Realistic Rally Points
Posted: 2009-02-11 11:23
Rally Points simulate reinforcements entering the battle zone. With very few exceptions reinforcements cannot deploy directly into areas that are in contest - they have to come in from outside the area and make their way in.
With this in mind, the idea of having RPs in the middle of the map that can be flanked and have no uncontested route to the edge of the map is highly unrealistic and is promoting bad play in the form of people not being scared enough of being killed because rallies can be so close at hand. This in turn reduces the role of suppressive fire and promotes radical risk taking that has a very high chance of making firefights a lot shorter than they should be. Another side effect is that because spawns are so easy to do, there are far fewer logical routes of reinforcement and choke points for more natural defenses than there would be in real engagements.
The solution is to make rally points only deployable within the narrow (depending on the map the depth could vary from 15 meters to anywhere out to 150m) ribbon running around the edges of the "Turn Back Zone". The distance, of course, can be tweaked, and could very well vary from map to map (some infantry unfriendly maps like Kashan, might need to keep present spawn rules). This will simulate the way forces actually have to physically traverse terrain and more realistically recreate the way reinforcements can be stalled and cut off. This is also going to mean that not all map edges are reinforcable - some are cut off by geographically impassable terrain.
Some points can be reinforced continuously because they simulate secure zones that are well garrisoned - these are simulated by FOs and would remain as are under this system.
In summary:
All rally points must be set close to the edge of the AWOL zone to simulate reinforcements coming in from outside the AO.
- Promotes desirable and more realistically cautious play (supply lines, while not unmanageable are now more punishing when you die).
- Allows more realistic and less digital delaying and cutting off of reinforcements than the current on/off system of killing rallies or letting them spawn does.
- Increases the importance of Firebases to assaults in the centers of maps.
- Increases the importance of geography in planning defenses, which in turn, should function more realistically because avenues of movement and attack will be more restricted, and less easy to set up on a flank.
- Has the advantage of being more realistic than instant spawns right by the action - 'nilla style.
- Squad leader retains some tactical control of the squad, while actual squadwork becomes more important because of more dependancy on one another for survival.
But is it hardcoded?
Edit: Adjusted for some concerns, included new thoughts and to clarified some times.
With this in mind, the idea of having RPs in the middle of the map that can be flanked and have no uncontested route to the edge of the map is highly unrealistic and is promoting bad play in the form of people not being scared enough of being killed because rallies can be so close at hand. This in turn reduces the role of suppressive fire and promotes radical risk taking that has a very high chance of making firefights a lot shorter than they should be. Another side effect is that because spawns are so easy to do, there are far fewer logical routes of reinforcement and choke points for more natural defenses than there would be in real engagements.
The solution is to make rally points only deployable within the narrow (depending on the map the depth could vary from 15 meters to anywhere out to 150m) ribbon running around the edges of the "Turn Back Zone". The distance, of course, can be tweaked, and could very well vary from map to map (some infantry unfriendly maps like Kashan, might need to keep present spawn rules). This will simulate the way forces actually have to physically traverse terrain and more realistically recreate the way reinforcements can be stalled and cut off. This is also going to mean that not all map edges are reinforcable - some are cut off by geographically impassable terrain.
Some points can be reinforced continuously because they simulate secure zones that are well garrisoned - these are simulated by FOs and would remain as are under this system.
In summary:
All rally points must be set close to the edge of the AWOL zone to simulate reinforcements coming in from outside the AO.
- Promotes desirable and more realistically cautious play (supply lines, while not unmanageable are now more punishing when you die).
- Allows more realistic and less digital delaying and cutting off of reinforcements than the current on/off system of killing rallies or letting them spawn does.
- Increases the importance of Firebases to assaults in the centers of maps.
- Increases the importance of geography in planning defenses, which in turn, should function more realistically because avenues of movement and attack will be more restricted, and less easy to set up on a flank.
- Has the advantage of being more realistic than instant spawns right by the action - 'nilla style.
- Squad leader retains some tactical control of the squad, while actual squadwork becomes more important because of more dependancy on one another for survival.
But is it hardcoded?
Edit: Adjusted for some concerns, included new thoughts and to clarified some times.