Custom server rules.

[Lazza66]

Re: Custom server rules.

Not quite. If the teams were even and balanced (skill level), this rule would perfectly balance the game. I've played on almost every map enough to see both teams win many, many times.

Even if you were right then so what? The rule is to prevent baseraping not to balance the map. My point is the rule only prevents one team from baseraping. How long is it going to take to get that across to you?

Buy your own server, f**king prick.

Don't open a paragraph with something that makes me not want to read it. Also, don't ever speak for me.

So don't ever tell me what to do. 1-1? Oh, and BTW I never spoke for you. It's you who said "I can't stand the rule", where you actually mis-spoke for me to which I was referring.

How isn't your post un-clarified. I had to read over your post several times just to try understanding what you meant. It is disorganized because you had your all ideas over the place, it was similar to reading a book with all the chapters scrambled and out of order.

Whats to clarify? The unfairness of barring one team from baseraping uncaps and not the other hardly needs clarified. And you claim I'm the one without clarity, pfft.

[Spik3d]

Re: Custom server rules.

Even if you were right then so what? The rule is to prevent baseraping not to balance the map. My point is the rule only prevents one team from baseraping. How long is it going to take to get that across to you?

You just don't get it, do you?

So don't ever tell me what to do. 1-1?

No, that was a suggestion.

Whats to clarify? The unfairness of barring one team from baseraping uncaps and not the other hardly needs clarified. And you claim I'm the one without clarity, pfft.

No, your reply to my post. It was almost impossible to read.

You know what. There's no point in arguing with somebody that only denies anything I say and restates their original thought. Unless you have something more to say than your original ignorant thought, don't reply to this post.

[Lazza66]

Re: Custom server rules.

You just don't get it, do you?

No, that was a suggestion.

No it wasn't, it was a statement not a suggestion.

No, your reply to my post. It was almost impossible to read.

A problem you experience disturbingly frequently.

You know what. There's no point in arguing with somebody that only denies anything I say and restates their original thought. Unless you have something more to say than your original ignorant thought, don't reply to this post.

Wrong again, you claim...

1. I "can't stand that one simple rules so much" - WRONG (and you say I'm hard to understand, lol @ u).

2. The no attacking carrier rule is for balance - WRONG

3. I stated my opinion and you rant "don't ever speak for me" - WRONG I didn't.

The "no attacking carrier" rule has nothing to do with balance. The issue is why do admins consider that letting one team baserape the other is fair.

[ALANMAN]

Re: Custom server rules.

I like to have fun with the 'No Carrier Rape' rule.

My Community's server allows uncap rape, but when I go to one that says "Do not attack the carrier" I tend to piss the admins off with technicality BS. I tell them: Technically, There is no carrier, because The U.S.S. Essex is not a carrier, it's an amphibious assault ship, therefore I'm not breaking the rule.

This of course never gets me anywhere and I usually get kicked and banned, but it's still fun, esp. when you have 10 people with you doing the same. Drives the admins nuts.

[Spik3d]

Re: Custom server rules.

No it wasn't, it was a statement not a suggestion.



A problem you experience disturbingly frequently.



Wrong again, you claim...

1. I "can't stand that one simple rules so much" - WRONG (and you say I'm hard to understand, lol @ u).

2. The no attacking carrier rule is for balance - WRONG

3. I stated my opinion and you rant "don't ever speak for me" - WRONG I didn't.

The "no attacking carrier" rule has nothing to do with balance. The issue is why do admins consider that letting one team baserape the other is fair.

Yep, blocked.

[xpnl]

Re: Custom server rules.

What are those big AA sh*t doing on the ship, how about a squad leader bailing out of a plane and waiting for back up nearby a flag etc etc
All those rules make BF players candy asses", I think
TEAMWORK or get you *** blown off....
:)

[Lazza66]

Re: Custom server rules.

What are those big AA sh*t doing on the ship, how about a squad leader bailing out of a plane and waiting for back up nearby a flag etc etc
All those rules make BF players candy asses", I think
TEAMWORK or get you *** blown off....
:)

True. The ROE does allow these custom rules. My problem with it is that one team gets to play the round hog tied.

Internode in Australia for example have such rules. Basically it's no attacking the carrier, and no attacking anything inside the red circle at uncaps.

In practice this translates to the USMC raping and spawncamping part of or most of their enemies uncaps, and where the enemy main is cappable it's just a full on spawnrape. Due to the rule within minutes the USMC have air superiority they always keep for the round, in nearly every round.

[Steppenwolf428]

Re: Custom server rules.

I like to have fun with the 'No Carrier Rape' rule.

My Community's server allows uncap rape, but when I go to one that says "Do not attack the carrier" I tend to piss the admins off with technicality BS. I tell them: Technically, There is no carrier, because The U.S.S. Essex is not a carrier, it's an amphibious assault ship, therefore I'm not breaking the rule.

This of course never gets me anywhere and I usually get kicked and banned, but it's still fun, esp. when you have 10 people with you doing the same. Drives the admins nuts.

pissing admins off is what keeps me in bf2 at times

[Lazza66]

Re: Custom server rules.

The only map on which having a single rule of "No attacking carrier" is remotely required is Wake Island. I'd even go so far as to say Wake brought about the only incentive for this rule.

Biasing every carrier map with a blanket rule for an 'after market' map based on the whinging of those who are stupid enough not to play other maps is pathetic.

[Teh_Diplomat]

Re: Custom server rules.

If carrier raping was allowed on more servers, people would be hesitant to spawn and wait 5 minutes for a helo.

I think as long as the opposing team has one flag on the mainland - on Wake Island 2007 for example - you should be able to attack the carrier.

[sm007h]

Re: Custom server rules.

I choose not to play on weak servers with nanny rules.
It's supposed to be a war, not a nursing home...if you want to play with toys, jump in a sim. The flag is uncappable so the team doesn't lose the base, not so enemy soldiers don't get killed, lol.

If the devs wanted it to be that way, they could have done so easily.
Every mod I've played has this as an option...but I don't support using homebase protections other than good fighting and proper teamwork.


That said, I also don't see any realistic way *any* military force would engage a US Carrier and walk/swim/fly away. Or a Chinese main military base, for that matter. Homebases should be chock full of weapons that don't pop like grapes from missles/bombs. Proper defenses, not artificial crutches.

[=sds=god]

Re: Custom server rules.

BFRoE is set in place to try to prevent, server owners and admins from creating their own rules. There alot of sorry *** rules out there, that are in clear violation of the RoE.
So NO, just because you are RENTING a server, and do not own it, you shouldnt be allowed to make up your own server rules.
Server hosts have to sign a agreement with stating, that they wont allow certain things within official RANKED servers.
IMO abusive admins, and NooB tactics such as attacking a UNCAP are afew of the main reasons... BF2 is not KinG anymore.
Ranked servers didnt work out for BF2, or 2142. To many loopholes, and over-zealous people wanting to try to beat the system instead of having it work for you.

It takes NO skills what so ever to attack a uncap. But NooBs, and idiots do it all of the time. In real-world tactics... No ship, or vehicle would get within 100 miles of a carrier group, let alone a carrier. If this game is supposed to be modern-warefare.
Why the HELL did EA put a map(Wake Island) into rotation, based upon a totally different theatre and title. Wake Island is joke for BF2, and should have never been added to this game.

[Gen.Vlade]

Re: Custom server rules.

No cheating, no hacking, no stats padding, no bunny hopping and no intentional TKs should be common sense rules. Nothing else more but EA's ROE.

[ALANMAN]

Re: Custom server rules.

There's nothing wrong with attacking an Uncap.

[Gen.Vlade]

Re: Custom server rules.

There's nothing wrong with attacking an Uncap.

Of course not. If the uncap is my only spawn point left, why should I complain when it's my own fault for putting myself in that position. On the other hand, if I have more spawn points left, hell, I'll spawn somewhere else and let them waste their time and rape the base while a cap their flags.