Base "rape." Should it be allowed?

[inlifex]

I agree bro, base rape can destroy a good round in minutes if not seconds.
But I have to go a bit to the other side tho, I would say that it should be fine for snipers to land a few shots in their main... makes it sooo much fun when you see little bunnies hopping all around trying to dodge your bullets and at the same time caring the binos on one hand trying to find yah

[Rudd]

I do think certain maps benefit from having baserape allowed.

Fallujah west for example, and this is really a necessity imo because the USMC main is also a firing position for the USMC. INS shoving mines and stuff down outside and snipingthe snipers is just...how it has to be since its a firing position.

The problem is that IEDs/Grenade traps cannot be safely detonated by the USMC if found. So it can kill gameplay to an extent.

However, certain maps do not as it kills gameplay and doesn't reward much teamwork.

Basrah is such a map.

The airport is so far off in teh corner that its just not going to be defended, and if you did defend it all you'd see is around 5 bombcars all round while ur outnumbered comrades get pwned in the city.

the iGi server operates a seperate rule for AAS and INS. AAS = you just don't touch their main in any way, not even flying over it until its cappable. You may ambush however if a significant distance away (150m) which is a good tactic on maps like OGT. INS = You may attack their main. But as I've pointed out, not all maps are conducive to this rule. But its not fair to ask players to remember a rule for every single map.

Operation Archer is pretty bad for it also, as hueys can be destroyed on the pad so easily. And the nearby hill covered with barbed wire is so easy to shoot from (you can prone underneath some of the wire)





What I would like to see is more AAS aspects to INS mode like Korengal. Which would give the ability to attack main bases (by removing some of the DoD or something). Like Archer, cap the Castle and you can shoot at their main with RPGs. Korengal, the outpost, Basrah teh VCP (excellent parody of reaslism " oh noes, they took the VCP now we can't check vehicles for bombs etc), Fallujah, the gateway?, Karbala, the mansion?.

^That way you get some of the fun 'seige' type gamplay, without idle assets being blown up etc.

[Alex6714]

I say no to baserape always, but servers should have the ultimate decision, they just have to keep in mind that that will be exploited and they will lose players and good gameplay.

[Airsoft]

I only agree on baserape if it's the last flag. My reason i disagree with the whole baseraping thing is that there are not enough people on the team. If there more people, mabye some would guard the perimeter and therefore make baseraping harder for the enemy. But with 32 people and most of them outside the base fighting, not enough guys defending the base.

[Kruder]

To hell with baserape,there was one server allowing it afair,now its empty.Like pointed out here,except Fallujah US main.

@Airsoft,would u like to be guy defending the main,if on 50 vs. 50 match?

[Threedroogs]

"baseraping" has never, ever, ever (not ONCE!) been an issue in my 3 years of playing this mod. the devs put a cone of death around everything that is supposed to be offlimits to the enemy already (and alter the maps that arent playing correctly, like the .86 changes to karbala). there is absolutely no need for a lot of servers' baseraping rules. in fact, a lot of servers' baseraping rules screw up things more than they help the game. one server (wont mention the name) has a policy against attacking enemies within one grid of the main base. this server still has maps like sunset city and bi ming in their rotation, but their server rules basically make the maps unplayable.

if you're main base is being attacked while it's not an AAS target, the enemy is wasting time. this is an advantage for your team!

if you're down to your last flag and you're just getting raped (which i *have* seen happen in my 3 years of playing, i just dont have a problem with it), deal with it for a few minutes and then get ready for the next round.

ANY tactic the enemy can throw at you can be countered on the battlefield itself. there is absolutely no need for "baserape" rules.

[Bob_Marley]

If the server rules say don't do it, don't do it. If they don't say that, why the hell not? You're playing to win, after all, so do everything you can within the confines of the game & server rules to win.

[BattleArena4]

Learn to adapt.

[burghUK]

On maps which drag on for 3 hours like kashan or anything thats so huge theres little action. These are the only circumstances i can think of where i support baserape.

[Zi8]

There's a few servers around which allow attacking the enemy main bases anytime.

We only allow attacking to main when AAS allows it - Insurgents are an execption. However, everone should have a change to spawn in piece without dying instantly so it basically means mines on the entrances and stuff. Baserape ruins the gameplay fast

I don't peronally see any advantage in attacking the main anymore (on AAS) since the Command Post cannot be blown to pieces anymore. Back in the days it was good tactic to sabotage other team by blowing the CO and the CP

[(HUN)Rud3bwoy]

Right now Karbala pops into my mind. Ive seen many times(experienced it also) that a freshly spawned apache get blown into pieces from the minaret in front of the base. Or Bigred driving into the mainbase etc. It can kill gameplay even on INS maps.

[goguapsy]

I believe base raping shouldnt be allowed. When I mean base rape i mean the moment u step out of the fences ur out of the base and u can be killed. (eg. when u leave the zig zag on the Americans base at fallujah west). its ur teams problem to realise abuot the rifleman specialist and rope another exit.

I believe that U can kill everything that is threataning to the outside, too, if its inside the base (eg. a man manning a defence turret or a HAT near the entrance able to kill ur tank (which is also in front of the entrance w8ing for a bite. or a sniper sniping from inside the base.
all u cant do is get around a way to Kill anything that is inside. Inside should be a safe zone (except the threataning stuff mentioned above) - notice that the threataning stuff could be a prblm with ppl claming "well, i killed that medic cuz it can be threataning in a while...)

My final words and conclusion ARE:

Only fire at an enemy base if the enemy shot at you. And that includes ONLY the man that shot you. Other words, if a sniper is shooting from their base, kill him, but don't kill his observer, then it would be baserape.



Oh and CyrusPI reminded me of something... on INSURGENCY game modes, base rapes should be allowed. Period.

kudos,
GoGuapsy

[CyrusPI]

Right now Karbala pops into my mind. Ive seen many times(experienced it also) that a freshly spawned apache get blown into pieces from the minaret in front of the base. Or Bigred driving into the mainbase etc. It can kill gameplay even on INS maps.

Thankfully, Karbala's getting an update. Great map, but that sort of thing seems to kill servers.

As long as the server allows it, by all means, let the bullets fly. If the server doesn't allow it, to preserve gameplay or otherwise, then it shouldn't be done.

Eventually, the players will recognize which PR servers allow base attacking, and pick the server they like. Sometimes, this can divide players, but it's a minor thing if the player's flexible.

[Jjjootjohn]

I like it to an extent. Driving a bomb car into their base is ok, or driving there, shooting at some people, then leaving is also alright. But when it gets to the point you can't spawn because they're camping it so much, it's not very fun. I also think it's alright to go to a base to kill assets when they spawn. Atleast someone should know when it spawns, so he can defend the base until the asset is safe. On Kashan, at the airports, there are mounted TOW's and AA, both missiles and 15mm, and they're there for a reason.

[503]

It is a waste of server admin time to deal with baseraping. Baseraping should be indeed allowed, but only if it is near impossible to do so. For example, high walls, bigger cone of death, behind a really high mountain, far from the rest of the map, underground?, more defenses (though who would man them), etc.

Though this would all require significant map changes.

[IAJTHOMAS]

This will go round and round like every similar thread before it and end up with the "its up to the server response" with no one changing their positions on the matter...

Personally, given the teamsizes, nature of game play and where I think attention ought to be focused, i'm against baserape. But at the end of the day, if you agree with it, play on a server that allows it.

[hiberNative]

dude baseraped my mec jet when i was on the ground rearming @ kashan. haven't been in the jet since that. f***ing ***.

i think ieds are ok, they just need to be removable with the wrench.