seconds count
a gunship takes off and gets caught in the emp and goes down, either taking minimal damage or gets destroyed. It wasn't a combatant yet it took damage as a result of an attack on the uncap
I hop in the PAC hover tank and start forward when dreah runs right out in front of me. I start to steer around him when the EMP disables my controls. Instead of gliding to the slide, I squish him... Of course I giggle because I've just TK'd dreah (again), but it was avoidable if I wasn't EMPed.

Those are off the top of my head, without discussing with anyone else, but it's enough to put me against the idea of allowing EMPs in uncaps, hostile or otherwise.

Noted, thanks.

**DrBeat** · 06-09-2009, 06:17 PM

Thanks for clarifying lovely admin team!

**Onoobiwan** · 06-09-2009, 09:56 PM

In depth rules but still simple enough.

I would just hope people are mature enough to use an ucb as a shield. They can use me; I seem to attract enough bullets!!

**MrJengles** · 06-09-2009, 10:58 PM

In a gunship there are pleanty of times I fly straight up from the UCB, and pleanty I don't. When I don't it's mainly because I want to get out fast and go do something, while not seeing any immediate danger. Otherwise the height gives me an advantage and helps if there is any anti-air waiting for me to leave.

If I were in the opposing gunship approaching the UCB and saw my new (reinforcement) target, fly upwards straight away, it would be worrysome because of the advantage it gives. The best things to do being either shoot him down or fly high as well - since I can't shoot him straight away, I'd advise fly high too. If the UCB gunship levels off and starts firing, you can fire back straight away and it's fair (at least you both have a chance).

The reason it would annoy me is if the enemy gunship starts looping around or whatever to get behind me, obviously trying to gain that advantage over me whilst already having the fact I cannot fire at him yet, if he hasn't done the same. At this point I'd agree with Whiskey and just shoot him, since he's been in the air long enough not to be disorientated (interesting, first time I've seen the word "disoriented", US English and GB English spelling difference apparently, GB had it first so

). Anyway...It's technically not the rules but it is in the spirit as I would see it as almost a loop hole for the UCB gunship to gain an unfair advantage (he could fly around for eternity until he succeeds in getting behind the opponent). This is my view, unless any admins disagree with me, please speak up before I get in trouble

Originally Posted by Lorax74

Commanders may not drop on OS or EMP in the uncap. I can think of a number of scenarios which would irk me if I had just spawned in an uncap and got hit by an EMP, including but not limited to:

I can't see a damn thing, causing me to wait until my vision clears. Sounds minor, but in this game, seconds count
a gunship takes off and gets caught in the emp and goes down, either taking minimal damage or gets destroyed. It wasn't a combatant yet it took damage as a result of an attack on the uncap
I hop in the PAC hover tank and start forward when dreah runs right out in front of me. I start to steer around him when the EMP disables my controls. Instead of gliding to the slide, I squish him... Of course I giggle because I've just TK'd dreah (again), but it was avoidable if I wasn't EMPed.

While I can see how frustrating that rule could be as a commander, when you have an EMP and Orbital Strike ready and you really want to take out that armor killing your team...I agree on the rules. It is best because if the enemy are sitting right outside your UCB and you're being forced to shoot them while still sitting inside, you're not really getting anywhere on the map and can't help your team as much. That being taken into account the game isn't very fair/close, especially if you've been pushed back to the UCB and it's all you've got left. A "don't orbital or EMP me" rule, helps prevent the game becoming horribly one sided, and therefore, more fun. Although of course hitting non-combatants is the main point, this is just the reason I'd think of if I was CO and a bit frustrated - ie, I'd be more frustrated if I was on the other team and had it happen to me.

So as to the improvements and clarifications

thank you Lorax.

**Aumen1** · 06-10-2009, 12:14 AM

C: Defending yourself from hostile combatants in the UCB that have engaged you or your squad in combat first. It is acceptable to protect yourself and your teammates to ensure the continued success of your mission.

D: Chasing a retreating enemy vehicle back into its UCB to kill it

So lets say I chase a tank back in and while doing so a squad engages me, I kill them and am still working on the tank, then Joe and his squad spawns and is my area of operations, they are real close, I don't know if they are part of the squad that just engaged me, but are to close of comfort so I kill them and move back to working on my tank, I then here over TS "I was not attacking you, I was just looking at you, you can't kill me...."

Same thing with asset squad, sometimes so many people are firing at you, you almost have to assume it was that enemy next to you, then you hear "I was not attacking..."

please help!

Okay re: the Gunship - just my two cents.

If I am the enemy GS and I see a GS hovering over a UCB then cool, but as soon as I see that GS either move out side the UCB, or tilt its nose to me and moves to engage - game is on. The thing is it should never have moved to engage, it should let the gunner out of the seat or land the GS and fire at the enemy GS with a saaw or AA, there is a serious advantage to being in a UCB. Protecting you gunship even in the UCB is a given it should have already been going on be you get in the GS, you can't take off unless the skies are cleared, you do not have the tactical advantage.

**PM..** · 06-10-2009, 05:48 AM

I like the addition of 'protecting your team mates'. Finally no-one can complain when a small squad takes a medic with them into the UCB for asset distruction. If they wanted to of course..

And with the gunship, I have left the UCB before and behind me is the enemy gunship right on top of me. This doesn't really come into the rule as such, as they are doing nothing wrong, as they are away from the UCB, and waiting for me to leave, but in a way, if you don't know it's there, it's pretty much spawn camping. Would be annoying to have to ask the commander each time you take off to find out where the enemy gunship is, especially if that commander doesn't talk, or help!

**MarthaHyer** · 06-10-2009, 06:52 AM

Originally Posted by Aumen1

Same thing with asset squad, sometimes so many people are firing at you, you almost have to assume it was that enemy next to you, then you hear "I was not attacking..."

please help!

Well done admins

One of the things thats great about the TG server is the admins and the amount of work they volunteer to do - not the least of which is hours of rules discussions to try and hammer out a set of 'laws' that will please all the people all the time - not easy at all

Aumen - I agree, this is a stickler and must make the admins gag as well.

I have a suggestion I want to toss out for the admins to chew on.

If 'anyone' fires at an enemy from within the UCB - whether that enemy is inside or outside the UCB - then the UCB 'veil' has been compromised by that team ( for the moment ) and anyone in the UCB is fair game.

This encourages teams to 'protect' the sanctity of their UCB. Often on the map with Pond ( forget the name ) the APC will hover in or near the UCB. Cant get mines on it because its too close to UCB, blasting away at it can cause you to kill innocents in the UCB - etc

Just wanted to throw that out in case it makes 'admining' the UCB rule any easier.

.. if it makes it harder then my official story is this is all Catman's idea and he made me type it because he said he would post the photos if I didnt

**HenkeTheMonkey** · 06-10-2009, 07:12 AM

no missunderstanding.. nice addition to the rules..

**Mordona** · 06-11-2009, 01:44 AM

The Gunship must be given the fair chance to leave its UCB or until it fires. Flying straitup off the bat will not give that gunship any tactical advantage until it breaks level. But if it have the chance to engage on a fair fight and hasn't fired yet, then its a legit target.

**MrJengles** · 06-11-2009, 10:12 AM

Originally Posted by Eroak

The Gunship must be given the fair chance to leave its UCB or until it fires. Flying straitup off the bat will not give that gunship any tactical advantage until it breaks level. But if it have the chance to engage on a fair fight and hasn't fired yet, then its a legit target.

Yeah, I meant the advantage it would gain if I didn't do anything about it, like fly upwards also. Thanks for the input, that certainly sums it up.

**Belander** · 06-12-2009, 09:59 AM

I know this rule always gets pounded into the ground but I have a situation that came up the other day on Sidi. My gunship squad swung aroudn teh back to wait for cap to grab the gun ship when it spawned. Normal yes. It spawned it got empd and orbitaled. Ouchies that sucks. We spawned back in at reactor core becasue it was under our control. We waited for teh gunship to respawn. A tank from offices was continuously firing shots across teh heli pad while the gunship was unspanwed in waht i assume to try and take out the gunship as it spawned. My partner got taken out by 1 hit, i managed to jump into the gun ship shield and take off with only 18 health left. I took off turned it towards teh UCB, did not commence any combat at all, flew straight back to teh UCB and as i was landing on the helipad to repair and my partner to spawn back in a roflcoptor took out the gun ship within 3 secs of reaching the helipad. Now this was very frustraiting and I was wondering, dumb question incoming, does the gun ship count as a hostile and combatant target without enaging in any combat and retreating to teh UCB to repair and actually get up off the ground?

Needless to say it was a rather aggravating and rough round lol but thought I would ask.

**jazy2** · 06-12-2009, 10:19 AM

You were fair game throughout. You have no safe haven for that gunship on Sidi. It is fair game to destroy it on the helipad, occupied or not. Even on the way back to you UCB you were active, even though you had not fired. Sucks....but those are our rules.

Thread Tools

Display