Project Reality Forums

I was taking a shower and I thought of this idea. How about getting rid of the tickets, and making it that the winner is the team that takes over all of the flags? In real life the majority of the battles are to sucure some place. Some times the winner in the game is the team that has half of the flags or sometimes one less then half, but killed a massive amount of people. However making it so that one team must capture all of the flags can incorparte a more teamwork focused gameplay. A good example of this game mode could be on Karkand 2. Generally who ever captures the center base just sets fireing positions and thats it. No one is advancing they just enjoy the ticket bleed, and kill people. If the game was made to capture all of the command posts squads would be sneaking behind enemy lines, flanking sides, and using some sort of strategy. I think that it could follow the AAS gamemode that is used now, but has no ticket limit, and the winner is the team that can use tactics the most effectively and gain control of the city, desert, what ever you guys have planned next

time limit would be long but then again thats not a bad thing. I have some games on GH that last the whole hour long and still have 215 tickets left.
back on topic. as it would be more tactical related the game would have a bunch of people suicide bombing because of no penalty other than a long spawn. people are more often going to run out and get killed because they have 4 out of 5 flags and run out instead of defending and regaining a steady lead on tickets. to add, im not sure if it IS possable to remove tickets. Only make them 1000 per team. (*Cough*Cough* AlBasra *Cough*Cough*).

Bodybag2224 wrote:I was taking a shower and I thought of this idea.

Funny how that happens, eh?

As for the idea itself, wouldn't that result in people just rushing the flags and not caring when they get mowed down? I guess the respawn time would stack up, but still...

would the team who had the most flags by the end of the match, but lost by tickets, be able to sustain their positions with the small ammount of men they have left?

What would be nicer is to see a sconario where some maps VS the Chinese PLA, the USMC were limeted to 22 players and the PLA had 32. What would be nicer isa map where the USMC has 5 bases, one being the Main Base with airfield and all. The PLA would have to overun the USMC incampments, starting with the smaller 4 out the outskirts of the Main.

...mongol...

'[DVB wrote: TRIggS'] Only make them 1000 per team. (*Cough*Cough* AlBasra *Cough*Cough*).

-1 is the code for unlimited ammo, could it work with points too? (No, i don't play online with it)

JP*wasteland.soldier wrote:Funny how that happens, eh?

As for the idea itself, wouldn't that result in people just rushing the flags and not caring when they get mowed down? I guess the respawn time would stack up, but still...

well, if the round lasts 1+ hour, these people would be taking a LONG time to spawn. i like the idea of longer rounds, but i'd just double the current amout of tickets. i have always been dissappointed when great games end too quickly because of too few tickets (like on al fallusa, or however it's spelled). it's still nice to have a limited amount of soldiers to draw from.

I think the way its set up now it reflects reality. In real warfare you'd want to take a minimal of ground to obtain your military goals to minimize troop losses. So Why would a commander risk more losses to take every sector of the field if hes already won the battle and the enemy is contained and defeated? Heh...and if the answer is a counter attack thats a different game, next map please.