LG-MindBullets wrote:
This has always puzzled me. Why do so many servers make it a point not to enter or attack uncaps unless you're spec ops? On any given map where a team has an uncap that team automatically has a HUGE advantage over the defending team without an uncap. The defending team has the potential to lose all their flags so it only seems fair that they should be able to prolong or distract the invasion of their CP's by attacking the uncaps when necessary.
I can understand the validity of this rule as it applies to carriers because it becomes nearly impossible to get off the carrier if your team is unsuccessful at getting or keeping additional flags in the first few minutes of the round but in all other cases there's no reason you shouldn't be able to get out of the uncap. I'd much rather be on a bad team that has an uncap but can't get bases than a bad team that doesn't have an uncap and can't hold onto bases.
To a large extent the root of the problem is that Dice designed several maps that give one team uncaps and not the other. Usually, this can be offset by playing the map for 2 rounds and alternating teams, but it still doesn't adequately address the issue since not all servers play each map for 2 rounds with a team swap between each round. What is the logic behind not allowing attacking of uncaps? I'm not talking about spawn killing, just attacking, destroying, and stealing assets.
It seems that servers are split 50/50 concerning this rule so I tend to play on the servers that don't employ this rule, but as a matter of curiosity I'd like to understand why admins use this rule at all.
True bullet there are alot of opinions about this. I guess alot of people didn't take some time to read the map scenarios and rules provided by Dice.
It is clear to me by analyzing the scenarios Dice didn't intend the games to be even everytime - on about 1/2 the maps they purposely place one team in a slight disadvantage in the beginning. This sets the stage for a "strategic shooter" (level 3-4 shooter) you need to plan and fight your way out of the disadvantage. Most FPS Shooter games before BF2, its all run and gun and level 1-2 shooter tactics. Why does it need to be even in every game? Since when was war even every battle?
These even battle expectations drove some people to demand safe zones in all the maps and used the Admins as hired guns to remove anyone who knows what the terms "offense/defense" "outflank" "raid" or "ambush" etc means. We need the safe zone rules for the people who are challenged at the level 3-4 game or they would just quit and buy something less difficult.
The argument for no camp/rape safe zone tries to blur the lines between spawn camping and stat padding - lol in BF2??? there are squad leaders and several points to spawn at, VoIP and spotting tools so how can someone statpadcamp unless the other team lets them? Let's be honest the best way to pad kill stats (the stats that camping would get you) is to go to a server that has safety fences around spawn points and play Karkand at the Hotel. Base raping is a concept created by the red slash/circle icon on a base. They thought that meant enemy not allowed!
Our solution was to rent our own BF2 server and apply all levels 1-4 strategic shooter rules. It gets insane sometimes with skirmishes at every cap and uncaps blowing up, facing 5 enemy tanks on Jalalabad with none of your own lol it's teamwork or die at that point squad-up and get back in the fight!
Our motto is: Nowhere to run, No place to hide
Added: The funny thing is with no safe zones the spawncampers/base rapers can't do it very long because people know how to deal with them. Camping/Raping only exists on servers who have those rules!!! Campers are fodder for strategic shooters.
Last edited by OpsChief (2006-11-04 10:36:13)
