View Poll Results: UCB

**jazy2** · 10-13-2009, 09:47 PM

Originally Posted by zhohar

you need to find a new way to enforce the rules: There is no way i can distinguish an admin from another player.
If someone is obviously following me, regardless of their weapon or item of choice in hand, i consider that to be engaged.

qft!

**Foxtrot6** · 10-13-2009, 09:56 PM

Might Damonte follow that person with the repair kit, kill that person, then on respawn follow the person again with repair kit, then kick the person if they shoot you?

Originally Posted by Damonte

Some finer points on UCB engagement rules to note.

Someone following you around when in an enemy UCB doesn't necessarily indicate intent to engage. When Damonte notices enemy asset teams in his own UCB, he may choose to follow that team around (at a respectful distance to avoid taking injury from RDX on assets). When he does so, he'll be brandishing a medic hub, an ammo box, a repair gun, or something non-combat to indicate his "non-combatant" status. Granted, part of this is due to his admin role and he may be choosing to ensure that UCB engagement rules are being properly followed.

While engineers repairing assets may be killed without provocation, seeing someone running around with a repair gun out (such as the afore mentioned Damonte), doesn't mean they are automatically fair game.

**Sluggo78** · 10-13-2009, 10:03 PM

No matter what, at the moment it seems like whatever you do regarding the rules of engagement, it's that those actions are put under speculation.

**Math_Magician** · 10-13-2009, 11:27 PM

Hey I just had a question...is putting down motion mines in an enemy UCB area legal? Because I have seen other TG members doing that.

**Crux** · 10-13-2009, 11:37 PM

I said my piece to the admins over UCB engagement rules a while back. I think there is just way too much gray in them at present. Make it clear, make it simple.

**Damonte** · 10-13-2009, 11:56 PM

Originally Posted by Foxtrot6

Might Damonte follow that person with the repair kit, kill that person, then on respawn follow the person again with repair kit, then kick the person if they shoot you?

No, Damonte wouldn't do that. That's entrapment or such.

It's rare that Damonte does the 'follow and observe' thing. Mostly it's done when there are reports of UCB camping.

**Damonte** · 10-13-2009, 11:57 PM

Originally Posted by Math_Magician

Hey I just had a question...is putting down motion mines in an enemy UCB area legal? Because I have seen other TG members doing that.

Placing motion mines inside the UCB is not allowed. You should report anyone (regardless of tags) if you seem them doing it.

Placing motion mines close to the UCB, but clearly outside it, is allowed.

**TheDarkPenguin** · 10-14-2009, 12:36 AM

If I have a guy following me, I don't care where he is, I will shoot back.

Now, if I am a sniper at Junkyard on Tunis Harbor, scoped in on a spawnpoint at their UCP, I will q-spot them, but not shoot. It's a little uneven then, though still, it seems a little crazy to just let them take that walker and run you over with it, even though you had a shot at their head the moment before they entered that walker.

Now, is it me in my UCB, being followed by a guy from the opposing team, blowing up my assets? Why wouldn't I shoot him if he is hurting assets for our team?

**SharinganTH1422** · 10-14-2009, 10:19 AM

The grey areas of UCB engagements is why I avoid going to the enemy UCB all together when playing on TG. When you have to keep worrying whether you're following the rules or not it takes away from the enjoyment of the game (for me at least).

**Axis_Sniper** · 10-14-2009, 10:58 AM

I voted No for a couple of reasons, mainly do people who rather bend the rules to their advantage then use the rules as a guideline.

Pretty soon I can see another rule coming up that allows people who are trying to get into vehicles allowed to be engaged because they pose a danger to the asset squad.

Then there will be a rule that allows vehicle destruction to prevent the rule before it. Pretty soon there will just be more rules that hinder the point UCB and turn it into a shoot-on-sight zone.

I see it as this, if you are in their UCB long enough to have people following you, then I think you should be leaving their UCB. The longer you are in their, the more chance of people complaining baserape, and the more work admins have to do going through BR files and accounts of playing in question.

**Mobiusxg5** · 10-14-2009, 11:17 AM

Recon soldiers only engage when they are spotted and attacked. If they are attacking assets then they are on the defense of protecting themselves and getting the job done.

If recon soldier is attacked at enemy ucb they have two choices run and hide or defend themselves and shoot the enemy. 1 and 10 chance for a lone recon soldier to survive being engaged.

Numbers is the key to get rid of recon soldiers

**Mobiusxg5** · 10-14-2009, 11:22 AM

Originally Posted by spiff913

2 points, both very much IMO, with multiple smilies, etc. -

1. Skulking around in the UCB is for sissies.

2. Destroying assets is rarely worth it, outside of a full-scale, organized scrim.

Conclusion, get out on the field and fight - problem solved.

Sigh* that is where you are wrong.. If your team is losing 150 to 200..then the best way to win the game is to mess with the assets turning the tide of battle to your teams favor. Sometimes being dirty has a good price..

**Sluggo78** · 10-14-2009, 11:27 AM

Not necessrily, even if the guidlines change, there doesn't have to be more rules adding on. It just needs to be made clear on what you can/can't do in the UCB if this poll passes as a rule. I voted yes because it will shed some light on the rules of engagement when in a UCB

**sproge** · 10-14-2009, 11:28 AM

well, i have bin doing allot of assets in my time in TG, so i have bin in "contact" (kick) whit the admins allot, asking questions, and they have told me this.
"do not fire, never ever, fire at someone that haven't engaged you, even if he have engaged a fellow asset killer."
it pisses me of whean i got someone behind me whit a knife and i am not aloud to shoot him, i can joust run, and run, and run, and i think, what they now have good situational awareness, and that they no longer should be counted as reenforcements. and if they shoot inside the UCB i think that they should be a fair target, if they shoot at my friends and kill them, then they have to have good situational awareness.

and asset destruction is god for your team, if you run a 2 man squad and
1.destroy assets, making it hard for the enemy commander.
2.taking enemies of the battlefield, often when i am doing asset runs i have 2-3 ppl trying to kill me.
3.holding back enemy armor from the battlefield, often when i am doing asset runs i have tanks or walkers sitting in the main trying to kill my.

**Sluggo78** · 10-14-2009, 11:33 AM

Originally Posted by Mobiusxg5

Sigh* that is where you are wrong.. If your team is losing 150 to 200..then the best way to win the game is to mess with the assets turning the tide of battle to your teams favor. Sometimes being dirty has a good price..

I agree, being in the UCB destroying assets causes a distraction for the enemy, causing them to use walkers, time, and soldiers to prevent it. That means you are allowing the rest of your team to do whatever they need to be doing without the hassle of enemy armor or more soldiers. One time I distracted 3 full squads by destroying their assets and playing hide 'n' seek with them in their own UCB!

View Poll Results: UCB

Thread Tools

Display

Re: UCB Poll

Re: UCB Poll

Re: UCB Poll

Re: UCB Poll

Re: UCB Poll

Re: UCB Poll

Re: UCB Poll

Re: UCB Poll

Re: UCB Poll

Re: UCB Poll

Re: UCB Poll

Re: UCB Poll

Re: UCB Poll

Re: UCB Poll

Re: UCB Poll

Thread Information

Users Browsing this Thread

Bookmarks

Bookmarks

Posting Permissions

Project Reality: ArmA2 v0.15 -...

Rayne's Eye on Independant Gaming:...

Panzer Corps Named Wargame of the...

Two New Multi-Mission Events for...

Tactical Gamer Podcast Series - TG...

Recent Blog Entries

:d

The Best Video Feedback

Beyond SOPA: ACTA, WIPO, and the...

Common Mistakes: #10