Originally Posted by Sabre_Tooth_Tigger

As an example, camping the MEC Jabal northern most bridge would be not true of the above imo. There is a limited path for MEC back to the front line.

A good general rule to me would be to avoid attacking any team as they progress from their last to the next flag unless you are capturing either of those flags.
So in the above case MEC main flag and the area between city/factory should not be camped. Laying mines or blowing up the bridge and then moving away is something I might do myself though.

On the USA side, a poor tactic imo would be for a vodnik to park at west beach beachhead and fire his 50 cal at blackhawks leaving the carrier/approaching dam.
I can see why people think its a grey area or perfectly fine even but it makes for poor gameplay and relates to a ucb attack imo.

While I understand that these two situations might be frustrating, they are not infractions. Infractions in these cases would be to mine the road directly outside of the UCB so that vehicles cant escape, or getting MEC troops onto the carrier. However, blowing the bridge and camping the area directly around it is perfectly fine. There ARE, in fact, alternate routes across. The road to the west is unobstructed and you can access west beach and dam from there, leading to bridge and east beach. You can also take an APC through the lake directly to dam or factory. These routes may take longer, but they are manageable, and the enemy has thus achieved their goal of effectively slowing your vehicle movement down.

The problem here is that people are confusing the rules with something that is inconvenient for their team. The goal of stopping enemy movement isnt to stop it where it's convenient for them. You WANT to keep them from deploying to forward areas, so you eliminate any means of getting there. You just need to be a certain distance from the UCB in order to do so.

Your MEC side situation might be different if they camped the bridge and fired AT at vehicles as soon as they came out of the UCB, but anything on the bridge, which is well over 200m away from it, is fair game. Same goes with the beaches. You dont HAVE to land boats/APCs/Blackhawks on the beaches. You have other alternatives. The difference on the US side being that if the beaches are not in play for the MEC side, you couldnt sit anywhere near the flag to take out enemy assets that moved in, you'd have to deploy up the beach a bit, or you could be confused with camping an uncappable/out of play flag. Also, if MEC troops are firing at the carrier, that also constitutes camping in a technical nature. However, I havent ever seen a blackhawk get shot down by a vodnik, seeing as the blackhawk could come in at a lateral vector and tear the vodnik to shreds with the mounted guns in a matter of seconds.

You may feel like those things make for poor gameplay, but thats just an opinion. It's not exploitive, it is very tactically sound if done correctly, and can be a huge bonus to the team that executes the blockade properly. Regardless of whether or not you feel like it relates to a UCB attack, the guidelines are very clear that it is not. This is no different than saying that it's unfair and makes for poor gameplay when people set their resolution to low so they have no terrain effects and can see everyone who tries to hide in bushes or grass. It may make you mad, but it's still fair game.

Dont get me wrong, I dont necessarily condone everyone taking on these tactics. They are very tricky situations and can get you punished if you get too close or execute them wrongly. But if you have the experience and understand the rules that you have to play by, feel free.