Battlefield 3 - Main Thread

2011-06-28 14:22:04

#3801

-Sh1fty-: plundering yee booty; +510|5512|Ventura, California

You could add a new gameplay mode called "Politically correct."

It actually could be pretty interesting if they made destroying a certain place give negative points, but not doing so makes victory more difficult. I can't think of a situation off the top of my head but I think that could be fun.

Like if you destroy this one building, you get negative points, but if you don't you have to go around it through chokepoints or something...I donno.

And above your tomb, the stars will belong to us.

2011-06-28 14:31:54

#3802

m3thod: All kiiiiiiiiinds of gainz; +2,197|6709|UK

lets not

and don't quit your day job

Blackbelts are just whitebelts who have never quit.

2011-06-28 14:44:41

#3803

globefish23: sophisticated slacker; +334|6362|Graz, Austria

-Sh1fty- wrote:
You could add a new gameplay mode called "Politically correct."

It actually could be pretty interesting if they made destroying a certain place give negative points, but not doing so makes victory more difficult. I can't think of a situation off the top of my head but I think that could be fun.

Like if you destroy this one building, you get negative points, but if you don't you have to go around it through chokepoints or something...I donno.

Yeah, and if you don't arrest disarmed enemy combatants, but instead shoot them or if you torture POWs and make silly photographs, you get court-martialed and get dishonourably discharged and can never get any achievements, medals or ranks with that account.

2011-06-28 19:29:06

#3804

-Sh1fty-: plundering yee booty; +510|5512|Ventura, California

You're going over the top. Don't be a dickhead.

Just saying, your team could have to make a decision which path to take.

And above your tomb, the stars will belong to us.

2011-06-28 20:04:24

#3805

Jaekus: I'm the matchstick that you'll never lose; +957|5217|Sydney

m3thod wrote:
lets not

and don't quit your day job

2011-06-29 02:15:36

#3806

RDMC: Enemy Wheelbarrow Spotted..!!; +736|6603|Area 51

-Sh1fty- wrote:
You're going over the top. Don't be a dickhead.

Just saying, your team could have to make a decision which path to take.

Wouldn't work as nobody would be willing to play as the US anymore with their ROE and possibly a billion negative points. Everyone would play as rebels and blow everything up.

2011-06-29 08:54:59

#3807

Trotskygrad: бля; +354|6037|Vortex Ring State

RDMC wrote:
-Sh1fty- wrote:
You're going over the top. Don't be a dickhead.

Just saying, your team could have to make a decision which path to take.
Wouldn't work as nobody would be willing to play as the US anymore with their ROE and possibly a billion negative points. Everyone would play as rebels and blow everything up.

could apply RoE to rebels as well, they don't want to lose their base of support, xD

2011-06-29 09:36:24

#3808

Ilocano: buuuurrrrrrppppp.......; +341|6705

RDMC wrote:
-Sh1fty- wrote:
You're going over the top. Don't be a dickhead.

Just saying, your team could have to make a decision which path to take.
Wouldn't work as nobody would be willing to play as the US anymore with their ROE and possibly a billion negative points. Everyone would play as rebels and blow everything up.

Ah, but the rebels wouldn't have air support, satellites, UAV, armor, advance weaponry, and general overwhelming power/numbers as it is in real life. They would only have AK's, IED's and RPG's for the most part.

2011-06-29 09:38:57

#3809

RTHKI: mmmf mmmf mmmf; +1,736|6775|Oxferd Ohire

http://www.southparkstudios.com/clips/1 … ght-for-us

2011-06-29 09:42:57

#3810

Trotskygrad: бля; +354|6037|Vortex Ring State

Ilocano wrote:
RDMC wrote:
-Sh1fty- wrote:
You're going over the top. Don't be a dickhead.

Just saying, your team could have to make a decision which path to take.
Wouldn't work as nobody would be willing to play as the US anymore with their ROE and possibly a billion negative points. Everyone would play as rebels and blow everything up.
Ah, but the rebels wouldn't have air support, satellites, UAV, armor, advance weaponry, and general overwhelming power/numbers as it is in real life. They would only have AK's, IED's and RPG's for the most part.

exactly, less penalties for the rebels in exchange for their technological inferiority

unless... we're doing the entire MEC thing all over again where we're facing regular troops armed with rifles in 5.56 NATO, xD

2011-06-29 09:46:27

#3811

RDMC: Enemy Wheelbarrow Spotted..!!; +736|6603|Area 51

Ilocano wrote:
RDMC wrote:
-Sh1fty- wrote:
You're going over the top. Don't be a dickhead.

Just saying, your team could have to make a decision which path to take.
Wouldn't work as nobody would be willing to play as the US anymore with their ROE and possibly a billion negative points. Everyone would play as rebels and blow everything up.
Ah, but the rebels wouldn't have air support, satellites, UAV, armor, advance weaponry, and general overwhelming power/numbers as it is in real life. They would only have AK's, IED's and RPG's for the most part.

But then everyone would be like 'OMG DIES GAEM.. IT IS NUT BALANCED'

2011-06-29 10:49:55

#3812

-Sh1fty-: plundering yee booty; +510|5512|Ventura, California

Pity, well it could be an added gameplay mode, doesn't have to be the one and only mode like Bf2's conquest.

And above your tomb, the stars will belong to us.

2011-06-29 11:29:03

#3813

krazed: Admiral of the Bathtub; +619|6818|Great Brown North

-Sh1fty- wrote:
You could add a new gameplay mode called "Politically correct."

It actually could be pretty interesting if they made destroying a certain place give negative points, but not doing so makes victory more difficult. I can't think of a situation off the top of my head but I think that could be fun.

Like if you destroy this one building, you get negative points, but if you don't you have to go around it through chokepoints or something...I donno.

lol, that would be infested with trolls blowing up the shit you're supposed to save

2011-06-29 11:33:21

#3814

Ilocano: buuuurrrrrrppppp.......; +341|6705

Imagine a capture the flag mode where the insurgents run into a Mosque and you can't follow.

But really, if there was really a full on US versus MEC conflict, will religious considerations be sidelined?

2011-06-29 12:59:16

#3815

RDMC: Enemy Wheelbarrow Spotted..!!; +736|6603|Area 51

Ilocano wrote:
Imagine a capture the flag mode where the insurgents run into a Mosque and you can't follow.

But really, if there was really a full on US versus MEC conflict, will religious considerations be sidelined?

You mean in real life?

Because if you do, I remember this documentary on Discovery, I think it was about some battle in Iraq. US Marines were tasked with clearing a town of insurgents however were not allowed to damage the town's mosque and eventually succeeded in the mission without damaging it..

However I think it is entirely dependent on the background of the war, since in Iraq they were supposed to conquer the minds and hearts of the locals (among other missions) as in a full out conflict I reckon the primary goal would be: Obliterate the enemy

2011-06-29 13:38:11

#3816

Eagle: Togs8896 is my evil alter ego; +567|6669|New Hampshire, USA

RDMC wrote:
Ilocano wrote:
Imagine a capture the flag mode where the insurgents run into a Mosque and you can't follow.

But really, if there was really a full on US versus MEC conflict, will religious considerations be sidelined?
You mean in real life?

Because if you do, I remember this documentary on Discovery, I think it was about some battle in Iraq. US Marines were tasked with clearing a town of insurgents however were not allowed to damage the town's mosque and eventually succeeded in the mission without damaging it..

However I think it is entirely dependent on the background of the war, since in Iraq they were supposed to conquer the minds and hearts of the locals (among other missions) as in a full out conflict I reckon the primary goal would be: Obliterate the enemy

That actually sounds like it would be an interesting game mode, kind of like shify's idea. Like imagine conquest assault maps, karkand for example, where you have a task associated with the mission, such as not damaging the mosque. If your team wins and completes the secondary objectives you get extra points or something, but nothing so big that it dtracts from gameplay. Wouold be interesting imo, especially with the destruction of the frostbite engine.

https://static.bf2s.com/files/user/14407/Sig_Pats.jpg

2011-06-29 17:56:40

#3817

NeXuS: Shock it till ya know it; +375|6380|Atlanta, Georgia

I'd be the faggot to lob tank rounds into the mosque 10 seconds into the game from spawn.

2011-06-29 17:59:25

#3818

Ilocano: buuuurrrrrrppppp.......; +341|6705

I'd wager Mosques will be indestructible on BF3. Sprites, yes. See-through holes, no.

2011-06-29 21:38:12

#3819

-Sh1fty-: plundering yee booty; +510|5512|Ventura, California

NeXuS wrote:
I'd be the faggot to lob tank rounds into the mosque 10 seconds into the game from spawn.

ditto

And above your tomb, the stars will belong to us.

2011-06-30 02:01:29

#3820

globefish23: sophisticated slacker; +334|6362|Graz, Austria

Let's step realism up a notch:

Terrorists have the ability to use civilians as human shields for defending objectives.
If civilians die, the terrorists can blame the US army, which will give them even more negative points than destroying mosques.
If no civilians die, terrorists can kill them themselves and then blame the US army, which will give them even more negative points than destroying mosques.

On the other hand, the US have the ability to use spin doctors, war mongers and weapon lobbyists to manipulate politics and media, to allow them the use of shady and illegal tactics like finding solid evidence for WMDs, waterboarding, phosphorous ammo and renegade kill teams, the latter which can kill civilians without anyone noticing (and without negative points).

2011-06-30 05:26:35

#3821

Trotskygrad: бля; +354|6037|Vortex Ring State

globefish23 wrote:
Let's step realism up a notch:

Terrorists have the ability to use civilians as human shields for defending objectives.
If civilians die, the terrorists can blame the US army, which will give them even more negative points than destroying mosques.
If no civilians die, terrorists can kill them themselves and then blame the US army, which will give them even more negative points than destroying mosques.

On the other hand, the US have the ability to use spin doctors, war mongers and weapon lobbyists to manipulate politics and media, to allow them the use of shady and illegal tactics like finding solid evidence for WMDs, waterboarding, phosphorous ammo and renegade kill teams, the latter which can kill civilians without anyone noticing (and without negative points).

yeah watch everyone rush to fill the PMC squad... xD

however I doubt the US military will be fighting irregular "insurgent" forces, we'll probably be facing MEC/Russian regular forces.

That "rebel" shit can wait for the SF expansion pack!

2011-06-30 05:28:12

#3822

Dilbert_X: The X stands for; +1,810|6144|eXtreme to the maX

Ilocano wrote:
Imagine a capture the flag mode where the insurgents run into a Mosque and you can't follow.

But really, if there was really a full on US versus MEC conflict, will religious considerations be sidelined?

How about the insurgents can have claymores, rpgs, remote controlled C4 and AT mines but coalition forces can't?

Русский военный корабль, иди на хуй!

2011-06-30 05:53:20

#3823

Jaekus: I'm the matchstick that you'll never lose; +957|5217|Sydney

How about claymore/C4 only servers?

2011-06-30 07:21:25

#3824

M.O.A.B: 'Light 'em up!'; +1,220|6261|Escea

AK47's for everyone!

2011-06-30 08:29:16

#3825

RDMC: Enemy Wheelbarrow Spotted..!!; +736|6603|Area 51

M.O.A.B wrote:
AK47's for everyone!

Hurraaaaay

BF2S Forums Battlefield 3 - Main Thread

-Sh1fty- wrote:

m3thod wrote:

-Sh1fty- wrote:

RDMC wrote:

-Sh1fty- wrote:

RDMC wrote:

-Sh1fty- wrote:

Ilocano wrote:

RDMC wrote:

-Sh1fty- wrote:

Ilocano wrote:

RDMC wrote:

-Sh1fty- wrote:

-Sh1fty- wrote:

Ilocano wrote:

RDMC wrote:

Ilocano wrote:

NeXuS wrote:

globefish23 wrote:

Ilocano wrote:

M.O.A.B wrote:

Board footer