Discontinue "Combat Zones" & "Spawn Protection"
- Thread starter 009
- Start date
Because then you'll be able to capture it the instant it unlocks, "which, in turn, severely erodes a serious FPS's authenticity and, more importantly, corrupts its enjoyment." Backcapping is not fun for anyone and is borderline cheating.
Although I do agree with your idea on invincibility frames for spawn protection. It's no less "tyrannical and despotic", but it'll still do the job of deterring spawncampers.
Upvote
0
^^^^
More immersion breaking to have the point behind you taken because nobody was there due to the fact its in the opposite direction they have to be going when they spawn.
Upvote
0
I will, once again, offer a perspective from someone who enjoys garnering a high score, kill streaks, and map-winning flanking maneuvers. I do not play for immersion solely, but it certainly adds the list of things I like about TW's game series.
First, I can concede the point that spawn camping is not fun for people who are being spawn camped, even though I would definitely do it if it was allowed
.
There needs to be a compromise between having a poisonous boundary directly following the capture point, and allowing either team to enter each other's spawn zones.
-The problem with the boundary so close after a cap zone is that the attackers will have a much more difficult time taking the point. For instance, if the defenders could set up a line of defense just inside their safe zone while barraging the offensive team with all of their resources, there would be no fear of close combat attackers or flanking maneuvers. I'm not saying that it would be impossible for the attackers to win. Rather, I'm saying it gives the defenders an advantage to move the safe zone up so far as adjacent to the cap point. It already takes skilled players considerable effort to flank so far back as to take out the trenches full of snipers, light machine gunners, and mortar teams.
-The problem with having no boundaries is obviously spawn killing and to a lesser extent, capping the next point with no resistance. As much as the fps warmonger in me enjoys racking up more kills, having no boundaries would allow spawn killing to an extent beyond being excessive. For instance, in RS, I could grab a flamethrower and wait at the next spawn and probably roast at least two waves before the enemy team could do anything about it. Meanwhile, my team would be sprinting forward to join me in my spawn killing efforts.
A compromise that a no-limits leaning gamer like myself would be willing to live with is opening up two cap points at a time, which allows for capping the next point if the attackers are doing well, but also employing anti-steamroll mechanisms. The defenders' spawn would be directly behind the second point, and inaccessible to the attackers, though still reasonably close to the first point. That way, the attackers can still flank and engage the first line of defense however they see fit. If the attackers are back-capping too fast (capping the next point with 20 seconds of capping the previous point), I would be ok with a barrier going up for the attackers until a high percentage of the defending team has spawned for ~15 seconds so that a real line of defense can be created. The attackers would still be rewarded with 2-3 cap points captured quickly while the defense would be allowed to regroup.
First, I can concede the point that spawn camping is not fun for people who are being spawn camped, even though I would definitely do it if it was allowed
.There needs to be a compromise between having a poisonous boundary directly following the capture point, and allowing either team to enter each other's spawn zones.
-The problem with the boundary so close after a cap zone is that the attackers will have a much more difficult time taking the point. For instance, if the defenders could set up a line of defense just inside their safe zone while barraging the offensive team with all of their resources, there would be no fear of close combat attackers or flanking maneuvers. I'm not saying that it would be impossible for the attackers to win. Rather, I'm saying it gives the defenders an advantage to move the safe zone up so far as adjacent to the cap point. It already takes skilled players considerable effort to flank so far back as to take out the trenches full of snipers, light machine gunners, and mortar teams.
-The problem with having no boundaries is obviously spawn killing and to a lesser extent, capping the next point with no resistance. As much as the fps warmonger in me enjoys racking up more kills, having no boundaries would allow spawn killing to an extent beyond being excessive. For instance, in RS, I could grab a flamethrower and wait at the next spawn and probably roast at least two waves before the enemy team could do anything about it. Meanwhile, my team would be sprinting forward to join me in my spawn killing efforts.
A compromise that a no-limits leaning gamer like myself would be willing to live with is opening up two cap points at a time, which allows for capping the next point if the attackers are doing well, but also employing anti-steamroll mechanisms. The defenders' spawn would be directly behind the second point, and inaccessible to the attackers, though still reasonably close to the first point. That way, the attackers can still flank and engage the first line of defense however they see fit. If the attackers are back-capping too fast (capping the next point with 20 seconds of capping the previous point), I would be ok with a barrier going up for the attackers until a high percentage of the defending team has spawned for ~15 seconds so that a real line of defense can be created. The attackers would still be rewarded with 2-3 cap points captured quickly while the defense would be allowed to regroup.
Upvote
0
I have no idea how anything you said is related to this discussion.
Do we really need artificial limits just because "every game before had them"? Well, Joint Operations didn't. It effectively also didn't have any map boundaries and it worked like a charm. Damn I miss that game.
Upvote
0
If you must. There must also be better ways to do it.
I see no problem here. I find the whole "capture the area" thing quite unrealistic. There should be more realistic goals.
Upvote
0
In reality you would fear for your life, and in the game you don't. The measures taken above in some way compensate for that; you aren't going to rush thru the enemy lines all alone and without your squad (and most likely against orders) and act like Johnny Rambo.
I support the spawn protections and map boundaries, although I have thought all the advancing minefields that force the defenders out of a captured objective highly excessive and not needed. They were almost never incorporated into RO Ostfront.
Upvote
0
I see no problem here. I find the whole "capture the area" thing quite unrealistic. There should be more realistic goals.
TERRITORIES
-Capture Zones
-Fixed Spawns
-Spawn Protection
FIREFIGHT
-Open map
-No designated objectives
-Randomized spawns
-No spawn protection
Good lord, it's like none of you people have ever played a FF or CD map before.
Upvote
0
What I didn't like about FireFight in RO2/RS is that they totally toned down the classes, everyone is playing full auto weapons and the spawns are making it boring.
I remember playing TDM in CoD1 & 2 and it was a lot of more fun. Somehow it remained a front and structure on the map.
Upvote
0
I've got no problem with minimal spawn protection, ie enemy bullets have no effect etc.
I've never liked the RSOD and especially how it was implemented after a cap fell. Retreat, get shot in the back or blow up? I usually chose to stay and kill a few unsuspecting enemy who rushed after my comrades. I understand why you need to limit areas on the map either to keep people out of spawns or from backcapping, but there are better ways to do it IMO. I would much prefer that you simply can't reload and limit mg's to 20 rounds or so. Incentive enough to get out, but with enough freedom to keep things lively if you so choose. Want to flank and annoy the enemy rushing out of spawn and up to the cap? You just lost your cap and you're in a nice defensive spot? Have at it, just make every shot count.
I've never liked the RSOD and especially how it was implemented after a cap fell. Retreat, get shot in the back or blow up? I usually chose to stay and kill a few unsuspecting enemy who rushed after my comrades. I understand why you need to limit areas on the map either to keep people out of spawns or from backcapping, but there are better ways to do it IMO. I would much prefer that you simply can't reload and limit mg's to 20 rounds or so. Incentive enough to get out, but with enough freedom to keep things lively if you so choose. Want to flank and annoy the enemy rushing out of spawn and up to the cap? You just lost your cap and you're in a nice defensive spot? Have at it, just make every shot count.
Upvote
0
I bet nobody would complain nearly as much if you got killed by ambient artillery each time you stepped out of bounds.
Or a random land mine.
Or a random land mine.
Upvote
0
I think this is one of the better suggestions that compliments what it sounds like the devs are doing. Give the person the ability to fire off what they have(or a limited portion). Thus giving them some room to fight to retreat. But not give the ability for someone to overboard.
Upvote
0
I've always liked minefields as a boundary. I would think that you could create minefields that were in either an active state or inactive depending on who owned a cap.
Last edited:
Upvote
0
Map artillery and minefields shouldn't be turned on and off imo. But it's a good map boundary and worked well in CoD1 & 2.
Upvote
0
Good point, that would be way more immersive. But still you should be aware of these dangers before entering the dangerous area...
Upvote
0
LugNut;n2157374 said:
I think an even better way to handle it would be simply prevent the defenders from moving back into the zone, but until all the defenders are cleared out, there would be an indicator to the attackers that some enemies are lurking still. Automatic spawning wouldn't move up to the new spawn zone until you'd cleared it, but you could choose to ignore that and spawn forward at your own risk.
Upvote
0