Capping a neutral flag at the start of a game should give tickets.

[PeppeJ]

I've been thinking about this for a while, and I feel as if capping a neutral flag should give your team tickets.

Why?

Well there's a fairly common strategy me and buddies use to do, and that's to convince the team that we should let the enemy cap many easy flags at first, simply so that we can clear them out, and cap it from them, causing them to lose 30 tickets for pretty much no reason.
Now this strategy might not work all the time, but it usually pays off and simply net's us an "easy 15 kills" if you want.

[rPoXoTauJIo]

Yeah, i remebred doing same on various CW's and tournaments

[fatalsushi83]

Agreed. You should get tickets.

[Spook]

This is indeed a strategy used in almost all competitive PR matches. Especially on Skirmish both teams often found themselves not capping a single flag and just going for the kills, simply to not risk a loss of 10 tickets.

[fecht_niko]

Don't touch it. It's a legit tactic and I prefer having more possibilities to win.
See it like rushing first flag, most enemies can't handle this...

[PeppeJ]

[quote=""'[R-CON"]Spook;2109031']This is indeed a strategy used in almost all competitive PR matches. Especially on Skirmish both teams often found themselves not capping a single flag and just going for the kills, simply to not risk a loss of 10 tickets.[/quote]

[quote="fecht_niko""]Don't touch it. It's a legit tactic and I prefer having more possibilities to win.
See it like rushing first flag, most enemies can't handle this...[/quote]

Both of these points is why I feel it has to be changed in someway, as the best tactic is to simply not play the game the way it's meant to play.

Maybe make it so you take tickets of the team for each stage of a cap? That would also help cause an incentive to cap. (In case receiving tickets isnt the wisest of ideas)

So Gray -> Capped = 15 tickets
And Enemy Cap -> Gray = 15 tickets

[Web_cole]

Its interesting but it would incentivise rushing on round start. Which might be good or bad depending on who you ask.

[solidfire93]

interesting idea !

always aim for the Objective !

[Rudd]

The problem I forsee is that when an enemy neuts a flag of yours, but you cap it back, it might give you tickets?

Otherwise I like this idea, the whole point of AAS is to focus gameplay around flags, free form gameplay works in many games but not so much in PR, our gameplay works because it is constrained but with enough space to allow lots of tactical options.

[Xander[nl]]

Personally I've always liked the idea of extra rewards for capping certain flags as an incentive to actually attack and cap instead of only defending. Rewards like an extra APC or something. Tickets would do too I guess.

[viirusiiseli]

Add ticket loss upon losing a flag while you're at it

Still not enough people understand the importance of flags and as a result mostly ignore them during games.

[sweedensniiperr]

I'm pretty sure I wrote something about this once, but now I can't find it.

Basically, flags give reinforcements which the commander can give in any time of the game.

[Mats391]

This could easily swing the other way. If flags give tickets in the beginning, teams would now rush and try to secure as many as possible at the start. This is also not what we want.
If we were to implement this, the tickets you gain would be significantly lower than the ones you lose with flags. So maybe only gaining 10 tickets for capturing. Would give incentive to take flags, but still punish if you take flags recklessly.

[sweedensniiperr]

What if there's a 30min delay then?(or X time)

[Mats391]

You mean mandatory time limits for capping flags?

[Xander[nl]]

This could easily swing the other way. If flags give tickets in the beginning, teams would now rush and try to secure as many as possible at the start. This is also not what we want.
If we were to implement this, the tickets you gain would be significantly lower than the ones you lose with flags. So maybe only gaining 10 tickets for capturing. Would give incentive to take flags, but still punish if you take flags recklessly.

Not sure if it would work for every map but how about limiting the ticket reward only to certain flags, ~i.e. the flags in the middle of the map. This way the capping of 'strategic' or 'tactically' important flags would be encouraged, while rushing the enemy's first flag(s) would not be.

[Mineral]

;2109448']Not sure if it would work for every map but how about limiting the ticket reward only to certain flags, ~i.e. the flags in the middle of the map. This way the capping of 'strategic' or 'tactically' important flags would be encouraged, while rushing the enemy's first flag(s) would not be.

That's possible although that requires a heavy amount of manual labour for the hundreds of layers and thousands of flags in PR So unless we get some really smart scripting going I doubt we will see that happening. Cause at first sight I like that idea. Although tbh I don't think there is much of an issue today with this in public games. It allows as some have said for some interesting strategic play which I welcome in PR.

[sf17k]

Interesting strategic puzzle.

If the enemies don't cap anything and you do, you're giving them a chance to take tickets and also pushing the fight closer to their territory where they can theoretically reinforce faster. So it seems disadvantageous to cap anything until you can cap everything at once and make them bleed.

On the other hand, capping forward can stall the enemy because they have to spend time neutralizing each flag they capture. If this buys you enough time to retake the flag, it's worth it. If it only buys you enough time to set up a new defense at an earlier flag, then it cost 30 tickets, so whether it was worth it is less clear.

This suggests that you should cap as far forward as you are certain you can defend, and no more. That is, until you've taken control of the whole map.

I'm not sure this is a bad thing, but it does seem strange to disincentivize capping. Rally points near capped flags used to stay up indefinitely, but that was removed in a recent patch, taking away one of the few advantages of a capped flag.

Perhaps the situation could be balanced by providing another advantage/incentive to capped flags. What if rally points within cap range stayed up indefinitely (instead of within two grid squares like before)?

Or what if the owner of a flag was able to see whether enemies are on it? Possibly also how many? That would let you know when the enemy is trying to cap behind you or sneak around, giving you an actual sense of map control while making it easier to convince players on public servers to defend.

EDIT: Though I suppose it could have the opposite effect, of people not defending until the flag tells them there's enemies on it. So exclude the active flag from showing enemy presence.

[matty1053]

Id like to see a time limit. You can only capture neutral flags within the first 15 minutes of the round.

[PeppeJ]

Id like to see a time limit. You can only capture neutral flags within the first 15 minutes of the round.

What happens if noone captures a flag then?