Game mode: Flag Rush(?)

[Cassius]

Sounds like a siege scneario to me.

How about a gamemode with insurgents/Taliban, where the BlueFor team has to hold its base, a flag, with a low ammount of tickets, like 50, for a given ammount of time ? The insurgents win if they capture the flag before the timer runs out or the bluefor runs out of tickets.

Eventually at the main, not the outpost the bluefor needs to defend, could be air transport, to resupply the outpost under a dome of death in an unacessible area, simulating that the helicopters are coming from a distant area the opfor can not access.
Maybe CAS could be added too, to help the bluefor stay alive and keep the enemy from overrunning the outpost.

While the blueforce has a lot of advantages being in a defensive fortified position and having CAS, it can not do too many errors, or will lose the game.
The Insurgents/Taliban will have a hard time assaulting a stargegically placed and fortified oupost, but have the numbers on their side.

It would fit into the reality concept and would replicate the gamemode you describe.
The only difference would be that there would be no moving along, but just one big base, an uncappable main, where the helicopters start and one single flag, which can win the game for the opfor if captured.

[snooggums]

Although game modes like this sound fun (and probably are) I've had the experience that mini game modes end up either bringing in people who don't play the big game (in PR's case large area coordinated combat) and drawing people into the smaller modes. This in turn causes new players to play the small mode and eventually the larger population servers dwindle down. My biggest example was Natural Selection adding the combat mode which turned the team efforts into individual goals and the team servers died out.

So basically Alternate game modes that turn the game into something other than the overall game (this would turn it into castle defense instead of large area control) probably aren't beneficial to the game.

That said, the game mode is interesting but it seems like the advantage would be too much in the defender's favor unless there was a lot of cover since the Insurgent's main strength (ambush) won't be used. Maybe two conventional armies would be better?

[E4$Y]

Well what about this: in some of the maps the attackers would be a conventional army, in others - insurgents. That's possible and does not require 2 separate game mods to be made.

[arjan]

Do not agree this would just make everyone to go for one flag and not evrywhere, plus its alot more intense whit 40+ people in one town

40+ man + 1 town = fragfest

[goguapsy]

* Reinforcements: The attacking forces have a limited supply of reinforcements (defenders have a limitless supply), but they can swell their ranks with base they successfully captured.

hmm... I actually think that the assault team should have like 100 more tickets than defending (400-300), since defending has the fortified base/mounted machineguns and everything.

The defender shouldn't have limitless kit. Unless you are planing on giving them a bomb car (yes, that means, insurgents must suicide, while americans or british (for example) have to survive!)

But of course, I see this game being played with USMC/US Army vs MEC. Both would have light vehicles (trans vehicle, Logi truck and a HMMVV/Vodnik with a turret).

good luck!

[E4$Y]

40+ man + 1 town = EPIC BATTLE

A little fix there

[Maxfragg]

yeah, it just depends on the size of the battlefield, and maybe there should be 3-4 points that need to be defended, and not only 2, but i think it can work with 64 players as well

[Cassius]

Although game modes like this sound fun (and probably are) I've had the experience that mini game modes end up either bringing in people who don't play the big game (in PR's case large area coordinated combat) and drawing people into the smaller modes. This in turn causes new players to play the small mode and eventually the larger population servers dwindle down. My biggest example was Natural Selection adding the combat mode which turned the team efforts into individual goals and the team servers died out.

So basically Alternate game modes that turn the game into something other than the overall game (this would turn it into castle defense instead of large area control) probably aren't beneficial to the game.

That said, the game mode is interesting but it seems like the advantage would be too much in the defender's favor unless there was a lot of cover since the Insurgent's main strength (ambush) won't be used. Maybe two conventional armies would be better?

Well you have a point there, but 50 tickets isnt a lot, so on the bluefor side, while there is frantic fighting they still have to keep it toegether to win the round.

[badmojo420]

I was going to suggest this game mode.

Out of all the negative comments, there is really nothing to stop this mode from being a great addition to PR. Of course taking muttrah and forcing the MEC to defend one T building while the americans attack would end up being a 'fragfest' which wouldn't encourage the typical style of play PR is known for. BUT, with custom maps, designed or modified specifically for this mode, and assets which will complement the map, it could be a great game mode. Im imagining some epic 2hr battles to sieze control of the MEC fortress, or something along those lines.

Defenders get lots of TOW/HMG/LMG/AA emplacements as well as a huge position advantage. While the attackers get front line assets like tanks, attack aircraft, apcs, etc. And the attackers face a long drive/walk to the objective.

Hard spawns for the defenders inside the objective, (Spawns which cannot be overrun, but can be destroyed by knife) would ensure that only breaching their defenses and gaining access to the compound would result in the position being overrun and isolated from resupply. A tiny cap radius would ensure that even a small number of defenders could prevent capture. Forcing the attackers to actually clear the complex, rather than just outnumber them.

I would suggest having multiple(maybe 3) positions which can only be captured in sequence, and cannot be recaptured by defenders after being lost. Although there could be issues with teams heading to the next objective when they think they are about to capture one. Getting the jump on the defenders. Perhaps multiple(5-6) locations could be created, but they are picked randomly when an objective is taken. Might be hard coded, but it would be a combination of AAS random flags, and random cache spawning. Giving the defenders a couple minutes to prepare the position before the attackers are notified of the position. Or maybe, don't even tell the attackers where the position is. Forcing them to recon and patrol the entire map looking for enemy activity. Or at least checking out the possible positions. That way, the defenders couldn't just ignore the objective and take the fight elsewhere to confuse the attackers.

Anyway, if anyone is going to attempt to create this game mode, let me know, i have lots of ideas for it and would love to see it happen.

[Redamare]

yea that mode is fun but only under Vbf2 rules run around like a bunch of wild turkeys with their heads choped off... yea plus AAS is pretty much the same deal.. take over 2 objectives and then move onto the next two objectives..

[badmojo420]

yea that mode is fun but only under Vbf2 rules run around like a bunch of wild turkeys with their heads choped off... yea plus AAS is pretty much the same deal.. take over 2 objectives and then move onto the next two objectives..

Why does an assault automatically have to be a vbf2 noob fest of people running around like headless chickens? You can still use tactics and teamwork to assault a fortified position. This is far from a modified skrimish mode where one team spawns in a castle. And the other spawns 100m away.

Think Kashan bunkers, with lots of defensive emplacements, and more usable cover, maybe tunnels. The high view distance and setup of the map would enforce teamwork. Just look at(dare i say it) kashan training, to sucessfully assault and hold down the MEC in their bombing range, teamwork is required. It's all about striking a balance between the attackers and defenders, which also includes the map itself, not just assets.

Also, taking control over two areas before moving on(AAS), is far from a system of 1 objective, which cannot be retaken after its lost. Besides the obvious differences, like the number of flags and high dependence on defense. AAS is about area control, where this would be about position control.

[myles]

All decent militarys would not fight by going form 1 flag to one flag infront because they would have way more better options going from sides or back and it would be a blood bath which it is in bf bad comapany when your all just running into the fron of the assault target.

Itll be like D-day.

[badmojo420]

All decent militarys would not fight by going form 1 flag to one flag infront because they would have way more better options going from sides or back and it would be a blood bath which it is in bf bad comapany when your all just running into the fron of the assault target.

Itll be like D-day.

If you want to get technical, most militaries would have no choice but to attack in a linear fashion. In order to secure some sort of logistics supply line back to safety. That's the way conventional wars are fought.

If you were to jump ahead and secure an outpost behind enemy lines, you run the risk of being attacked from all sides, with no easy way of bringing in reinforcements.

As far as the actual battle, of attacking a fortified position. You have a wide range of options. Sides, rear, from above, sneak attack, etc. But you have only 1 goal, take control of the position held by the enemy. It seems like a rather straight forward mission. Realistic as well.

Battlefield Bad Companys' Gold Rush mode is a bloodbath, there is no denying that. But there are many factors that contribute to it being a bloodbath. Mainly, the fact that all structures can be destroyed, which gives the attackers incentive to sit back and lob tank rounds, rockets, artillery, etc at the area until there's nothing left. Also, the gold crates are pretty much out in the open at almost every objective. And all it takes is a couple sticks of C4 and it's destroyed. Basically 1 person can win the game for the team.

I don't want to re-write what I have already stated above. But the system I propose wouldn't allow for the same level of bloodbath type play, as you see in BFBC. This idea is so much more than just Gold Rush mode for PR. Gold rush mode is the basics of what we want, not the end result.