Project Reality Forums

-I was wondering, is it possible to link tickets and flags so that who wins depends on the amount of flags held and the tickets left?

Example:
Map has 5 flags(Leaving out the mains)

1 flag is worth 20 tickets(For the sake of this example)

If team 1 holds three flags and their tickets run out then they will win unless the other side has more than 20 tickets left. If team 2 has 19 tickets then team 1 wins.

If team 1 holds 1 flag and has more than 40 tickets left while team 2 is out of tickets then team 1 wins. If team 1 has less than 40 tickets then they lose.

-I'm just asking because I'm getting a little bored with tickets being the sole victory condition and being the only incentive to cap flags(Excepting a few game modes of course).

I agree. Something like this needs to be added. In addition to this I think it would be nice to make a way to regain tickets. Might be fun and it would keep those really fun matches going longer.

Would be good if flag values could be weight on some maps so as to reflect defensive/attacking teams and importance of objectives.

i.e. Flag A is worth 20 to attacking team as it their objective to take territory, but maybe only 5/10 to defensive team as it not the key flag on the map and with drawing to better defensive positons is an option.

You have to make a decision is its really worth throwing yourself at a flag in the grand scheme of things.

That is a great idea i like the sound of that.

-Also, the current incentive for taking flags is ticket bleed, a feature I find to be detached from the rest of the game and ends up forcing people to make unsound decisions because of the urgency that is placed upon a team that is bleeding, allowing for some chance of recovery. There would be a lot more strategic and tactical options available to teams with this and also place more importance on the flags themselves instead of them only being a means to an end.

I think taking out bleed will slow the game too much. The idea is that your side is defeated if they take too many casualties or lose control of the battlefield and can't regain it. I think the problem is that bleed isn't linked closely enough to flags on some maps. There are maps where bleed doesn't start until you're practically in the enemy camp, causing the game's focus to shift to killing rather than securing strategic areas (aka flags).

Cobhris wrote:I think taking out bleed will slow the game too much. The idea is that your side is defeated if they take too many casualties or lose control of the battlefield and can't regain it. I think the problem is that bleed isn't linked closely enough to flags on some maps. There are maps where bleed doesn't start until you're practically in the enemy camp, causing the game's focus to shift to killing rather than securing strategic areas (aka flags).

-First, slowing it down is a good thing . Second, you can just cut down on the amount of tickets.

-Ticket bleed doesn't represent anything, it only makes games more rushed(Not in the sense that they don't take a lot of time, but they reinforce zerg rushing by both sides; one will rush to cap flags so the other side starts bleeding, the other will rush to take back the flag that causes the bleed, both using retarded strategies to do so). Flags aren't important as actual locations on the map right now, they're a means to an end.

Cobhris wrote:I think taking out bleed will slow the game too much. The idea is that your side is defeated if they take too many casualties or lose control of the battlefield and can't regain it. I think the problem is that bleed isn't linked closely enough to flags on some maps. There are maps where bleed doesn't start until you're practically in the enemy camp, causing the game's focus to shift to killing rather than securing strategic areas (aka flags).

Well, idk if ticket bleed was in the origional suggestion, but i think its fine. i think that bleed should be left alone, but you should be able to gain/lose tickets for capping/losing control of flags

flem615 wrote:Well, idk if ticket bleed was in the origional suggestion, but i think its fine. i think that bleed should be left alone, but you should be able to gain/lose tickets for capping/losing control of flags

-That's not what I was talking about in the OP. And that would only reward the side with the advantage, making it a ***** to get back from a losing position.

hmm. i see where your coming from but i still think that there should be a way to regain lost tickets. sort of like recovering from an attack. almost like a mini counter-attack. i think that it would lengthen good games, and shorten bad ones.

I like the idea of having certain flags have certain ticket values for certain teams

but then again...in a way thats already in

a flag that is easily defended should cost the defenders few tickets, and the attackers many...as few defenders will die and many attackers will.

The problem with ticket costs on flags would be that a flag might change hands several times in a short time, which would result in major ticket lost without much bearing on the tactical situation.

I do think that ticket bleed should be brought back in, even if its incredibly slow for attackers. e.g. Mestia, Kolesck etc, so that they can't just sit back. This is really a gameplay thing to get the action rolling. And anyway, the APCs etc the russians have should give them the advantage they need to take the first flag at least.

I like Long, strategic rounds. But I don't want to only have time for one round of PR in a day, I would like to play at least three maps in a sitting and ticket bleed helps accomplish this, as well as helping to get rape over and done with quickly.