Project Reality Forums

So i just ranted in Maps Feedback forum about how messed up Op Barracuda flags are and i came to this idea.

Men ofWar, an ww2 RTS, has a combat gamemode in wich 2 or more players are set on a map with no objectives at all, the objective is just kill the opponent the best way you can. While playing that gamemode it "forced" me to set defences in a village or somewhere where its benifitial to me.

So im suggesting a hybrid between CnC and AAS, a free combat mode with 3 starting FOBs per each team, wich would represent objectives, as in CnC.

For every destroyed FOB, the destroying team gets 1 additional FOB avaliable (like current flags, only they can be "moved"), while the team with the destroyed FOB must defend the other 2 or try to destroy an enemy one to gain a free FOB slot). For every lost FOB (completely dissapeared) the team loses 50 tickets, so that there is some point in defending and overrunning "objectives" not just plain killing, wich results in a bit more centralised fighting as now with flags. Now theres a problem. Why would a team want to place FOBs wich potentially cost them 50 tickets as they can just sit at main shooting out.

Therefore i'm suggesting gaining 40 tickets when placing a fob, so there is a benefit of having a fob set up for those extra tickets but there is also a chance of losing them if not defended.

How to make this thing more AAS style not vanilla random flag system. First only 2 FOBs are "necesarry" (the bleed wouldnt be hard on only 1 fob but just to remind you that you dont have 2(nothing that should make you go OMG the bleed will be our defeat!)), so its not CnC for kids but it doesnt split up the team in 3 parts, but the third FOB can be placed to gain tickets but you obviously put it at risk by either not defending it or put others at risk by reducing the man count on each of them.

Another thing is the rambo FOB runners (go past everybody knife theFOB, gtfo/die, problem solved), wich would be solved by FOB being destructable by C4 ONLY!, that would require more time to do it resulting in requiring more enemies cleared out wich represents seizing an area.

CO bzuild order needs to be introduced.

The predefined spawnpoints on maps like Barracuda (beaches) and such would stay to represent the land being in one teams hands.

Pros
- More "sandbox" element
- Promotes commander work
- More strategy involved on a bigger scale
- Recon elements come into play
- Possible slowig down in the gameplay
- Pretty much removes rushing

Cons
- Unorganized team
- Having no CO would hurt the gameplay
- Unrealistic troop insertion (going behind enemy and enemy going behind you)
- BF2 "flag" system without order.

Will add more later if needed...

I would love to see this thing tested (If you approve and work on it obviously) like you tested it with the RP system, shouldnt include much more than tweaking CnC, i hope.

Wait... that might be awesome. Seriously. Something like "random" King of The Hill.

Make sure we start with 30 tickets (no ticket loss for death). Build a FOB = +40 tickets. Lose a FOB = -50 tickets. Destroy enemy FOB = +10 tickets (one more FOB).

How about that?

Current CnC is random king of the hill...

Also tickets for kills should be still in, so you can win by killing. Destroying FOBs only gets you the better areas and make the enym lose tickets.

Also edited first post with changes.

I like this idea. Although why is slowing down the gameplay a good thing :S

Not slowing down the combat itself but rather eliminating the sensless rush to a flag without rushing, ofcourse it would slow down the game play at the start when you dont know where the enemy positions are but once you do it should be the same as the current system.

Just tought about something. How to make this thing more AAS style not vanilla random flag system. First only 2 FOBs are "necesarry" (the bleed wouldnt be hard on only 1 fob but just to remind you that you dont have 2), so its not CnC for kids but it doesnt split up the team in 3 parts, but the third FOB can be placed to gain tickets but you obviously put it at risk by either not defending it or put others at risk by reducing the man count on each of them.

Another thing is the rambo FOB runners (go past everybody knife theFOB, gtfo/die, problem solved), wich would be solved by FOB being destructable by C4 ONLY!, that would require more time to do it resulting in requiring more enemies cleared out wich represents seizing an area.

ChizNizzle wrote:
wich would be solved by FOB being destructable by C4 ONLY!, that would require more time to do it resulting in requiring more enemies cleared out wich represents seizing an area.

Defintley agree and that point if the FOB should be only destryed by C4 its wat too arcady the way peole just run up and knife also the combat eginner kit needs more attention. Maybe make a suggestion for the C4

I really don't see too much of a difference compared to the regular CnC mode. but I do like the idea of a combat engineer being needed to kill a firebase and think this would be a good addition to CnC mode but not in regular AAS

Me likez the ideaz!
It is something different, cause you pretty much make your own flags/outposts/hideouts or whatever you wanna call it. So it all depends on the commander where he wants those flags/outposts/hideouts. Which is kinda realistic!

I like it.

i do like it but commander build order will be needed to be re-introduced again

Katanama wrote:I really don't see too much of a difference compared to the regular CnC mode. but I do like the idea of a combat engineer being needed to kill a firebase and think this would be a good addition to CnC mode but not in regular AAS

Depends how you look at it...

mikeyboyz wrote:Me likez the ideaz!
It is something different, cause you pretty much make your own flags/outposts/hideouts or whatever you wanna call it. So it all depends on the commander where he wants those flags/outposts/hideouts. Which is kinda realistic!

I like it.

This shouldnt be something different, should be something primary.

killonsight95 wrote:i do like it but commander build order will be needed to be re-introduced again

That is needed indeed.

myles wrote:Defintley agree and that point if the FOB should be only destryed by C4 its wat too arcady the way peole just run up and knife also the combat eginner kit needs more attention. Maybe make a suggestion for the C4

Then all Officer (?) kits should have C4, otherwise the enemy team has a simple task: hide and kill the CE when he gets to the FOB...

or we could just reduce the amount of riflemen with incendary? and still use them? and make a 5-10 second animation for dropping them?

goguapsy wrote:Then all Officer (?) kits should have C4, otherwise the enemy team has a simple task: hide and kill the CE when he gets to the FOB...

How about dont get your CE killed.

You see thats exactly what im talking about, NO rushing, take your time, get 2 squads + support, make sure CE doesnt get killed otherwise youre in somewhat of a deep sh*t if they find it.

Incase enemy gets your CE kit then that means you fail at this game completely by rushing/not saving him/getting his kit and in the end you have the secondary objective to get your CE kit back while enemies have 3 or 4!

It makes sense, think twice before you write some nonsense please because i invested some time to make this suggestion.

ok, what if some ********* comes on and takes the damn CE kit(s)?

Not cool if we have a fuzzy griefer hanging aroudn the server, and those ******** are hardcoded...********.

Otherwise this would be an excellent gamemode for private engagements.

However this seems too much like CnC, a CnCv2 perhaps, because the objective is still the FOB.

Douchebags ruined the game before, ruin the game now and they will keep ruining it... its how it is.

And also FoBs arent the objectives, killing the enemy team is the objective, FoBs are just a chance to fortify positions that will make it easier to kill enemy team. It is an objective if desired but not so important as in CnC.

ChizNizzle wrote:Douchebags ruined the game before, ruin the game now and they will keep ruining it... its how it is.

Smacktards can ruin the game, make it barely unplayable.

But here they make it truly unplayable. It's a different concept which good admin'ing wouldn't solve.

Katanama wrote:I really don't see too much of a difference compared to the regular CnC mode.

To me, when I read it, the difference was that the initial FOBs spawn on their own, which would be great.

Sounds sexy, and the C4 part is great, you would just need to change up kits slightly or something. Damn this is a good idea.

smacktards will ruin a game no matter how much protection you put up they will find a way! if thats an arguement then lets remove AAS because people can fly heli's into the ground and loose points or they can block off bridges so you can cross them?

Startrekern wrote:To me, when I read it, the difference was that the initial FOBs spawn on their own, which would be great.

You are a bad reader.

CO places(approves) FOB placement.

And the smacktards issue, its the same as HAT kits with insurgency, but how come insurgency is still with us?