Announcement

Collapse
No announcement yet.

Why not AAS?

Collapse
X
  • Filter
  • Time
  • Show
Clear All
new posts

  • Why not AAS?

    I overheard some folks on TS last night (I think Santa) talking about how the TG PR server was less than popular because it is not running AAS. Someone pointed out that only certain maps seem to play well with AAS. I think there might be truth to that.

    My question is, why don't we run AAS on the 'off' nights (not Thurs. and Sun. - the tactical nights). Lately I've seen the PR server empty a lot on these off nights, so what difference does it make? I'm only saying this because I enjoy PR much more than PoE - AAS or conquest - though I'd also like to take a crack at VIP when we get the empty squad thing worked out.

  • #2
    Re: Why not AAS?

    It's pretty ridiculous when you have more than 20 or so people fighting over the same flag. Can't there be a script written that would change from AAS to conquest on new map load when the server population goes beyond a predetermined number of players? The only problem with that is informing everyone of that fact. Maybe some kind of automated text up at the top letting everyone know it's back on conquest. Eh...who knows, I'm just throwing ideas out there.

    Comment


    • #3
      Re: Why not AAS?

      I agree, Mosely, but asch has said it's impossible to switch from AAS to Conquest and back.

      Whoever said AAS is unbearable with a population over 30 is absolutely correct. The last couple of weekends I've played on servers approaching 60 players and it's just the Karkand standoff with deadlier weapons and no nametags. PRM is a mod I can play at 4:00 a.m. on Sundays (when I'm awake and not at work!) but I intentionally look for servers with around 20 people, not the ones with 61 players...

      Comment


      • #4
        Re: Why not AAS?

        There are issues with both the conquest and AAS game modes.

        1) The AAS and CONQUEST python files are made so that we can only host one or the other. To switch between these two game modes requires Tempus to directly access the box and make a code change and then restart the server.

        2) AAS doesn't work well with over 40 players. Even that can be on the high side with 20v20 fighting over one flag.

        3) The maps aren't designed for conquest which leaves us without UCBs and maps with too many or too little CPs for the given player size.

        4) Because the maps aren't created for conquest with the right number of CPs, we can't run the map auto-sizer.

        ----

        Now with all that being said, we are looking into ways to enhance the conquest mod and possibly rewrite the code so we can switch between the two.

        We're not happy with the state of either the conquest or AAS game modes. We're trying to work with PR to make some changes but it isn't being received so well.

        We're going to see what we can do server-side with our own icky magic, and I'm trying to work something out with the PR team.
        |TG-12th| asch
        sigpic

        Comment


        • #5
          Re: Why not AAS?

          Maps that I think work well with AAS:

          Jabal (64 size)
          Qwai River (64 size)
          Hills of Hamgyong (32 size)
          Road to Kyongan Ni (64 size)
          EJOD desret (64 size)
          Operation Ghosttrian (32 size)

          Maps that I think play better in Conquest:

          Al Fallujah (32/64 size)
          Muttrah City (32 size)
          Steel Thunder (16 size)
          Gulf of Oman (32/64 size)

          Maps that I think suck:

          All vanilla maps. WAY too arcadish.
          CP Abadan.
          Goods Station with more than 12 people...
          Zhanjing Security Area


          Personally I dont see how Conquest mode "Supports game play in a near-simulation environment." However I know there are arguments for both Conquest and AAS, but I see both of them being quite flawed in their current form. AASv2 will hopefully be much better and I think you guys should give it a try when it comes out.

          Currently I think the inherent problem in BF2/PR is that its just way too damn fast. You cant make real tactical decisions when people are spawning in so rapidly and the spawn points are so close. Ive always wished for a mod to make main base spawning and squad leader spawning (possibly mobile APC spawning) the only choices, so that way players cant simply spawn at a flag they know is in trouble... This would promote much more methodical, organised play...

          I was playing on the PR tactical gamer server a few nights ago and it really felt like whack-a-mole from vbf2 all over again. Admittedly I might have been on at a bad time and I realize all servers have their good and bad moments. But I witnessed some prety stupid **** happen with squads of 100% TG members that made me go hmmmm. The most disappointing was the vast majority of the time there was no commander (this problem is in ALL PR servers..... no intelligent central command!!!) and I never once saw a commander actually TAKE COMMAND, and issue orders to the squad leaders, which is a damn shame.

          Well anyways Im just posting here to agree with the original poster, give AAS a chance, yes, its flawed and yes in certain scenarios conquest is more ideal, however AAS does have incredibly rich and tactical gameplay, you just have to play with the right people and the right maps.

          Anyways Im gonna try to pop into the TG server more often and I hope Ill find the good realistic tactics and teamplay that I know you guys are known for.

          Comment


          • #6
            Re: Why not AAS?

            We would love to run both AAS and conquest, depending on the number of players. Ideally we would have one game mode that supports both population sizes.

            Conquest works great with the Tactical Mod because the maps are designed correctly for conquest and we have the map auto-sizer which helps for various population sizes. Unfortunately the maps aren't quite designed for conquest.

            We're still trying to establish PR at TG. Neither game mode is perfect. AAS frustrates many TGers when the server gets over 24 - 30 players. We have far too many stalemates. Conquest is also frustrating unless there is a critical mass of TGers on the server which, at the moment, probably only happens on Sun/Thurs.

            PR doesn't allow us the option to switch back and forth (easily).

            @fuzzhead.... you probably felt quite a bit whack-a-mole. We're not hitting the groove yet with PR and aren't hitting critical mass of TGers playing it on a consistent basis. I have felt the same pains.

            We'll give AASv2 a look when it comes out.
            |TG-12th| asch
            sigpic

            Comment


            • #7
              Re: Why not AAS?

              Originally posted by asch View Post
              We would love to run both AAS and conquest, depending on the number of players. Ideally we would have one game mode that supports both population sizes.

              Conquest works great with the Tactical Mod because the maps are designed correctly for conquest and we have the map auto-sizer which helps for various population sizes. Unfortunately the maps aren't quite designed for conquest.

              We're still trying to establish PR at TG. Neither game mode is perfect. AAS frustrates many TGers when the server gets over 24 - 30 players. We have far too many stalemates. Conquest is also frustrating unless there is a critical mass of TGers on the server which, at the moment, probably only happens on Sun/Thurs.

              PR doesn't allow us the option to switch back and forth (easily).

              @fuzzhead.... you probably felt quite a bit whack-a-mole. We're not hitting the groove yet with PR and aren't hitting critical mass of TGers playing it on a consistent basis. I have felt the same pains.

              We'll give AASv2 a look when it comes out.

              Exquisite post asch.

              TG currently lacks the ability to switch the size of the map size depending on the amount of players on the map.

              So whack-a-mole is in happening often when the population is low on a map with 7 flags.

              asch (Tac Mod team/developer) and PR and are working together with AASv2.

              It is going to take time get this all figured out.

              In the meantime I recommend we keep trying new things with the game in order to give the PR team feedback and for us to better understand the excellence of the mod.
              Also, get to understand the TG way and players with the TG name tag. Once PR 1.0 goes live I can gurantee you 64.34.161.157 will be heavily populated.
              (PO3) Marcinko_R. (BF2 PR .509) Squad Member
              (CPO) Marcinko_R. (BF2 PR .509) Squad Leader
              (LCDR) Marcinko_R. (BF2 PR .509) Commander

              Squad Member pledge to their SL:
              Squad Leader pledge to their team:
              Commander pledge to their SL:

              Comment


              • #8
                Re: Why not AAS?

                Orginally posted by fuzzhead: "The most disappointing was the vast majority of the time there was no commander (this problem is in ALL PR servers..... no intelligent central command!!!) and I never once saw a commander actually TAKE COMMAND, and issue orders to the squad leaders, which is a damn shame."

                This is a damn shame. It sucks hard being a CO.

                I tried being a CO the first night I started playing PR and it was garbage.

                The next night I joind with BigGayAl (who was a SL) and I had a blast.

                The CO position is not taken for various reasons.
                1. Players are on the spot and do not want to mess up
                2. They do not have VOIP
                3. They do not know what to do
                4. They have way more fun as a Squadleader or Squad member.

                I don't understand why it can't be the same amount of fun for the CO and Squad leaders (up to 9).

                @Fuzz, How often do you CO. It is a tough sale.

                As a CO you must be the first to start conversation.

                Tips:
                Press the return button and see the types of squads that are forming, i.e jets or sniper or support or tank.

                Give the command to condense squads.

                Before the map starts, get a mic check with your SLs and give them orders.
                This will break the ice. It does not have to be complex.

                When CO:
                expect your squad leaders to forget about you and to have never read or watched a war movie. For example, a defending squad could be engaged for a good three minutes, take deaths, and be wiped out and a SL (who you know has VOIP) will not say crap to you. Happens all the g.d. time. (keep in mind the CO communicating/interacting with up to 8 other squads and may not be watching your area of operatons) Why can't they report contact and casulaties! so the CO can gets some support there? Dunno.

                And you wonder why people do not go CO.

                I am pretty much done with the position.

                i mean who can turn down some fun Squad action with BiggayAl as the Squad leader any way?

                But I can tell you this Fuzz, if your the CO, I'll report in and tell you what my squad is built for and keep you in the know of essential things on the battlefield.
                Last edited by Rick_the_new_guy; 12-05-2006, 09:26 PM.
                (PO3) Marcinko_R. (BF2 PR .509) Squad Member
                (CPO) Marcinko_R. (BF2 PR .509) Squad Leader
                (LCDR) Marcinko_R. (BF2 PR .509) Commander

                Squad Member pledge to their SL:
                Squad Leader pledge to their team:
                Commander pledge to their SL:

                Comment


                • #9
                  Re: Why not AAS?

                  Thanks for that detailed post Asch, I definitely wasn't aware of many of the technical conflicts that you mentioned - some, but definitely not all. Good luck ironing them out, and definitely keep us PR players posted on anything we can do to help support and promote this great mod.

                  Comment


                  • #10
                    Re: Why not AAS?

                    yea rick ive tried being CO about a dozen times, its never went too well..

                    usually ill get 1-2 squads who actually acknowledge me, but rarely will actually take my advice...

                    when CO i try a radiocheck at begining of round, and also i try to stay off voicecoms as much as possible because i know clogging the radio is not good when you already have 6 people yelling your ear you dont need a 7th.

                    Its just frustrating, because whenever Im playing as SL I see an immediate demand for a CO... and whenever im CO I see an immediate demand for good SL's.... arghh...

                    Comment


                    • #11
                      Re: Why not AAS?

                      Originally posted by fuzzhead View Post
                      Its just frustrating, because whenever Im playing as SL I see an immediate demand for a CO... and whenever im CO I see an immediate demand for good SL's.... arghh...
                      I hear ya.

                      It's going to be a process to build up the talent for PR in TG. Many of the veteran CO/SLs are in PoE2 or have moved on to 2142. Hopefully we'll get to a stable server with the game mode and maps. Then we can start working on the regulars to the server and build up the quality to that which we expect out of a TG server.

                      When in our hayday of vanilla, we had more CO & SLs than we could count.
                      |TG-12th| asch
                      sigpic

                      Comment


                      • #12
                        Re: Why not AAS?

                        With vanillia you did not need to say anything to your platoon at all as CO.

                        Meaning, you could scane and spot
                        have a uav go by constanly
                        drop arty at your whim

                        and that would be good support. Thanks to the arcade nature of the game, the gunships and jets were totally independent from you.

                        I spent some time on Full Contact War, and this situatoin went well. Ocasionaly throw down a defense marker and attack at that's game.
                        Basically vanillia conditioned us not to communicate with the CO.

                        The gameplay is slowing down with PR. And it is going to get a lot more slower. Granted it will never come close to real life because it is a video game and you get to respawn, but it will slow down with each new version.



                        I have not made up a tactic sheet on the PR CO because the game is still in its experimental phases.

                        I'll tell you this, a preview if you will.

                        The CO will be the liason between the infantry and the support (jets/gunships/tanks/transport choppers/lil bird scouts/etc.

                        I predict that the PR crew will phase out much of what shows up on the liberal HUD.
                        For example, at a certain distance, friendly dots disapear.
                        Or the CO can only see his/her Squad Leaders on their map.
                        Or the members will always see their squad member green dots, but others will appear when they get closer.
                        That sort of stuff.

                        The game play will be slowed down continusly, making radio communications that much more important between infantry and CO; and support and CO.
                        (PO3) Marcinko_R. (BF2 PR .509) Squad Member
                        (CPO) Marcinko_R. (BF2 PR .509) Squad Leader
                        (LCDR) Marcinko_R. (BF2 PR .509) Commander

                        Squad Member pledge to their SL:
                        Squad Leader pledge to their team:
                        Commander pledge to their SL:

                        Comment


                        • #13
                          Re: Why not AAS?

                          Seeding:

                          Being in Europe, the TG servers are normally low pop when I play. This was fine with Vanilla and POE when the maps could handle low pops. Under the current setup, PR Conquest on low pops gives us the dreaded whack-a-mole problems unless the players can be gentlemanly.
                          This, we can sort out eventually I hope. My problem is seeding the PR Conquest server.

                          When starting an evening's play, the TG server is typicaly emtpy, so I'll try to seed it for 30 mins or so. If i'm lucky, I'll get someone to actually stick around and build on that. To often though, once there are 8 players or so are around, we get some bad eggs who just want to do their own thing like bomb everyone or take a back flag. I don't want to open the whole 'gentleman's agreement' can of worms. But this behaviour leads to good players leaving and the server not growing in pop, or just dying completely.
                          I wasn't on the server when it was just AAS, so I can't comment on whether it was better then, and I don't want to give the Admins more headache (btw thanks for the hard work). I'm just trying to let y'all know how things are from an early-evening (i.e. euro timezone) perspective.

                          May be BigGaayAl can testify to this, or maybe he'll disagree with me completely, but he's a European that gets the server going well.

                          I think that the way a server starts out is important for how things are during prime time, firstly in that it get started in the first place, and secondly in the quality of players that are in it: I believe that if you start of with good team work, that will carry on because team players will stay where there is good team play to be had.

                          I'm afraid I can't make any implementable suggestions however, this is just a rant.
                          -nick 'Ale06'

                          Comment


                          • #14
                            Re: Why not AAS?

                            Personally the move to whack-a-mole style play has moved this server from the top of my list to the one I go to only if I don't have any other choice. What draws me to PR is the fact that standoffs DO occur. More specifically, it is the challenge that is presented in breaking those standoffs. It takes leadership, teamwork, and good tactics to break a well entrenched enemy; things which I had sort of thought were the cornerstones of the TG server.

                            Comment


                            • #15
                              Re: Why not AAS?

                              Originally posted by Cougar View Post
                              Personally the move to whack-a-mole style play has moved this server from the top of my list to the one I go to only if I don't have any other choice. What draws me to PR is the fact that standoffs DO occur. More specifically, it is the challenge that is presented in breaking those standoffs. It takes leadership, teamwork, and good tactics to break a well entrenched enemy; things which I had sort of thought were the cornerstones of the TG server.
                              Unfortunately 32v32 over one flag on a TG server leads to standoffs. This even happens on conquest maps if there is a choke point that is the only route. This means that we really can't run an AAS server over 30 (or so) players. 64 players battling over a single position ends up like a deathmatch.

                              There's also the problem that in AAS there is no incentive to push forward. If a team has a ticket lead, they might as well sit on defense where ever they are at. You lose less tickets on defense. So a team with fewer CPs that happens to have a ticket advantage can win the round.

                              We're also stuck with maps that aren't well designed for conquest mode. We can't run our auto map-sizer script. This makes it very hard to seed a conquest map that is designed for 32+ players.

                              You'll also find that many TGers are playing other games (2142, PoE2, the new Armed Assault, GRAW, etc.) This leads to an unfavorable ratio of TGers to pubbies, which means not as much leadership from the TGers on how we play here.

                              Try catching us on a Thurs / Sun night when there are a decent number of TGers playing. You'll see COs providing orders, SLs providing leadership, squads playing defense, etc.
                              |TG-12th| asch
                              sigpic

                              Comment

                              Connect

                              Collapse

                              TeamSpeak 3 Server

                              Collapse

                              Advertisement

                              Collapse

                              Twitter Feed

                              Collapse

                              Working...
                              X