Should DICE give us AAS game mode in a future patch?

[MrBrown]

Re: Should DICE give us AAS game mode in a future patch?

Bases are to small, with both teams sending arty, 5 parachute bombs, 2 normal bombs, flashbangs, smoke granades, tanks, apc's and up to 64 people into 1-2 bases, you would not only spawn and die faster than CoD2 but I bet this is would cause so much lagg people with high end PC's would have to switch there settings to low.

People could just play the 64 sized maps with 32 or even only 16 players.

[Lith1um]

Re: Should DICE give us AAS game mode in a future patch?

AAS maps dont have to be completely linear.

In Joint ops you can assign 2 or even 3 cp's to a capture segment.

In other words both sides can have a rear base, then you can build 2 or even 3 central bases than can be capped independently but those central bases must be capped before you can move onto the final.

There are several variations that can be made. It would allow AAS games with 2 or more battle fronts.

[(AWG)SERious]

Re: Should DICE give us AAS game mode in a future patch?

there were certain maps in JO that had 2 or 3 first flags.i would love to see this.there was a mini mod out that was AAS but they didnt have it set up right with the bases. you could still capp any base.all it would take if they were to say NO is someone to make a mod.maybe we will get lucky and Desert Conflict will add the push mode.

[Muddyfunster]

Re: Should DICE give us AAS game mode in a future patch?

I think the only frontline action that is created in bf2 currently is on karkand. If the USMC push the opposing team of the first island and over to the industrial estate, a massive struggle always occurs at the bridge point.

It's one of the best parts of the map imo, but the only thing that lets it down is every bugger spawns in as a sniper and it turns into a one shot shooting match.

Thats all i would worry about 32 snipers arseing about.

G.

[zipp0r]

Re: Should DICE give us AAS game mode in a future patch?

this is the gamemode i wanted to play when i got the game only to find out it was some ****ing ****ty flag hopping game. you cap one flag, move to another and by the time you got that new flag you have to go back and get the one you took previously. songhua stalemate really ****es me off cos of that and i just leave the game.

to run AAS mode you would need to do the following:
more tickets (300 would run out fast)
increased spawn timer, 15 seconds is too short if trying to push people backwards, 30-60seconds would be better.
artilary removed or with a MASSIVE timer.
scanner with a MASSIVE timer.

[CreamSoda]

Re: Should DICE give us AAS game mode in a future patch?

Especially maps on Karkand i hate when a humvee gets all the way to the Factory and ruins the game for everyone, i say ask them to implement it, it could be done like PRMM that i'm sure was definately mentioned

[Blades]

Re: Should DICE give us AAS game mode in a future patch?

I think the only frontline action that is created in bf2 currently is on karkand. If the USMC push the opposing team of the first island and over to the industrial estate, a massive struggle always occurs at the bridge point.

It's one of the best parts of the map imo, but the only thing that lets it down is every bugger spawns in as a sniper and it turns into a one shot shooting match.

Thats all i would worry about 32 snipers arseing about.

G.

Actually, when USMC battles MEC back to the Warehouse, it is ridiculously fun. It is purely awesome. The tanks cant do much and everyone is running around from one side to the other and gunning down infantry as they enter from both sides. So much fun. The best map for this stuff would be Omaha Beach. WHY DIDNT THEY PUT OMAHA IN!!! Probably because they couldnt come up with a story for it.

[[MyIS]Spetsnaz]

Re: Should DICE give us AAS game mode in a future patch?

Actually, when USMC battles MEC back to the Warehouse, it is ridiculously fun. It is purely awesome.

The keyword is 'battles'.

If you are playing a full 64 man server on Karkand, 2 guys sneaking buy the initial defenses will never be noticed by the MEC because everyone is busy fighting. Even if they are noticed, things like going out of bounds and rolling off of the hill into the river makes it nearly impossible to stop APCs.

People will rarely notice the flags getting taken behind since the fight is so strong at hotel. By the time someone realizes what happened, a whole ton of MEC already spawn in the back .. take the flags and now the battle is not as intense anymore.

For AAS, things need to be thought through as well.

For instance, you cannot have the USMC start where they do on Karkand. They need to start at Hotel because it is nearly impossible to capture Hotel or USMC if that's the objective.

I really like what the guy said above about Joint Ops. That's a good idea -- dont restrict the AAS to just 1 flag, maybe have 2 or even 3 ... but dont allow someone to go *all* the way in the back start capping flag zones on their own.

[tehpwnerofnoobs]

Re: Should DICE give us AAS game mode in a future patch?

I'm all for that. The most fun I have is on Kark when theres a firefight between the square and hotel. Everyone's all together and attacking the same objective and it's the best firefight for infantry in BF2. It'd be awesome to have all the flags like that.

[-=TxG=-Phoenix]

Re: Should DICE give us AAS game mode in a future patch?

Screw AAS, I say give us CTF!

[ConscriptVirus]

Re: Should DICE give us AAS game mode in a future patch?

more the merrier...

[bitvomit]

Re: Should DICE give us AAS game mode in a future patch?

I wanna see trench warfare. A couple maps on Day of Defeat had working trenches but nothing on the massive scale of BF2 type maps.

[Leeus]

Re: Should DICE give us AAS game mode in a future patch?

2) SpecOps actually act like SpecOps. Special Forces aren't meant to secure large zones, rather to disrupt enemy movement behind the lines. A perfect example of this is blowing up a bridge that tanks use to get to the line or keeping the tanks busy in the back as they try to hunt you down. That shift of power will easily be felt if there is a frontline as mentioned above.

Yeah , but right now they spend most of thier time suiciding themselves. I don't think they are going to stop.

That play mode is alright, but might upset the point system a little. I think that's why they havn't done much with it.

Actually, when USMC battles MEC back to the Warehouse, it is ridiculously fun. It is purely awesome. The tanks cant do much and everyone is running around from one side to the other and gunning down infantry as they enter from both sides. So much fun. The best map for this stuff would be Omaha Beach. WHY DIDNT THEY PUT OMAHA IN!!! Probably because they couldnt come up with a story for it.

Proabably because that's "So 1942." Welcome to the future where battles are not fought like they were in the stone age.

[imported_Ownerofall]

Re: Should DICE give us AAS game mode in a future patch?

Adding AAS isn't all that hard, so I think we should all politely ask DICE to add it to the official game so we can have a little more selection in our game experience, or a variation of AAS.

Ok, here's the deal. As we all know, people on this forum are quite fond of voicing their concerns about the game, which is great. What I think lacks here is a true understanding of what Conquest Mode really is and what real disadvantages it provides for folks.

Alot of people play these games in hopes of re-creating an epic battle (or creating an epic battle). I think we can all agree that there's nothing more fun than mass attacking a single flag or trying to defend it.

The problem is, Conquest Mode isn't geared for that type of gameplay. It's a very balanced mode that allows for flag hopping and struggling for a single flag all at the same time ... based on what both teams want, but it also provides alot of disadvantages to the teamwork folk and those that want to use 'mass tactics' to win a battle.

In conquest mode you cannot:
a) Have a frontline.
b) Have prolonged firefights.
c) Set up a 'perimeter' to defend or use strategic locations as chokepoints.
d) Notice the beauty of BF2's maps

The above may happen, but the occurence is either luck or very, very rare.

To briefly explain point D. If you guys have ever taken the time to really look at the maps and all of the different features you would be amazed. If you do not spend all of your time trying to get the flag (and focus only on that) you would realize the beauty of BF2's maps with all of the rooftops, windows, doors, ledges, hills, corners, barrels, lamp posts, etc etc.

Here's a tip, trying getting on a map and picking a location to hold for the entire map. You won't have that much action (unless it's one of the first flags to the enemy main spawn), but there are so many details to pick and notice on.

AAS (Project Reality dubbed it Advance And Secure mode, I'm sure there's an official name for it somewhere) is a game mode that forces each team to take one flag at a time. In other words, all flags must be taken in order (no flag hopping).

AAS provides a few advantages that I think we should take note of. I'll list the advantages below.

As a final note, I honestly believe that AAS *should not* have artillery for obvious reasons. Maybe even cut down on the UAV.

Advantages:

1) It creates a frontline. The action becomes more intense and tactics can finally be used on a larger scale. You will finally see the epic battles you (and myself) have dreamed of. You will find yourself looking for a crack in the line and trying to exploit it as much as possible. Flag zones will become utter mayhem so moving in without a mass of troops is suicide.

2) SpecOps actually act like SpecOps. Special Forces aren't meant to secure large zones, rather to disrupt enemy movement behind the lines. A perfect example of this is blowing up a bridge that tanks use to get to the line or keeping the tanks busy in the back as they try to hunt you down. That shift of power will easily be felt if there is a frontline as mentioned above.

3) There will finally be a purpose for small servers to run large 64 player maps. If you need to take it flag by flag, the map seems alot larger than it is when you hop around from flag to flag. Also, smaller servers will now have action much like large servers because the battles are centralized.

4) Now you really need your team as support. You cannot single handedly do anything on the larger servers anymore.

5) And more... :P

Disadvantages:

1) Points will be a problem if not dealt with properly (perhaps by changing the mechanics of AAS slightly? Or maybe change how the map loadouts are). People will spam conjested zones with alot of fire (as they should), so the defensive will always have a huge advantage. Grenades, flashbangs and grenade launchers (dont forget claymores) will drive people nuts.

I cant really think of any other disadvantages other than people are going to use the new mass of players in one area to rack up kills, so something would need to be done (which is why I added the 'variation' to the poll).

any games have aas besides jo and jo:e?

[Leeus]

Re: Should DICE give us AAS game mode in a future patch?

I wanna see trench warfare. A couple maps on Day of Defeat had working trenches but nothing on the massive scale of BF2 type maps.

Yeah but that would battlefield 1914