Poll

Remove or keep crossed flag rule on 762 servers?

Remove
55 (76.4%)
Keep
17 (23.6%)

Total Members Voted: 71

Voting closed: 06-08-2012, 21:08:45

Author Topic: Rule against attacking crossed flags on 762 Servers / Ban of sheikyerbouti  (Read 13081 times)

Offline psykfallet

  • FH-Betatester
  • ***
  • Posts: 578
    • View Profile
some seems to think this rule is also on 96 test server, it isnt is it? Was a lot of whining yesterday. Because I know devs are against this rule.



Offline McCloskey

  • Developer
  • ******
  • Posts: 1.298
  • Heart or head, either way Jerry's dead!
    • View Profile
What the most people tend to forget, is the quiet realistic tactic of retreat. But only a few people do this and the only tactic that seems to be known is to attack, attack and once more ... attack. Defending in FH2 isn't interesting for the majority - atleast that's my experience. When I am the SL I give my squad the order to fall back.

That's because falling back has no real meaning in the game because you can always just spawn on the nearest flag after you die, UNLESS the flag behind you you want to spawn on is being capped by the enemy and it would mean your team (you) would have to regain the once held position again.

Offline [130.Pz]S.Lainer

  • FH-Betatester
  • ***
  • Posts: 1.934
    • View Profile
    • 130th
  I don't really give two shits for 7.62 or its lame rules but I scrolled through all this crap looking for a colorful post by shiek. ;D

I am more then just a little disappointed.  :(
http://www.bfewaw.com/campaigns/waw24/promo/campaign/waw24banner1.png
The purpose of this deployment was to "annoy and defy the United States ... on her with Bofors 40 mm guns from a range of 650

Offline THeTA0123

  • The north remembers
  • Masterspammer
  • ****
  • Posts: 16.842
    • View Profile
  I don't really give two shits for 7.62 or its lame rules but I scrolled through all this crap looking for a colorful post by shiek. ;D

I am more then just a little disappointed.  :(
Same here :(

But i to am for removing this rule. I was almost kicked several days ago when i was doing a heroic defense on st vith...When suddently like half the german army came and capped the last flag of the first defense line....I saw like 10 enemies immediatly coming my way wich i heroicly defeated with all of my ammo (i was anti-tank kit)

Then they start to bitch because i was "Supposedly" attacking the uncap :/

REMOVE!
-i am fairly sure that if they took porn off the internet, there would only be one website left and it would be called bring back the porn "Perry cox, Scrubs.

Offline hitm4k3r

  • Developer
  • ******
  • Posts: 1.123
    • View Profile
What is more important is the question what works in practice and what not. I see people asking to skip a certain map because one side gets raped on the exit of their base. Best example is St. Vith. We emptied a server by playing this map to the very end on the 762 #1 with german soldiers never being able to leave the base and get raped while spawning in their base.

People have to get rid of the way of thinking, that the Devs are always right with their design desicions and have to start to give their honest feedback. Because I don't think that the devs had in mind to empty a server while playing a certain map. In this case their design desicions failed and this has nothing to do with 762 servers offering a certain set of rules or not. Same goes for the tanking system and that many things got nerfed in 2.45 (artillery for example). Maps got changed and tweaked to death, where no tweak was needed from the gameplay POV - Meuse River is a good example. Than more I play 2.45, than more I wish 2.4 back tbh - with some changes made in 2.45 ofcourse.

2.4 felt like a revolution in playing FH2 and in playing shooter games in general for me. 2.45 feels like a step backwards besides some little improvements that took almost a year. We had extremely good player counts with 2.4 after the release for several months. Now - two weeks after the release of 2.45 - we have almost the same playercount as before 2.45 with a little gleam of hope caused by the 96 player code.


That's just a little advise how to argue about it so please don't take it offensive - not just throw in "the devs don't want it". Errare humanum est - and the devs are also humans and can make mistakes too though some things about this mod seem to be from another world quality wise and in a positive way.

Now back on topic, but please with practical reasons.  ;)
« Last Edit: 29-07-2012, 16:07:33 by 5hitm4k3r »

Offline Kev4000

  • Developer
  • ******
  • Posts: 1.039
  • FH2 "special" coder
    • View Profile
I hope the ban isn't for long - people get aggravated and say stuff without thinking through. No reason to issue a ban for more then a day unless its repeated/constant. As among the most populated servers, 762 has a responsibility to not shun otherwise good players from the community. Permabans or year+ bans should be used on confirmed hackers.

As for attacking uncaps, devs don't have a consensus on it. My personal opinion?
Stealing the flak vierling on mareth before a single outpost is capped? Warning then kick then if repeated ban 2 hours. Increased duration for each repeat.
Rushing through an outpost with an APC on the way to flank a captureable one, killing 5 guys in the uncap base on the way: Flanking maneuver not intentionally camping an uncap.

Typically, attacking the uncaps presents little problem. It'll do no good for attackers, the manpower could be used elsewhere. Most of the time it'll give the attacking team more of a disadvantage.
There's more reason to kick someone attacking an uncap because he is not helping his team, instead of kicking him for killing defenders in their base.

It presents a large grey-area, and the vast majority of the cases should not call for a kick. Without more clarification to the grey area, I'd vote for removing the rule. Intent is key.

Offline hitm4k3r

  • Developer
  • ******
  • Posts: 1.123
    • View Profile
I don't know whether I am right about this, but I witnessed this situation yesterday via TS. Sheik got several warnings not to attack an uncap, and in the last instance Odium joint his squad to talk to him about this situation.
It is like driving drunk. You aren't allowed to do so, but if you do it - then you have to life with the consequences. Atleast that's my point of view. Most people "respect" this rule and act according to it on the server. It is a rules where you have to act with common sense as an admin and not abuse it and admins are called upon to do so.
I drove with my StuH to lambert north yesterday though it was crossed out, just to get behind Unique who was camping on his usual spot and I simply had no other chance. I think nobody got ever kicked for such moves and I think it is out of question that you can do it.

But I also experienced situations, that weren't fun at all for many people and where people were abusing the push mode and the gameplay mechanics to an extent where fair play ends for sure. Best example was St. Lo in 2.4. In several matches there was a grey flag that locked the last german flag for the allied team. But instead of caping the grey flag and end up the round many allied players were using this situation to push their score. Zykloon got warned to not arty this crossed out flag over ten minutes but he had nothing better to do than raping the spawning inf. The tanks weren't moving to the mentioned grey flag to cap it, but kept on raping spawning inf as well. After Zykloon and other players got kicked, he came back to the server and started a flame war against Gotkai (who was enforcing the rule with the right sensibility) and insulted other players aswell. For this he got a two weeks ban and if you ask me with right. One game night ended on Sidi Rezegh because one side was using the game to it's full potential.

These are extreme examples, but they nevertheless happen. And only because of these situations I support this rule. When a player isn't able to play the game itslef anymore because he got killed the moment he spawns in his base, you can shut down the servers. Players are evil  >:(

Offline KnowYourEnemy123

  • Newbie
  • *
  • Posts: 37
    • View Profile
Wow so many people for removing...

Don't remove it. It's stupid, and will only result in stats whores camping and just being annoying.

If removed, what's going to happen to hurtgen forest's final sections ? Every German is, and should be defending the uncapturable flag ( can't remember the name ) which is already very hard to hold on to. Before the flag is capture, a full american squad goes to germeter while it's still uncap and take position in one of the houses. When the the uncappable flag goes down, germans fall back and germeter goes down 10 seconds later. Germans lose.

Removing the rule makes no sense at all. What about Bastogne ? I can see a german squad destroying every american tank in the base before they get out of there.

Offline Ts4EVER

  • Banner of THeTA0123
  • Developer
  • ******
  • Posts: 7.812
    • View Profile
Isn't there a delay now on Hurtgen? Something like 30 seconds before the flag gets unlocked?

Offline hyperanthropos

  • Jr. Member
  • **
  • Posts: 338
    • View Profile
The reaction in the forum which is vastly different from the actual and complete Fh community is of course obvious. In my opinion the only people who activly attack uncaps are either noobs or stat whores. Of course there are certain situations in which a flag gets back capped and a squad ends up in a uncap flag, but when there is no hope to backcapped flag gets capped by your team again, of you should get out of there and attack the backcapped falg again!
Its not stupid to have such a rule it just corrects the ignorance, stupuidity or lack of understanding of players. I have read this so often in this forum "I dont want my movement to be restricted", when you are attacking an uncap flag you are a useless player for your team (in the majority of cases, or course the exeptions). I think its just a excuse to stick to your usual game style or a lack of understnading of the map. "Sneaking" behind lines is in the most cases just lame like S mining spawnpoints... be all know those guys. Having a squad camping in an uncao falg very often results an a loss of a huge part of the intended gameplay if the map, when the first falg get capped and the second (former uncap) gets also capped right away. Is this how the map should be played? Certainly not!

I think and always thougt this rule corrects maps and behavior of players. Its a great and needed addition, which Fh as it comes form the Devs lacks, please dont remove it. Atleast not on the bases of this forum, way to much 762 haters etc.

It  has always been a reason for me to play 762 rather than hslan and its great to have a chance to decide which kind of gameplay you like. The lack of this rule made certain maps on hslan very bad for me, some vastly annoying.

For those you want to rule removed I can only say one thing. Get hslan going again. pretty sure it hasnt been really up also more then two weeks after the release 2.45 you have a great hslan fanbase here it has to be possible. Never been a great hslan fan as I said, but I still somehow miss the server.
NOT REMOVE


Offline Strat_84

  • FH-Betatester
  • ***
  • Posts: 369
  • Lemming Chieftain
    • View Profile
The problem I see with removing this rule is that some of the maps will clearly loose their charm. Best example is Hurtgen Forest. Simply camp with one single guy in Germeter the whole round and open up a squad if it becomes capable.

If one guy manages to sneak there, going through the bunkers, MGs and the entire German team, then he deserves to cap Germeter with this trick. Not that I really approve this way to play but that's the kind of thing almost impossible to achieve if the players in front aren't completely retarded.


Offline kingtiger1891

  • Jr. Member
  • **
  • Posts: 458
    • View Profile
Some experience on 762:

Fall of Tobruk: Driving pzIVF1 and attacking the last British cp, then British stole harbour and their last cp became crossed out. I was immediatly warned by an admin(on British team of course) that I must leave and stop attacking the crossed out cp. Why I can't just wait for my teammates to capture harbour again and continue suppressing the enemy?

Hurtgen: American captured their second last flag and armor start spawning on German side, so I grab a Stuka zu fus and fire to the American cp, I get kicked. Because that cp can't be recaptured and it's crossed out. So what can axis team do now? According to this rule they can't attack any enemy cp atm while the American can attack their last flag. If it's for the sake of spawn raping prevention then the rule can just prevent spawn raping on one side, fair?

The most serious problem is how the admin judge people on this rule, IMO some admin judge on their interest only.

Goodwood: Grab a Panther and killed an admin, he's on the very edge of blue abc line, I got kicked. We all know how Goodwood looks like, so what if I take a few step backward, drive inside red abc line and shoot enemy from there? If I got kicked for killing people on the edge of blue line, people who try to attack me in red line should be kicked too? But I don't think the admin would do a damn thing if I get killed.


But this rule has its place, playing Mereth line you would hate those d*ck who steal flak, put mines on Gabes before Mareth is even captured, or playing Falaise and someone sneak into allied cp, steal 6pdrs and shoot Shermans when they're just a few meters out of base. So how about changing this rule to: Don't mine or steal vehicles in crossed out.
« Last Edit: 29-07-2012, 19:07:46 by kingtiger1891 »

Offline TASSER

  • Jr. Member
  • **
  • Posts: 625
    • View Profile
I feel it is more annoying and game-ruining to constantly see in chat "DON'T ATTACK UNCAP. READ THE RULES."

I've noticed that uncap raping is rarely an issue on any of the servers. I'd be happy to see the rule go.
BOOM! BOOM! BOOM! BOOM!
BOOM! BOOM! BOOM! BOOM! –ping       <3

Offline pureperversions

  • FH-Betatester
  • ***
  • Posts: 46
    • View Profile
as few people hae also said its also problem linked to few admins who as soon as flag changes to unlocked will act on people esp if you kill them, even if in a sitation where you are greying a flag slowly and there is a rapid lose of one of your rear flags

Offline Surfbird

  • Full Member
  • ***
  • Posts: 1.101
    • View Profile
I'm for removing it.

Why: Personal freedom on the battlefield. Why not flank the whole enemy lines and get close to that crossed out flag. People camping on it are stupid anyway. But as soon as you get close to it, someone is already flaming you, which is the actual bad thing. Whatever, usually it makes sense not to get close to that positions anyway, but sometimes there are just situational things that lead to close in on a crossed out flag.

But most important. Like TASSER also mentioned, is that the whole shittalk going on is the biggest issue on 762. I can live with your rules in general, but rules also mean hate and accusations among the players which is the worst thing of all. One rule less = less hateful community = 1 reason more for me to get on your server.

The not attacking uncap rule is one of the sources of a sometimes really annoying community on your server. Make sure that baserape is not allowed though.

cheers
« Last Edit: 29-07-2012, 20:07:18 by Surfbird »