Re: Flag Cap status: GRAY question

**Lucky Shot** · 05-16-2007, 02:06 AM

Originally Posted by msdz

Just thought I would air this out, the free reign LuckyShot stated is not allowed or if it was then no one would have a gripe about anyone being at the flag ahead of the flag actually in play, ready for it to be taken. Should be people defending and attacking always, which I refer to the leap frog tactic.

The only limitations on where you are is based around the UCB and what we have termed the Main Base flag which is the very last flag that you can potentially capture. It is allowed, people may gripe about it, but it is allowed.

Lucky Shot

**gerardnm** · 05-16-2007, 05:34 AM

Originally Posted by msdz

What I hate is when you have a flag capped and go to the next flag and start capping it, the enemy come from no where and cap the flag you capped previously. So you and your squad will stick around in hopes the other upteen squads your team has will recap that flag back so you can continue capping the flag you are at when the enemy ambush you and your squad at that flag. Then after a fire fight and you walk away victorious the enemy start crying you aren;t supposed to be there YET. Well that flag was ready to be capped, so why RUN BACK when those other upteen squads and 20 some soldiers are all around the previous flag....cause you know as soon as you get back to help cap it you gotta just turn right back around to go where you just came from. It is like playing monkey in the middle, lol. Well, as long as that previous flag is still in the grayed state and I am at this other flag I will stay my ground, especially when I see on the mini map the whole team going to take that previous flag back leaving some other flag undefended, no map in mind but have seen this happen. The game needs to be played in a leap frog style to advance, such as men moving, they need to move in a leap frog style to advance and not leave nothing wide open or undefended that needs defending.
http://www.tacticalgamer.com/704692-post10.html
Just thought I would air this out, the free reign LuckyShot stated is not allowed or if it was then no one would have a gripe about anyone being at the flag ahead of the flag actually in play, ready for it to be taken. Should be people defending and attacking always, which I refer to the leap frog tactic.

Agree totally.......toughest map to do this is basrah with 3 flags to hold before moving to a 4th (facility or mosque). Tough ask for any team

**Sparkks** · 05-16-2007, 12:46 PM

Originally Posted by Morganan

Sure, in the real world, but not in this game. ... (I say artillery since there is no reason to use a covert deep-strike team in this game on this server beyond destroying artillery, anything else is either against the server rules to touch, or not worth risking a ticket over, and a recon team wouldnt be considered a "deep-strike team" would it?).

I respectfully, but strongly disagree. There are all kind of valid reasons worth the ticket loss to go "deep strike" and get behind enemy lines. The first and formost in 0.5 PR being flanking and setting rallypoints or an APC for the rest of the team to spawn in on. Others being leapfrogging, ambush, allowed asset destruction. Often as a squadleader I am doing many of these at once.

But as always there is a tradeoff in game balance for any strategy you employ which the enemy can exploit. To go "deep strike" I must move my men away from re-enforcing the battleline for a significant time.

**Sparkks** · 05-16-2007, 01:31 PM

[QUOTE=Morganan;706504]I think it is safe to say any flag beyond the "next flag" in the order is an UCB and should be treated as such.

QUOTE]

Morganan, Sabre_Tooth, Mingmong and others,

You are incorrect about this, but not alone in thinking it should be so. I sometimes like head on battles too, but find them a bit constraining if that is all there is. Built in the 0.5 PR version of AAS and on TG there are other valid strategies.

I do suppose these issues are always worth discussing. A whole bunch of us went round and round on this back in March. Here' the links if you are nerdy enough to want to see.

Originally Posted by Dirtboy

Base Raping!

Originally Posted by Riki_Rude_BTYC

Bad Sportsmanship on TGs part.

I'm sorry, but some of you people have been using some real underhanded techniques for the sake of winning. Two examples.

From this got a clarification of the Main base Rule and an ADMIN decision to not expand the rules too much so as to Keep It Simple Stupid.

Morganan,

you may find it this post by Acsh interesting as he explains theory behind gameplay that some of the Devs have.

Originally Posted by asch

There are several discussions taking place that bring up the reasoning and intent of the AAS game mode. I'll try to describe the purpose of this game mode, to the best of my knowledge, based on discussions with the PR dev team.

**Sparkks** · 05-16-2007, 02:01 PM

It may have been this incident or another, but I was one who has complained loudly about your actions [FEAR] sanada2005. I even went so far as to switch teams to find out who you were. The issue I had was about excessive and repeated spawnkilling such as what happens at Kyongan Ni's Outpost vehicle spawn whne the flag can not yet be capped.

I understand that sometimes these things happen out of a missunderstanding or even exuberance and appreciate your post. I see you are more honorable than I supposed.

I think Fuzzhead gave us a taste of how some issues will be addressed. I am sure there will be new ones, as all these PR 0.x releases are experiments with different ideas.

I think TG has done much to elevate the level of play with educating participants on the spirt of their SOPs and rules. In a map like Kyongan Ni with atypical vehicle spawn it can sometimes result in confusion between what is valid. In my opinion it is valid to preposition and even engage enemy around Outpost before it can be capped. It is even valid to have to cross the vehicle spawn on the way up to the flag resulting in a firefight.

What is against the spirit of the TG rules on spawn killing is to camp this fixed spawn. It may also be bad form to destroy vehicles in this particular spawn. Should you find yourself engaing with the USMC in the area they spawn at the Outpost you really should beat a retreat to a reasonable distance so as not to take advantage of their dissorientation or engage vehicles within their spawn area.

**msdz** · 05-16-2007, 03:32 PM

Well, now I know definitely about this rule I will feel a little more free(as long as the CO or SL will allow me).

**Morganan** · 05-16-2007, 06:08 PM

Sparks: I understand all that, but what you are missing I believe is the "reality". This is just going to end up degrading the overall play on the server to a point well below TG standards.

The other valid strategies you speak of are with all due respect a load self-fufilling strategies that in the grand scheme of things, do little to help your team win and mainly only give personal satisfaction that you completed a mission, irreguardless of whether or not it truly helps your team. As for the head-on-battles, that is the entire purpose of the AAS system, like it or not. It is no different from any other "system" placed into a game, people will find a way to manipulate it to their advantage instead of simply taking it at face value.

In this game, like it or not, intricate and in-depth strategies are typically wasted due to simple "real-world" constraints. This game is about twitch-skills, any rationalization otherwise is simply silly. It doesn't matter how disciplined your formation is, how well your troops employ fire-disclipline. Your life-expectancy in this mod is based solely on 2 factors.

1) how often you engage the enemy
2) how good your twitch skills are

This is simply a case of people transferring generic BF rules to a mod who's premise goes well beyond the typicall BF game. We can sit and talk strategy all day about this game, (I love discussing strategy for the BF series of games, and I have been making competitive strats for BF games/maps since the closed beta of 1942) but at the end of the day, all the fancy "interdiction" and "deep strike" strategies that have been discussed in regards to this are only effective if the other squads can hold up their end of the plan. Can you count on that on a pub server? Does it matter if you cut off enemy armor from moving to a point of contact if their team doesn't need the armor to hold your team off? Have you taken that into account before deciding to attempt this type of mission? Is that artillery really what keeps you from taking a flag, or is it a lack of your teams ability to kill the enemy? Would you be better helping your team fighting at the point of contact instead of doing a covert mission?

I defintely think there is a place for these types of missions, but only when a commander orders them. I personally put the kabosh on these types of missions when I CO until I get a feel for the quality of my team, and what can/cannot be expected of them and how I need to adjust my plan to take into account their shortcoming/strongpoints. Allowing these types of missions to occur at a SL's whim is going to end up with a negative overall affect on the quality of the games on the server.

**Root** · 05-17-2007, 12:58 PM

Originally Posted by Morganan

at the end of the day, all the fancy "interdiction" and "deep strike" strategies that have been discussed in regards to this are only effective if the other squads can hold up their end of the plan............. I defintely think there is a place for these types of missions, but only when a commander orders them. I personally put the kabosh on these types of missions when I CO until I get a feel for the quality of my team, and what can/cannot be expected of them and how I need to adjust my plan to take into account their shortcoming/strongpoints.

Well said that man!

**Sparkks** · 05-17-2007, 01:11 PM

Originally Posted by Morganan

Sparks: I understand all that, but what you are missing I believe is the "reality". This is just going to end up degrading the overall play on the server to a point well below TG standards.

The other valid strategies you speak of are with all due respect a load self-fufilling strategies that in the grand scheme of things, do little to help your team win and mainly only give personal satisfaction that you completed a mission, irreguardless of whether or not it truly helps your team.

Morganan,

You have some valid observations, but I think you are wrong on most of your conclusions.

It is true that I do get self satidfaction out of leading a squad to complete missions behind enemy lines, though it is but one of the ways I like to play. This is just a game to me and I appreciate the variation in gameplay in multiplayer battle maps. Particuairily in the PR mod with its expanded possibilities for multiple strategies. This is not to dimminish the importance of AAS in focusing the battle. It helps avoid the failings of Bf2 vanilla conquest maps.

As long as one is not camping spawns I dissagree that this degrades play on TG servers. In fact I see it as expanding the experience for both teams. It gives players and leaders more variables to think about. For every mission you alot men there is a tradeoff. You may lose numbers on the frontlines, but if you can draw the enemies attention to a flank,supply route or defending SL rally points or APCs you degrade their defense. Success in capturing a flag or winning is not all gauged by twitch skills and oppertunities to shoot.

Does destroying arty and inderdicting APCs or transports behind enemy lines turn the tide by itself? Probably not, but flanking does. As I said my missions have multiple objectives. They can be very helpful and sometimes crucial in helping my team. By flanking the flag in contention and antagonizing the enemies rear or supply route I can prod them into pulling men away from their defense or assault. Getting a rallypoint or APC in a flanking position on one of my "deep strike" missions has proved time and time again to be the way to crack the nut on even tough maps like Kayong Ni, Ghost and Al Basarah.

Yesterday, keeping your comments in mind I went and turned a badly losing team around by positioning my squad and an APC up behind the enemy held Kayong Ni bridge flag. This allowed my team's Sls to lead missions to locate enemy rally points and ambush incoming vehicles. The tide was turned without even firing a shot. In fact our team had very poor kill/death ratios and we still won.

I then did it again in Al Basrah. Though this time I did have cooperation of 2 other USMC squadleaders who were willing to fight simutainiously over the 3 outlying flags. We were way down on tickets and kills, yet we still won the game. This was because I drove my APC around and around throughout the city spawning teamplayers behind the Insurgents assault and destoying spawncars. I was then able to dash the APC into facility when we held all the 3 flags allowing the 3 entrenched squadleaders to order their defenders to spawn on me as they died. They could not have moved up on foot without losing their flag. I lost only 3 APCs all game although I had them in the city nearly the entire time. The enemy kept trying to destroy me, but I would beat a retreat to repair and return to another sector in the city.

Originally Posted by Morganan

As for the head-on-battles, that is the entire purpose of the AAS system, like it or not. It is no different from any other "system" placed into a game, people will find a way to manipulate it to their advantage instead of simply taking it at face value.

AAS in PR is a great system. It focuses the battle and brings the opposing team into interesting battles. I think you are in love with the 0.4 version. I liked the head on battles then too, but the 0.5 version and it's deployable Rally points offers more strategy options which add to the exprience without detracting from the gameplay. The devs moved away from strictly head on battles for a reason. Take Ejod for example, it had become an arcade shoot 'em up stalemate in 0.4, now it is much better. It has the geography and flags for both flanking and countering a flanking manuever.

**Morganan** · 05-18-2007, 02:52 AM

Sparks: I actually first downloaded the mod right after .5 was released.

Your example is fine, but it fails to take into account the most important aspect's..

1) how good was your enemy?
2) how good was your squad in comparison to the enemy?
3) did the enemy coordinate who would go after you, or did every squad in your area just decide to hunt you down and ignore the flag because you ambushed them?

I think you are reading to much into my post's. I like the AAS system, and the opportunities it brings to the table in both a tactical and strategic sense. At no point have I said flanking is bad since it has been a staple of "real" military movements for a few thousand years now, yet you allude otherwise for some unknown reason. My point boiled down to the simplest terms is this.

Just because you might be be intelligent enough to know when to flank and when not to, don't assume everyone is. Rules like this discourage overall teamwork in most pub games. Let's face fact's, for every 1 round there is a CO directing squads and the squads have solid communcation and teamwork even if there is no CO, there are 4 rounds that stuff doesn't happen. That's not a shot at the admins or anything like that, it's just "reality".

**gerardnm** · 05-23-2007, 05:40 AM

Guys we d this on Kwai last nite, I was on China team and we'd the factory greyed and from reports almost taken.

A squad mate killed a US sniper and i took the kit. As the 2nd last flag was gray I moved to final flag.

On TS guys started complaining we were camping the the last flag....however from my understanding as the 2nd last was grayed we were asllowed move to last?

Can we FINALLY have as ruling. From what I've read and from playing on the server i did nothing wrong.

BTW we never did actually take the factory, as soon as the flag turned US again I moved away to help at office.

**mingmong** · 05-23-2007, 06:11 AM

Yes, you were in the wrong. A neutral flag does not cause the AAS messages to say "Capture <next flag>" therefore the flag is not in play. If there are no AAS messages pertaining to the flag, then it isn't in play - and if it's a main base, then yes, you're baseraping.

**gerardnm** · 05-23-2007, 06:33 AM

Originally Posted by Lucky Shot

The only limitations on where you are is based around the UCB and what we have termed the Main Base flag which is the very last flag that you can potentially capture. It is allowed, people may gripe about it, but it is allowed.

Lucky Shot

Yeah if it's not allowed then i was raping.....it was this post that confused me, thought the admin was saying that it is allowed even though people don't like it.

Can an admin come back on it?

**mingmong** · 05-23-2007, 06:49 AM

He was referring to people griping about people being on flags that are not in play, but are not main bases. You are allowed to be on a flag that is not a main base, regarding of where it is in the capture order.

**Lucky Shot** · 05-23-2007, 12:19 PM

I was attempting to remove the confusion about where you had to be on the battlefield. Some think every flag is a UCB and it just isn't the case. Only the very end flags in the AAS system are to be treated this way.

Lucky Shot

Thread Tools

Display