Rule against attacking crossed flags on 762 Servers / Ban of sheikyerbouti

[x4fun ODIUM]

First of all I have to say thanks for so many replies in only one day!
Neo, Knallkopp and I have agreed to leave the vote on bf2awards.de (see link in first post) open until next Sunday. So all you need to do is login there and vote, if you wish.

@Kev4000: Thanks for your 2 pence on this. I see what you mean by the proposed kicks. My problem is that IF we remove the rule and then kick for something that the player is not informed about beforehand in the loading screen we loose credibility.

People who are kicked for raping crossed flags without a rule that forbids it, will have the same feeling they got before I started handling the rules and admin team on 762 Servers. Namely that admins would act arbitrarily and make up their rules as they please.

That I want to avoid by any means. That is why all new admins on 762 are instructed to act on the fixed, given rules only and the players who join 762 servers managed by our admins can rely on what they read in the loading screen.

So if we remove the rule and narrow it down to something like "No attacking of mainbases and ABCs" we have to trust in the players to play the maps as they were intended to be played by the Devs - and thereby give them free hand on the maps. That might be a leap of faith but I would do it.

If an forum mod could insert a poll to this thread about removing or keeping the crossed flag rule, that would be much appreciated since I as user cannot do that. That way next sunday we can go over both Polls and then act on their results.

I banned sheikyerbouti because of repeated flaming and the ignoring of the said rule.
How our timed bans work can be read up in the "FH2 Server Rules" subsections of our boards.
We have not had any troubles with him before so it is 2 weeks and he is welcome to join after that. 

We all have some crappy days from time to time but we cannot let players go on full rampage because of it. I hope that can be understood.

[Ciupita]

Poll is up.

[TASSER]

I think I speak for a good majority of FH2 players in saying that I really, really appreciate the fact that the 762 admins have brought an issue like this up to the community for discussion. It's incredibly refreshing to see that "the powers that be" have recognized that there may be some controversy surrounding a topic and have met it in an open manner rather than just brushing it off as "it's the rules, live with it or GTFO."

Well done guys I'd like to see this become a recurring trend throughout the FH2 world!

[CHRISTIEFRONTDRIVE]

It's an awkward rule because sometimes attacking an crossed-out flag (COF for this post) is reasonable, and sometimes it's just shit playing and detracts from the experience.

Scenario 1 - Port-en-Bessin, and the British set up in the field west of Church, suppressing enemy infantry spawning at the Outskirts flag to make their push on church more successful. That's a clever team doing what a clever team does.

Scenario 2 - Port-en-Bessin, and the British drive 2 Bren Carriers and a Sherman to Widerstandnest before the 3 flags in front of it have even seen enemy fire. The guys in the Bren carriers mine the shit out of the German spawn bunkers, and the Sherman sits behind where the StuG spawns, spawnkilling for 20 minutes until someone manages to faust it (which would be nearly impossible).

Kind of drastic examples but the point is that the COF rule doesn't differentiate between the two activities, when one is a legitimate way to play the game and the other is useless and serves no purpose other than to frustrate players into ragequitting.

[Jimi Hendrix]

How many times have 99% of players goten into the capzone of a cappable flag, only for it to become a crossed out uncap as some rogue enemy squad somewhere backcaps a flag. 

What do you do then? Sprint for 5 minutes wasting your gametime evading the enemies wrath back to the nearest cappable? Or stay and FIGHT like you do in most first person shooter games?

Or obey ze rulez and suicide? Losing your team valuable tickets?

REMOVE PLEASE! 

 ^ This

[Slayer]

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.

Wow, so naive. You make it sound like what you describe is never gonna happen when a server has a rule to prevent attacking crossed out flags. Btw: if they take position in a house, not firing at any enemy (which would be smart, btw, otherwise they would be detected very soon), they aren't actually attacking it, making the entire rule redundant.

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!

And there is a huge difference between being at a flag which suddenly becomes crossed out and all out attacking it. You want to punish only the latter (at least I hope so), but very often, people who fit in the first category get kicked for it. A nice example of a bad rule, where people with good intentions get punished for the bad deeds of a minority.

"Getting out of there", does that mean I can't fire at enemies? In a shootergame? This isn't called "UN missions", you know...

Also, you turn this into a 762 vs hslan topic, pls don't do that. I really appreciate it that
Odium posts this thread here, and now you read stuff which you dislike, you troll? Of course you know that some people will jump on your post like that, so pls refrain from posts like that.

[Oddball]

My thoughts are remove. If FH2 is suppose to be based off realism, well then war is hell... tough luck. Besides, It's legit military tactic to cut off supply lines, which could be considered part of this strategy, stopping planes, tanks, etc. from reinforcing the enemy team...

[hitm4k3r]

I have to second Slayer. Please keep it clean and constructive. I expected the same due to other reasons like the simple fact that alot of 762 long time players aren't registered here in this forum. In the 762 forum it might look completely different. But this is a total different story.

The positive and the negative sides of this rule are clearly vissible, but whether you punish one player for attacking an uncap is less dramatic than making a server empty due to alot of ragequits. Atleast this is my point of view.

And as said earlier. You don't get kicked, because a flag got just crossed out and you defend yourself. You don't get kicked because you drive near to an uncap. This rule is for me really just there to prevent excessive spawnraping and lame tactics that make the sense of pushmode obsolete. Ofcourse an admin will kick you, after he gets killed the third time at his spawn at an uncap - what do you expect. These are the guys who notice behaviour like this at the first instance. But a wise admin will warn you first and act according to the situation.

The real difficulty is to judge, where the edge is? It is a fine line between laming on an uncap and defending yourself. If the rule gets really removed, I am excited how this will work out - because then some of our really dirty players will rape the hell out of us and that's for sure


@Oddballs Post: Then why do you place the vehicles on the maps, if they get blown up anyway the moment they move a little. You can make your supply line cuts and ninja moves still if the flag is capable and the center of the action. Atleast that's how I do it on other maps like Mareth. It is not like that we have tons of vehicle depots in this game but I want to see those beauties in action.

[Slayer]

And as said earlier. You don't get kicked, because a flag got just crossed out and you defend yourself. You don't get kicked because you drive near to an uncap. This rule is for me really just there to prevent excessive spawnraping and lame tactics that make the sense of pushmode obsolete. Ofcourse an admin will kick you, after he gets killed the third time at his spawn at an uncap - what do you expect. These are the guys who notice behaviour like this at the first instance. But a wise admin will warn you first and act according to the situation.

Change the rule into "don't spawnrape"? I mean, spawnraping at a cappable flag is equally annoying, but there is no rule against that, right?

@ ragequits: 1) these get caused by raping (among other things), see my point above. 2) experienced players will not ragequit, they will tell admins about the raping and the respective player(s) will get a warning etc., right? In my experience most people ragequit when there is no admin (and then whichever rules you have - those "bad players" will have a go anyway), or when they have a bad day themselves.

[Fuchs]

I only came here for Sheik's reply. Disappointed. OP does not deliver.

[LtJimmy]

I only came here for Sheik's reply. Disappointed. OP does not deliver.

[Zoologic]

So basically, the rule is trying to make the pub server a tournament-wannabe now?

I'd say remove the rules and let the server admins judge the situation thoroughly using his own knowledge, be it rules and no rules.

So improve the admin quality, not just creating more rules.

[hyperanthropos]

So basically, the rule is trying to make the pub server a tournament-wannabe now?

I'd say remove the rules and let the server admins judge the situation thoroughly using his own knowledge, be it rules and no rules.

So improve the admin quality, not just creating more rules.

Let the admis judge the situation by their own knowledge? first 762 admins are experienced enough to judge situations their quality is high enough, whatever the 762 haters in here say about situations that occured years ago.
Second when the admins would only judge on their own knowledge, but without a base of rules it would be the biggest shitstorm in this forum for "totally arbitrarry kicks on 762" ever. You need a set of rules to base kicks etc. on.
The rules trys to make the server into a tournament "Wannabe"? The rule trys to enhance the experience the gameplay which again I think it does very well. I dont want to see the spawnrape fest when it is removed.
A Anti spawnrape rule would be much harder to define than just go with the dont attack uncap rule.

restricting your movement in the battlefield? Yes sure it does, because in 90% percents actions that are considered attacking an uncap flag are stupid and dont accomplish anything for your team, the next 5% are so quick that no one would complain, like driver through an uncap, the othe 5% are bad luck. And form my point of view a rate of like 5% (as I would think the numbers are) is okay, for a better gameplay. So yes please restrict stupid movement on the battlefield, this argument is mostly to excuse rapinmg etc.

[hitm4k3r]

So basically, the rule is trying to make the pub server a tournament-wannabe now?

I'd say remove the rules and let the server admins judge the situation thoroughly using his own knowledge, be it rules and no rules.

So improve the admin quality, not just creating more rules.

And that is the big problem of 762 before they started to recruit the set of admins, they have now. You need something to refer to as admin otherwise it just get's total chaos and admins start to abuse their priviliges. Thatswhy you have certain rules on every server - like "Don't attack mainbases", or rules to punish TK on purpose. Ofcourse it is not always easy to judge a situation right and there also happen mistakes, but overall admins on the FH servers are doing a good job. 762 never had in mind to set up a wanna-be tournament server. These rules were set up to deliver the best possible experience for the majority of the players - atleast that was the idea behind them and thre aren't too many rules (four if I am correct). Sometimes there are people on the server who do shit and say GTFO with your rules. But these players are a minority and don't stay long on the server. The majority of players on 762 welcomes the rules an acts quiet smart.

I have a quiet good example of how some rules can work in a positive or negative way. Yesterday I witnessed how Horstpetersens abused the possiblity to fire behind the ABC line on Eppelorf on the hslan server. Kwiot was always trying to get on the Nebelwerfer, but everytime Horst blew him up. At the same time Horst managed to blast with HE's into the further german spawn in the forrest what made this spawn and the Nebelwerfer placed there totaly useless. I think you all can imagine how Kwiot started whining  -> in this case the lag of a rule led to a flame war and not the other way around.

Atm it is quiet calm on the 762 servers and I can't remember a flame war since some of these annoying people got banned or stoped playing there. I like as it is now - never change a runing system!

[CHRISTIEFRONTDRIVE]

Been some weird logic in this thread. So it's apparently unfair that you attack a cappable flag which then becomes uncappable because of an enemy squad re-capping a flag somewhere else on the map, but when a squad sits around a flag they can't capture and then capture quickly when it becomes possible, the other team should have used teamwork to defend that flag in case of a quick cap? Shouldn't your team have used teamwork to prevent the other team recapping the flag that made yours cross out?

As for 'cutting off supply lines', that's half-legitimate and half-bullshit. On one hand, a sly enemy squad sneaking through my team's lines and causing havoc with mines or whatever else is fair enough - my team shouldn't have let that happen. Germans using 10 out of bounds paths to sneak into the middle of St. Lambert and s-mining spawn buildings on the three town flags is not disrupting supply lines, its being a piece of shit.

The reason I hate this rule so much is because it's so awkward to play by - I never really know if I should let my guard down or not, if there are implied safe zones on the map or not, and I try to play the game against enemies the way I want them to play against me, and I don't want to kill players in any way that serves only to frustrate them. My aim is to outfox the other players, and kamikazing through the first 3 flags deep on Tobruk in a tank, jumping out into the church and sniping enemies five miles from the front lines is playing like shit. I don't want anyone to do that to me and I don't want to do that to anyone.