'Xander[nl wrote:;2010869']My point is that there is no point in attacking (when teams are equal), because attacking generally only costs tickets and the gains of capturing a flag are currently too low to justify attacking it. When teams are smart they just camp out and it completely ruins the pace of the game. You don't win a game by capturing most of the flags, you win by tickets. For example I've seen dozens of matches of Jabal ending up in the USMC pointlessly attacking MEC's last flag (Jabal or bridge) and lose because they ran out of tickets, even though they controlled 3/4s of the map for half the match.
My point remains that flags are currently usually useless indications of where enemies might be (and nothing more), and to make things more fun I'd still recommend giving some kind of incentive to actually capture most of the map's flags and justify wasting tickets attacking them. An incentive like more vehicles or extra supplies.
So you think attacking is pointless or AAS is just useless?
And of course, people will pointlessly attack last flags or such. It's retarded.
BUT, it can be good. Since if they have the correct kits. (such as HAT, combat engie, and such) they can neutralize enemy heavey assets such as choppers, tanks, apc's and multiple supply trucks. So you can win the match in a way.
TBH, you have to lose tickets either way, that is pretty much how you have a good game.
What I consider a good game: If teams have less then 10 tickets at round end.... Example on Jabal on HOG a few months ago. 1-0 US won.
Best battle ever.
