Project Reality Forums

Please add a ticket bleed for the OPFOR Team. PRT just ran the map and Without a bleed a team can stall the game as much as they want.

Care to elaborate ? is stalling the game a bad thing, why should we rush the players in? was you on NATO by any chance?

Gazz, Militia can win with 3 vs 32. Drop area attack, hope you get one kill and then just sit at main for 4 hours.

what might be an idea is to set one of the 2nd state british flags to neutral at the start, give it the slowest form of bleed avaliable, make it slightly slower to cap, then there is a kind of delayed bleed.

L4gi wrote:Gazz, Militia can win with 3 vs 32. Drop area attack, hope you get one kill and then just sit at main for 4 hours.

Same with Russia on Kozelsk, US on Barracuda...

Oh this thread is in no way related to the recent PRT battle, is it?

snooggums wrote:Same with Russia on Kozelsk, US on Barracuda...

That isn't a fair comparison. The other team gets all the bases, unless that's the start at ocha, I haven't played it a lot. But maybe make a delayed ticket bleed? If you cap then lose it the bleed starts?

[quote=""'[R-CON"]Outlawz;1341138']Oh this thread is in no way related to the recent PRT battle, is it? [/quote]


[quote="Wilkinson""]PRT just ran the map[/quote]


Oh me, oh my

Exterior wrote:That isn't a fair comparison. The other team gets all the bases, unless that's the start at ocha, I haven't played it a lot. But maybe make a delayed ticket bleed? If you cap then lose it the bleed starts?

Sure it is:
Attacker on assault maps (where the other team starts with ALL of the defending flags) never gets a bleed so as long as they do some damage they can sit at their main for the next 4 hours and goof off.

I guess the other team could technically counter with artillery on their main but I'm not sure which servers allow that on AAS maps anymore and all of the vehicles can be parked out of arty effect to the best of my knowledge.

The biggest thing in my opinion is that to make assault maps have assault game play they need to lock the flags as they are taken instead of allowing them to be recapped, and giving the attackers a bleed if they don't cap in X time period for the first few flags to force an assault instead of a camp fest. Give the attackers more tickets or other benefits, but keep the game moving or let the defenders win by defending successfully instead of having to attack.

Snooggums is right in that the assault maps don't actually encourage assault gameplaywise, apart from Muttrah and Beirut (may be others as well) where there is bleed. Easy way to make bleed "delayed" is to give attacker more tickets and bleed from beginning. Example: taking first objective takes 15 minutes normally, bleed is 3 tickets per minute (noticeable but won't stall you if you bleed for 10 extra minutes) and attacking team 50 tickets more. End result you have nice incentive for attacking team to actually attack while it's not one of those game-ending bleeds which are in many maps.

the convention that Mestia used in the old British days was the best imo, flags start neutral, bleed starts when they are capped (militia got rally points at those flags so they spawned there) then just modify tickets to balance

[R-CON]Rudd wrote:the convention that Mestia used in the old British days was the best imo, flags start neutral, bleed starts when they are capped (militia got rally points at those flags so they spawned there) then just modify tickets to balance

I never liked this because it forced the attackers to rush to cap like headless chickens instead of giving them a time frame to attack like a set bleed start timer would allow for. Mestia often ended up with one side of the other having a huge ticket advantage based on the original flags, plus the attackers didn't have to actually push the following the flags to win as long as they held their bleed flags.

Having 5 flags that could be capped, with the first three needing to be capped on each hour and the assaulting team losing if they don't take all the flags would give a much more assault game than any of the prior implementations that I recall. It would also cause more of the map to be played since it wouldn't end up being the first one or two flags that matter for the majority of the game.

Didn't counterattack gamemode in 0.7 have locked flags? Once MEC lost something on Zatar they couldn't cap back..or is that just a distant and distorted memory.

Also....balance is not right on Ochamchira atm, there is no incentive for the militia to attack because they are so poorly equipped to do so. Their little APC vs the British TOW and HAT and LAT kits......however, switch the situation and teams around say.... or just get rid of all 4 flags altogether and make one bigger one in the middle. Hard to cap but once you do, the British stay down.

chimpyang wrote:Didn't counterattack gamemode in 0.7 have locked flags? Once MEC lost something on Zatar they couldn't cap back..or is that just a distant and distorted memory.

Also....balance is not right on Ochamchira atm, there is no incentive for the militia to attack because they are so poorly equipped to do so. Their little APC vs the British TOW and HAT and LAT kits......however, switch the situation and teams around say.... or just get rid of all 4 flags altogether and make one bigger one in the middle. Hard to cap but once you do, the British stay down.

I would also prefer a single large flag for this map, or have the four surrounding flags capable in any order and locked once captured. The current layout requires the two lower flags to be capped first and then held until another lag is turned white. Ugh!

Outside of a "well" coordinate tournament, how often do you see an entire team of people ignore the game for 4 hours? I like winning, but I'm not going to not play for 4 hours to get that win. The system is fine. It's even better than with a bleed, because now action can take place away from flags, and make it more interesting.

Orthas wrote:Easy way to make bleed "delayed" is to give attacker more tickets and bleed from beginning.

Yes and that is taken in mind that the attacker will be unable to stop the bleed until the tickets even out with the other team, which is highly unlikely. What if the attackers stop the bleed at the start? Then you have a team that doesn't bleed tickets, but still has a massive ticket advantage over the defenders.

snooggums wrote:I never liked this because it forced the attackers to rush to cap like headless chickens instead of giving them a time frame to attack like a set bleed start timer would allow for. Mestia often ended up with one side of the other having a huge ticket advantage based on the original flags, plus the attackers didn't have to actually push the following the flags to win as long as they held their bleed flags.

Having 5 flags that could be capped, with the first three needing to be capped on each hour and the assaulting team losing if they don't take all the flags would give a much more assault game than any of the prior implementations that I recall. It would also cause more of the map to be played since it wouldn't end up being the first one or two flags that matter for the majority of the game.

you read my mind.

Have you guys ever played this map on a public server, usually militia fails their first couple of attacks and if they are able to cap a flag they will lose them, cause of the British spawns. I have never seen a full cap by militia in any public game. Adding a bleed to this map will probably be better, it causes the map to be over sooner so we can play the next map. In my opinion this should be changed on the map.


Fighting area for British should be bigger
Flags should be reduces to 3 flags (1SW,1SE,1 middle)
Brits should have a solid spawn on the NW or on a ship, and not on the flags, rally point should be removed
There should be no bleed unless there’s an outpost in the surrounding area(city i.e.).
Militia should have an tickets advantage
U should be able to walk through the water on the west or south west
The roads should be looked at, there going nowhere.

Ochi map ??? which one is that? is that a short for a map ?