Well here a very simple, but maybe the best option to prevent basecamping:
Install a deadzone over there, like it is on every map.
But this special deadzone only injures players that do not belong into this mainbase.
This is only for flags, that can not be captured(like many in AAS)
Should be possible to realise, shouldn`t it?
(Idea from [k]Tom)
Selective Deadzone-Antispawnraping!
-
Topf
- Posts: 320
- Joined: 2005-10-29 01:39
Selective Deadzone-Antispawnraping!
http://www.k-clan.org
!! Recruiting german players !!
Help, the quartermaster has fallen in love with me and wants to make me drunk!
"how about a whisky"
!! Recruiting german players !!
Help, the quartermaster has fallen in love with me and wants to make me drunk!
"how about a whisky"
-
[T]Terranova7
- Posts: 1073
- Joined: 2005-06-19 20:28
Reminds me of the Dome of Doom concept. I don't like it for the most part. Its unreal to suddenly break a leg because you walked into the enemy base. If anything, uncappable bases should be easier to defend. More stationary MG and AT placements, objects where players can take a conveinant base of fire etc. Maybe even a mine field if possible on some maps. Basically, without having god curse you for walking into an enemy uncap, that base should sport one hell of a defence. Almost making it impenatrable with proper teamwork on that side.
-
Elchewbacca
- Posts: 105
- Joined: 2006-03-20 16:02
-
RikiRude
- Retired PR Developer
- Posts: 3819
- Joined: 2006-02-12 08:57
i think id like to see grenade launcher as well as MG and AT and AA inplacements at main bases, im talking MGs inside of little bunkers, AT in a somewhat hidden postition, and grenade launchers up off the ground to hit better and so on. then it would just simply be stupid to try to base rape. id even go so far as to have the spawn points at the main, at these inplacements, so if you are being attacked you are right next to one to start laying down some fire.
Proud n00b tub3r of 5 spam bots!


'[R-CON wrote:2Slick4U']That's like being the smartest kid with down syndrome.
-
00SoldierofFortune00
- Posts: 2944
- Joined: 2006-02-28 01:08
-
Tracekill
- Posts: 15
- Joined: 2006-04-30 19:31
Deuce6 wrote:I like it, because realisticly, you will have base support troops. Your not gonna leave your base ungaurded. It would simulate a permanent gaurd force.
I thought the whole point of this mod was to escape the boundaries of simulation and achieve full and precise realism. Realistically, you do have base guard troops but to take up one of these positions is the option of the player. Realistically you do not get struck down by the fiery wrath of god for stepping within an unseen boundary.
-
Malik
- Posts: 1676
- Joined: 2006-04-20 16:49
Totally agree with that. This is Project Reality, and in real life if you don't stop the enemy getting to your base, you will be slaughtered. There's no need to have to add invisible protection to those guys who can't defend themselves. The 0.3 system relies on the ability to access mainbases as Commander assets work again, so they'll need to be disabled permanently. Not only that, uncappables are indeed gone too, so eventually the battles will move to the aircraft carriers and airfields right down the back. I never really get a problem with spawnrape, if it happens once I don't spawn there again unless I know I can deal with the threat. If I do get killed, yeah it's annoying, but I wouldn't want the system changing just so I'm safe. The battlefield is never safe.Tracekill wrote:I thought the whole point of this mod was to escape the boundaries of simulation and achieve full and precise realism. Realistically, you do have base guard troops but to take up one of these positions is the option of the player. Realistically you do not get struck down by the fiery wrath of god for stepping within an unseen boundary.
-
M.0.D
- Posts: 138
- Joined: 2006-05-07 21:54
I do not know much about realism, but if you only have one spawnpoint left, and the enemys are nade-spamming it is really annoying.. i spawned 6 times, and died less then a second after spawning, there was nothing i could do.. then the end of the round saved me ^^
I would like to see at least a possibility to even recognize where you are, and where the enemys are, so you can even TRY to defend yourself
I would like to see at least a possibility to even recognize where you are, and where the enemys are, so you can even TRY to defend yourself
-
BigEd88
- Posts: 35
- Joined: 2005-10-04 00:15
00SoldierofFortune00 wrote:There will be no uncappables in .3 as they have stated already.
which to me is unrealistic, maps with an aircraft carrier should not allow it to be captured....because an aircraft carrier would not only have an enitre crew on it but also support ships around it.
Back on the subject of spawn camping, the fact that is happens is because of the unrealistic "people appearing" out of nowhere. I'm not saying we should go to an ameriacas army type 1 spawn in thing but I think a main base defense (made up of AI!? its seem "half competant" in offline mode) would really help out.
-
Malik
- Posts: 1676
- Joined: 2006-04-20 16:49
Or, shoot the enemies before they get to your last base. Nade spamming is out of the picture in 0.3 thanks to the 8 second 'reload' time, not to mention the fact that medics and engineers can't even use grenades any longer.
The capturable Aircraft Carriers are fine in my opinion, it's going to add some more fun to the game, having to board the craft from above or sneaking in the back. The fact is, unrealistic or not, in BF2 the marines like to bring the aircraft carriers to battle with no naval support. If you want it defending, do it yourself, it shouldn't be hardwired into the game.
I'm going to give 0.3 a shot, if I don't like it I'll discuss it, but right now I have nothing against it.
The capturable Aircraft Carriers are fine in my opinion, it's going to add some more fun to the game, having to board the craft from above or sneaking in the back. The fact is, unrealistic or not, in BF2 the marines like to bring the aircraft carriers to battle with no naval support. If you want it defending, do it yourself, it shouldn't be hardwired into the game.
I'm going to give 0.3 a shot, if I don't like it I'll discuss it, but right now I have nothing against it.








