Dr2B Rudd wrote:As I've said b4.
I've been playing muttrah since it was first brought out in beta. I've seen this tactic in around 70% of muttrah rounds I've played as MEC, and suspected it around 50% of the time as USMC.
Trust me, I play alot too and since the release of Muttrah and with Grimsoldier and I almost never see this. If the US sucks and doesn't get a foothold in the city early, they deserve to have enemies come behind them. Don't forget that the MEC on Muttrah are the defenders and natives too, so they would naturally have the resources, ability, and knowledge of the land to flank the US. And just because you see it on 1 map doesn't mean it happens on everymap or would effect every map positively if changed.
technically you only need one dude. He joins a squad, he gets combat engineer, he leaves and makes a new squad. He can set FOBs and build htem how he wants.
I've seen it plenty of times now. Its not teamwork orientated and I don't think its a desireable gameplay tactic for the reasons I've stated.
Then complain about the engineer being able to do it, not the current system. The engineer being able to have a shovel and build alone is the problem, not the current system......... I would agree with you on this point.
Contradiction is when I make a previous point of mine conflict with a new point. I have not done this. My point is that it doesn't take 1 dude to set up a RP, it takes squad teamwork.
It is a contradiction because you said it has requirements. So does building a FOB, especially alone. They aren't ALL "typical" requirements. There are only 2 engineer kits for 1 which maybe taken already. You have to go there with 2 crates either by vehicle or chopper for 2, which attracts attention. And 3, you have to be alone for 5+ minutes and safely hidden while unarmed in order to build. Not to mention the big smoke plum that goes up from building. How are they not requirements? It is no different from the RP.
Please notice no1 has been talking about insurgency mode. The only map that might fall in to this discussion is Korengal, and I'm sure you can see how that wouldn't be affected by the discussion.
You obviously missed my "Battle of the Buldge reference. WW2 was the last "conventional war", so that example obviously holds true. The Germans split the American lines just like what we are discussing.
Now think about that sentance. You are advocating the return of vBF2 cappable bases. Do you not see the similarity in tactics?
The reason for AAS is to center the combat in an area to
1) Give the impression there are more players on the map than there really are
2) Keep the combat intense and give players objectives rather than 'milling around'
3) To give the impression that there is a supply line
4) Increase teamwork, so that squads work together to take one objective/defend one objective
5) To keep the game fresh, as it means you fight over particular areas for some time, then move on.
Uhhhh, no I am not. I never want a return to those BF2 tactics. Your whole 5 points is just wrong though because the US/MEC STILL have to fight over that particular piece of land. Yes, the MEC may build a firebase behind US lines. Doesn't mean they have to stop going for that objective now. All it means is that they are coming at the US from another direction and flanking it. There is still as much teamwork involved and what I am saying actually keeps the game "fresher" and "more interesting" because the enemy can attack from any direction anytime, so games are never the same.
The way you are suggesting would basically limit combat to head on engagements which are just meat grinders. Yes, RPs can get behind enemy lines, but those don't last forever, especially if the combat is head on. The whole "supply line" idea doesn't mean it literally has to be in a line like WW1. Helos make attacking from behind possible now ala my Kha Shan reference.