Big or small capradius

[Rhino]

after playing some FH2 over the past few days I forgot how bad small cap radius's where. Really small ones seen in vBF2 and FH2 take all the strategy out of taking a control point and make it really predictable what the enemy is going to do.

Large cap radius's do add to the tactical value of taking a control point but ones that are too large can easily turn a area into a big stalemate that takes ages to finally brake out from, like normally seen on Muttrah thou this on its own isn't a bad thing, it just becomes a bad thing when it happens all the time at the same place since then it becomes repetitive...

I believe that the size of the flag really depends on the flag's surroundings and the map's layout.

[Smegburt_funkledink]

I believe that the size of the flag really depends on the flag's surroundings and the map's layout.

Exactly.

Muttrah flags in my opinion are perfect. Mestia may seem like the radius is a bit large but I like long fights that require a team to sweep large areas rather than a singular building.

Once you have capped a flag on Mestia, you know that you've outgunned and outnumbered the enemy. With small caps, that will not always be the case. Sure you've capped the small radius and beaten the enemy there but you may still be surrounded and outnumbered.

[Rhino]

Muttrah flags in my opinion are perfect.

hehe, I have to disagree with that

Right now I would say that its pretty good, but many of the flags especially North City tend to turn into stalemates far too often and the fight hardly moves from that part of the map unless one side is very much dominating over the other. I would like to see the flow of combat be much more dynamic and actually see more combat around South City and the fortress area where you rarely see the fight reach upto thous points.

[Farks]

It's all relative.

[CodeRedFox]

I have a mix view on cap sizes. While I think a majority of maps should have large cap areas, some maps and some objective shouldn't.

[Smegburt_funkledink]

hehe, I have to disagree with that

<whino>

And how many full games have you played on Muttrah v2?

I'd rather have the odd stalemate and drawn out firefights than constant flag swapping and tard rushing. If they were made any smaller, even larger parts of the city will go unused.

Seriously, the caps on Muttrah cover just the right number of buildings over just the right areas. (apart from docks IMO). The radii are just the right size for a third of the team/ 2 squads to sweep though effectively but they're not so small that a single APC can cover its entirety.

The only time I'd want to see small cap zones would be to have 1 per building, all linked into 1 block that has to be captured as a whole before moving onto the next block without the ability to see the small 'cap stages' (or current cap value) until the entire block was captured/ cleared. That is all a bit far fetched though...

[Rudd]

Seriously, the caps on Muttrah cover just the right number of buildings over just the right areas. (apart from docks IMO). The radii are just the right size for a third of the team/ 2 squads to sweep though effectively but they're not so small that a single APC can cover its entirety.

yeah it is good.

and IMO, the north docks -> the 2 city centers is a good gameplay dynamic that is required for teh Americans.

This allows them to choose which city center to attack of the 2, i.e. which is easier to take. And helps ensure tha the USMC gets at least half way to capping the MEC out if both sides are fast off the mark at teh start of the game.

Its only after that that you get alot of 1 flag Vs 1 Flag fighting which is drawn out and usually decided by APC fights.

[Rhino]

And how many full games have you played on Muttrah v2?

enough

but I think your misunderstanding my point. What I mean is that the combat far too often turns into a stalemate around the north city and doe not move off that area of the map into the rest of the city. I have played rounds where 80% of the fighting took place at north city simply in a huge struggle to fully capture and hold that point where both teams where pretty equally matched with the odd bit of getting off the flag but as soon as one team tried to move off it and might even neutralize one of the other flags, the MEC overrun north city

I aint thought of a better solution to the muttrah flag layout to make the combat flow a little more but I'm thinking on it

[Skodz]

Better flag location.

The AAS v3 is cool but sometimes flags are in very odd position.

I think its not all about the capping zone, its also about where you fight.

With that said, I'd say medium size.

Too small is like BF2 but too big is annoying and not very strategical in my opinion.

[K4on]

Think about it, on Mestia do you really want the flag back at storage bunker?

Why do we have to control the storage bunker?

If the enemy are in a superior defensive position, why would I attack him there ...

You are right, but what about the both Towers ? East and West ?
Theset are superior positions to, why don t put a flagpoint on it again like in 0.7 ?

The actually flagpoints on mestia are just ****.

[Tartantyco]

-I've always wondered, do cap radii have to be circular, or can they be any shape you want them to be?

[TheLean]

^^ good question.

I prefer big Cap radius. Small cap radius limits the tactical options and funnels soldiers into mindless meatgrinds.

Muttras cap radius are perfect. The game turns into a stalemate since the map is well balanced. Remove an APC from Mec to give the US a bigger advantage. Or create another layer were the us has three flags on mainland already to see some fighting in the unused areas.

[Rudd]

They can only be spherical.

I just wonder...can we link flags together so that they are 2 radii but 1 flag? (I'm not talking about supply group ID)

[Rhino]

I just wonder...can we link flags together so that they are 2 radii but 1 flag? (I'm not talking about supply group ID)

not without a load of rework of the code.

[Masterbake]

Roughly 100m size is the best I think, like Muttrah and probably some others I can't remember. Personally I preferred it when maps like Ejod and Sunset had smaller capzones, as mentioned previously, as they definitely provided more action.
Personally I'm more bothered about action than map tactics, but personally I think if a map has huge cap radii like Qwai or Mestia it isn't tactical at all. Squads just tend to roam around looking for enemy units instead of fortifying at strong points or being able to flank round to the back of a flag. Also, if each side has 1 cap zone and yours is turned neutral, everyone on the team who's in the other zone has to run back 500m or so, which gets pretty tedious.

[NyteMyre]

I really miss the bunker-flags on Mestia.
Where you had to retreat to the ammo-dump and reorganize an attack on the bunker. Now it doesn't matter where you are.


I also see it like this:

Big radius makes the game a bit more like a deathmatch. You just put a lot of grunts in cap range and the team who can keep more guys alive in the area wins. A small cap radius feels more like overtaking a position. Clearing the area of enemies and such.

[Alex6714]

I think its map dependant, kashan should be big etc but mestia was definitely 100% better before with the bunkers and towers imo.

[K4on]

I really miss the bunker-flags on Mestia.
Where you had to retreat to the ammo-dump and reorganize an attack on the bunker. Now it doesn't matter where you are.


I also see it like this:

Big radius makes the game a bit more like a deathmatch. You just put a lot of grunts in cap range and the team who can keep more guys alive in the area wins. A small cap radius feels more like overtaking a position. Clearing the area of enemies and such.

I can't say it better.

So pls: smaller capranges !