Project Reality Forums

I have been playing PR for a while, and been doing my best to capture flags, as I assumed this would cause ticket bleeds to the opposition.

However, I never knew for sure, and went back to the manual recently to find out - but after re-reading all of it, I found no mention of the effects of capturing flags.


Asking other players yielded lots of "I don't know either.."


So why capture those flags? Why not just take one or two and then camp there (nice campsites on Kozelsk for example..)

its gonna start a bleed for the enemy eventually, and if you cap their last flag they might not be able to spawn anymore also resulting in extreme bleed on some maps. if youre not having a bleed and are happy defending, just make sure you kill more than you die and lose as few vehicles as possible.

some maps have a bleed from capturing flags (at least they used to)

Ticket bleed is on all AAS maps but some, most maps with bleed the bleed starts when the last or second to last flag is taken. Other AAS maps without bleed are basically kill maps, some maps have ticket bleed for only one side, Usually the first two flags are just leeway and have no effect besides having a safe place to set up a base etc.

It's primarily objective based, giving the entire team an objective with a similar goal and promoting teamwork. "Assault and Securing flags" (aka capturing) basically represents the combating armies 'securing' areas of importance in the area of operations rather than search and destroy in the other games. That's how I usually see it anyways; hopefully in the future these 'flags' can actually spawn strategic assets as well (similar to Korengal's side objective).

In addition, it's a BF2 mod , and essentially the main thing about BF2 is basically Capture the flag

That would be awesome, if you capture an area and you get to use the assets in it.


Like "Motorpool" It has a bunch of vehicles that the team who has it can use. That will make the other team create massive assaults to take it back if they want vehicles!

Indeed, whereby holding certain maps provides actual benefits, for example;

Holding an Artillery position on a hill decreases the off-map arty reload time
Capturing a motorpool spawns a number of vehicles
Capturing an airport spawns choppers/(if possible) initiates a small negative-bleed for the holding side (tickets go UP slowly over time, making it a major objective)

Shits and giggles?

Most AAS maps have some form of bleed on afaik its just a matter of triggering it. Tad Sae for instance has an absolutely massive bleed if one side holds both of the flags. Same for EJOD desert as when either side captures the gas station/desert fortification flag it puts on a massive bleed and prevents the opposing team from spawning on their main, effectively winning the round.

It is to provide an objective based element to the gameplay, and to centralise the fighting. This is why flags must be captured in specific sequence as it focuses combat to that area, instead of the 'nilla method of any flag can be captured and enemy can just pop up anywhere which in turn creates the frag fest that is 'nilla BF2.

Hopefully in future builds we will start to see more of the flag based objectives popping up such as on Korengal. This will most likely be included in insurgency maps such as the upcomming Sangin and Feyzebad, but certainly could have an application in AAS as well.

Not to mention that there is already another non-flag capture based game mode; the criminally underused CnC mode. Personally i'd like to see more servers running this mode to introduce some variety into the established AAS/insurgency sequence.

jigsaw-uk wrote:Shits and giggles?

All AAS maps have some form of bleed on afaik its just a matter of triggering it. Tad Sae for instance has an absolutely massive bleed if one side holds both of the flags. Same for EJOD desert as when either side captures the gas station/desert fortification flag it puts on a massive bleed and prevents the opposing team from spawning on their main, effectively winning the round.

It is to provide an objective based element to the gameplay, and to centralise the fighting. This is why flags must be captured in specific sequence as it focuses combat to that area, instead of the 'nilla method of any flag can be captured and enemy can just pop up anywhere which in turn creates the frag fest that is 'nilla BF2.

Hopefully in future builds we will start to see more of the flag based objectives popping up such as on Korengal. This will most likely be included in insurgency maps such as the upcomming Sangin and Feyzebad, but certainly could have an application in AAS as well.

Not to mention that there is already another non-flag capture based game mode; the criminally underused CnC mode. Personally i'd like to see more servers running this mode to introduce some variety into the established AAS/insurgency sequence.

What about sunset city? no bleed what so ever, Operation berrcuda only has a bleed for the Chinese forces, Chinese have to rely on killing enough Americans until there tickets run out.

nick20404 wrote:What about sunset city? no bleed what so ever, Operation berrcuda only has a bleed for the Chinese forces, Chinese have to rely on killing enough Americans until there tickets run out.

True, very true however only 2 exceptions therefore and as I detailed in my post there are other reasons for capturing flags beyond initiating a bleed.

i wish you had to capture certain buildings or groups of buildings. that would be cool.

Menigmand wrote: So why capture those flags? Why not just take one or two and then camp there (nice campsites on Kozelsk for example..)

Thats how project reality tournament(most organized teamplay you are ever gonna get in PR) rounds go %90 of the time.This thing needs an overhaul.


And it doesnt matter if one team starts to bleed after they lost all or all but one flag,since most of the time rounds end without one team capturing whole flags.

Just put a small bleed for every flag,fast bleed for more flags.

it's not called 'camping'... it's called 'defense'.

and yes...you should stay and defend what you took instead of charging mindlessly towards the next objective.

Kruder wrote: Just put a small bleed for every flag,fast bleed for more flags.

I would like it much better the other way around, with ticket gain or something. Although getting assets etc like mentioned is a much better way of promoting progression.
That bleed is/was awful, with alot too much focus on the flags.

Defending is fun, and alot more fun if you don't have to be excactly where it's most obvious - the actual flag.

[R-CON]ReaperMAC wrote:That's how I usually see it anyways; hopefully in the future these 'flags' can actually spawn strategic assets as well (similar to Korengal's side objective).

If you're talking about having flags spawn vehicles or something of the like, it's doable. Pretty much every flag in vanilla BF2 has a vehicle asset linked to it that spawns for whichever team owns the flag, ranging from jeeps at small hilltop camps to helis and jets for capturing the airfield flag.

Harrod200 wrote:Indeed, whereby holding certain maps provides actual benefits, for example;

Holding an Artillery position on a hill decreases the off-map arty reload time
Capturing a motorpool spawns a number of vehicles
Capturing an airport spawns choppers/(if possible) initiates a small negative-bleed for the holding side (tickets go UP slowly over time, making it a major objective)

This is a very good idea except the only thing that I worry about is balance. So if there was a way to balance this out so that if one team looses an airport and an arty hill then they dont get pounded by arty and airstrikes and they actually have a chance to take those flags back then it would be awesome and give a whole new reason why to go after flags and not just noobs running around looking for firefights. So I hope the devs can some how bring this to life.

Menigmand wrote:I have been playing PR for a while, and been doing my best to capture flags, as I assumed this would cause ticket bleeds to the opposition.

Most people do.

Menigmand wrote: However, I never knew for sure, and went back to the manual recently to find out - but after re-reading all of it, I found no mention of the effects of capturing flags.

No idea who wrote that thing...

Menigmand wrote: So why capture those flags? Why not just take one or two and then camp there (nice campsites on Kozelsk for example..)

Because defense is for cowards. And the winning side...

Why not just camp? Because we're all indulging in our culturally indoctrinated war fetish and we all know that in war you take objectives.

I don't understand why you'd play a game with flags and actually wonder why you cap the flag. I'm not one of those people that would sit in spawn just because I knew we'd win. We're here to play some modern tactics based infantry/combined arms gameplay on objective based maps.

We're here to represent an armed conflict consisting of many battles. Each battle represents an attack or defense of key strategic objectives or strategic positions which relate to defending key objectives. That is what infantry do: clear out key objectives and defend them.

Flags are pointers towards those key objectives that HQ needs you to hold. Imagine it being part of a greater war where the map keeps going in all directions and there are other armies fighting to take objectives along a front line. Thats what we're doing.

The purpose of designing the game mode is to compel the teams to keep moving on towards the bleed point or defending against defeat. Kozelsk sees Chechens defending against the russians, essentially turtling and if they lose those flags they get a bleed on. If Russians don't take them then they either die or are just sitting in main spawn doing nothing interesting at all.

Why cap flags? Cause they're there and thats where the enemy is going!

*ahem*

A solution to the flag issue