State ticket bleed in map briefing

[TheLean]

My suggestion is small. State which flags needs to be captured and which does not in terms of ticket bleed in the Map Briefings.

On many maps holding flags gives no tickets bleed to the opposite team. This varies from map to map; on some maps all flags regulates ticket bleed. On other maps only a few flags regulates ticket bleed and on some maps there are no ticketbleed whatsoever. Most people do not know this. For example, in Operation Barracuda the US lose most of the time since they attack in wave after wave to capture flags even when they dont have any ticket bleed to start with. Presumably, if the players are informed of this we will se alot more fun tactics develop where players use flanking manouvers to create defendable firebases and stealth squads to kill AA positions etc.

A criticism my idea is that it would lead to a more stale battlefield where both sides are avaiting the others move. I do not think this will happen. People play games to have fun and are too impatient to sit and wait an entire round for the enemy to come to their positions. There will always be an advantage for the squad that takes the initiative and does something unexpected. A skilled squad can sneak around and create chaos without capturing flags. All I want is to create a sense in the community that flags does not always have to be captured at all costs. If they have to, why are there maps withouth ticket bleed?

[badmojo420]

Good suggestion, i am often confused about this.

[Ace42]

Ditto; bleed is pretty inconsistent ATM.

I'd be cautiously in favour of scrapping bleed altogether in favour of a ticket economy and perks to asset spawning.

[single.shot (nor)]

Ditto; bleed is pretty inconsistent ATM.

I'd be cautiously in favour of scrapping bleed altogether in favour of a ticket economy and perks to asset spawning.

i am in 110% agreement on this one.