FOBs are bad for gameplay.

[Gracler]

Squad-leaders should be able to create rally more rapidly while in a "defense" or "offence" range of a control point, not just when near a FOB which is already a spawn-point.
It can be very frustrating to continually having a squad split up because there is no FOB's in the area and no transport.

[Murphy]

This is the most absurd discussion. FOBS are perfect! No other game allows players to pick their own respawn point. No other military based game does ANYTHING at ALL to replicate logistics, which are truly the backbone of any modern military force. FOBs not only offer players more of a "sandbox" approach, which is one of the huge reasons PR is soo amazing, but they also restrict teams that are not willing to run logistics properly. The OP is on about bad squads wasting tickets and even worse SLs wasting time/man power.

Sorry but I 110% disagree with this thread and I wish it's existence was ceased immediately. Removing FOBs from PR will just bring us one step further from what makes PR unique, interesting, and just all around better then other games.

WORST THREAD EVER.

[victor_phx]

I too mostly disagree with the OP, but this "SHUT THIS THREAD DOWN" attitude is extreme!

Of course the majority of players won't want anyone to remove FOBs from the game. They're great, yes. But aren't we always looking for ways to improve the gameplay? This here is the place to discuss it! This is the time. This thread involves many different matters; we're not all claiming that FOBs must cease to exist.

[...]the need for logistics right now is at a good level and shouldn't be increased or decreased in any way imo. Another reason why I favor Deploy FOB re-spawn timer instead of a steady stream of crates to a FOB to keep it running or 4 or more crates just to build defenses. I don't like that idea.

Something that keeps most players from giving up instantly after getting wounded is most welcome. Some sort of time limitation or player spawn limitation in FOBs could be interesting, but there's a lot more to think about before suggesting anything to be implemented.

[Stemplus]

I'd say decreasing the max FOB count and adding firebases which would act like normal FOBs but would require 2 crates, you wouldn't be able to spawn on them, but you would be able to place assets on em just like on a normal FOB + you would have a different limit for them.

[zombie-yellow]

I don't know why everyone is talking about removing FOBs, not anyone in here proposed that, not even the OP. It would be sh*t if they removed FOBs, everyone knows that, and therefor, we said nerfing the FOBs by one way or another, not removing them !

Damm...

[mockingbird0901]

How do you guys think combat would play out if the overrun radius and enemy count for FOB's (but not rally points) were significantly increased? Say, 500 meters with six or more hostiles on 4km maps, 250 meters with four or more hostiles on 2km, 125 meters with three or more hostiles on 1km. Squad leaders would still be able to set rallies to bring their squads in, and rallies would still be refreshed at firebases whether or not they are overrun.

I offer this as a strictly hypothetical scenario; I can't disclose our current plan for FOBs and rallies at this time.

Increase would be good IMO, but it's all about finding a balance, as always. I at least like to get shot at while playing this game, but at the same time I want to be able to move up once I've taken out the enemy. I have had rounds where the enemy came at us every 2-3 min, same squad, and we would kill them and revive for the most part. But we weren't able to move up, which I would like to be able to do, since they came at us so often.

If radius of spawn can vary as you imply depending on map size, an increase would be preferable, as I think that would result in a stronger incentive to stay alive for people, while at the same time allowing people to get a bit strategic when it comes to moving up to a new defensive position, creating more dynamic gameplay. Defending the same street/building/hilltop all round can get tedious.

[DDS]

If it isn't broke dont fix it. What is broken here?

few things about fobs that bothers me when I play

Oh, it bothers you?

"No, We are not taking objective, We are looking for fobs"

Right, some squads have the choice to do this. Its logical. Cut off reinforcements and increase your chance of capturing the flag. You don't get this???

"Just give up and spawn on closest fob"

In some cases this is your only choice. Just because the squads you are involved with do this extensively is not to punish other squads who dont. That is a player (server) issue.

"There is so many of them!"

Yes, thankfully the team is working together to over run their flag. How does this concept get past you?

"Half of our team is building fobs"

I think you are over stating this quite a bit. I've seen a very few times when "half the team" is building fobs. Some squads are planning on other flags to come into play and build a fob, others are planning on defending a back flag and built one there. This is called STRATEGY

"There must be enemy fob somewhere"

Yes, and if there are you need to figure out as a team why that is. The other team is prepared to polish you off in a decisive fashion. They deserve the win because of it.

[Sgt. Mahi]

FOBs are an important asset in PR. It's vital to the logistic gameplay. It just needs to be more valuable so players will make a bigger effort to defend it. So there should be some kind of a big bonus when building a FOB besides the spawning. I think that CNC is on to something but there are many areas where it is faulty. Like it can take a long time before any team finds the enemy FOB, which can be tedious. And mortars are allowed...

It could be nice if there could be a combination of AAS and CNC. If there could be one objective to find and destroy enemy FOB and at the same time another objective to take the flags. Maybe if you had to take down one enemy FOB before you can take the next flag... or something.

Edit: I just realised that the idea I had is just what the gameplay is like now: Destroy FOBs near the flag objective before you are able to take full control of the flag. I actually think it's near perfect as it is. I just wish players would be... Well better players and realise the importance of FOBs. Maybe 128 servers could make a difference.

[ComradeHX]

This thread is bad for gameplay.

Keep FOBs. They are fine for both offensive and defensive purposes.

[Anderson29]

ya we should wait till 1.0 comes out.

the 100 man servers will change the way the game is played, that much is for sure....

till then i will hold my opinion on fobs but i cant help but think how awesome it would be with no fobs on the map(i know no one is suggesting "no fobs" but i cant help it...im hardcore...) and actually being tasked out to ambush supply lines and then maybe the anti personnel kit will come to some use....anyways i've said to much.

i foresee me necro'ing this thread in the future.

[{ZW}C-LOKE]

If anything, there should be more of a necessity to not only build them, but defend them. That's about the only problem I see with the current FOBs. That, and possibly add more deployables, like Hesco barriers (?) so that emplacements are more useful *cough* HMG nests.

And maybe, like virtual target designators (outlines placed on the ground), so you can get visual feedback of where assets are going to get placed. Maybe by holding shift while you hover over the asset, and green or red outlines to indicate whether it would even place (or place on you).

[Gracler]

And maybe, like virtual target designators (outlines placed on the ground), so you can get visual feedback of where assets are going to get placed. Maybe by holding shift while you hover over the asset, and green or red outlines to indicate whether it would even place (or place on you).

Now your thinking Arma2 ...its not possible with the BF2 engine

[Psyrus]

Now your thinking Arma2 ...its not possible with the BF2 engine

It's more than possible, but the devs decided not to do it ages ago due to how exploitable it would be afaik.

[{ZW}C-LOKE]

It's more than possible, but the devs decided not to do it ages ago due to how exploitable it would be afaik.

Thanks for the infos, Psyrus. It was partly due to sandbox mod where the idea of something like this had spawned the idea.

Although I'm not sure I understand how an outline could be exploited, I recognize it's not really my place to worry about that. These are useful informations nonetheless!

Cheers both of you!

[Psyrus]

Although I'm not sure I understand how an outline could be exploited, I recognize it's not really my place to worry about that. These are useful informations nonetheless!

Ok, so you know how it's possible to get fobs in those enterable apartment buildings on maps like Dragon Fly, Beirut and others? I'm pretty sure that the devs didn't intend for that to be possible. Thus, if you were able to perfectly place the assets where you wanted them, I believe the thought process was that it would be even more exploitable than it currently is.

[rodrigoma]

Psyrus;1860531']Ok, so you know how it's possible to get fobs in those enterable apartment buildings on maps like Dragon Fly, Beirut and others? I'm pretty sure that the devs didn't intend for that to be possible. Thus, if you were able to perfectly place the assets where you wanted them, I believe the thought process was that it would be even more exploitable than it currently is.

I never actually saw a problem with fob's being inside buildings, yes it looks weird, but as long as it is still visible ad destructible it would make sense for people to make forward outposts inside buildings?

[Professorson]

CBC reading the whole thread but fobs aren't bad . Fack spawning at main every single death
nobody got time for dat

[Gracler]

Psyrus;1860524']
It's more than possible, but the devs decided not to do it ages ago due to how exploitable it would be afaik.

Okay I'm not familiar with how the Fob creation works currently (apart from the imagination that its dropped an invisible dummy vehicle like a bomb from 10m height and if its stops moving within seconds it will change to whatever the player selected), but what the sandbox is showing is not considering Collision when building which definitely would be exploitable. In arma 2 you get a outline that turns red if its not possible to build if I remember correctly.... that's what afaik. Isn't possible to make in a reasonable amount of time.

[{ZW}C-LOKE]

Psyrus;1860531'][...]fobs in [the] enterable apartment buildings on maps like Dragon Fly, Beirut and others[.] I'm pretty sure that the devs didn't intend for that to be possible. Thus, if you were able to perfectly place the assets where you wanted them, I believe the thought process was that it would be even more exploitable than it currently is.

Oh, ok. Now I get it. That does make a ton of sense, actually. Good point here.

I never actually saw a problem with fob's being inside buildings, yes it looks weird, but as long as it is still visible ad destructible it would make sense for people to make forward outposts inside buildings?

Actually, that's exactly what they're (Canada, GB, and afaik so do the USMC and Army) doing in Afghanistan, and previously Iraq. They set up forward operating bases in abandoned buildings, so placing FOBs in buildings is semi-realistic... in a way. I've seen them do this with buildings a lot in various documentaries on Youtube. Of course, they're not pulling out a radio and setting a circular effigy that has a squealing Fischer Price radio that can be knifed into a pain-inducing dust cloud of suppression, but...

[xGHOST11x]

Alright, what if a specific number were allowed per map. For example, a 4k map could have 4 FOB's. That way, FOB's could be placed near objectives that the teams were trying to take. And that would force the opposing team to spawn at the base that was being attacked and defend, or left it fall. (Dev's, is it possible to build in a feature that allows say an SL to dismantle a FOB?) Once dismantled, new FOB's could be setup for a new objectives. For the vehicle based people, you would know that objective derp was being attacked and turn you attention to said objective. Hopefully the teams would attack more that one objective at a time though so it wouldn't create a c****** f***.

I hope this makes sense, just kinda popped into my head.